The stock assessment - however flawed - is one of the key criteria that is used to determine the health of the fishery. It is loosely consistent data accumulated over the years from many different sources that attempts to paint a picture of the health of the stocks for fisheries management.
Is it accurate? Most likely not. But it is something that has been charted over the years to indicate the state of the stock.
Trying to break down the stock by year classes, gender, who's catching what and where, that assessment is the one big thing that triggers who can keep how many and from where, whether commercial landings, estimated impact by kept fish and guestimated mortality by us even doing C&R.
Many of us for years have wanted to err on the side of caution (maintain 1 recreational fish @ 36 for example) and have gone to meetings to fight commercial increases (recent fall 2010 for example, Mass commercial increase in 2006 as another example). Some people propose Game Fish status (I am not one even though I don't fish commercially, I think everyone should take cuts).
The stock assessment, how good or bad the assessment or how good or bad the results, is probably the key indicator of the state of the fishery. At least in regards to what will come down by way of regulations / regulation changes.
For a real significant brain cramp, read this
novel explanation on stock assessments:
http://www.asmfc.org/publications/Gu...ssessments.pdf