WIREDGOV

On Wednesday 24^th October, WWF launched a new report, revealing UK and devolved governments are not comprehensively monitoring UK fishing activities at sea.

• Ahead of the UK Fisheries Bill a new WWF report finds less than 1% of UK fisheries are effectively monitored at sea
• Scientific observers who currently collect data on vessels can experience intimidation and abuse
• Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) using CCTV cameras is an effective alternative that costs a quarter of the price and can provide 100% coverage, as well as supporting more sustainable fishing practices
• WWF is calling for the UK and devolved Governments to show global leadership and make REM with cameras a condition of fishing in UK waters post-Brexit

A pioneering and far more cost effective alternative – Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) with cameras and sensors - is available however, that could make the UK a world leader in sustainable fishing as the UK leaves the EU.

The research shows that traditional methods (using port, vessel and aerial monitoring) are significantly more expensive and nowhere near as effective as REM. Moreover, scientific observers who go to sea to collect data for stock management – a job that could largely be done more effectively by cameras - have reported experiencing intimidation and abuse.

Helen McLachlan, WWF Fisheries Programme Manager said:

“As the UK prepares to leave the EU we must take the opportunity to become a world leader in sustainable fishing. At the moment we simply do not know what’s happening on our fishing boats or how many fish are being taken out of our seas, and that’s putting jobs, fish stocks and the UK’s precious seas at risk. The discard ban, which aims to eliminate the wasteful practice of returning often dead or dying fish to the sea – while a ground-breaking piece of legislation – is not being monitored effectively.

“We’re calling on UK and devolved governments to demonstrate real leadership by introducing REM as a key component of any new post-Brexit fisheries policy, starting with the forthcoming Fisheries Bill. Installing cameras on vessels is the most effective means of monitoring the health of our fish stocks for a fraction of the cost of traditional methods, while at the same time providing accountability and consumer confidence. Debate about the future of fisheries has focused on arguments around access rights and trade deals, but we want to ensure that sustainability sits at the heart of any new legislation and that we don’t lose important environmental protections as part of the Brexit process. There’s a strong case for making REM a condition for all vessels over ten metres that fish with mobile gear in UK waters, not just UK vessels.”

REM is the most effective and value-for-money tool for monitoring fishing activities at sea. To record 100% of activity and review 10% of this for all UK vessels over 10 metres would cost around £5 million, a quarter of the money spent on traditional systems which monitor less than 1% of vessels. REM also helps to prevent illegal discards and potential overfishing, which is not just vital for fish stocks, but also to ensure consumer confidence.

This year the New Zealand Government adopted new legislation requiring all vessels in their fleet to carry cameras, citing the reduction of waste, improvement of information, more responsive decision making and strengthening international reputation as key reasons for their decision. Yet, despite the clear advantages of REM, there has been little progress by UK fisheries in adopting it. Parliamentary questions tabled by WWF reveal that the proportion of fishing trips undertaken by English vessels using REM equipment was less than 1% between 2014 and 2016, and around 3.7% for Scottish vessels.

Since WWF’s initial assessment in 2015, the cost of the REM system has reduced by 22% from £4,694 to an estimated £3,785 per vessel per year between 2015 and 2017.

There is also a human cost to the UK’s current systems, with a small number of scientific observers reporting that they have been subjected to intimidation and unsafe working conditions. Although these incidents are believed to be rare, the true extent of the problem is not known. Between 2015 and 2017, WWF compiled testimonies from a number of scientific observers including:

One observer, whose identity has been protected, told WWF:

“I was supposed to conduct a series of research voyages with the same vessel over several weeks. During the first trip the weather was severe and water often poured into the accommodation. On returning ashore I refused to do another trip because I thought the vessel was not suitable for research this far offshore. This had been a frightening experience in itself but on top of this I was then threatened with violence ashore by one of the crew because losing the contract was going to cost the vessel and crew lots of money.”

1. of REM technology has provided valuable insights. After volunteering to participate in an REM trial investigating catches of western haddock in the south west of England in 2013, David Stevens, skipper of the FV Crystal Sea, is now a keen advocate of the technology and has chosen to maintain it on his vessel.

David Stevens, skipper of the FV Crystal Sea, said:

“We installed REM to help bridge what we saw as gaps in the scientific data. We were being told that stocks were threatened and that due to limited available data scientists had to take a precautionary approach to stock management.

“The cameras and REM systems gave us the chance to collect data and prove we were telling the truth but also help managers at the same time. The successful trial has led to us being able to show other vessels in our local fleet that there is nothing to fear from the systems and that it can only help. We want a healthy well managed stock and that can only be achieved through good data collection.”

NOTES FOR EDITORS

• The new report “Remote Electronic Monitoring – why camera technology is a cost effective and robust solution to improving UK fisheries management” is available to download here.
• A selection of images is available here. Footage of REM in operation is available on request.

Testimonies from Scientific Observers:

1. They defecated on my measuring boards. Observer D
2. They threw my measuring boards over the side. Observer B
3. I was thrown down the wheelhouse steps. Observer B
4. They stuck the deck hose inside my oilskins when I was working to humiliate me. Observer D
5. They refused to let me sample at night because they were misreporting these catches. Observer E
6. They told me to record the retained cod as discarded because they had no quota and were landing them illegally. Observer F
7. They would not take me to sea because I was a woman. Observer G
8. I had to check my boots every haul as they kept putting dead fish or live crabs in them as a joke. Observer F

Case Study: Available for interview on request

• In 2013, David Stevens, skipper of the FV Crystal Sea, volunteered to participate in a long term REM and gear innovation trial, investigating the reduction of unwanted catches of western haddock (ICES Area VIIb-k) in the south west of England. REM was installed on the vessel and video from 10% of the hauls fished was reviewed. The trial resulted in improved understanding and management of the fishery and incentivised ways of decreasing the capture of small, undersized haddock which had to be discarded. Without this innovation these fish would have gone onto cause significant problems for the vessel under a landing obligation.

ABOUT REMOTE ELECTRONIC MONITORING

REM describes an on-board system that monitors all fishing activity using GPS, CCTV cameras and sensors. Footage is then analysed by experts to assess the quantities of fish being caught and whether or not fish are being discarded. It is by far the most affordable and effective means of delivering fully documented fisheries, a key component in ensuring consumers have access to sustainable fish.

Summary of benefits of REM systems:

• 100% coverage of fishing activity can be recorded with varying levels of footage monitored according to the level of risk associated with the fishery[v][1].
• REM offers a continuous monitoring presence, in comparison to traditional methods, which are only effective during the presence of the monitoring vessel, onboard observer or aircraft
• If undertaken by all EU fishing vessels, the system would help to ensure parity of compliance with the Landing Obligation, delivering a level playing field for the fishing industry and could in time lead the way in developing this across seas shared by other member states.
• Data can be used for multiple purposes including contributing to, and improving confidence in, stock assessment, or to demonstrate best practice
• It also offers an effective means of providing accountability for catch which is a key element in sustainable fisheries management and underpins consumer and retailer confidence.

GLOSSARY

• The Landing Obligation (or discard ban):

A reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) was agreed between European Member States in December 2013 and entered into force in January 2014. Within this reform package was the introduction of a ban on discarding of fish at sea. This is referred to as the Landing Obligation under Article 15 of the CFP basic regulation (Council Regulation No 1380/2013). The Landing Obligation will require fishers to bring all catches of the specified species ashore and the total catch will count against their quota, rather than just the marketable landed proportion of the catch as has previously been the case. The aim of this management strategy is to gradually eliminate the wasteful practice of discarding fish at sea, to fully document all fishing mortality and to improve the data going into the scientific stock assessments. It will also encourage fishers to fish more selectively so that their quota is not being used to account for fish they cannot sell i.e. fish that are caught and landed but are below the Minimum Conservation Reference Size (MCRS) as these cannot be sold for human consumption. It is being phased in 2015-2019.

• Discards: 
  The EU definition of discards is catches that are returned to the sea. This includes any fish returned after being brought on board a vessel or any release of catch from fishing gear whilst it is still in the water (sometimes described as "slipping"). In addition the landing obligation will also apply to non-Union waters which are not subject to a third countries' jurisdiction, in other words Union vessels operating in international waters.