SHELLFISH CORALS

SHELLFISH CORALS

FISHERIES • Oyster surveys • Coral surveys • Plankton surveys BIRDS • Tissue and • Tissue collections • Invertebrate surveys AQUATIC • Aerial surveys sediment • Contaminant • Adult fish surveys • Ground surveys sampling VEGETATION • Mussel collection surveys • Larval fish surveys • Aerial surveys • Nearshore boat surveys • Shrimp collection • Field surveys in large beds of • Offshore boat aquatic vegetation surveys • Radio telemetry

¶This figure represents the various natural resource categories being assessed as part of the Deepwater Horizon Natural Resource Damage Assessment. Such an assessment, which always follows an oil spill, is used to make the public whole for ecological damages caused by a spill. This graphic illustrates the three-dimensional challenges that an assessment of a deep sea blowout presents.

¶NOAA (adapted)

¶Natural Resource Damage Assessment The federal Oil Pollution Act (OPA or the Act) creates a process for assessing the damages caused by an oil spill and then the expenditure of monies collected to address those damages. To that end, the Act formally designates "natural resource trustees," who are responsible for assessing the "natural resources damages" of the spill.69 (Figure 6.1) The trustees accordingly prepare a "natural resource damage assessment" that seeks to quantify oil-spill damages to: (1) public natural resources; (2) the services they provide (e.g., oysters provide water filtration); and (3) the public's lost use of those resources.70 For the Macondo spill, NOAA and the Department of the Interior are leading the effort as trustees on behalf of the federal government.71 The Department of Defense will also participate on behalf of affected military property along the Gulf coast.72 The federal representatives will be joined by natural resource trustees from the five Gulf States.73

¶Identifying and quantifying damages, particularly where complex ecosystems are involved, present enormous challenges. Developing sound sampling protocols that cover adequate time scales, teasing out the effects of other environmental disturbances, and scaling the damages to the appropriate restoration projects often takes considerable time. A typical damage assessment can take years. Two sets of determinations—one concerning the baseline conditions against which damages to each species or habitat will be assessed and

another concerning the quantification of those damages—are particularly difficult and consequential in terms of the overall results.

The goal of a natural resource damage assessment is "to make the environment and public whole for injuries to natural resources and services resulting from [an oil spill]."74 The injury is quantified by reference to baseline conditions: "the condition of the natural resources and services that would have existed had the incident not occurred."75 But making this determination is often inherently difficult and highly contentious. Without well-established baseline conditions, there can be inaccurate quantification of damages or required restoration. Given that the ecological baseline can vary seasonally, annually, and over much longer time scales, it can be difficult to pinpoint the exact condition of an ecosystem prior to a spill. Because long-term historical data are often nonexistent or discontinuous, natural resource trustees are likely to be disadvantaged by a lack of sufficient information to fully characterize the condition of relevant ecosystems prior to the incident in question.76

As OPA regulations indicate, "baseline" for purposes of damage assessment is generally considered to be the condition of the resource just prior to the spill.77 The precise application of this definition has particular importance in the Gulf of Mexico context, where many coastal habitats have been substantially degraded over decades—even centuries—under the pressure of ever-expanding industrial, commercial, and residential development. The natural resource damage assessment regulations, as generally applied, require that BP and other potentially responsible parties restore Gulf resources to their functioning level as of April 19, 2010—by which point the Gulf ecosystem in April 2010 was already weakened.78 In this context, effective long-term restoration will require the stabilization and eventual reversal of a number of long-standing, damaging trends.

The effort to thoroughly address the ecological impacts of this historic pollution event is unprecedented in scale. Thousands of samples have been collected from dozens of research cruises. Hundreds of miles of coastline have been observed and sampled.79 Marine mammals and turtles are being observed aerially and monitored by satellite or radio tracking devices.80 The assessment of natural resources damages is the largest and most complex that the government has ever undertaken to assess oil spill impacts.

Supporting independent scientific research. Apart from these governmental efforts, independent scientists have also sought to study the spill's impacts. But funding for academic and other scientists in the days and weeks immediately after the spill was limited.81 As a result, the nation lost a fleeting opportunity to maximize scientific understanding of how oil spills—particularly in the deep ocean—adversely affect individual organisms and the marine ecosystem. Such research depends on sampling, measurements, and investigations that can be accomplished only during and right after the spill. The National Science Foundation tried to fill the gap by funding studies under its Grants for Rapid Response Research (RAPID) Program, aimed at better understanding potential impacts to coastal and marine habitats and resources.82 Through September 2010, the Foundation funded 167 Deepwater Horizon research projects totaling $19.4 million.83 The Foundation became practically the sole provider of emergency funding for independent

¶scientists as the disaster unfolded. Nevertheless, the Program was not a panacea—because individual RAPID grants cannot exceed $200,000 per year, many scientists were left to seek additional funding to pay for the necessary, costly chemical analyses of their environmental samples.

¶In May, BP committed to provide $500 million for independent research on ecosystem assessment, impacts, and recovery efforts. Unfortunately, for multiple procedural and political reasons, by late November 2010 BP had only allocated a small portion of that money.84 BP has since announced that it intends to work through the Gulf of Mexico Alliance, an organization led by the five Gulf coast governors, to implement this research program.85 Here too, meaningful scientific inquiry will need to include long-term monitoring of the impacts of the spill on the Gulf 's marine and coastal ecosystems.

¶With numerous studies under way through both the government's damage-assessment process and independent scientific research, the published literature regarding environmental impacts from the Macondo blowout can be expected to grow substantially. Major research commitments, totaling hundreds of millions of dollars, have already been made.86

¶Economic Impacts The Deepwater Horizon oil spill put at risk two enormous economic engines that rely on it. Tourism and fishing, the industries affected as collateral damage, were highly sensitive to both direct ecosystem harm and, indirectly, public perceptions and fears of tainted seafood and soiled beaches. For this reason, whatever uncertainty may exist about the immediate and long-term adverse environmental impacts of the oil spill, no such uncertainty exists in terms of the significant adverse economic effects—especially from loss of confidence in commercial fishing.87 The Gulf coast's economy depends heavily on commercial fisheries, tourism, and energy production88—each directly and immediately affected by the oil gushing from the Macondo well. Federal and state closures of commercial fisheries—a precautionary public-health measure—at once suspended much of the fishing and processing industry;89 public concern nationwide that seafood was not safe to eat further compounded the economic impact along the Gulf.90 Similarly, public perception that otherwise clean beaches were, or would become, oiled or that air quality during peak vacation season was impaired led to declines in hotel bookings, restaurant seatings, and a wide array of coastal activities.91 Claims for losses have been submitted by real-estate agents and developers,92 fishing charters,93 and even an Alabama dentist who alleged a loss of summer customers.94 And the Gulf oil and gas industry, its workers, and the regional economy were affected as the federal government imposed a moratorium (described in Chapter 5) on deepwater drilling intended to prevent another disastrous spill while the causes and consequences of the blowout were evaluated.95

¶That BP agreed to place in escrow a $20 billion fund to help address financial losses, at President Obama's urging, indicates the magnitude of the economic impact from the loss of control of this one deepwater well.96 In its first eight weeks of operation, as of November 23, the independently administered Gulf Coast Claims Facility had paid out more than $2 billion to approximately 127,000 claimants.97 By comparison, during its two-year

¶Figure 6.2: Annual Tourism & Fishing Revenue: Economic Activity by County