Dear EarthTalk:
I’ve seen a lot of warm and fuzzy TV ads, some sponsored by BP Oil,
urging me to vacation in the Gulf of Mexico. But are things really
“back to normal?” - Paul Shea,
Dublin, OH
It is still unclear
whether or not marine and coastal ecosystems in the Gulf of Mexico are
healthy two years after BP’s offshore drilling rig exploded 40 miles
off the Louisiana coast, eventually releasing 205.8 million gallons of
oil into the water column.
Pic Credit: U.S. Coast
Guard
The
Gulf of Mexico may be open for business and eager to attract tourists,
but it’s still unclear whether or not marine and coastal ecosystems
there are healthy two years after BP’s offshore drilling rig exploded
40 miles off the Louisiana coast, eventually releasing 205.8 million
gallons of oil into the water column.
Five months after the April 2010 disaster the Obama administration released a detailed recovery plan, calling for spending up to $21 billion—most which would come from BP’s civil penalties—on clean-up and long-term ecosystem restoration. With much of this work—designed to complement the restorative powers of Mother Nature—well underway, some observers are pleased with the results so far.
“The natural recovery is far greater than what anybody hoped when it happened,” says James Morris, a University of South Carolina biologist and a member of the National Research Council committee tasked by Congress to assess the effects of the spill on the Gulf's ecosystem. “The fears of most people—that there would be a catastrophic collapse of the ecosystem in the Gulf—never materialized.”
“The fisheries have come back like gangbusters,” Morris reports. “One of the interesting findings was that after the oil spill, bait fish populations collapsed, and predator populations boomed. The reason was that there was no fishing pressure on the top predators because people stopped fishing after the spill. So the predator fish populations rebounded, and they grazed down their prey.”
Not everyone shares such a rosy view. The international environmental group Greenpeace reports: “Throughout the food chain, warning signs are accumulating. Dolphins are sick and dying. Important forage fish are plagued with gill and developmental damage. Deepwater species like snapper have been stricken with lesions and their reefs are losing biodiversity. Coastal communities are struggling with changes to the fisheries they rely upon. Hard-hit oyster reefs aren’t coming back and sport fish like speckled trout have disappeared from some of their traditional haunts.”
Still other observers argue that two years is not enough time to tell whether the region’s ecosystems will be severely damaged long term. “We really don’t know the effects the Deepwater Horizon spill had in the deep sea because we know little about the ecosystem processes there,” reports Gary Cherr, director of UC Davis’ Bodega Marine Laboratory and a lead author on a recently released paper published in the journal Bioscience. Cherr and his fellow researchers, including leading oceanographers, ecotoxicologists, and ecologists, conclude that scientists need more time to study how to contain damage from such accidents, especially given the trend to seek new sources of oil in off-shore regions around the U.S. and beyond.
“The deep sea is not a dead zone. It’s not a desert. There’s a lot of life down there,” adds Cherr. “Unfortunately it’s not until a disaster happens that we try to piece together the impacts. That’s difficult to do when you don’t have a complete—or even partial—understanding of the ecosystem.”
Five months after the April 2010 disaster the Obama administration released a detailed recovery plan, calling for spending up to $21 billion—most which would come from BP’s civil penalties—on clean-up and long-term ecosystem restoration. With much of this work—designed to complement the restorative powers of Mother Nature—well underway, some observers are pleased with the results so far.
“The natural recovery is far greater than what anybody hoped when it happened,” says James Morris, a University of South Carolina biologist and a member of the National Research Council committee tasked by Congress to assess the effects of the spill on the Gulf's ecosystem. “The fears of most people—that there would be a catastrophic collapse of the ecosystem in the Gulf—never materialized.”
“The fisheries have come back like gangbusters,” Morris reports. “One of the interesting findings was that after the oil spill, bait fish populations collapsed, and predator populations boomed. The reason was that there was no fishing pressure on the top predators because people stopped fishing after the spill. So the predator fish populations rebounded, and they grazed down their prey.”
Not everyone shares such a rosy view. The international environmental group Greenpeace reports: “Throughout the food chain, warning signs are accumulating. Dolphins are sick and dying. Important forage fish are plagued with gill and developmental damage. Deepwater species like snapper have been stricken with lesions and their reefs are losing biodiversity. Coastal communities are struggling with changes to the fisheries they rely upon. Hard-hit oyster reefs aren’t coming back and sport fish like speckled trout have disappeared from some of their traditional haunts.”
Still other observers argue that two years is not enough time to tell whether the region’s ecosystems will be severely damaged long term. “We really don’t know the effects the Deepwater Horizon spill had in the deep sea because we know little about the ecosystem processes there,” reports Gary Cherr, director of UC Davis’ Bodega Marine Laboratory and a lead author on a recently released paper published in the journal Bioscience. Cherr and his fellow researchers, including leading oceanographers, ecotoxicologists, and ecologists, conclude that scientists need more time to study how to contain damage from such accidents, especially given the trend to seek new sources of oil in off-shore regions around the U.S. and beyond.
“The deep sea is not a dead zone. It’s not a desert. There’s a lot of life down there,” adds Cherr. “Unfortunately it’s not until a disaster happens that we try to piece together the impacts. That’s difficult to do when you don’t have a complete—or even partial—understanding of the ecosystem.”
CONTACTS:
James Morris,
ww2.biol.sc.edu/~morris;
Greenpeace,
www.greenpeace.org;
Bioscience paper,
www.aibs.org/bioscience-press-releases/resources/Peterson.pdf.
In Spanish :
Querido
DiálogoEcológico:
He visto bastantes anuncios celebratorios en televisión,
muchos patrocinados por British Petroleum (BP), instándome a
ir de vacaciones en el Golfo de México. ¿Pero han vuelto las
cosas realmente “a la normalidad?” -
Paul Shea, Dublín, OH
No se sabe todavía
si los ecosistemas marinos y costeros del Golfo de México están sanos
dos años después de la explosión de la torre perforadora de BP 64 km
costa afuera del litoral de Luisiana, eventualmente dejando escapar
205,8 millones de galones en la columna de agua.
El Golfo de México puede estar
abierto para el comercio y ansioso de atraer turistas, pero todavía no
está claro si los ecosistemas marinos y costeros son sanos dos años
después de la explosión del aparejo de perforación de BP a 40 millas
de la costa de Luisiana, dejando escapar al final 205,8 millones de
galones de petróleo en la columna de agua.
Cinco meses después del desastre
de abril de 2010 la administración de Obama publicó un plan detallado
de recuperación, invocando una inversión de hasta $21 mil
millones—cuya mayor parte vendría de las penas civiles de BP—para la
limpieza y restauración a largo plazo del ecosistema. Con mucho de
este trabajo ya bien en marcha—diseñado para complementar los poderes
reconstituyentes de la Naturaleza—algunos observadores se pronuncian
contentos con los resultados hasta este momento.
"La recuperación natural es mucho
más grande que lo que se esperaba cuando sucedió la tragedia," dice
James Morris, un biólogo con la Universidad de Carolina del Sur y
miembro del comité del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones encargado
por el Congreso de evaluar los efectos del derrame en el ecosistema
del Golfo. "Los temores de la mayoría de las personas—que habría un
desplome catastrófico del ecosistema en el Golfo—nunca se realizó".
"Las pesquerías se han recuperado
en forma abismante," reportea Morris. "Una de las conclusiones
interesantes fue que después de la fuga de petróleo, las poblaciones
de pez cebo se desplomaron, y las poblaciones de peces de rapiña
explotaron. La razón fue que no había presión pesquera en los
principales animales de rapiña porque la gente dejó de pescar después
del derrame. De esta manera las poblaciones de peces de rapiña se
expandieron enormemente, y diezmaron su presa habitual".
No todos comparten una visión tan
color de rosa. El grupo ambiental internacional Greenpeace indica: "A
través de la cadena alimenticia, las señales de alerta se están
acumulando. Los delfines están enfermos y a menudo agonizantes. Peces
importante de forraje están plagados de daños en las agallas y en su
desarrollo. Especies de agua profunda como el pargo han sido afectadas
con lesiones y sus arrecifes están perdiendo biodiversidad. Las
comunidades costeras luchan con cambios en las pesquerías que
constituyen su sustento. Los arrecifes de ostras fuertemente afectados
no se recuperan y peces de deporte como la trucha moteada han
desaparecido de algunos de sus lugares tradicionales".
Sin embargo otros observadores
afirman que dos años no son suficiente tiempo como para decir si los
ecosistemas de la región serán dañados severamente a largo plazo.
"Realmente no sabemos los efectos que tuvo el derrame de la plataforma
Deepwater Horizon en aguas profundas porque sabemos poco acerca de los
procesos de los ecosistemas allí," reportea Gary Cherr, director del
Laboratorio Marino Bodega de la UC Davis y autor principal de un papel
recientemente publicado en la revista Bioscience. Cherr y su equipo de
investigadores, inclusive prominentes oceanógrafos, ecotoxicologistas,
y ecólogos, concluyen que los científicos necesitan más tiempo para
estudiar cómo contener el daño de tales accidentes, especialmente dada
la tendencia de buscar nuevas fuentes de petróleo en regiones costa
afuera alrededor de EEUU y ultramar.
"El mar profundo no es una zona
muerta. No es un desierto. Hay mucha vida allí," agrega Cherr.
"Desafortunadamente hasta que sucede un desastre no tratamos de
recolectar los impactos. Y eso es difícil de hacer cuando se carece de
un entendimiento completo—o aún parcial—del ecosistema".
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario