33. The Consultation considered that electronic logbooks require manual data entry, in contrast to vessel position reports, where the data are automatically generated. The data sets required for the electronic logbook must be determined by the information users. These include fish buyers, fisheries statisticians, fisheries managers and enforcement agencies. In addition to the different user requirements, it is important to make use of the most economical and universally recognized formats for data capture. This will minimize communication costs and, where applicable, facilitate international exchange of market information, or of data required under bilateral, or multilateral fisheries arrangements.
34. The benefits of electronic logbooks include reducing illegible entries, reducing data entry errors at the FMC, securing and verifying authorized data entries, timely submission of catch and other information in relation to management requirements, increased efficiency (concomitant reduction of costs) of data entry, timely verification from other data sources (e.g. landings) and access to electronic markets.
35. The experts noted that electronic logbook data need not necessarily be transmitted via a VMS, or even transmitted at all. The logbook information could be transmitted via radio, email, fax or other means. In many fisheries, electronic logbooks are not transmitted at all; the information is stored aboard the vessel for later submission to, or downloading by, the fishery agency. Further, the experts agreed that electronic logbooks are not always required for daily reporting.
36. Electronic logbook programmes have been used or under development in many regions and nations around the world, including the USA, Japan, Iceland, Australia, European Union (EU) and others. The experts provided two examples of electronic logbook systems, while noting that these programmes were not necessarily any more or less desirable than other electronic logbook systems now in use or under development.
a) The Secure and Harmonised European Electronic Logbook (SHEEL) is a project financed by the European Community (EC) and undertaken by several EU Member States, Norway and Iceland, in cooperation with the private sector. The EC’s Directorate of Fisheries is not, however, committed to adopting such a programme. The objective is to develop, implement and demonstrate a secure, cost effective and harmonized electronic logbook for European fisheries. Specifically, it is intended that SHEEL (i) define the message type and format, the user interface and the services of the system that will facilitate on board inspections; (ii) define all the security measures for ensuring secure data transmissions; and (iii) define the system requirements for transmitting the fisheries report via several communication services.
b) The Norwegian SatRap system was developed to assist the vessel master with registration of catch and activity reports. Predefined code lists prevent the user from registering wrong codes. The result of a completed registration becomes a small file in the North Atlantic Format (NAF) that is also encrypted. All messages contain an authenticity code and are saved in an encrypted log. The system requires that the vessel uses an electronic key or "dongle" which is programmed by the Directorate of Fisheries in Norway. The system also gives the ability to confirm whether a message had been sent or not.
37. The discussion of electronic logbooks highlighted a number of design and implementation issues that need to be addressed:
a) the scope of the electronic logbook, i.e. will they be limited to the replacement of the paper logbook in force, include activity reports, effort reports, observer/inspector data, etc.;
b) whether or not the electronic logbook will be used in parallel with a paper logbook (for legal reasons of signature, etc.);
c) management of the process of converting to a totally electronic system;
d) the need for acknowledgement or confirmation of messages that had been sent from electronic logbooks;
e) whether the electronic logbooks would be mandatory or voluntary, i.e. allow individual fishers to decide if they want to switch from the paper logbook, or not;
f) means of integration into regulatory frameworks, with particular attention to the evidential value of the information obtained from the electronic logbook;
g) compatibility and inter-operability of the flag State logbooks with the requirements of third countries and of RFMOs;
h) the issue of compatibility, particularly with regard to language;
i) choice of data standards (e.g. North Atlantic Format, XML, UN/ECE EDIFACT, etc.);
j) routing of the information (to flag State, to coastal State, to RFMO, etc.);
k) problems of back-up and recovery procedures in case of technical failures; and
l) anti-fraud provisions.
m) Should electronic logbooks be used only in specific fisheries or on board specific size classes of vessels?
n) Should electronic logbooks be required only for vessels fitted with VMS, or also for non-VMS vessels?
38. The Consultation considered the implementation of an electronic logbook system whereby the initial implementation was restricted to a small "pilot" group of users. Later phases would expand to include larger groups, and ultimately, the scheme would be made compulsory for all users in the regulated fishery.
39. The Consultation reviewed a programme where financial rewards were offered for the submission of logbooks. This scheme had not proven to be completely effective, and a more efficient system to collect comprehensive fisheries data was being sought.
40. The Consultation confirmed that near real time position reports are particularly sensitive and must be handled in strict accordance with the law, and the confidentiality requirements of the industry. The electronic submission of catch information which can be linked in near-real time with position reports increases the sensitive nature of the data, with a heightened need for safeguards and data security.
