New Zealand’s onboard camera rollout increased transparency in inshore fisheries. Its future is uncertain.

Background: why cameras were introduced In 2016 leaked documents showed that the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) had evidence of systematic illegal discarding of low-value fish and other violations on commercial vessels, including failures to report a catch of an endangered Hector's dolphin. MPI's choice not to prosecute or disclose those findings prompted questions about what happens on fishing vessels when there are no independent observers.

MPI and Fisheries New Zealand moved to require onboard cameras and other electronic monitoring across much of New Zealand's inshore fleet. The rollout focused on vessels that operate close to shore and was completed in 2025. It covers vessels using six types of fishing gear and now accounts for most of the inshore catch. Deepwater vessels are not included in this program.

Conservation-minded observers and NGOs report improved transparency and better data on bycatch and protected-species interactions. Sharks Pacific's policy director Bubba Cook described the system as delivering greater accountability and a clearer understanding of removals, particularly for bycatch species. Commercial fishers, both large and small, have shown growing support for the system, noting technical and economic feasibility when supported correctly.

Shane Jones, the Fisheries New Zealand minister who took office after the camera rollout was underway, has publicly criticized the system, calling it "state surveillance of industry." He considered halting the rollout and has sponsored legislation that would restrict public access to camera footage. Despite his skepticism, his government allowed the program to continue, and the cameras remain largely intact as of his tenure.

A fisher's perspective: the Chips case

The camera program does not cover deepwater fleets, so gaps in coverage remain. The system is described as imperfect by conservation groups, and its effectiveness will depend on how footage is managed, who can access it, and continued technical and operational support. Political moves to limit public access to footage could change transparency outcomes even if the monitoring hardware stays in place.

Key indicators of the program's durability will be any legal or regulatory changes that restrict access to footage, decisions about expanding or excluding deepwater vessels, and the balance of support between industry actors who have embraced cameras and political actors skeptical of the program's oversight role. Continued reporting on bycatch figures and enforcement actions tied to camera evidence will also show whether the monitoring translates into measurable conservation and compliance gains.