The issue of the use of satellite transponders gave rise to considerable discussion. According to an FAO study, the cost is small when compared to the cost of vessels, navigation equipment and operational costs. A number of delegates commented that the cost of transponders should be borne by the industry. Questions raised include: should all vessels carry transponders (including those that fish primarily in EEZs); what is the implication on coastal countries; what exact role should these transponders play and how can they contribute to real time evaluation. A number of delegates described their country or region's experience with transponders and how they can be used for position reporting and/or the transmission of real time catch and effort data.
Some delegates commented that aerial surveillance can also be an important tool for verification and should be mentioned in this document. Others argued that aerial surveillance is an effective tool but has nothing to do with data reporting and verification and should be taken up under a section on compliance. There was a suggestion that the paper differentiate between data reporting and verification/compliance/enforcement. Others stressed that reporting and verification are intertwined and should be considered together, as they are in the Chair's discussion paper.
The use of ships' logs to verify catch was also mentioned. The issue of who should bear the cost of aerial, surface or satellite surveillance and/or verification was also discussed. Some countries said that the cost was the responsibility of the coastal States, whereas others said that this was the responsibility of the distant water fishing States.
[Return to start of article]