EU Fisheries Control System factsheet

The document advocates for the adoption of Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM)—an integrated system of sensors and cameras—to address non-compliance with the EU Landing Obligation (LO). It highlights that traditional monitoring is insufficient and that REM provides a cost-effective way to verify catch data, improve stock assessments, and satisfy retailer demands for sustainable sourcing. While citing successful implementations in Canada, the US, Australia, and New Zealand, the text identifies privacy concerns and a lack of political will as primary barriers. It concludes by recommending that the European Commission strengthen its revised Control Regulation to mandate REM for high-risk fleet segments and remove exemptions for small catches.

• Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) uses sensors and video cameras to provide precise data on fishing activities, including catch composition, handling methods, and discard activity, which allows for the cross-verification of self-reported data.
• The EU Landing Obligation (LO), introduced in 2013 to reduce the estimated 1.7 million tonnes of fish discarded by EU Member State fleets, faces significant compliance challenges, particularly in the Baltic Sea where compliance is described as extremely low.
• REM is more cost-effective than using onboard observers; for example, a project in New Zealand found that the cost of a REM pilot study was approximately 40 per cent of the cost of using onboard observers for the same number of monitored vessel days.
• Retailers and seafood processors in the UK and Germany support REM to ensure the legality and sustainability of their products, suggesting that REM-equipped vessels could gain market value.
• Several non-EU jurisdictions have already implemented extensive REM coverage: Canada began 100 per cent monitoring of specific fleets in 2006, and New Zealand and Chile have legislated 100 per cent REM coverage.
• The primary obstacles to REM implementation in the EU are privacy concerns among fishers regarding video imagery and a lack of political willingness to invest in the technology, despite available funding from the EMFF.
• The author recommends that the European Commission's revised Control Regulation be strengthened to mandate REM for fleet segments identified by EFCA as medium, high, or very high risk, and to remove the recording exemption for catches under 50kg.

APA

ClientEarth (n.d.). EU Fisheries Control System factsheet. https://www.clientearth.org/media/hv2n5gao/rem-factsheet-coll-en.pdf

Chicago

ClientEarth. EU Fisheries Control System factsheet. n.d. https://www.clientearth.org/media/hv2n5gao/rem-factsheet-coll-en.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=ClientEarth |title=EU Fisheries Control System factsheet |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/hv2n5gao/rem-factsheet-coll-en.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{clientearthndfisheries, author = {{ClientEarth}}, title = {{EU Fisheries Control System factsheet}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/hv2n5gao/rem-factsheet-coll-en.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }