A new Scottish Government mandate requiring fishing vessels to install Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) systems has sparked significant concern among the nation’s fishermen. The regulations, set to come into force for pelagic vessels on 7 March 2026, necessitate the fitting of cameras and sensors across all areas where fish are caught, handled, or processed, with recording commencing automatically upon net deployment.
Ministers contend that these surveillance systems will furnish crucial scientific data, thereby ensuring the sustained health of fish stocks and bolstering compliance with fishing quotas and environmental laws. The legislation applies to pelagic vessels 12 metres or more in length with chilled or refrigerated seawater (CSW/RSW) systems, primarily those targeting mackerel and herring.
However, many within the fishing community view the introduction of these ‘Big Brother’ cameras as a clear signal of governmental mistrust. Beyond the perceived lack of confidence, fishermen face substantial financial outlays, with installation costs potentially running into tens of thousands of pounds.
Veteran skipper George Anderson, operating the 230ft Adenia out of Whalsay, Shetland, has already invested £60,000 in fitting nine cameras to his vessel. Although official estimates for system and installation costs for pelagic vessels range from approximately £7,300 to £12,000, with annual running costs between £700 and £2,500, other projections suggest first-year costs could reach £27,630 per vessel.
The Scottish Government has stated that vessel owners are responsible for these costs, considering fish stocks a publicly owned resource.
Further anxieties stem from the potential for punitive fines. Breaches of the new regulations could incur Fixed Penalty Notices ranging from £500 to £10,000. More severe infractions may lead to fines up to £50,000 on summary conviction, or even unlimited fines and confiscation orders for fish and gear upon conviction on indictment.
The system’s reliance on technology also introduces operational vulnerabilities. Should monitoring equipment fail at sea, vessels are legally obligated to cease fishing immediately, risking the abandonment of entire trips and incurring significant financial losses until repairs are completed.
The Scottish Pelagic Fishermen’s Association (SPFA), representing the country’s 21-strong fleet of mackerel, herring, and blue whiting vessels, has voiced strong opposition to REM.
Ian Gatt, chief executive of the SPFA, stated: “They claim it’s about science but really it’s about control, enforcement and a complete lack of trust in the country’s fishermen.”
Mr Gatt highlighted concerns about equitable enforcement, noting that Scottish waters are fished not only by the local fleet but also by approximately “70 Norwegian, 50 EU and 20 Faroese boats”.
He added: “It will simply be impossible to check it all. Our concern is that whoever is doing the monitoring will concentrate on Scottish boats, because they’re the easiest target.”
In Case You Missed It:
The SPFA is advocating for a six-month review of the policy to prevent unfair targeting of Scottish vessels.
The introduction of mandatory REM in Scotland contrasts with the approach in England, where voluntary schemes are currently being trialled in selected priority fisheries, with plans for future mandatory rollout.
A Scottish Government spokesman reaffirmed the policy’s aims, stating that “Remote Electronic Monitoring protects the Scottish fleet by requiring non-Scottish vessels to follow the same rules and regulations, ensuring we can better protect our fish stocks from illegal fishing.” The spokesman also confirmed intentions to review the policy “at various points following its introduction.”
