--- title: "NAFO Standing Committee on International Control (STACTIC) Intersessional Meeting Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada; Possible revisions of NAFO CEM enforcement measures" sdDatePublished: "2026-05-14T18:11:00Z" source: "https://www.nafo.int/Portals/0/PDFs/COM/2026/comdoc26-04.pdf" topics: - name: "international organisation" identifier: "medtop:20000644" - name: "regulation of industry" identifier: "medtop:20000636" - name: "environmental policy" identifier: "medtop:20000423" locations: - "Lisbon" - "Vilnius" - "Ontario" - "Halifax" --- NAFO Standing Committee on International Control (STACTIC) Intersessional Meeting Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada; Possible revisions of NAFO CEM enforcement measures comdoc26-04 STACTICRpt May2026 Serial No. N7720 NAFO/COM Doc. 26-04 Report of the NAFO Standing Committee on International Control (STACTIC) Intersessional Meeting 06–08 May 2026 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada 1. Opening by the Chair, Patrick Moran (United States of America) ......................................................................... 2 2. Appointment of Rapporteur ................................................................................................................................................... 2 3. Adoption of Agenda .................................................................................................................................................................... 2 4. Annual Compliance Review 2025 ........................................................................................................................................ 2 5. Annual compliance review format....................................................................................................................................... 3 6. NAFO MCS website and application development ....................................................................................................... 4 7. New and pending proposals on enforcement measures: Possible revisions of the NAFO CEM ............... 4 8. Review of specific measures in Article 6 of the NAFO CEM ...................................................................................... 5 a. Measures relating to the cod fishery in Division 3M ............................................................................................ 5 b. Measures relating to the yellowtail flounder fishery ........................................................................................... 6 c. Measures relating to the squid fishery ....................................................................................................................... 6 9. Update from the Editorial Drafting Group (EDG) ......................................................................................................... 6 10. Report and recommendations of the Working Group on the Introduction of FLUX UN/CEFACT Standard for fisheries data exchanges in NAFO (WG-FLUX)........................................................................................................ 6 11. Review of the Electronic observation program ............................................................................................................. 7 12. Half-year review of the implementation of new NAFO CEM measures .............................................................. 7 13. Discussion on the definition of directed fisheries and bycatches .......................................................................... 7 14. Flag State Performance Review ............................................................................................................................................ 7 15. Practical application of port State measures in NAFO ................................................................................................ 8 16. Review of Annex II.B of the NAFO CEM ............................................................................................................................. 8 17. Review of current IUU list pursuant to NAFO CEM Article 53 ................................................................................ 9 18. Review and evaluation of practices and procedures ................................................................................................... 9 19. Other business .............................................................................................................................................................................. 9 a. NAFO Inspectors’ Workshop ........................................................................................................................................... 9 20. Time and place of next meeting ............................................................................................................................................ 9 21. Adoption of the report .............................................................................................................................................................. 9 22. Adjournment ................................................................................................................................................................................. 9 Annex 1. List of Participants ................................................................................................................................................... 10 Annex 2. Agenda ........................................................................................................................................................................... 14 2 Report of STACTIC, 06-08 May 2026 Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization www.nafo.int Report of the NAFO Standing Committee on International Control (STACTIC) Intersessional Meeting 06–08 May 2026 Halifax, Canada 1. Opening by the Chair, Patrick Moran (United States of America) The Chair, Patrick Moran (United States of America), opened the meeting at 09:00 hours on Wednesday, 06 May 2026. The Chair welcomed representatives, both in-person and virtually, from the following Contracting Parties: Canada, Denmark (in Respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland), European Union, France (in respect of St. Pierre and Miquelon), Iceland, Japan, Norway, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, Ukraine and the United States of America (Annex 1). 2. Appointment of Rapporteur The NAFO Secretariat (Catherine Thompson) was appointed as rapporteur. 3. Adoption of Agenda The Chair introduced the provisional agenda and asked representatives if there were any comments or additions. The European Union proposed the addition of the NAFO Inspectors’ Workshop under agenda item 19 (Other Business). Following the rules outlined in the Standing Committee on International Control (STACTIC) Rules of Procedure regarding data confidentiality and participation in meetings (COM Doc. 22-19), the Chair highlighted a nomination for in-camera sessions for discussions on STACTIC WP 26-01 and STACTIC WP 26-02, and agenda item 6, only if the Secretariat intends to display any Monitoring, Control, and Surveillance (MCS) website information that is intended exclusively for control purposes. However, there were no in-camera discussions because all attendees were government representatives or Commissioners. The agenda was adopted, with the changes highlighted above, as outlined in Annex 2. 4. Annual Compliance Review 2025 The NAFO Secretariat presented the draft Compilation of Fisheries Reports 2025 in STACTIC WP 26-01 (Rev. 3). Contracting Parties thanked the Secretariat for their work and provided comments and clarifications. The NAFO Secretariat also presented the Summary of Inspection Information for 2025 in STACTIC WP 26-02 (Revised). The Secretariat noted that, following a request from the 2025 Annual Meeting, sub-totals by inspection party for at-sea and port inspections are included in Table 1 in Part I. The European Union noted that some inspection reports were submitted and uploaded to the MCS Website almost a year after the inspection took place. The United States of America recommended that STACTIC further reflect on Part III of the working paper, questioning whether STACTIC could identify any trends or patterns in the infringements, and if any modifications to the CEMs or enforcement were needed. It was suggested that STACTIC consider whether a vessel-by-vessel analysis would provide more useful information than a year-by-year analysis. Canada included an update on their Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS) activity in STACTIC WP 26-02 (Rev. 2) and also delivered a presentation on their RPAS and processes. Contracting Parties thanked Canada for the presentation and asked follow-up questions. 3 Report of STACTIC, 06-08 May 2026 Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization www.nafo.int The NAFO Secretariat presented the Summary of Observer Information for 2025 in STACTIC WP 26-03 (Revised). The European Union highlighted discrepancies in the submissions, particularly on missing or incorrect information. As noted in their submission, Norway explained that it’s unclear how to calculate the percentage derogated in Part II (Comparison of Fishing Activities With and Without An Observer) of the template. Two Contracting Parties suggested basing the percent derogated on number of fishing days in the case where an observer is not on board for a whole fishing trip. Contracting Parties acknowledged that there are varying interpretations of the template and more clear instructions would be beneficial. One Contracting Party suggested changing the language from “percent derogated” to “percent observed” to better align with the text of Article 30.4 of the CEM. The European Union highlighted that the aim of the exercise is specifically to check how Contracting Parties are implementing Article 30 and that observers collect independent information to that of the Master of the vessel. The European Union raised that four Contracting Parties had Observer and Master figures exactly matching by kilogram, which according to the European Union, suggests a lack of independent data recording. The European Union stated that in the past there had been vessels in these fisheries, that had been cited for infringements related to mis recording of catches, not identified by observers. Contracting Parties discussed the table in the working paper titled: Summary of fishing trips where the figures of the observer in Part 2 of the observer trip report are the same or very similar to the figures reported by the master for observed tows The European Union suggested changing the exercise from a calculation at the haul- by-haul level to one on the fishing trip level, as each trip has many hauls. Contracting Parties noted that the purpose of this exercise is to ensure that observers are reporting independent data. Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland) noted that if there’s figures that are not matching, there needs to be an explanation why. It was noted that Japan has added context as to why the figures are matching, and it may be useful for all Parties to provide similar explanations. Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland) suggested adding columns to include the observer figures, master figures, and landed figures for comparison. The United Kingdom noted that it would be useful to have clear instructions on what Contracting Parties should be including in the Article 30 reporting template, as it seems Parties have varying interpretations of how to complete the tables. Contracting Parties agreed to revisit this discussion of the Article 30 reporting template at the 2026 Annual Meeting. The NAFO Secretariat presented the first draft Annual Fisheries and Compliance Review in STACTIC WP 26-04 (Revised), and Contracting Parties provided initial comments and clarifications. Canada offered to facilitate a meeting with interested Parties to draft the conclusions and recommendations sections ahead of the 2026 Annual Meeting. It was agreed that: • Contracting Parties provide any necessary revisions to STACTIC WP 26-01 (Rev. 4), STACTIC WP 26-02 (Rev. 2), STACTIC WP 26-03 (Rev. 3), and STACTIC WP 26-04 (Rev. 2) ahead of the 2026 STACTIC Annual Meeting. • Canada and the Secretariat to coordinate a meeting with interested Contracting Parties to review STACTIC WP 26-04 (Rev.2), with the aim of drafting the conclusions and recommendations sections, prior to the 2