As NOAA continues to grapple with\u00a0staffing cuts\u00a0implemented last year, along with ongoing budget constraints, the Trump administration has now proposed additional deep cuts in its 2027 budget plan, released in April. Experts are also raising concerns about how already-approved funding is being distributed to the agency, arguing there are delays in disbursement that hinder its ability to carry out its congressionally mandated work.<\/p>\n A spokesperson for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), an executive office of the president that oversees the distribution of money to federal agencies such as NOAA, told Mongabay there were \u201cno intentional delays\u201d with the distribution of funding, and that \u201capportionments for NOAA and all of those submitted to OMB have been reviewed and approved in a timely manner.\u201d At the same time, the spokesperson acknowledged that funding had been apportioned for some programs \u201cover the four fiscal quarters.\u201d Prior to 2025, the OMB normally gave NOAA its annual funding all at the same time.<\/p>\n NOAA itself did not respond to Mongabay\u2019s request for comment.<\/p>\n Last year, the Trump administration proposed sweeping\u00a0cuts\u00a0to NOAA, including an 18% reduction of its workforce, a roughly $1.5 billion decrease in budget \u2014 which would have lowered the agency\u2019s enacted 2025 budget of about $6.1 billion by nearly 25% \u2014 and a termination of several programs, including those related to climate research.<\/p>\n While Congress pushed back on most of this and managed to preserve the majority of NOAA\u2019s budget, lawmakers\u00a0raised the alarm\u00a0about OMB withholding allocated funds. Experts say this issue has persisted. The agency also wasn\u2019t immune from firings as the U.S. government laid off thousands of federal workers after Trump began his second term. Some branches of NOAA, including the National Weather Service, ultimately rehired staff. However, experts interviewed for this story told Mongabay that staff cuts have continued to have a deep impact on NOAA.<\/p>\n The administration\u2019s\u00a0new proposal\u00a0for NOAA\u2019s budget for the 2027 fiscal year calls for slashing around $1.1 billion, or 18%, from the overall $6.1 billion budget, and terminating or reducing dozens of programs. If enacted, these cuts would eliminate more than 1,000 positions. NOAA\u2019s\u00a0website\u00a0states that the agency currently has 12,000 personnel worldwide.<\/p>\n Proposed cuts target numerous programs and grants coordinated by NOAA\u2019s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), also known as NOAA Fisheries. The budget proposal also recommends cutting climate and weather research programs run through the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, or NOAA Research, and programs focused on coastal zone management, marine sanctuaries, ocean acidification and coral reef conservation, run though the agency\u2019s National Ocean Service \u2014 among others.<\/p>\n At the same time, the budget includes proposed funding increases for some parts of the agency\u2019s operations, including the development of deep-sea mining, an industry that critics say could\u00a0cause widespread and long-lasting damage\u00a0to the marine environment. While deep-sea mining has not yet begun, NOAA will act as a regulator for any future seabed mining activities in international waters, and is currently reviewing applications for both mineral exploration and exploitation. The budget proposal also pledges additional support for the seafood sector and the development of a \u201cfleet of autonomous research vessels to enable efficient survey of our coasts, address current data gaps, and propel a stronger ocean economy.\u201d<\/p>\n Neither the White House nor NOAA responded to Mongabay\u2019s questions on these matters.<\/p>\n Jeff Watters, the vice president of external affairs at the Washington, D.C.-based environmental advocacy group the Ocean Conservancy, told Mongabay the proposed budget \u201clooks very similar to the budget that the administration proposed last year,\u201d with many of the same programs put forth for elimination. However, he said some of the cuts, including those for NOAA Fisheries, were \u201cdeeper and worse\u201d this year.<\/p>\n Among the proposed cuts to NOAA Fisheries are the termination of certain fisheries management programs, fisheries surveys and data collection, Pacific coastal salmon recovery efforts, habitat conservation and restoration work, and grants for species recovery.<\/p>\n Andrew Rosenberg, the president of MRAG Americas, a U.S.-based fisheries consultancy, who once served as Northeast regional administrator and later deputy director of NOAA Fisheries, said he found the suggested changes \u201cextremely concerning.\u201d During his time at NOAA in the 1990s, Rosenberg helped implement recovery plans for New England and mid-Atlantic fisheries, as well as marine mammal and endangered-species protections. He continued working with NOAA as an adviser from about 2005 to 2010, and has continued to stay in touch with current NOAA workers, he said.<\/p>\n \u201cContinuing to cut the fisheries programs in terms of the management offices, which are down to skeletal staff, in some cases, is a huge concern, because we\u2019ve made so much progress on fisheries over the last 20 to 30 years,\u201d Rosenberg told Mongabay.<\/p>\n April marked the\u00a050th anniversary of the U.S. Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA), a landmark conservation law that helped prevent the collapse of many U.S. fisheries through sustainable management and environmental protection measures. Experts now worry that staff and budget cuts for NOAA fisheries could reverse this progress.<\/p>\n Rosenberg added that the cuts, along with the Trump administration\u2019s decision to\u00a0open fishing in marine monuments and sanctuaries, was \u201cfoolishness\u201d because of the impact it could have on fish stocks.<\/p>\n Fishing industry representatives have also raised concerns about the past and proposed cuts to NOAA Fisheries. Bob Alverson, manager of the Fishing Vessel Owners Association in Seattle, Washington, told Mongabay in an email that NOAA staffing shortages have slowed the implementation of regulations aimed to improve fishing efficiency, leading some fishers to stop fishing until the rules are approved. Alverson said the cuts have also affected data specialists who process annual stock survey data into usable datasets, as well as stock assessment biologists who rely on those data to evaluate fish populations.<\/p>\n \u201cA lot of institutional memory instantly vanished,\u201d Alverson said.<\/p>\n Another recommendation put forth in the White House budget proposal is to move all Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act functions from the BOAA Fisheries\u2019 Office of Protected Resources to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, a separate agency under the U.S. Department of the Interior. According to the budget proposal, this \u201cwould improve coordination and efficiency and streamline implementation of these statutes, reducing regulatory burden on American citizens and industry.\u201d<\/p>\n Rosenberg said this plan didn\u2019t make sense and risked weakening these functions. \u201cThe problem with sending protected species, including the marine mammals, over to the Fish and Wildlife Service, is that it becomes completely disconnected from the management of ocean activities,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Rachel Brittin, who served as NOAA\u2019s deputy director of external affairs from August 2023 to April 2025, when she lost her job during the mass layoffs, said implementing cuts to NOAA Fisheries would be like \u201cturning off your car\u2019s headlights on a dark, winding road.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cNOAA Fisheries manages more than 500 fish stocks, including popular seafood such as salmon, cod, halibut, and crab, as well as other species that support jobs, food security, and local economies across the country,\u201d Brittin told Mongabay in an email. \u201cIn 2023 alone, U.S. commercial and recreational fishing generated $319 billion in sales and supported nearly 2.1 million American jobs. The proposed cuts would weaken the science, staffing, and enforcement needed to keep fisheries sustainable and coastal economies strong.\u201d<\/p>\n If anything, Brittin said, NOAA Fisheries\u2019 budget should be expanded. \u201cThe staff is stretched thin, and especially now after the loss of so many last year,\u201d she said. \u201cFurther cuts would force the agency to do less at the exact moment communities need more reliable ocean data, stock assessments, habitat protection, and marine wildlife conservation.\u201d<\/p>\n NOAA\u2019s challenges extend beyond the proposed cuts. Although Congress ultimately preserved most of the agency\u2019s funding last year, sources say money is being released slowly, rather than provided as a lump sum, disrupting operations and delaying work. The bottlenecks are reflected in\u00a0federal apportionment documents\u00a0published by the U.S. government.<\/p>\n Watters of the Ocean Conservancy, who reviewed the documents and said he\u2019d discussed them with former U.S. government staff familiar with these processes, described the funding process as \u201cdesigned incompetence.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIt seems like they\u2019re designing things to tie things up,\u201d he said. \u201cThings are taking longer.\u201d<\/p>\n The OMB spokesperson countered this view, arguing that Mongabay\u2019s sources \u201cmight call that a \u2018delay\u2019 because they want all the funds up front, but that doesn\u2019t make it true.\u201d<\/p>\n Rosenberg said he was aware of the slow release of funds and that it was affecting work across NOAA Fisheries, preventing research from being conducted on schedule and potentially undermining the quality of long-term scientific data.<\/p>\n \u201cYou could lose an entire field season, which puts in jeopardy an entire time series,\u201d Rosenberg said. \u201cIt\u2019s really, really detrimental to any kind of science enterprise.\u201d<\/p>\n Volz, who worked at NOAA for more than 11 years before being placed on administrative leave (for which he said he was never given a clear reason), also confirmed that funding delays were occurring. He said the combination of slow apportionments and staffing cuts was gradually \u201cstarving\u201d the agency, and that in the long term, it could eventually affect the quality of NOAA\u2019s data and scientific output.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat you\u2019re going to see is a steady degradation across the board of what was once pretty comprehensive data sets,\u201d Volz said. \u201cThey\u2019re going to be going dark one at a time. If you think of a big TV screen with a bunch of pixels, you\u2019re going to be losing pixels, and you don\u2019t notice it right away, but over a period of months, in a year, you\u2019ll start to see it going dark in critical areas.\u201d<\/p>\n Volz added that while NOAA was still sharing its weather and Earth observation data with countries around the world, the U.S. has pulled back from international partnerships and support systems that helped developing countries actually use that data effectively.<\/p>\n \u201cThe result of those actions is we are not able to help countries use our data, we are not there to translate or interpret or train their users as we have in the past,\u201d Volz said. \u201cSo while we can claim we are still providing all the data, we know the capacity to use it well is limited and we are not helping improve that capacity.\u201d<\/p>\n The White House\u2019s budget proposal FY2027 budget proposal is only a recommendation. Congress must draft and approve its own spending bills before the budget becomes law \u2014 a process that can typically take many months.<\/p>\n And even if Congress once again rejects most of the Trump administration\u2019s proposals, OMB may continue to delay the dispersal of funds to NOAA. If so, lawsuits might ensue, experts told Mongabay.<\/p>\n Despite the mounting challenges, Brittin, the agency\u2019s former deputy director of external affairs, pointed to the resilience of NOAA staff, who continue working hard under tightening constraints. She also emphasized the importance of NOAA\u2019s work, such as the restoration and conservation of wetlands.<\/p>\n \u201cYou can actually see the before and after changes \u2014 the positive change,\u201d she said. \u201cWhen you restore a wetland, you can see the way it was before versus the way it is after. You can see the jobs it creates. You can see the way that a restored wetland or mangroves protect the coastline, which means the communities behind it. So anything that you do for habitat, for nature, and on the conservation front, helps people, too. So why would you take that away?\u201d<\/p>\n\u2018Deeper and worse<\/strong>\u2019\u00a0cuts<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\u2018Extremely concerning<\/strong>\u2019\u00a0cuts to NOAA Fisheries<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\u2018A steady degradation<\/strong>\u2019<\/h2>\n
\u2018The NOAA budget should be double<\/strong>\u2019<\/h2>\n
![\"NOAA\u2019s](\"https:\/\/imgs.mongabay.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/06\/01111554\/d.-53391379424_987f16b2f3_o.png "\\"\\"")
![\"Sargassum](\"https:\/\/imgs.mongabay.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/06\/01112152\/e.-Mark-Yokoyama-6363519905_8c8857b82e_o.jpg "\\"\\"")
![\"Adult](\"https:\/\/imgs.mongabay.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/06\/01112028\/g.-11468631085_18df417d97_o.jpg "\\"\\"")
![\"Humpback](\"https:\/\/imgs.mongabay.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/06\/01112535\/n.-%C2%A9Julie-Larsen-Maher-4257-Humpback-Whale-Feeding-NY-Bight-08-27-14.jpg "\\"\\"")
![\"Stephen](\"https:\/\/imgs.mongabay.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/06\/01112657\/b.-Stephen-Volz-NOAA-25666905677_21a27a698d_o.jpg "\\"\\"")