Near-pristine coral reef ecosystem discovered

(Photo Credit PLoS One, Barrot et al 2010)

Practical Fishkeeping, June 29, 2010
By Ben Clarke

An expedition to Millennium Atoll, a remote coral atoll in the Central Pacific, has uncovered an almost completely undisturbed underwater ecosystem that could serve as an important reference for restoration projects throughout the Pacific Ocean.

The survey findings, published recently in the journal PLoS One, describe an abundance of giant clams (Tridacna maxima) within the atoll lagoon, as well as large populations of blacktip reef sharks and Napoleon wrasse (Cheilinus undulatus).

The highly enclosed central lagoon measures 6 km by 0.5 km and is surrounded by a shallow perimeter reef, helping to protect the lagoon inhabitants from predation. It is likely that the lagoon and its network of reefs acts as an important nursery area for juvenile fish, including threatened species such as the endangered Napoleon wrasse.

Coral cover in the lagoon exceeded 62% of the benthos and was found to be dominated by Acropora, with some colonies exceeding 3m in diameter. Corals from the genera Montipora, Fungia, Pavona and Leptastrea were the next most abundant.

A total of 89 fish species were recorded in the lagoon, with the Three-striped humbug damselfish (Dascyllus aruanus) being most common. Interestingly, macroalgal cover was extremely low (<1%),>

In addition to gardens of giant clams, the benthic invertebrate community was found to consist of an abundance of sea cucumbers and other filter feeders, almost certainly contributing to the high clarity of the lagoon water.

The expedition findings highlight the importance of protecting the atoll, which belongs to the Republic of Kiribati and is a member of the Southern Line Islands chain. Although relatively abundant at present, the sharks, clams, sea turtles, lobsters and Napoleon wrasse of Millennium Atoll are vulnerable to exploitation by fisheries; therefore, protecting the atoll and regulating any fishing in the area is crucial for the preservation of this unusually pristine ecosystem.

For more information see the article: Barott KL, Caselle JE, Dinsdale EA, Friedlander AM, Maragos JE, Obura D, Rohwer FL, Sandin SA, Smith JE, Zgliczynski B. (2010) The lagoon at Caroline/Millennium Atoll, Republic of Kiribati: natural history of a nearly pristine ecosystem. PLoS One 5(6) e10950. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010950

Keep Reading

NOAA-Supported Scientists Predict “Larger Than Average” Gulf Dead Zone

June 28, 2010
NOAA

The northern Gulf of Mexico hypoxic zone, an underwater area with little or no oxygen known commonly as the “dead zone,” could be larger than the recent average, according to a forecast by a team of NOAA-supported scientists from the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium, Louisiana State University, and the University of Michigan.

Scientists are predicting the area could measure between 6,500 and 7,800 square miles, or an area roughly the size of the state of New Jersey. The average of the past five years is approximately 6,000 square miles. It is the goal of a federal state task force to reduce it to 1,900 square miles. The largest dead zone on record, 8,484 square miles, occurred in 2002.

This forecast is based on Mississippi River nutrient flows compiled annually by the U.S. Geological Survey. Dead zones off the coast of Louisiana and Texas are caused by nutrient runoff, principally from agricultural activity, which stimulates an overgrowth of algae that sinks, decomposes, and consumes most of the life-giving oxygen supply in the water. It is unclear what impact, if any, the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill will have on the size of the dead zone.

“The oil spill could enhance the size of the hypoxic zone through the microbial breakdown of oil, which consumes oxygen, but the oil could also limit the growth of the hypoxia-fueling algae,” said R. Eugene Turner, Ph.D., professor of oceanography at Louisiana State University. “It is clear, however, that the combination of the hypoxic zone and the oil spill is not good for local fisheries.”

Hypoxia is of particular concern because it threatens valuable commercial and recreational Gulf fisheries. In 2008, the dockside value of commercial fisheries was $659 million. The 24 million fishing trips taken in 2008 by more than three million recreational fishers further contributed well over a billion dollars to the Gulf economy.

“As with weather forecasts, this prediction uses multiple models to predict the range of the expected size of the dead zone,” said Robert Magnien, Ph.D., director of NOAA’s Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research. “The strong track record of these models reinforces our confidence in the link between excess nutrients from the Mississippi River and the dead zone.”

“The 2010 spring nutrient load transported to the northern Gulf of Mexico is about 11 percent less than the average over the last 30 years,” said Matthew Larsen, Ph.D., USGS associate director for water. “An estimated 118,000 metric tons of nitrogen in the form of nitrate were transported in May 2010 to the northern Gulf.”

The collaboration among NOAA, USGS, and University scientists facilitates understanding of the linkages between activities in the Mississippi River watershed and the downstream effects on the northern Gulf of Mexico. Long-term data sets on nutrient loads and the extent of the hypoxic zone have improved forecast models used by management agencies to understand the nutrient reductions required to reduce the size of the hypoxic zone to the established goal. This year’s forecast is an example of NOAA’s growing ecological forecasting capabilities that allow for the protection of valuable resources using scientific, ecosystem-based approaches.

An announcement of the size of the 2010 hypoxic zone, which is an annual requirement of the Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Task Force Action Plan, will follow a NOAA-supported monitoring survey led by the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium between July 24 and August 2. Information on the extent of hypoxia will also be available on the NOAA’s Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Watch Web page, which displays near real-time results of the NOAA Fisheries Service summer fish survey in the northern Gulf of Mexico currently underway and scheduled to be completed by July 18.

Keep reading

Deepwater reefs to get federal protection

(credit Star News)

Star News, June 24, 2010
By Gareth McGrath

'Rain forests of the sea' providing scientists with new discoveries

You might need a boat, some seasickness pills and a mini sub to get to them.

But the region is about to get a several new sanctuaries to protect some of the most fragile and least understood habitats in the deep ocean.

"These are the rain forests of the sea in structural and biodiversity terms." said Doug Rader, chief ocean scientist for Environmental Defense Fund, of the deepwater coral marine ecosystems. "They truly are world-class habitats."

The federal government has signed off on a plan, designed and already approved by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, to designate nearly 23,000 square miles of deepwater coral habitat as Coral Habitat Areas of Particular Concern.

The designation, which takes effect July 22, will mean the five deep-sea areas – two of which are off North Carolina – will be off limits to bottom-disturbing fishing practices, including longlines and trawling.

The move also gives the sensitive deep-sea habitats extra protection before commercial pressures increase to explore and potentially exploit the mineral and fish resources around the reef areas.

Steve Ross, a researcher at the University of North Carolina Wilmington, has been exploring the deepwater reefs for over a decade, including one of the newly-protected areas about a three-hour boat ride off the Cape Fear coast.

He said scientists are still making new discoveries with every exploration.

"We're finding an incredible storehouse of species that are new to science, and that's very exciting," he said, noting that some of them could hold potential in the biomedical field.

Both Ross and Rader also noted the irony in the announcement of new protections for the deepwater corals in the Atlantic while those in the Gulf of Mexico – which also are just beginning to be explored – come under growing threat from the oil still spewing out from the broken Deepwater Horizon wellhead.

While the new designation won't necessarily outlaw oil and gas exploration in the reef areas, Ross said it will force federal agencies to take a very hard look at the possible environmental impacts from any drilling activities.

The slow-growing deepwater coral reefs, which extend along much of the continental shelf off the Southeast, start at about 1,000 feet and go much deeper.

Because of the depths, accessing them involves using remote-operated vehicles and small submersibles.

But that type of research is very expensive.

Rader said he hopes this week's announcement opens up new funding avenues for scientists such as Ross to continue and even expand their research efforts.

"What they've been able to do so far on a shoestring budget is really amazing," he said.

Rader, who is past chairman of the fishery council's Habitat and Environmental Protection Advisory Panel, said he hopes the designation also raises the public profile of these special areas – even if the public won't ever likely get a chance to see them.

Keep Reading

Cold, Dark and Teeming With Life

By WILLIAM J. BROAD, The New York Times

The deep seabed was once considered a biological desert. Life, the logic went, was synonymous with light and photosynthesis. The sun powered the planet’s food chains, and only a few scavengers could ply the preternaturally dark abyss.

Then, in 1977, oceanographers working in the deep Pacific stumbled on bizarre ecosystems lush with clams, mussels and big tube worms — a cornucopia of abyssal life built on microbes that thrived in hot, mineral-rich waters welling up from volcanic cracks, feeding on the chemicals that leached into the seawater and serving as the basis for whole chains of life that got along just fine without sunlight.

In 1984, scientists found that the heat was not necessary. In exploring the depths of the Gulf of Mexico, they discovered sunless habitats powered by a new form of nourishment. The microbes that founded the food chain lived not on hot minerals but on cold petrochemicals seeping up from the icy seabed.

Today, scientists have identified roughly one hundred sites in the gulf where cold-seep communities of clams, mussels and tube worms flourish in the sunless depths. And they have accumulated evidence of many more — hundreds by some estimates, thousands by others — most especially in the gulf’s deep, unexplored waters.
“It wouldn’t surprise me if there were 2,000 communities, from suburbs to cities,” said Ian R. MacDonald, an oceanographer at Florida State University who studies the dark ecosystems.

Read more...

 

 

Death by fire in the gulf

By Kim Murphy, Los Angeles Times

Reporting from the Gulf of Mexico —

Here on the open ocean, 12 miles from ground zero of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the gulf is hovering between life and death.

The large strands of sargassum seaweed atop the ocean are normally noisy with birds and thick with crustaceans, small fish and sea turtles. But now this is a silent panorama, heavy with the smell of oil.

There are no birds. The seaweed is soaked in rust-colored crude and chemical dispersant. It is devoid of life except for the occasional juvenile sea turtle, speckled with oil and clinging to the only habitat it knows. Thick ribbons of oil spread out through the sea like the strips in egg flower soup, gorgeous and deadly.

Read more...

Stranded harbor-seal pup cute, but don't touch

By Erik Lacitis Seattle Times staff reporter

The young couple, on an oceanside vacation at Westport, just couldn't leave the harbor-seal pup to fend for himself.
He was so alone on that beach by the lighthouse.
So helpless-looking, with no mom in sight. The big, cold ocean ready to engulf him.
How would this bundle with the soulful eyes ever survive?
So, of course, they took the pup to their motel room.

Read more...

UF Marine Researchers Rush To Collect Samples As Oil Threat Grows-Algae May Hold Anti-Cancer Compound

(Credit Linda Homewood)

Before its News, June 20, 2010
By Alton Parrish

In a race against time, University of Florida marine researchers are hurrying to collect underwater marine algae samples in the Florida Keys while an ever-growing Gulf oil spill steadily migrates toward Florida, already reaching the Emerald Coast in the Panhandle.

Hendrik Luesch, an associate professor of medicinal chemistry at UF College of Pharmacy took his research team to Long Key last week in hopes of advancing early drug discoveries that may yield cancer-fighting properties hidden in marine algae. It’s an expedition he has made annually for four years, but this year it seems there might be a limit on how long the ecosystem will yield its specimens.

According to federal and independent scientists, as much as 2.5 million gallons of oil per day are spewing from a pipe in the Gulf of Mexico that engineers have failed to seal.

“Cyanobacteria, or organisms that overgrow coral reefs, are shown to produce drug-like compounds that may be exploited for biomedical purposes such as anti-cancer drugs,” Luesch said.

The warm waters and mild year-round temperatures allow marine life to flourish in the Keys, creating a predatory environment among these organisms, Luesch said. In order to survive, marine organisms develop defense systems, sort of like a chemical survival kit. Researchers use these toxic chemicals as the basis for creating drugs that can target and fight cancers.

“It’s the biodiversity that makes the Florida Keys a hot spot for researchers,” Luesch said.

At the same time, the coral reefs are also a very sensitive ecosystem, he said. For example, the extended chill in the tropical waters last January caused sea turtles to become cold-stunned and killed more than 85 percent of reefs in certain areas, according to Cynthia Lewis, a biological scientist at the Keys Marine Laboratory in Long Key, where the UF researchers collected specimens.

Scientists in Florida don’t know what to expect, she said.

“We are concerned and watchful,” she said. “We don’t know how far the marine impact may go.”

Keep reading

Carl Safina on Colbert Nation!

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Carl Safina
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Fox News

What Happens When Oil Collides with Coral?

CBS, June 15, 2010
By Kelly Cobiella

As Researchers Struggle to Bring Dying Reefs Back to Life, They Worry about Threat of Approaching OilMarine scientist Meaghan Johnson is fighting a battle few ever see - she's slowly bringing Florida's coral reefs back to life, reports CBS News correspondent Kelly Cobiella.

Thirty feet below the surface Johnson showed Cobiella row after row of coral alive and growing after decades of being battered by disease and warmer water.

All of it was planted here by scientists and each fragment started out as only a couple of inches tall.

It all started in Ken Niedemeyer's backyard in the Florida Keys. His daughter needed a 4-H project so they decided to try growing coral.

"Good thing I never read about it because everyone said it couldn’t be done," Neidermeyer said.

Their technique worked. They took it to researchers and nine years later it has blossomed to this - the largest man-made nursery project with 5,000 coral colonies growing underwater from Fort Lauderdale to the Virgin Islands. Scientist clip and plant new coral just like pruning a tree, and anchor it with underwater glue. When the coral is big enough, it's moved to a reef to replace dead or dying coral.

"It's just amazing what happens," Neidermeyer said. "A lot more habitat for fish, for juvenile fish, for large fish, for invertebrates."

But they're now facing a new threat - BP oil. Every day, Johnson anxiously checks the forecast for the Gulf "loop current," the system that seasonally carries water, and anything in the water, eastward through the Florida Keys.

"It's definitely devastating to watch what's happening in the gulf and know that it could come here," Johnson said. "I think we are all worried about what's going to happen in this project."

There's little they can do to protect the nurseries. If the oil is weathered and weakened enough, Johnson thinks the young coral just might pull through.

"Those are our little babies, you know," Johnson said. "We put those guys out there. And it's nice to come back in a month or two and see them actually growing. And feel like, 'Wow, I did that. You know, I'm helping. I'm doing something good.'"

With oil coming a little closer every day, she's hopeful at least some of that "good" will survive.

Now Accepting Applications for the 2010 Mia J. Tegner Memorial Research Grants Program in Marine Environmental History and Historical Marine Ecology

Marine Conservation Biology Institute (MCBI) is pleased to announce the 2010 Mia J. Tegner Memorial Research Grants Program in Marine Environmental History and Historical Marine Ecology.  Initiated in 2001, this program supports research documenting historical ocean conditions prior to large-scale human impacts.

This program honors the late Dr. Mia J. Tegner, an esteemed marine biologist at Scripps Institution of Oceanography who conducted seminal work in the field of historical marine ecology.  Through her studies of long-term changes in abalone populations and kelp forest communities, Dr. Tegner demonstrated the importance and utility of developing ecological baselines for our oceans. Dr. Tegner’s work was shortened prematurely after her untimely death in 2001, while diving off the coast of California.
This year’s program is made possible through a generous grant from Holland America Line.

Research Grants Program

Goal - To fund studies that develop ecological baselines for our oceans, and help policymakers and conservationists better conserve and restore marine biodiversity.

Scope- The program supports natural and social scientists seeking to uncover interactions between natural and human history in marine and estuarine environments worldwide.
MCBI is particularly interested in studies describing systems prior to large-scale human impacts and industrialization.  Research may draw on sources ranging from culturally- and geographically-derived information, to biological and physical data.   Examples of possible information resources include fishery data, letters, journals, interviews, oral histories, historical documents, maps, photos, field surveys, etc. 
MCBI looks to support projects where our funding can significantly contribute to a key phase or project outcome.

Programmatic Focus – MCBI seeks novel proposals that study, document, and describe historical marine ecology throughout the world.  We particularly encourage projects related to:
o    The Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument;
o    The High Seas, which are those areas outside of nation’s jurisdictions;
o    Holland America Cruise destinations in Alaska, Caribbean, and Europe;
o    Deep and shallow water coral ecosystems; and
o    The historical impacts of fishing on marine populations and ecosystems.

Eligibility- MCBI invites individuals and collaborative teams from both US and international academic institutions and non-governmental organizations to apply.  Preference will be given to graduate students, post-graduate researchers, and early career scientists.  For more information contact Elizabeth Rauer (Elizabeth.Rauer@mcbi.org) or visit www.mcbi.org/what/tegneroverview.html.

Eligible Expenses and Limitations – Individual proposals with budgets up to $10,000 (USD) are welcomed.  Acceptable funding requests include computing costs, equipment purchases, page charges, supplies, materials, salaries, consulting fees, travel expenses to conduct research, and expenses for residing at research sites.  Funds from this program cannot be used for administrative overhead, capital expenditures, general funding and conference travel.

Application Guidelines- The deadline for submission is June 25th, 2010 .  Grant decisions will be made by early September.
To apply, please include:
1.    A concise project description, including a justification for the proposed project, a summary of proposed methodology, expected impacts, and the project's relevance to marine conservation (2 pages maximum).
2.    Supporting documentation, which should include:
o    A one-page budget (with justification for expenses and details regarding additional funding sources, if any);
o    An estimated timeline;
o    A list of project collaborators and their affiliations;
o    A curriculum vita for the principal investigator;
o    A letter of support from a primary academic advisor if the applicant is a student or postdoctoral researcher;
o    Contact information for at least one referee or reference.

Applicants should e-mail all proposal materials by 11:59 p.m. PDT on June 25th, 2010 to tegnerawards@mcbi.org. PDF documents are preferred, but MS Word and Excel documents are acceptable. 

Download  a PDF version of the application guidelines.

For more information, visit: www.mcbi.org

Famed fishmonger plans a sea change

By Lynda V. Mapes

Seattle Times staff reporter

The Seattle Times

It's already the loudest and most entertaining fish market in Seattle. But can those fish-tossing mongers at Pike Place Fish Market, a beloved Seattle icon, become sustainable too?

Owner John Yokoyama says he is determined to try, as he yanks some species, hikes prices for others, and reviews everything at his market stand from lighting to packaging with an intent to adopt more sustainable practices.

Even figuring out just what sustainable means is a tall order. Unlike organic, or country-of-origin labeling, no government policy sets minimum standards for the marketing claim "sustainable."

Seafood is a last frontier in the feel-good food fight, and it's inherently complex. Involving hundreds of species, dozens of gear and harvest practices, and countries all over the globe, seafood is one of the most far-flung, complex, inscrutable foods to follow from source to plate.

But sustainable seafood's the new thing, and everybody's talking about it. Wal-Mart is promising to use only sustainable sources for its wild seafood — a small portion of its fish on offer. Target has announced it will no longer sell farmed salmon. Safeway, Publix and other mainstream supermarket chains also are examining their practices.

While definitions vary, the term "sustainable" is broadly understood to describe practices that will enable both the product sold, and the environment that produces it, to endure into the future.

Read more...

Climate Change Impacts to National Marine Sanctuaries

On Thursday, the California Academy of Sciences kicked off its Oceans Conference with a recently released report on the impacts of climate change on the Gulf of Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries. The impacts report is a first step towards a climate change action plan for these sanctuaries. The setting inside a museum with an aquarium was appropriate as fish are among the species that will be impacted by climate change.

The Gulf of the Farallones is a 1,255-square-mile area made up of tidal flats, rocky intertidal areas, wetlands, subtidal reefs and coastal beaches. The sanctuary is home to thousands of seals and sea lions, and hosts great white sharks and the largest concentration of breeding seabirds in the continental U.S. The Cordell Bank Sanctuary is a 526 square mile area beyond the Gulf of the Farallones, 52 miles northwest, at the edge of the continental shelf. Endangered humpback whales, porpoises, albatross and marine species are found in these habitats.

The report provides the foundation of information needed to develop climate change action plans for these sanctuaries. The report is the outcome of eighteen months of collaboration among local experts from 16 organizations. The report - titled "Climate Change Impacts: Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries" - makes recommendations for future action for sanctuary management.
The report identified some key issues as well as some data gaps. Sea level rise is occurring at the mouth of San Francisco Bay. Ocean acidity levels are rising. Extreme weather events, which are becoming more likely, are causing coastal erosion.

Of perhaps most concern is the northern movement of some species. For example, gray whales, Humboldt squids and bottlenose dolphins all now travel much further north to find food. Sunburst anemones are also now extending into Northern waters. As climate change continues, this trend is expected to get worse.
In the future, the report projects more La Ninas than El Ninos. La Ninas are associated with strong upwelling in the ocean; El Ninos are associated with a lull in the cold upwelling conditions, which typically prevail in that area.
Upwelling is a process that involves wind driven motion of dense, cooler, and nutrient- rich water towards the surface, replacing the warmer, nutrient-depleted surface water. The increased availability in upwelling regions results in high levels of primary productivity and fish production. So upwelling is the key process that begins the food chain. Too much or too little wind can upset the process. Upwelling is projected to increase due to climate change which could be a good thing, as upwelling will cause some waters to get cooler and some fish, such as Coho salmon, prefer cooler waters. However, while upwelling is increasing, inland bays, such as Tomales Bay, are warming. This warming could counterbalance the cold upwelling forces.
In this manner, much of the data is inconclusive, and too broad to list specific impacts due to climate change. For example, the data shows that here has been a decline in rockfish at the sanctuaries, but it is unclear if this is associated with climate change.

After the presentation of the report in the Museum's planetarium, there was a panel of several of the report authors giving the public the opportunity to ask questions. One audience member asked about quantifying the economic impact of climate change impacts. Currently there is not a lot of detail in the economic projections. Pacific Institute's reports have some economic information in addition to climate change impacts but their reports do not address the topic of erosion.
The sanctuary administrators want to bridge the gaps between science, management and policy. They are committing to taking action and scientists and managers at the sanctuaries are already working together on next steps.

What are the next steps?
We need to devise policies that promote the ocean's resiliency, so that species can withstand/adapt to climate change. We need to protect valuable assets, including wetlands and buffers that protect the coasts. We need to employ best management practices with sediment reducing Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) etc.
Stay tuned on the NOAA website for further recommendations and updates.

World's Marine Scientists Call for Large-Scale "National Parks at Sea"

More than 245 marine scientists (PDF) from 35 countries are calling for the establishment of a worldwide system of very large, highly protected marine reserves as "an essential and long overdue contribution to improving stewardship of the global oceanic environment."

While small marine reserves are known to protect some species, large reserves—comparable to large national parks on land—are necessary to better protect sea life in our oceans, which cover 71 percent of the planet.
By signing the statement (PDF), the experts endorsed the scientific case for designating very large, highly protected marine reserves and called on policymakers to take bolder action in establishing these areas. The statement issued by Global Ocean Legacy, a project of the Pew Environment Group, was released today for World Oceans Day.

"The need to set aside more and larger marine reserves as one means of ensuring the continued health of our oceans is well-accepted among marine scientists," said Dr. Bernard Salvat, noted coral reef scientist and professor emeritus at the University of Paris' Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes (EPHE) and the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS). "We have to work on very large trans-boundary marine protected areas with intergovernmental agreements. We now need to speak out to educate governments and the public about the crisis facing our oceans and the long-term benefits of establishing large, no-take marine reserves."

Overfishing, pollution and climate change are adversely affecting the health of the world's oceans, and ultimately threatening the livelihoods, food security and economic development of millions of people. Very large reserves can help reduce these problems, according to a recently published book, The Unnatural History of the Sea, by Dr. Callum Roberts with the University of York.
Less than 0.5 percent of the world's oceans are fully protected from extractive or destructive activities. Large, no-take marine reserves have been shown to blunt the effects of excessive commercial fishing by offering a refuge for sea life to breed and spawn, providing for healthier fisheries as the fish swim into surrounding areas, and thus ensuring more resilient coastal economies. Because the ecosystems in ocean reserves are healthier, they are also more resistant to the damage caused by pollution, climate change and a wide range of other development activities.

"More than a century after nations had the foresight to protect important landscapes like Yellowstone National Park in the United States and Kruger National Park in South Africa, they have just begun to turn their attention to protecting similarly significant places in the sea," said Jay Nelson, director of Global Ocean Legacy. "The world's leaders need to recognize what more than 245 marine scientists from across the world understand: that the designation of very large, highly protected marine reserves is critical to maintaining the health of the ocean environment."

• Read the science statement (PDF)
• French transalation of the science statement (PDF)
• List of scientists who signed the statement (PDF)
• Senior scientists and marine specialists: please show your support for marine reserves.

What the Spill Will Kill

Newsweek, June 7, 2010

By Sharon Begley

Giant plumes of crude oil mixed with methane are sweeping the ocean depths with devastating consequences. ‘I’m not too worried about oil on the surface,’ says one scientist. ‘It’s the things we don’t see that worry me the most.’

It was in mid-May that independent scientists—not any of the officials or researchers working for any of the government agencies on scene at the Deepwater Horizon disaster, let alone BP—first detected the vast underwater plumes of crude oil spreading like Medusa’s locks from the out-of-control gusher in the Gulf of Mexico. BP immediately dismissed the reports, and in late May CEO Tony Hayward flatly declared “there aren’t any plumes,” stopping just short of accusing the scientists of misconduct. Federal officials called the scientists’ claim “misleading, premature and, in some cases, inaccurate.” Moreover, continued a statement from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, any oxygen depletion in the surrounding waters due to plumes is not “a source of concern at this time,” and critics blaming dispersants for the plumes had “no information” to stand on. NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco, a respected oceanographer when President Obama tapped her to lead the agency, insists there are no plumes, only “anomalies”—though last week she acknowledged the possibility of oil beneath the surface.

Now it is increasingly clear that the initial reports of undersea oil were right, that life-giving oxygen in the water column is indeed being depleted, and that unless the laws of chemistry have been repealed, dispersants are likely worsening the tentacles of undersea crude. What might have been just another oil spill—albeit a bad one—has been transformed into something unprecedented. Even if the containment dome lowered into place late last week continues to siphon off some of the leaking crude, the Deepwater Horizon disaster will enter the record books not for how much but for where: an enormous release of crude oil not only onto vulnerable shorelines and fragile marshes but into the largely unexplored depths of the sea. The consequences for the delicate balance of existence in the vulnerable ecosystems of the gulf, and for the vast cycles of nature that sustain life there and beyond, are as incalculable as they are potentially devastating.

“I’m not too worried about oil on the surface,” says chemist Ed Overton of Louisiana State University. “It’s going to cause very substantial and noticeable damage—marsh loss and coastal erosion and impact on fisheries, dead birds, dead turtles—but we’ll know what that is. It’s the things we don’t see that worry me the most. What happens if you wipe out all those jellyfish down there? We don’t know what their role is in the environment. But Mother Nature put them there for a reason,” and many are in the plumes’ paths.

Their presence has blown to smithereens the cliché that oil floats on water. That correctly describes what happens when pure crude spills into the sea from a well in shallow water or a tanker at the surface, as happened with the Exxon Valdez. But when a gusher is 5,000 feet down, consists of a mix of crude oil and dissolved methane, and is being disgorged under tremendous pressure and temperature, studies predict that the physical and chemical properties of the spill will undergo an ugly alchemy. “The dispersants are changing the chemistry and physics of the oil,” says biological oceanographer Ajit Subramaniam of Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. “They are creating microlayers of oil that are being carried by the deep currents.” Even without dispersants, the crude gets broken into zillions of droplets suspended in the water column and corralled there, prevented from rising to the surface. The result is the undersea plumes that oceanographer Samantha Joye of the University of Georgia and colleagues first detected from the research vessel Pelican three weeks after the blowout. Despite years of research showing that undersea oil might form such plumes, BP’s Hayward insists it cannot. “Oil floats!” he repeatedly says.

Making matters more interesting, the chemical dispersants that work fairly well on surface spills, breaking apart oil slicks into droplets that degrade more quickly than a contiguous layer, may be exacerbating the undersea-oil problem. A 2007 report by the Minerals Management Service—which OK’s oil and gas leases—on the environmental consequences of oil and gas drilling on the outer continental shelf concluded that an underwater plume is a real possibility: “The use of dispersants on oil spills … could cause these compounds to reach the deeper water reef areas.” BP has pumped 185,000 gallons of dispersant onto the out-of-control wellhead (plus 800,000 on the surface). That is causing more of the gushing crude to break up into the very form unlikely to rise to the surface. There have been no suggestions that BP intended to keep the worst of the spill out of sight.

After NOAA questioned the finding of deepwater oil plumes (but now has two boats using sonar to look for plumes), the National Science Foundation stepped in with the kind of support that matters: cash. With “rapid response” grants from the foundation, scientists are searching for plumes and trying to assess their impact. As far as scientists can tell, the undersea oil is actually a witch’s brew of crude mixed with dissolved methane, stretching 15 miles long, 5 miles wide, and 300 feet thick in the case of one plume detected by the Pelican, and 22 miles long, 6 miles wide, and 3,000 feet thick in the case of a plume found by University of South Florida researchers aboard the WeatherBird II last week. The latter plume reaches all the way to the surface.

NOAA’s skepticism about plumes is correct on one point. Contrary to what the phrase conjures up, oil plumes are not black serpentines. The USF researchers caught one on camera last week, but in general they can be detected only by sophisticated instruments lowered into the depths. Samples hauled up do not even look black, though when they are run through a filter, black specks are revealed.

These undersea rivers of oil, though not nearly as concentrated as oil at the surface, are likely to affect the gulf through two mechanisms. The first is oxygen depletion, which has been estimated at 30 percent in the plumes. The other will be direct toxic effects of the oil and methane. Leatherback turtles and sperm whales dive to the 3,200-foot depths where plumes have now been detected, and aren’t smart enough to take evasive action. “They don’t necessarily recognize the plumes as something dangerous,” says marine scientist Ellycia Harrould-Kolieb, who works with the green group Oceana. Sharks, shrimp, and squid are all inhabitants of the deep, which would protect them from a Valdez-type spill on the surface, but now puts them in the crosshairs. Marlin, snapper, and grouper swim hundreds of feet down. One of the biggest losses may be bluefin tuna. Already imperiled from overfishing, the species breeds only in the Mediterranean Sea and the gulf. “This could spell the end to bluefin,” says Harrould-Kolieb. Even small bits of crude, like those in the plumes, can suffocate fish by gunking up their gills.

Keep reading

Firms operating offshore will have to give information about risks, precautions, MMS says

The Washington Post, June 2, 2010
By Juliet Eilperin

The federal agency overseeing offshore energy exploration announced Wednesday that it would require companies operating offshore to provide additional information about the potential risks and safety precautions in their drilling plans. Regulators have failed to demand such disclosures even in the aftermath of the BP oil spill, according to evidence obtained by The Washington Post.

The Minerals Management Service exempted more than half a dozen drilling operations in the Gulf of Mexico from a detailed environmental review -- including the site of the Deepwater Horizon explosion and seven projects in the accident's wake -- after subjecting them to a pro-forma checklist, according to documents released by the Interior Department.

The agency gave all eight operations "categorical exclusions" from the National Environmental Policy Act -- a waiver that freed oil and gas companies from completing a lengthy environment impact statement. The checklist does not mention the prospect of a blowout, does not address the impact of an operation's noise on marine mammals and minimizes an oil spill review for any drilling site within four miles of national marine sanctuary.

"This is a process that's designed to give approval, rather than one to identify a sensitive area," said Richard Charter, senior marine policy advisor for the advocacy group Defenders of Wildlife, after reviewing the documents. "In the Gulf of Mexico, they only have a rubber stamp for categorical exclusions, saying 'Go ahead.'"

Bob Abbey, who is serving as acting director of MMS, said Wednesday in a statement that even those companies who have received environmental waivers will have to resubmit their development and exploration plans before drilling any new wells.

"The moratorium on deepwater drilling that Secretary Salazar has ordered is a prudent step that will allow time for the Presidential Commission to complete its review of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill and for immediate safety and environmental reforms to be implemented," Abbey said. "Pulling back exploration plans and development plans and requiring them to be updated with new information is consistent with this cautious approach and will ensure that new safety standards and risk considerations are incorporated into those planning documents."

In response to a request from The Washington Post, Interior officials provided redacted versions of the reviews MMS conducted before approving eight separate exploration plans in the gulf. Several environmental groups--including the Defenders of Wildlife, the Southern Environmental Law Center and the Center for Biological Diversity--are suing Interior on the grounds that it failed to make drilling companies comply with federal environmental laws.

They list a few dozen "trigger" criteria that would prompt a more extensive environmental assessment, such as whether the project will involve "new or unusual technology" and if it's within four miles of the Flower Garden Banks national marine sanctuary or within three miles of the Stetson Bank sanctuary. But for the most part, the review document appears to provide a relatively easy path to obtaining a federal environmental waiver.

For example, an Interior Department manual that took effect May 27, 2004 states that MMS should not issue categorical exemptions to drilling taking place in "relatively untested deep water, or remote areas." But on May 3 the agency approved an Anadarko well going more than 9,000 feet deep. In the section that refers to "initial [development operations and coordination documents] for processing facilities in [water depths greater than] 400 meters," the box "no" was checked.

Keep reading

Scientists Worry About Oil Plumes’ Effects on Coral Reefs - NYTimes.com

The New York Times
By JOHN COLLINS RUDOLF

Last September, marine scientists studying deep-sea biology in the northern Gulf of Mexico lowered a submersible robot off the side of a government research vessel and piloted it 1,300 feet to the ocean floor.

There, in complete darkness and near-freezing temperatures, the robot’s lights revealed a thriving colony of corals, anemones, fish, crustaceans and other sea life rivaling that of any shallow-water reef in the world. Researchers onboard were elated.

“We flipped on the lights, and there was one of the largest coral reefs in the Gulf of Mexico sitting right in front of us,” said Erik Cordes, a marine biologist at Temple University and chief scientist on the vessel, the Ronald H. Brown.

Nine months later, the warm thrill of discovery has cooled into dread. The reef lies just 20 miles northeast of BP’s blown-out well, making it one of at least three extensive deepwater reefs lying directly beneath the oil slick in the gulf.

Yet it is not the slick that troubles scientists. They fear a more insidious threat: vast plumes of partly dissolved oil apparently spreading in the deep ocean.

Read more...

What will a Hurricane do to the Oil Spill?

(Credit BBC)

BBC, June 2, 2010
By Finlo Rohrer

The prediction this year for the Atlantic is for an "active to extremely active" hurricane season, which officially began on 1 June.

According to the US's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, there is a 70% chance of eight to 14 hurricanes, of which between three and seven could be major hurricanes with winds of more than 111mph (179km/h).

Apart from the possibility of damage and loss of life unrelated to the oil spill, there is a very obvious downside to hurricanes passing near the source of the oil spill.

A hurricane would clearly disrupt the efforts to stop the leak, although BP has a plan to install a device in order to quickly disconnect and reconnect the link down to the spill site in high winds. On shore, tasks like the laying of boom and rescue of wildlife would become more problematic.

But what would happen to the oil that is already out there floating in the sea?

High winds and heavy seas would mix the oil and water and help the process of biodegradation, NOAA believes.

Bacteria effect

Prof Ed Overton, an environmental studies expert at Louisiana State University (LSU), agrees with this view.

"Concentrated oil in a very small area is very bad. But if you spread it out… nature can handle that. Bacteria can degrade the oil. I'm of the belief that hurricanes are Mother Nature's dispersant."

But there is another downside. A hurricane has the potential to take oil to places it would not otherwise reach. It all depends on the path of the storm.

"A hurricane passing to the west of the oil slick could drive oil to the coast," the NOAA says. "A hurricane passing to the east of the slick could drive the oil away from the coast."

This is because hurricanes rotate counter-clockwise.

Slow-moving water

To date, the weather conditions have been relatively placid out in the Gulf of Mexico.

"So far the water has been very slowly moving, almost stagnant," says Prof Chuanmin Hu, an optical oceanographer from the University of South Florida.

But hurricanes cause storm surges. Such a surge of water has the potential not only to affect the behaviour of oil far out in the Gulf, but also to cause grim consequences when it reaches the shore.

"It is potentially not a pretty picture," says Prof Nan Walker, an oceanographer at the School of the Coast and Environment at LSU.

"A real concern is that because Louisiana is so low-lying, even a category one storm can raise the water level eight or 10 feet.

"There is potential for oil to go fairly far inland, penetrating the marshes even deeper. It makes the problem potentially a lot worse."

The sand berms, or barriers, that have been planned in Louisiana may not stop even a relatively small storm surge.

Keep reading