Greg DiDomenico Archives - Page 3 of 4

Trade groups want 10-year requirement removed from Magnuson-Stevens Act

September 15, 2017 — As Congress gets ready to address reauthorizing the Magnuson-Stevens Act, representatives from commercial fishing interests are urging lawmakers to revisit some of the current law’s regulations they feel have hindered the industry.

In particular, they’re urging officials to do away with language that caps rebuilding plans for overfished species to 10 years. It’s an arbitrary figure that has too rigidly applied across all federally managed species, said Lori Steele, the executive director of the West Coast Seafood Processors Association, at a hearing Tuesday of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation’s Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard.

“Mixed stock and multispecies fisheries in particular are incredibly complex to understand and manage,” she said in a prepared statement. “We’ve experienced this on the East Coast and the West Coast. Stocks within a multispecies complex can have very different life histories and growth rates.”

Greg DiDomenico, executive director for the Garden State Seafood Association, joined her in support for ending the requirement, adding his group wants rebuilding plans based on science.

“We support rebuilding plans that can take into account environmental factors and predator/prey relationships,” he said.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

East and West Coast NCFC Members Testify on Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization at Senate Hearing

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — September 12, 2017 — Two members of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC) testified before a key Senate Subcommittee today on the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

The hearing was convened by Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard, and was the third in a series of hearings on the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Lori Steele, Executive Director of the West Coast Seafood Processors Association

Lori Steele, Executive Director of the West Coast Seafood Processors Association based out of Oregon, and Greg DiDomenico, Executive Director of the Garden State Seafood Association based out of New Jersey, discussed the state of U.S. fishery laws and the needs of commercial fishermen.

In written testimony submitted to the Subcommittee, Ms. Steele said in part:

“Based on my prior experience with the New England Council and currently with the seafood industry on the West Coast, I feel confident the next MSA reauthorization can build on lessons learned from our past experiences in order to truly fulfill one of the fundamental and original goals of the MSA, emphasized in National Standard 1, the Act’s guiding principle – to prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery. From its beginning, the MSA has conserved, protected, rebuilt, and sustained marine resources in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). As we move forward with this next reauthorization, we have an opportunity to better conserve, protect, and sustain the people, the economies, the culture, and the communities that rely upon healthy and abundant fisheries.”

Read Ms. Steele’s full testimony here

In written testimony submitted to the Subcommittee, Mr. DiDomenico said in part:

“We believe there are four main threats to the domestic fishing industry that are consistent with the concerns of this Subcommittee. They are as follows: (1) the status of the implementation of the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), specifically the 2006 Amendments which were interpreted to be overly precautionary and limit management flexibility; (2) the growing efforts of the environmental industry to curtail commercial fishing access via use of the Antiquities Act, National Marine Sanctuary designations, and marine planning created pursuant to the National Ocean Policy; (3) the chronic inability to estimate and manage recreational fishing mortality; and (4) the potential for unfair implementation of catch shares.”

Read Mr. DiDomenico’s full testimony here

Alaska Sen. Sullivan Schedules Next Magnuson-Stevens Hearing for Sept. 12

September 11, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, is continuing his series of hearings regarding reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, with another one scheduled for next week in Washington, D.C.

Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation member Sullivan, chairman of the Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard, will convene the hearing, “Reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act: Oversight of Fisheries Management Successes and Challenges” at 2:30 p.m. on Tuesday, Sept. 12, in Room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building. The hearing is the third of the series and will focus on the perspectives of commercial, charter, and recreational fishermen on the state of our nation’s fishery laws.

The first panel of witnesses include: Phil Faulkner, President, Nautic Star Boats; Jim Donofrio, Executive Director, Recreational Fishing Alliance; and Chris Horton, Senior Director, Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation.

The second panel of witnesses includes: Lori Steele, Executive Director, West Coast Seafood Processors Association; Capt. Robert F. Zales, II, President, National Association of Charterboat Operators; and Greg DiDomenico, Executive Director, Garden State Seafood Association.

The hearing coincides with the National Fisheries Institute’s Annual Political Conference, when many seafood company representatives will be in Washington, D.C.

Witness testimony, opening statements, and a live video of the hearing will be available on www.commerce.senate.gov.

This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

Shark Fin Soup Could Become Extinct Across the United States

May 23, 2017 — The Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act by U.S. Rep. Ed Royce of Fullerton would extend a similar prohibition to all 50 states. In the upper house, Sen. Cory Booker’s Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act would prohibit the import, export, sale and trade of shark fins. The fishing industry is fighting the legislation, while animal rights advocates say the practice of finning, in which sharks are often maimed and left for dead, needs to stop.

Shark finning is illegal in domestic waters, but sharks are sometimes caught outside the United States and their fins imported. Advocates for the business argue that federal regulations already require all domestic fishing to be ecologically sustainable and that so few sharks fins traded in the United States — the Sustainable Shark Alliance says the country is responsible for about 3 percent of global shark fin trade — that the law is unnecessary.

“We believe in sustainable harvesting [of] every aquatic species and using the whole animal whenever possible,” says Robert Vannase, executive director of Saving Seafood, a public outreach group funded by the commercial fishing industry. “There is demand for shark fins, and we think it makes much more sense for that demand to be fulfilled by well-regulated, sustainable fishing rather than to have the U.S. check out of the market entirely.”

Industry advocates emphasize that when sharks are caught or imported, the whole fish is used. Banning shark fins would contradict this ethos of sustainable fishing, they say. “Why would you throw them in the trash,” says Greg DiDomenico, executive director of New Jersey’s Garden State Seafood Association and a vocal critic of the Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act. He adds that such a ban could put some small-scale fishing concerns out of business. “This is a razor-thin margin business,” DiDomenico says. “It will remove another choice for American working fishermen.”

“It’s punishing people who are playing by the rules,” adds Shaun Gehan, an attorney for the pro-fishing-industry Sustainable Shark Alliance.

Read the full story at L.A. Weekly

ENGOs Renew Push for Shark Trade Elimination Act Passage; Industry, Scientists Push Back

May 16, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — Like sharks in a feeding frenzy, a group of scientists, students and Oceana are circling, renewing their push to pass the Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act, threatening sustainable U.S shark fisheries. The scientists and ENGOs also say sharks are in decline.

On the other side, the Sustainable Shark Alliance, a U.S. seafood industry trade group, opposes the legislation. It’s unnecessary, they say, won’t make a dent in the global shark trade and ultimately penalize responsible fishermen.

“Oceana presents a false choice between a sustainable domestic shark fishery and other uses, such as tourism,” Shaun Gehan, a lawyer for the Sustainable Shark Alliance, said in a statement. “University and federal studies alike show growing domestic populations.”

The practice of shark finning, using only the fins and releasing the shark, has been banned in the U.S. since 1993. Some states have passed legislation banning trade of some shark parts or some species.

“The Shark Finning Prohibition Act ended the brutal practice of finning, the removal of the sharks’ fins while discarding their bodies at sea, and the Shark Conservation Act eventually closed some of its loopholes ensuring that sharks are landed with their fins naturally attached to their bodies,” the scientists wrote in their May 9 letter to Congress. “However, the United States continues to allow the buying and selling of fins. Five of the 11 countries that export shark fins to the U.S. do not prohibit shark finning. Therefore, while the U.S. bans shark finning in its own waters, it indirectly promotes this practice elsewhere and perpetuates the global trade in shark fins.”

Alliance members and other scientists counter that the Shark Trade Elimination Act will, by removing sustainably sourced shark parts, result in the increase of illegal trade of shark fins.

“Oceana and their partners are grossly misinformed and are misinforming the public,” said Bob Jones, Executive Director of the Southeastern Fisheries Association. “The U.S. shark fishery is the most sustainably run shark fishery in the world. Oceana should be promoting the responsible practices of the fishery instead of working to dismantle it.”

Dr. David Shiffman, a renowned shark conservation biologist, also is against the proposed legislation and wrote about it on the marine science and conservation blog Southern Fried Science.

“Shark fin trade bans do not allow for a sustainable supply of shark fins to enter the marketplace, punishing American fishermen who are doing it right,” Shiffman wrote. “Sustainable trade is incompatible with a total ban on trade, at least in the same place and time. The United States has some of the most sustainable managed shark fisheries on Earth. When these fisheries provide fins to the marketplace, it shows that fins can absolutely come from a well-managed shark fishery.”

Moreover, using the sustainably managed U.S. shark fisheries as examples would be better in the long run when the U.S. is negotiating with other countries, Shiffman said.

“This can be an important example for international fisheries negotiations and associated advocacy (e.g., ‘the United States manages their shark fisheries well, and so can you, here’s how.’),” Shiffman wrote. “According to Dr. Robert Hueter of Mote Marine Laboratory, a nationwide ban on the shark fin trade ‘will cause the demise of a legal domestic industry that is showing the rest of the world how to utilize sharks in a responsible, sustainable way.’ (And yes, sustainable shark fisheries absolutely can exist and do exist, although there are certainly many more examples of unsustainable shark fisheries.)”

While not affecting illegal international shark populations, the bill will hurt U.S. shark fishermen who play by the rules. It will force fishermen to dispose of shark fins on every shark they catch, which currently account for 50 percent of a shark’s value. Proper management can only occur when U.S. shark fisheries are allowed to collect the full value of their catch – without this revenue, shark fisheries will not be able to afford fuel costs and will cease to exist, the Alliance said in the statement.

“Our members are struck by the intolerance of the proponents of this campaign. It is clear that they are indifferent to the potential loss of income. I guess the livelihoods of fishing families are insignificant to the folks who support Oceana’s agenda,” said Greg DiDomenico, Executive Director of the Garden State Seafood Association.

Other respected shark scientists have come out in opposition to the legislation as well, including Dr. Robert E. Hueter. Hueter is the Director of the Center for Shark Research at Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota Florida, and has more than 40 years of experience in shark research.

“This bill will do nothing to effectively combat the practice of finning on the high seas and in other countries, where the real problem lies, and it will not significantly reduce mortality of the sharks killed in global fisheries every year,” Hueter wrote in a letter to Congress.

This story originally appeared on SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

Sustainable Shark Alliance Opposes Unnecessary Bill Threatening to Shut Down U.S Shark Fisheries

May 12, 2017 — The following was released by the Sustainable Shark Alliance:

The future of sustainable U.S. shark fisheries is threatened by a renewed push by environmental groups to pass an unnecessary law that will do little to dent the illegal global shark trade, while penalizing responsible U.S. fishermen. Earlier this month, Oceana circulated a new letter with 150 signers, mostly academics and students, in favor of the Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act, which would ban the buying and selling of shark fins in the United States but do nothing to improving shark conservation.

Shark finning – a reprehensible practice universally derided by responsible fishermen whereby a shark’s fins are removed and the mortally wounded creature is released back into the ocean – has been banned in the U.S. since 1993.

“Oceana presents a false choice between a sustainable domestic shark fishery and other uses, such as tourism,” said Shaun Gehan, a lawyer for the Sustainable Shark Alliance. “University and federal studies alike show growing domestic populations.”

Today, roughly three percent of shark fins in the global market come from the United States. Removing these sustainably sourced fins will only create a void that would be filled from illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing operations operating in the international market.

While not affecting illegal international shark populations, the bill will hurt U.S. shark fishermen who play by the rules. It will force fishermen to dispose of shark fins on every shark they catch, which currently account for 50% of a shark’s value. Proper management can only occur when U.S. shark fisheries are allowed to collect the full value of their catch – without this revenue, shark fisheries will not be able to afford fuel costs and will cease to exist.

Respected shark scientists have come out in opposition to the legislation, including Dr. Robert E. Hueter. Dr. Hueter is the Director of the Center for Shark Research at Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota Florida, and has over 40 years of experience in shark research.

“[The Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act] is not about ending finning, therefore, but instead will cause the demise of a legal domestic industry that is showing the rest of the world how to utilize sharks in a responsible, sustainable way,” wrote Dr. Hueter in a letter to Congress. “This bill will do nothing to effectively combat the practice of finning on the high seas and in other countries, where the real problem lies, and it will not significantly reduce mortality of the sharks killed in global fisheries every year.”

The Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act paves the way for illegal fishing operations to thrive while effectively shutting down a U.S. industry that has adhered to stringent regulations for decades. Instead of attempting to send a symbolic message, it’s far more important that the U.S. continues to support a shark fishing operation that exemplifies sustainable practices for the world to follow.

About the Sustainable Shark Alliance

The Sustainable Shark Alliance (SSA) is a coalition of shark fishermen and seafood dealers that advocates for sustainable U.S. shark fisheries and supports healthy shark populations. The SSA stands behind U.S. shark fisheries as global leaders in successful shark management and conservation. Its supporters in the U.S. shark fishery include:

Safe Harbour Seafood, Bon Secour, AL
Bryant Products, Bayou La Batre, AL
Madeira Beach Seafood, Madeira Beach, FL
Save On Seafood, St. Petersburg, FL
Seafood Atlantic, Port Canaveral, FL
Greg Abrams Seafood, Panama City, FL
AP Bell Seafood, Madeira Beach, FL
Fishermen’s Ice & Bait, Madeira Beach, FL
Kings Seafood, Port Orange, FL
Wild Ocean Market Seafood, Titusville, FL
Omni Shrimp Company, Madeira Beach, FL
Day Boat Seafood, Lake Park, FL
Phoenix Fisheries, Southport, FL
DSF, Inc., Daytona Bch., FL
Hull’s Seafood Markets, Inc., Ormond Beach, FL
Phillips Seafood, Townsend, GA
Ocean Fresh Seafood, New Orleans, LA
Venice Fish and Shrimp, Venice, LA
Southern Seafood Connect’n, Crisfield, MD
Crystal Coast Fisheries, Morehead City, NC
Avon Seafood, Avon, NC
Wanchese Fisheries, Wanchese, NC
O’Neal’s Sea Harvest, Wanchese, NC
Jeffery’s Seafood, Hatteras, NC
B & J Seafood, New Bern, NC
Willie R. Etheridge Seafood, Wanchese, NC
Crystal Coast Dayboat Seafood, Morehead City, NC
Viking Village Seafood, Barnegat Light, NJ
Carolina Seafood, Rutledge Leeland, SC

Read the release here

A canyon-sized power struggle is developing 100 miles off New Jersey’s coast

May 8, 2017 — It makes little sense that these two groups would be fighting at all.

On one side are the environmentalists, who wish to keep marine life safe from the harmful effects of gas and oil drilling in the Atlantic Ocean. On the other are the fishermen, who want precisely the same thing — to protect their catches and their business.

Yet a divide between the groups has been created, approximately 100 miles east of the mouth of the Hudson River off the New Jersey coast. That’s where the two sides are waging war over the future of the Hudson Canyon, an almost-mile-deep crack in the sea floor.

It’s a battle that has become even more pitched, especially since President Trump has moved to bring oil and gas drilling back to the Atlantic Ocean.

So how did this power struggle develop, and what exactly are the two groups disagreeing about?

In November 2016, the Wildlife Conservation Society nominated Hudson Canyon to be designated a National Marine Sanctuary. The WCS selected the canyon, the largest submarine crevice on the Atlantic Coast, due to its wide biodiversity. The canyon is home to more than 20 protected species, including the North Atlantic right whale, according to the conservation group.

“This is a canyon the scale of the Grand Canyon,” said Jon Forrest Dohlin, the Vice President of the WCS and the director of the New York Aquarium. “It seemed like something that could really benefit from awareness and protection.”

Commercial fishermen in New Jersey fear losing access to a profitable fishing ground. According the Greg DiDomenico, the executive director of the Garden State Seafood Association, $48 million worth of seafood was caught in the Hudson Canyon in 2014. That’s almost a third of the $149.3 million catch landed by New Jersey fishermen that year, according to the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Read the full story at NJ.com

MAFMC Overwhelmingly Rejects Hudson Canyon Sanctuary Proposal

Image courtesy of Hudson Canyon Cruise 2002

April 14, 2017 — On Wednesday, the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council voted 15-4 in opposition to a proposal by the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) to name the offshore Hudson Canyon a National Marine Sanctuary. The proposal was widely opposed by both commercial and recreational fishermen.

“The proponents of the sanctuary nomination will eventually claim that commercial fishing in the sanctuary is a threat,” said Garden State Seafood Association executive director Greg DiDomenico, who testified in-person at the MAFMC meeting. “They will use the authority under the Sanctuaries Act to address those threats and restrict commercial fishing. In addition, they want to conduct science, and educate and organize a constituent base, all things that they can accomplish without making the Hudson Canyon a sanctuary. It’s that constituent base that they will use later to harm the commercial fishing industry.”

The American Bluefin Tuna Association (ABTA) praised the MAFMC’s decision to oppose the sanctuary nomination. In a press release today, ABTA wrote, “Notwithstanding statements made by the WCS at the meeting that sanctuary status would not affect fishing in the area, great concern was expressed by the Council for the fact that the Marine Sanctuary Act provides for a sanctuary to have ultimate statutory authority over fishing […] The MAFMC should be applauded for a bold decision taken at the appropriate time.”

The following is excerpted from an article published yesterday by The Fisherman:

In their official nomination, the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and their Coney Island Aquarium staff outlined their specific reasons for nominating the offshore Hudson Canyon as a National Marine Sanctuary.

“Many people, whether they are ocean enthusiasts or have never set foot in salt water, will never make it out to the Hudson Canyon itself because of its distance offshore and accessibility being restricted to a half-day boat trip,” the letter says, adding “WCS has the unique opportunity to bring the wonder of the deep sea directly to millions of visitors each year through interactive exhibits within our parks.”

For thousands of coastal fishermen who don’t mind the “half-day boat trip” to the Hudson to tangle with mahi, tuna and billfish, there was good news on April 12 when the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) voted 15-4 in opposition to the WCS pitch to designate the Hudson Canyon as a restricted area of the ocean.

While claiming to have “community-based support for the nomination expressed by a broad range of interests,” the WCS marine sanctuary plan had actual fishermen and fishing industry leaders incensed.

In a letter of opposition on behalf of coastal fishermen, Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA) executive director Jim Donofrio noted that regardless of the WCS’s intention, recreational fishermen would not have any legal protection under the federal sanctuary law.

Read the full story at The Fisherman

Read a press release from ABTA here

Read a letter from ABTA to the MAFMC here

Recreational fishermen push for pots off reefs

November 18, 2016 — A couple lobster men spoke their opposition to any plan that would deny them use of the ocean floor.

Greg DiDomenico, the head of the commercial fishing trade group Garden State Seafood Association, said he didn’t doubt the existence of gear conflicts on the reefs but would like to see a compromise made instead.

“All we really want is some resolution to this problem other than a complete prohibition,” he said.

The group suggested before that the reefs should be divided among users groups: three reefs for divers, six for recreational fishermen, and three for commercial fishermen. One reef would remain as a scientific no take zone.

Read the full story at the Asbury Park Press

GSSA Executive Director Greg DiDomenico to Talk Sustainable Fishing at New York Times Food Conference

September 27, 2016 – The following was released by the Garden State Seafood Association:

TRENTON, N.J. (Garden State Seafood Association) — September 27, 2016 – Today, Garden State Seafood Association (GSSA) Executive Director Greg DiDomenico will discuss sustainable fishing issues at t he New York Times’“Food for Tomorrow” conference. The conference, which seeks to “uncover and assess the most important issues and trends affecting the nourishment of our nation and the world,” is hosting a panel on marine issues and fisheries management, titled “Tricky Waters,” addressing “the demand for fish without depleting our oceans.” Joining Mr. DiDomenico on the panel will be Sean T. Barrett, Co-Founder of Dock to Dish and Bren Smith, Owner of Thimble Island Ocean Farm and Executive Director of GreenWave.

The GSSA has been at the forefront of promoting sustainable fisheries, while also advocating on behalf of New Jersey fishermen. In 2015, it worked with other fishing groups, environmentalists, and fishery managers at the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council to pass the Deep Sea Coral Amendment. This open, transparent, and inclusive effort resulted in new protections nearly 40,000 square miles of Mid-Atlantic corals, and has been praised by both fishermen and conservationists alike.

“The GSSA has always been a force for conservation in the Mid-Atlantic, and an example of how we can balance the real and serious concerns of the commercial fishing industry, with ensuring the future health of our oceans,” said Mr. DiDomenico.

In his remarks, Mr. DiDomenico plans to address the misconceptions surrounding current fishing practices, and to highlight the sustainable nature of U.S. fisheries management and domestically caught seafood. Mr. DiDomenico will also discuss the value of fish as a low-cost protein alternative that will be instrumental in feeding a hungry world.

GSSA leaders have been awarded for their past work on sustainability issues. In 2015, the New York Aquarium recognized Mr. DiDomenico as a Conservation Leader. Ernie Panacek, the President of the GSSA, was also honored in 2015, receiving the Urban Coast Institute’s Regional Ocean Champion Award.

“Food for Tomorrow” will take place from September 26-28 at the Stone Barns Center for Food and Agriculture in Pocantico Hills, New York. The event will be streamed live on The New York Times’ website, beginning at 4:35 PM on September 27. Other notable speakers include US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack on the Obama Administration’s food policy record, television star Martha Stewart on the future of food, and Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney on a recent Philadelphia initiative to tax soda consumption.