Electronic monitoring in fisheries: Lessons from global experiences and future opportunities

Abstract

Since the beginning of the 21st century, electronic monitoring (EM) has emerged as a cost‐efficient supplement to existing catch monitoring programmes in fisheries. An EM system consists of various activity sensors and cameras positioned on vessels to remotely record fishing activity and catches. The first objective of this review was to describe the state of play of EM in fisheries worldwide and to present the insights gained on this technology based on 100 EM trials and 12 fully implemented programmes. Despite its advantages, and its global use for monitoring, progresses in implementation in some important fishing regions are slow. Within this context, the second objective was to discuss more specifically the European experiences gained through 16 trials. Findings show that the three major benefits of EM were as follows: (a) cost‐efficiency, (b) the potential to provide more representative coverage of the fleet than any observer programme and (c) the enhanced registration of fishing activity and location. Electronic monitoring can incentivize better compliance and discard reduction, but the fishing managers and industry are often reluctant to its uptake. Improved understanding of the fisher's concerns, for example intrusion of privacy, liability and costs, and better exploration of EM benefits, for example increased traceability, sustainability claims and market access, may enhance implementation on a larger scale. In conclusion, EM as a monitoring tool embodies various solid strengths that are not diminished by its weaknesses. Electronic monitoring has the opportunity to be a powerful tool in the future monitoring of fisheries, particularly when integrated within existing monitoring programmes.

Commercial viability of locating pelagic longline branchline weights at the hook to reduce seabird bycatch

“…Compliance monitoring of Lumo Leads, GloLeads and Hookpods through dockside monitoring would be relatively weak: during the fishing trip, crew could easily change the position of the Lumo Leads/GloLeads on leaders, and fishers might not attach Hookpods to hooks during setting. If, in the distant future, compliance monitoring occurs for 100% of pelagic longline fishing effort, such as through the use of electronic monitoring systems (Gilman et al 2019, van Helmond et al 2020, then branchline designs that currently do not support compliance monitoring will be better options. Until then, consideration of the capacity of a bycatch mitigation method to facilitate surveillance through dockside monitoring remains necessary.…”

A NOAA Fisheries science perspective on the conditions during and after COVID-19: challenges, observations, and some possible solutions, or why the future is upon us

“…The COVID-19 situation has afforded us essentially with a test. The test has effectively shown that the assumptions and concerns of widespread telework at-scale were largely unfounded and warrant being revisited (Orgysko 2020, Thornton 2020); that is, our personnel are finding ways to adjust, and remain remarkably productive (Smith 2020, Thornton 2020. Although productive and still meeting many facets of our mission, we also do not want to overstate the ability of our personnel to maintain productivity given some of the unique challenges arising from work-from-home scenarios, especially over extended periods of time.…”

Approaches to combatting illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing

“…Machine learning powers algorithms that can detect fishing activity, transshipments at sea and vessels entering restricted areas or even turning off their signals 19 . Electronic monitoring of activity on board vessels can help spot excessive bycatch or potential illegal catch of species such as sharks 20,21 . The increasing use of e-documentation can reduce manipulation of catch figures, while blockchain technology promises full traceability of fish products from their origin to the end user 22 .…”