A warming, more acidic ocean. Grounded ships and heavy fishing nets. Coral reefs face a lot of threats from humans. For these tiny animals that build their own limestone homes underwater, oil spills may add insult to injury.
But how does spilled oil reach coral reefs? And what are the effects?
How an oil spill affects corals depends on the species and maturity of the coral (e.g., early stages of life are very sensitive to oil) as well as the means and level of exposure to oil. Exposing corals to small amounts of oil for an extended period can be just as harmful as large amounts of oil for a brief time.
Coral reefs can come in contact with oil in three major ways:
- Oil floating on the water’s surface can be deposited directly on corals in an intertidal zone when the water level drops at low tide.
- Rough seas can mix lighter oil products into the water column (like shaking up a bottle of salad dressing), where they can drift down to coral reefs.
- As heavy oil weathers or gets mixed with sand or sediment, it can become dense enough to sink below the ocean surface and smother corals below.
Once oil comes into contact with corals, it can kill them or impede their reproduction, growth, behavior, and development. The entire reef ecosystem can suffer from an oil spill, affecting the many species of fish, crabs, and other marine invertebrates that live in and around coral reefs.
As oil spill responders, NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration has to take these and many other factors into account during an oil spill near coral reefs. For example, if the spill resulted from a ship running aground on a reef, we need to consider the environmental impacts of the options for removing the ship. Or, if an oil spill occurred offshore but near coral reefs, we would advise the U.S. Coast Guard and other pollution responders to avoid using chemical dispersants to break up the oil spill because corals can be harmed by dispersed oil.
We also provide reports and information for responders and natural resource managers dealing with oil spills and coral reefs:
- Oil Spills in Coral Reefs: Planning and Response Considerations
- Introduction to Coastal Habitats and Biological Resources for Spill Response (Chapter 3, Sensitivity of Coastal Environments to Oil, includes sensitivity information for coral reef communities)
- Characteristic Coastal Habitats: Choosing Spill Response Alternatives (Particularly, the section Subtidal Habitats: Coral Reefs, PDF)
You can learn more about coral reefs, such as the basic biology of corals, how damaged coral reefs can recover from an oil spill or be restored after a ship grounding, and what we’ve learned about oil spills in tropical reefs.
For lessons a little closer to home, be sure to find out five more things you should know about coral reefs and listen to this podcast about threats to coral health from NOAA’s National Ocean Service.
NOAA Fisheries Biologist Matthew Parry also contributed to this post.
In 30 feet of water, just outside the entrance to Hawaii’s Kalaeloa Harbor, emergency coral restoration is just getting underway. NOAA and our partners are working with the owners of the cargo vessel M/V VogeTrader to repair corals that were injured when the vessel accidentally lodged itself onto the reef one morning in 2010.
The grounding—and the response activities taken to haul the vessel off the reef and prevent it from spilling any of its fuel—crushed, broke, dislodged, and buried various species of corals. A few of the types of marine life affected include the common coral species Montipora capitata (rice coral), Porites lobata (lobe coral), Pocillopora meandrina (cauliflower coral); sponges; and other bottom-dwelling invertebrates. We’re pursuing emergency restoration [PDF] to prevent unnecessary future injuries that might occur if actions are further delayed.
Beginning on October 30, 2013, teams of divers began working to reattach broken coral and remove rubble to prevent loose pieces from moving with wave action and causing further damage to the reef.
This restoration project requires a series of trips, over several months, to the grounding location near the coast of Oahu. NOAA and our partners undertook the first of many of these missions during a recent two-day effort. Leaving from Kalaeloa/Barber’s Point Harbor, the first day was spent conducting acoustic mapping surveys to determine exactly where the rubble was located and the size of the affected area.
On the second day divers were back to find and move any live corals and coral fragments out of the area where rubble is going to be removed. We recovered the corals by hand, placing them in baskets before transporting them a short distance to areas outside the work zone. The corals will be safe there until after the rubble is removed and they can be transported back into the cleared area for reattachment.
Stay tuned as we post updates and photos of the progress. In the meantime, you can learn more about the underwater techniques and technologies we use for these types of projects.
Dr. Matthew Parry got his Ph.D. in Oceanography from the University of Hawaii in 2003. He came to work for the NOAA Restoration Center in Honolulu as part of the Damage Assessment, Remediation and Restoration Program in 2007. He continues to work at NOAA as a Fishery Biologist specializing in Natural Resource Damage Assessment
At a holiday feast like Thanksgiving, something is sure to be spilled: gravy, cranberry sauce, salt, and even more tragically, sometimes oil. For those of us in NOAA who deal with the effects of spills every day of the year, we’ll be grateful if there aren’t any major spills of these items, edible or otherwise, this Thanksgiving.The Beans
During a large storm on December 8, 2004, the cargo ship M/V Selendang Ayu lost power and ran aground just off the coast of Alaska’s remote Aleutian Island of Unalaska, approximately 25 miles southwest of Dutch Harbor. It was in these chilly waters that the ship broke in two and literally spilled the beans—about 60,000 tons of soybeans—along with 337,000 gallons of oil. The beans and most of the oil were washed onto the island’s rocky beaches, coating miles of shoreline.
In the aftermath of the spill, NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration helped conduct shoreline surveys before and after cleanup, made cleanup recommendations, and was involved in assessing damage to natural resources and planning restoration. While spill responders labored to remove oil from the beaches, they left the tons of soybeans to rot and disperse naturally.
An unfortunate side effect of this, however, was that the decomposition used up oxygen in the water, similar to what happened when molasses spilled in Hawaii’s Honolulu Harbor in September 2013. This caused low oxygen levels and impacts to marine invertebrates such as shellfish in the intertidal zone. The seagulls took care of the invertebrates, but there are few natural predators of soybeans in the surf of the Aleutian Islands. At one point, there was a concern that the soybeans could begin sprouting in the moist conditions, but that was never observed, and they continued decomposing over the next year and a half.Coconut Oil
Coconut oil, while popular with some bakers, is less popular with spill responders. On February 11, 1986, NOAA responded to the mess that followed when a ship carrying 85,000 gallons of coconut oil was struck by a tug boat crossing the Kill Van Kull, a tidal strait separating New York’s Staten Island from Bayonne, N.J. The stricken Dua Mar released all of its coconutty cargo into the strait.
NOAA provided the U.S. Coast Guard with a trajectory of where the oil would go, along with properties of coconut oil (it solidifies at temperatures below 76 degrees Fahrenheit) and an analysis of potential environmental impacts to nearby animals, plants, and habitats. Because it was winter, the coconut oil solidified upon mixing with the water and washed onto structures along the shore. Cleanup efforts involved pitchforks and shovels but were complete after several weeks.Palm Kernel Oil
A mere month after coconut oil coated the waters off Staten Island, N.Y., Proctor and Gamble reported a spill of 50 gallons of palm kernel oil nearby. The oil entered a line from one of their facilities to a tug boat, which eventually leaked it out the exhaust drain into the tidal strait known as Arthur Kill.
In this case, NOAA advised that the palm kernel oil would not solidify but instead remain a light oil floating on the water’s surface. This vegetable oil is not the same as what is commonly known simply as “palm oil” (that comes from the palm fruits rather than the palm seed). Still, both types of palm oils and other vegetable oils have the potential to harm species that frequent the surface of the water, usually via smothering, suffocating, or removing the waterproofing abilities of feathers or fur.Butter
Yes, butter. It can be more than just a hazard to your arteries, as 70 firefighters in Madison, Wisc., learned in the eight days that followed the Great Butter Fire of May 3, 1991. A four-alarm blaze erupted at the cold-storage facilities of the Central Storage and Warehouse Company. The extreme heat melted 16 million pounds of butter along with lard and cheese stored in the warehouses, creating a grease fire and releasing a stream of melted butter into surrounding roadways and ditches and threatening nearby Starkweather Creek and Lake Monona.
At first, responders tried to absorb the grease using six truckloads of sand. Next, engineers at the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources successfully redirected the river of butter [PDF] away from the still-burning warehouse by digging channels and lagoons that led to lower ground. This method allowed the buttery liquid to form pools, keeping it away from the urban waterways that had recently received $1 million in environmental restoration. The fire was extinguished on May 11 but had destroyed about 50 million pounds of food in the process. In an interesting turn of events, the ruined butter and lard were actually salvaged and processed into animal feed.
On behalf of NOAA, have a happy and spill-free Thanksgiving!
This is a post by the NOAA Restoration Center’s Carl Alderson.
Ernie Oros, former New Jersey State Assemblyman and octogenarian, stood next to me on the bank of a newly created tributary to the Woodbridge River and looked out across an expanse of restored tidal marsh. It was May 2008 and the marsh that he had long championed was now lush and green and teeming with fish. This inspiring sight before us was the result of a marsh restoration project undertaken by NOAA, the Army Corps of Engineers, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.
Years ago a tall berm was raised between the Woodbridge River and this marshland, effectively walling it off from the reach of the tides that replenished it. Reeds that grow in damaged marshes choked off the tides even further.
He gave a pause, drew a breath and was on to the next subject before I had finished marveling at the sea of grass standing before us. “When can you get the observation walkway back up?” Ernie asked me. “Soon,” I replied, “we have a plan.” “Good,” he said, “I’m not getting any younger.”
That’s how the conversation went until August 2012 when Ernie passed away at the age of 88. The construction of the tidal marsh itself—with all the complexities of hydrology, chemistry, biology, logistical twists and turns, negotiations, permits, and contract discussions—seemed to go up in a snap. In two years it went from design contract to dedication ceremony. Yet, the observation boardwalks—there were now two—seemed to lag behind in a mire of contract disputes, tight budgets, two hurricanes, and extension after extension of funding agreements.A Vision to Restore
I never wondered why Ernie was so anxious to move forward; he was after all in his 80s and by his own account in failing health. In his knock-around clothes, he looked like an old clam digger, but in his best suit, like the one he wore the day of the marsh dedication ceremony, he still cut the figure of the State Assemblyman he once was. Ernie had a vision for this place, and he was now on a roll. He had long ago established Woodbridge River Watch, a community organization to advocate for open space in Woodbridge, N.J.; he had guided the town through major acquisition and conservation efforts; he gathered momentum for his butterfly garden; planned to landscape the perimeter with local historic artifacts; and now he could add the marsh restoration to his list of achievements.
Among all of his accomplishments, nothing could be more dramatic than having blown life into this dying marshland. It linked the past and the future to a community that blossomed at the cross roads of the American colonial experience in the 17th century, soared to the peak of industrialization beginning in the 18th and 19th centuries, then boomed and at last came to rest upon the suburbanization movement of the 20th century. For myself, I could live with the simple sweet note of this being an urban habitat: a rebirth for colonial wading birds, ribbed mussels, fiddler crabs, and young juvenile bluefish called “snappers.” But for Ernie, the marsh was the opening hymn to a chorus of American history.
It took me a long time to realize what Ernie was up to. The marsh wasn’t just a host for the history garden; it itself was an artifact. The marsh represented every century that came before the first European settlers arrived. Better than any artifact, the marsh was living history as far as Ernie was concerned.
The observation boardwalks were the last piece of the plan. Both Ernie and I viewed the future boardwalks and their brightly designed story panels as a means of drawing in the citizens of Woodbridge. Boardwalks send a signal of welcome where a marsh alone often does not. The signs would interpret for them the plants, the animals, the natural processes unfolding in the marsh around them.
That is why Ernie was so anxious to see this vision through to completion. Despite the town’s position on the waterfront of three major bodies of water—the Raritan River, Raritan Bay, and Arthur Kill (a tidal straight separating the township from New York City)—very little of it was accessible to the public. Ernie hoped to change that by inviting people into a renewed Woodbridge Marsh.A Day to Remember
Greg Remaud is the Deputy Director for the New York/New Jersey Baykeeper. The Baykeeper, a long-time partner of NOAA and advocate for open space in New York Harbor, is a non-profit organization committed to the conservation and restoration of the Hudson-Raritan Estuary. For Remaud, it had become increasingly apparent that the post-industrial age presented opportunities to create New Jersey’s waterfront in a new image.
Greg had met up with Ernie Oros years before. With the help of many others, this pair championed a new way forward for the Woodbridge River. Eventually, they were able to draw the attention of key agencies and help these dreams take the shape of Spartina grasses, High Tide bush, and killifish.
Then, earlier this year, I learned of the Baykeeper’s plan to honor Ernie’s memory with a day-long celebration.
On the astonishingly beautiful Saturday morning of September 28, 2013, the NOAA Restoration Center was on hand to be part of a very special event to honor Ernie’s life. To honor his legacy, the New York/New Jersey Baykeeper held a family-friendly event right next to what I consider Ernie’s greatest environmental achievement: the 67-acre Woodbridge River Wetland Restoration Project.
In a day that featured music, games, picnics, and face painting, the most popular event was the free kayak tours with the very capable staff of the Baykeeper, who led citizens through a seeming maze of restored marshes and tidal creeks. Several of Ernie’s family members were present. His sons, granddaughters, and great-grandkids jumped into canoes and kayaks to venture a ride through Ernie’s great achievement.A Role for NOAA
NOAA’s involvement with the Woodbridge River Wetland Restoration Project began to take shape sometime in the late 1990s. We provided funds from natural resource damage settlements for two local oil spills to conduct feasibility studies, design, and permitting in 2000. Under a partnership of federal and state agencies, the project was designed and constructed between 2006 and 2007. NOAA and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection provided $2.3 million, combining it with funds from the Army Corps of Engineers Harbor Deepening Program to make the full project come together for the Woodbridge River.
The project removed berms and obstructions that had sealed the former wetland from the Woodbridge River for decades and reunited two large tracts of land with the tides via created tidal creeks and planted marsh grasses. Today, the site is once again the home of wading birds, waterfowl, fiddler crabs, ribbed mussels, and seemingly hundreds of thousands of killifish. Ernie had tirelessly dedicated much of his adult life to campaign for the acquisition, protection, and restoration of his beloved Woodbridge River wetlands and his achievements will live on in their vibrant waters.
Carl Alderson is a Marine Resource Specialist with the NOAA Restoration Center, located at the JJ Howard Marine Science Lab in Highlands, N.J. Carl provides oversight of coastal habitat restoration projects and marine debris programs through NOAA’s Damage Assessment, Remediation, and Restoration Program (DARRP) and Community-based Restoration Grants Program (CRP) in the mid-Atlantic region. He is a graduate of Rutgers University and is a Licensed Landscape Architect. Before joining NOAA, Carl worked for the City of New York and led a decade long effort to restore tidal wetlands, marine bird, and fish habitat as compensation for natural resources damages resulting from oil spills in New York Harbor. Carl is recognized as a national leader in restoration of coastal wetlands and bay habitats.
Happy GIS Day! Today, GIS events are being hosted around the globe to highlight and celebrate the transformational role of Geographic Information Systems, or GIS.
GIS is mapping software that can display multiple sets of location-based information onto a single map. Viewing information this way can help you visualize lots of data and identify trends and relationships, such as the potential health impacts of living near power plants and major highways, or how many pizza places are within 10 miles of your house.
Like offices and agencies around the world, we in NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration use GIS in our everyday work. Take a look at a few of the ways we use GIS—and you can too—to reduce environmental threats from coastal pollution.Mapping Environmental Sensitivity
One of our teams is developing Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) maps using GIS technology to integrate and share information about sensitive shoreline resources, such as birds, wildlife, fisheries, and public beaches. Historically used for oil and chemical spill response and planning, these maps have become effective tools in preparing for and responding to storms, hurricanes, and other coastal disasters.
ESI data are published in a variety of GIS formats, including a file geodatabase and map document, that simplify their use within the GIS program ArcMap. Users can query data for their region to see what species are present in January, where threatened and endangered species live, what shoreline types are present, etc. You can download ESI data and ESI tools from our website and use them yourself.Mapping Resources during a Disaster
MARPLOT is the mapping component in CAMEO, our software suite of tools for chemical spill response, which we develop with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It’s a free and easy-to-use GIS system that emergency responders and planners use to display information from other programs in the CAMEO suite. This could mean mapping estimates of high-risk areas for toxic chemical clouds (from ALOHA) or the locations of chemical production and storage facilities in relation to schools and hospitals (from CAMEOfm).
MARPLOT can also be used as a general mapping tool, which allows users to add objects, move around the map, and get population estimates. Some users have adapted MARPLOT, which operates without an Internet connection, for use during tornado response, search and rescue operations, and emergency planning. The development team is working on a major revision to MARPLOT, which will include access to global basemaps, enhanced web-based features, and additional data management capabilities.Mapping Environmental Response
Web mapping for environmental response, such as oil spills, has come a long way in the past decade. NOAA is a leader in this digital mapping revolution with ERMA®, the Environmental Response Management Application, which we designed with the University of New Hampshire’s Coastal Response Research Center and the EPA. It’s an online mapping tool offering comprehensive access to environmental response information and is customized for many coastal areas of the U.S.
ERMA integrates both static and real-time data, such as ESI maps, ship locations, weather, and ocean currents, in a centralized map for use during a disaster such as an oil spill or hurricane. It provides environmental responders and decision-makers with up-to-date information for planning, response, assessment, and restoration activities. The application incorporates data into a convenient, web-based GIS mapping platform that can be accessed simultaneously by a variety of users via the Internet.
ERMA Deepwater Gulf Response is currently assisting with the ongoing response operations for the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Data related to this oil spill is displayed here and updated daily. In the northeast, Atlantic ERMA provided support to the Post Tropical Cyclone Sandy pollution response along the coast of New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut.
To the far north, Arctic ERMA has been used to integrate and display response-related information from oil spill technology demonstrations aboard an icebreaker in the remote Arctic Ocean and to display the data and high resolution imagery of the ShoreZone project, which seeks to map all 46,600 miles of Alaska’s coastal habitat and features. You can view all of the regional ERMA sites on our website.Discover Your World
You can explore on the GIS Day website some of the amazing stories that GIS can help tell:
- Take a visual tour of the impacts of the September 2013 floods in Longmont, Col.
- Learn where in the U.S. fracking (hydraulic fracturing) is being used to mine natural gas from shale rock.
- View the devastation of Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines.
This is a post by the Office of Response and Restoration’s Zach Winters-Staszak.
I learned a few things while I was at a meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, last month. Most importantly (and perhaps a surprise to those from Texas), I learned everything is bigger in Alaska, namely its shoreline. Alaska’s shoreline measures over 46,600 miles (75,000 km), longer than the shorelines of all the lower 48 states combined.
Now imagine for a minute the work involved in flying helicopters low along that entire shoreline, collecting high-resolution imagery and detailed classifications of the coast’s geologic features and intertidal biological communities. No small endeavor, but that’s exactly what the Alaska ShoreZone Coastal Inventory and Mapping Project, a unique partnership between government agencies, NGOs, and private industry, has been doing each summer since 2001.
Since then, ShoreZone has surveyed Alaskan coasts at extreme low tide, collecting aerial imagery and environmental data for roughly 80% of Alaska’s coastal habitats and continues to move towards full coverage each year. Collecting the vast amounts of imagery and data is a great accomplishment in and of itself, but ShoreZone, with help from NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service, has done an equally incredible job at making their entire inventory accessible to the public.
Just think how this valuable and descriptive information could be used. Planning for an Alaskan kayak trip next summer? ShoreZone can help you prioritize which beaches will save your hull from unwanted scratches. Trying to identify areas of critical habitat for endangered fishes? ShoreZone can help you in your research. Indeed, ShoreZone has many applications. For the Office of Response and Restoration, ShoreZone is an invaluable tool that serves alongside NOAA’s Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) maps and data as a baseline for the coastal habitats of Alaska and is currently being used for environmental planning, preparedness, and Natural Resource Damage Assessment planning in Alaska.
One of the many ways to access ShoreZone imagery and data is through Arctic ERMA, NOAA’s online mapping tool for environmental response. There are several advantages to this. For example, the National Marine Fisheries Service used ShoreZone imagery and data to designate critical habitat areas for endangered rockfish in Washington’s Puget Sound, a process that could also be applied to Alaska if necessary. That information could quickly be integrated into ERMA and displayed on a map allowing you to view the data used to determine those locations as well.
As updates and additions to the imagery database become available they will also be available in Arctic ERMA. The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) has provided funding to complete the imagery processing and habitat mapping for the North Slope of Alaska. BSEE also provided funding to finish Arctic ERMA and to develop the internet-independent Stand-alone ERMA. The efforts are complementary and strategic given the increased activity in the Arctic.
To prepare for this increase in activity, the ShoreZone and ERMA teams are working to incorporate ShoreZone data into Stand-alone ERMA for use when Internet connectivity is unreliable. The beauty of the photos included here is deceptive. A majority of Alaska’s shoreline is rugged, unforgiving, and remote. Having access to high-resolution imagery along with environmental and response-focused data in the kind of Internet-independent package that ShoreZone and ERMA provide would be an indispensable tool during a hazardous incident like a ship collision, oil spill, or search and rescue mission. This is just one way NOAA and ShoreZone are working together to strengthen our commitment to the coastal environments and communities of Alaska.
Zach Winters-Staszak is a GIS Specialist with OR&R’s Spatial Data Branch. His main focus is to visualize environmental data from various sources for oil spill planning, preparedness, and response. In his free time, Zach can often be found backpacking and fly fishing in the mountains.
Flowing freely through southeastern Washington is an approximately 50 mile stretch of the Columbia River known as the Hanford Reach. This unique section of river is birthplace and home to many animals at different stages of life, including Chinook salmon, the largest of the river’s Pacific salmon. Yet this same segment of river at one time also served as the birthplace of the nuclear age: at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. Today, NOAA, other federal and state agencies, and Indian tribes are still trying to determine the full impact of this nuclear legacy on fish, wildlife, and their habitats.
Beginning in 1943, the Hanford Reach, with its steady supply of water and relative isolation, attracted the attention of the U.S. government during World War II. Searching for a location to erect nuclear reactors for the top-secret Manhattan Project, the U.S. was racing to build an atomic bomb and this work took shape at Hanford.
The first nuclear reactor built at Hanford—and the first full-scale nuclear production plant in the world—was the B Reactor, which began operating in 1944. This and the other eight reactors eventually constructed at Hanford were located right on the Columbia River, an essential source of water to carry away the extreme heat generated by nuclear fission reactions. In these plants, workers turned uranium (euphemistically referred to as “metal”) into weapons-grade plutonium (known as “product”). The plutonium eventually ended up in the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki, Japan, in 1945, as well as in nuclear arms stockpiled during the U.S.-Soviet Cold War. Hanford’s last reactors shut down in 1987.The River Runs Through It
While the nuclear reactors were operating, however, water was pumped from the Columbia River and aerated at a rate of 70,000 gallons a minute. This was meant to improve its quality as it flowed through a maze of processing equipment—pipes, tubes, and valves—and into the core, the heart of the nuclear reactor. There, in the case of B Reactor, about 27,000 gallons of water gushed through 2,004 process tubes every minute. Each tube held 32 rods of uranium fuel.
Inside the reactor’s core, where the nuclear reactions were occurring, the water temperature would spike from 56 degrees Fahrenheit to 190 degrees in a single minute. Later in the reactor’s lifespan, the operators would be able to leave the water inside the nuclear reactor core long enough to heat it to 200 degrees before releasing the water into lined but leaky outdoor holding ponds. Once in the holding ponds, the reactor water would sit until its temperature cooled and any short-lived radioactive elements had broken down. Finally, the water would return to the Columbia River and continue its path to the Pacific Ocean.
Water played such an essential role in the nuclear reactor that engineers had four levels of backup systems to keep water constantly pumping through the core. In addition to being aerated, the water was also filtered and chemically treated. To prevent the core’s plumbing equipment from corroding, chromium was added to the water. Hanford’s D Reactor, in particular, handled large quantities of solid hexavalent chromium, a toxic chemical known to cause cancer.The Salmon Runs Through It
Fast-forward to 2013. NOAA and its partners are participating in a natural resource damage assessment, a process determining whether negative environmental impacts resulted from the Department of Energy’s activities at Hanford. As part of that, NOAA is helping look at the places where water leaked or was discharged back into the Columbia River after passing through the reactors.
One goal is to establish at what levels of contamination injury occurs for species of concern at Hanford. Salmon and freshwater mussels living in the Columbia River represent the types of species they are studying. Yet these species may face impacts from more than 30 different contaminants at Hanford, some of which are toxic metals such as chromium while others are radioactive isotopes such as strontium-90.
Many of the Columbia River’s Chinook salmon and Steelhead trout spawn in or migrate through the Hanford Reach. Currently, NOAA and the other trustees are pursuing studies examining the extent of their spawning in this part of the river and determining the intensity of underground chromium contamination welling up through the riverbed. This information is particularly important because salmon build rocky nests and lay their eggs in the gravel on the bottom of the river.
You can learn more about the history of the Hanford Reach and the chromium and other contamination that threatens the river (around minute 8:50-9:03) in this video from the Department of Energy:
The trustees have many other studies planned, all trying to uncover more information about the natural resources and what they have been experiencing in the context of Hanford’s history. Yet, for the natural resource damage assessment, even if the trustees find salmon experiencing negative impacts, the evidence found needs to be tied directly to exposure to Hanford’s pollution (rather than, for example, the influence of dams or pollution from nearby farms). It is a complicated process of information gathering and sleuthing, but eventually it will culminate in a determination of the restoration required for this critical stretch of habitat on the Columbia River.
For more information, see:
- Hanford Natural Resource Damage Assessment
- What Do Hanford’s Latest Nuclear Waste Leaks Mean for Environmental Restoration?
- Restoration Amid Nuclear Waste and the Largest Environmental Cleanup in the U.S.
- CSI: Hanford, Complete with Nuclear Superheroes
The U.S. has a long and winding shoreline—95,471 miles of it—extending into bays, inlets, and the Great Lakes. This massive scale creates a challenge just as big to keep trash and other debris off our shores and out of our coastal waters.
Fortunately, the NOAA Marine Debris Program uses the power of funding to put much-needed dollars into the hands of worthy community groups, non-governmental organizations, tribes, local government agencies, and universities working to address marine debris in their areas.
In addition to funding projects like these, the NOAA Marine Debris Program coordinates, strengthens, and promotes marine debris activities within NOAA and among its partners and the public through regional coordination, research, outreach, and education.Get It Out
Earlier this year, we awarded $967,000 to 11 removal projects ranging from Alaska to Puerto Rico. Some focus on abandoned vessels and fishing gear, while other projects aim to sweep plastics, Styrofoam, and other consumer debris from beaches and sea turtle nesting sites.
One innovative project in North Carolina establishes a pilot program to encourage commercial fishers to collect derelict crab pots from surrounding waters so they can be transformed into artificial reefs, creating habitat for oysters.
The NOAA Marine Debris Blog reports that “through this program, NOAA has funded 76 marine debris removal projects and removed more than 3,800 metric tons of marine debris from our oceans and Great Lakes since 2006.”Keep It Out
Yet the easiest way to clean up marine debris is to keep it from getting into the water in the first place. This is why the NOAA Marine Debris Program also awards grants for outreach and education efforts to prevent marine debris. In 2013, we provided $949,512 to eight groups across the country to develop hands-on education materials and activities, curricula, workshops, and museum displays, as well to three scientific organizations to research the interactions of microplastics with the marine environment.
The Rozalia Project for a Clean Ocean received one of these education grants, which they will use to support their traveling dockside education programs featuring “Hector the Collector.” Hector is a small, yellow remotely operated vehicle that dives in harbors searching for and gathering marine debris with its headlights, sonar, camera, and gripper claw. In addition to educational activities surrounding Hector, the Rozalia Project organizes beach cleanups, with aspirations of picking up 500,000 pieces of debris this year.
The projects funded through the NOAA Marine Debris Program typically last between one and two years but produce lasting benefits to the environment, fish and wildlife, and communities they serve.
To learn more about the NOAA Marine Debris Program’s efforts to remove and prevent marine debris, head to marinedebris.noaa.gov.
We’ve heard a concern from some of you that there’s an island of debris in the Pacific Ocean coming from the 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan. For those of you who may be new to this topic, we’d like to address those concerns.
Here’s the bottom line: There is no solid mass of debris from Japan heading to the United States.
At this point, nearly three years after the earthquake and tsunami struck Japan, whatever debris remains floating is very spread out. It is spread out so much that you could fly a plane over the Pacific Ocean and not see any debris since it is spread over a huge area, and most of the debris is small, hard-to-see objects.
We have some helpful resources for you, if you’re interested in learning more.
While there likely is some debris still floating at sea, the North Pacific is an enormous area, and it’s hard to tell exactly where the debris is or how much is left. A significant amount of debris has already arrived on U.S. and Canadian shores, and it will likely continue arriving in the same scattered way over the next several years. As we get further into the fall and winter storm season, NOAA and partners are expecting to see more debris coming ashore in North America, including tsunami debris mixed in with the “normal” marine debris that we see every year.
NOAA has modeled the debris’ movement, and the model shows the overall spread of all simulated debris and an area where there may be a higher concentration of lower floating debris (such as wood) in one part of the Pacific. However, that doesn’t mean it’s in a mass, and it doesn’t tell us how much is there, it just shows there may be more debris there than in other areas. Observations of the area with satellites have not shown any debris.
Even though there’s no mass, addressing this debris is very important. NOAA has worked with partners in the states to monitor the debris, form response plans, and try to mitigate any impacts. We’ll continue that work as long as necessary. We’re happy to answer any questions you may have. Feel free to email us at MarineDebris.Web@noaa.gov.
This is a post by the Office of Response and Restoration’s GIS Specialists Kari Sheets and Jay Coady.
Students wearing crisp, blue uniforms lean in to get a better look at the map of the Gulf of Mexico being projected at the front of the small classroom.
Their normal Friday GIS class at the United States Coast Guard Academy in New London, Conn., has been taken over by two mapping specialists from NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration. Kari Sheets and Jay Coady are standing in front of the classroom of cadets to introduce these future U.S. Coast Guard responders to an important tool they may use one day in the midst of a hurricane or oil spill response.
The tool is NOAA’s Environmental Response Management Application (ERMA®). ERMA is an online mapping tool that integrates both static and real-time data, such as ship locations, weather, and ocean currents, in a centralized, interactive map for environmental disaster response. Having all the latest information in an easy-to-use format provides environmental resource managers with the data they need to make informed decisions about where and how to deal with a pollution threat when it happens. NOAA and the University of New Hampshire developed ERMA with the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Interior.To the Classroom and Beyond
By offering training and collaboration opportunities like this early in cadets’ careers, NOAA and the Academy are providing future Coast Guard responders with the real-world knowledge and tools that they might encounter when addressing future pollution events.
One day this fall, Sheets and Coady taught three GIS classes that focused on ERMA, its capabilities, and how to use it once the cadets graduate from the Academy. The classes covered a general overview of the ERMA platform, how it fits in the Incident Command System structure, how it enables users to see and access data. They also included a live demonstration of the tool that highlighted recent data used in the response to Post Tropical Cyclone Sandy in 2012.From Training to Explaining
The lesson also integrated data from a training exercise held from September 17-19, which simulated a tug-and-barge grounding and potential oil spill in Long Island Sound as part of the National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP).
NOAA’s Sheets and Coady began working with the Academy over the summer in preparation for this exercise in Long Island Sound. Coast Guard Academy GIS instructor LT Sabrina Bateman and Cadet Jaimie Chicoine helped provide and add data and information into ERMA for the PREP exercise, where ERMA was designated the common operational picture (COP). As the COP during an incident, ERMA brings together various types of information, providing a single place to display up-to-date information that is also accessible to all individuals involved in incident response operations. This consistency and accessibility helps improve communication and coordination among responders and stakeholders.
The Academy was able to use ERMA to load selected data from their internal databases. As a result of these early collaborations preparing for the drill, Sheets and Coady were invited to the Academy to guest lecture on ERMA for the GIS classes. The classes they taught went well, solidifying the Office of Response and Restoration’s connections with the Academy and resulting in an invitation back to teach again in the future.
In the meantime, LT Bateman plans on using ERMA in several of her GIS lectures and labs at the Academy to get cadets more accustomed to using it once they receive their assignments and enter Coast Guard stations around the country after graduation. This relationship has continued growing as the two organizations explore further opportunities for collaboration.
Kari Sheets is a GIS specialist with the Office of Response and Restoration’s Spatial Data Branch in Silver Spring, Md., where she works on GIS strategic planning and leads ERMA projects. Previously, she worked at NOAA’s National Weather Service, where she coordinated GIS activities throughout the office.
Jay Coady is a GIS Specialist with the Office of Response and Restoration’s Spatial Data Branch in Charleston, S.C. He has been working on the Deepwater Horizon incident since July 2010 and has been involved in a number of other responses, including Post Tropical Cyclone Sandy. Jay is a co-lead for the Gulf of Mexico regional ERMA.
This is a post by NOAA Office of Response and Restoration’s Katie Krushinski.
We’d like to wish you a happy Halloween … but it’s only appropriate we mention zombies first. In recent years, zombies have invaded popular culture, as well as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), who have done a great job linking being prepared for a zombie attack with overall disaster preparedness. You may laugh, but you can also learn a thing or two about being ready for the return of the undead.Don’t Let the Zombies Win
If you watch any movies or T.V. shows about surviving zombie apocalypse, you can actually pick up some handy preparedness tips. Although pre-made zombie survival kits are amusing, most of them have in common the kind of life-saving ideas that will work in any emergency situation:
- Water: Having three gallons per person per day is critical. Water is not only used for drinking—we use it for cooking and cleaning too. But consider including alcohol-based hand gels or wipes to ration water use and avoid getting sick.
- Food: Keep on hand at least two weeks’ worth of nonperishable food; the type that doesn’t require cooking or refrigeration is best. And don’t forget about food and water for pets and service animals!
- First Aid Supplies: Commercial kits are available at most drug stores. It’s a good idea to have a kit at home and one in your car. Be sure to replenish items you use and be mindful of expiration dates.
- Gas: It’s typically a good idea to keep at least a half tank of gas in your car at all times. If you know a hurricane or other threatening event is coming, be sure to fill up early.
Being ready for disasters is something we take very seriously at NOAA’s Gulf of Mexico Disaster Response Center. Which is why we’ve taken this advice to heart and made sure our own facility in Mobile, Ala., is ready to withstand a hurricane, tornado, or even zombie apocalypse. Just peek into our restrooms, where we have:
- Multiple 25-person survival kits, which include items such as safety goggles, pry bar (especially handy for zombie defense!), multifunction tools, first aid supplies, flashlights, and emergency water pouches.
- Backup generators that will automatically switch on if the primary power fails (zombie attacks usually result in power loss).
- Internet hookups, which are being fed into the building from two different directions in case zombies or stormy weather damage or sever one of the cables.
Of course, both your family and your employer should customize the steps you take and supplies you stock based on your particular needs and situation.Sweat the Small Stuff
We all know it’s important to make an emergency plan and keep an up-to-date list of important phone numbers. But sometimes we are so focused on gathering the big things that we forget about the small stuff.
For instance, it is suggested that you stock canned food, but don’t forget to grab the “all-mighty” can opener. It’s also recommended to wear sturdy, close-toed shoes if you need to go outside. But it isn’t mentioned very often to keep a pair of spare socks in a tightly sealed bag. This will allow you to have at least one dry pair as a backup. Another tip is to keep a flashlight, radio, and other battery-powered items on hand—but make sure they all use the same size battery to avoid stocking multiple sizes.
Today, zombies provide a fun and creative way to teach about the importance of being prepared for anything. For a spooky story that kids and adults alike might enjoy, check out the CDC’s “Preparedness 101: Zombie Pandemic” short graphic novel, which is an entertaining and informative way to learn about preparing for an emergency, whether it’s a natural disaster or a very unnatural attack by zombies.
Happy Halloween (and watch out for the undead)!
Katie Krushinski works at NOAA’s Gulf of Mexico Disaster Response Center in Mobile, Ala., where she is responsible for coordinating training events, producing external communications, and writing and editing. Katie has a background in emergency response and management. NOAA’s Disaster Response Center serves as a one-stop shop, streamlining the delivery of NOAA services that help the Gulf region prepare for and deal with disasters.
At the end of October 2012, Hurricane Sandy raced toward the East Coast. Although the hurricane became a post-tropical cyclone before making landfall, it still caused extensive damage. Its forceful winds and flooding swept waves of oil, hazardous chemicals, and debris into the waters along New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut.
Both before and after Sandy hit, NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration (OR&R) was bracing for the repercussions of this massive storm. In the year since, we have been working with federal, state, and local agencies to reduce the environmental impacts, restore coastal habitats, and improve the tools needed to prepare for the next disaster.Restoring Tidal Wetlands in New Jersey
As water levels receded, the U.S. Coast Guard began receiving reports of pollution in the areas of coastal New Jersey and New York. Petroleum products, biodiesel, and other chemicals were leaking into the waters from pollution sources such as damaged coastal industries, ruptured petroleum storage tanks, and sunken and stranded vessels. The area of Arthur Kill, a waterway that borders New York and New Jersey, was hit particularly hard. One such spill occurred when a tank holding diesel broke open at the Motiva refinery in Sewaren, N.J., releasing an estimated 336,000 gallons of diesel into several creeks.
The week following Sandy, our Damage Assessment, Remediation, and Restoration Program (DARRP) staff ventured into storm-ravaged areas to gather data on impacts to coastal habitats and other natural resources, including those potentially affected by the Motiva oil spill. NOAA, along with representatives from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Motiva, surveyed affected sites both by land and by boat and coordinated with these groups to determine whether to pursue a natural resource damage assessment and implement environmental restoration.
Early in this process, the trustees, NOAA and New Jersey, and Motiva agreed to focus on restoration, rather than conducting new studies and debating legal issues. This meant using observations from the surveys, past damage assessments in the area, and previous scientific studies to determine the amount of restoration required to offset the resulting injuries to natural resources. As a result, NOAA and New Jersey reached consensus on a cooperative settlement in less than 6 months with the Motiva refinery in Sewaren for the release of oil during the storm. This successful agreement will provide funds to restore and monitor recovery of tidal wetlands in the Arthur Kill watershed, which will begin before the end of 2013.Identifying Remaining Debris Along the Coasts
Even when drums, tanks, and other debris swept into the waters after a storm are free of oil and chemicals, they can still pose a threat to navigation, commercial and recreational fishing grounds, and sensitive habitats. This was a considerable problem after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and Sandy was no exception in 2012.
In the months following this storm, the NOAA Marine Debris Program coordinated debris response activities and initial assessments with agencies in impacted states. Using aerial, underwater, and shoreline surveys, today we continue working with federal and state agencies to identify the amount and location of remaining debris that Sandy littered up and down Mid-Atlantic coastal waters.
In addition, we are using a computer model we developed with NOAA’s Office of Coast Survey after Hurricane Katrina to predict probabilities of finding debris generated by Sandy in the nearshore waters of New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut. These and other analyses, along with support from the rest of the Marine Debris Program and OR&R’s Atlantic ERMA mapping tool, will inform how states prioritize cleanup efforts.
Due to the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act of 2013, the Marine Debris Program received $4.75 million for activities related to finding and clearing debris from Sandy. Through the end of 2013 and into 2014, we will continue our work identifying priority items for removal and supporting limited removal efforts. The program is also using what we learned from Sandy to establish long-term debris recovery plans for future storms.Adapting to a Changing Shoreline
In addition to damaging buildings, roller coasters, and vessels, Sandy’s strong winds and waves caused considerable change to shorelines on the East Coast. The areas most affected were metropolitan New York, northern Long Island, Connecticut, and New Jersey.
As a result, OR&R’s Emergency Response Division received funding through the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act of 2013 to update our Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) maps for northeast states. These updated maps will reflect the shoreline changes caused by the storm but will be developed with a broad range of potential disasters in mind.
Additionally, they will expand the coastal information offered to better inform planning and response efforts for the next disaster. Such information may include flood inundation and storm surge areas, environmental monitoring stations, tide stations, and offshore renewable energy sites. Long Island Sound is first on our list for updates, but the Hudson River, Chesapeake Bay, and affected shorelines from South Carolina north to Maine eventually will follow suit.
While it has already been a year since Sandy left its mark on the U.S., the work of recovery and rebuilding is not yet complete. You can read more about these efforts in support of healing our coasts and communities on NOAA’s Ocean Service website.
This is the third in a series of posts about Arctic Shield 2013 by the Office of Response and Restoration’s Zach Winters-Staszak. Read his first post, “Arctic-bound” and his second post, “Breaking Ice.”
76° N, 158° W marks the spot. The wind chill has dropped the mercury below zero as the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Healy, an icebreaker, sits idly, anchored by the sea ice that dominates the landscape. All eyes are fixed on the brilliant orange of the Coast Guard zodiac, the small boat’s color contrasted against the cobalt blue water off the icebreaker’s port side. A faint hum of a motor gets louder and louder overhead as the “Puma” comes into view. Then, just as the miniature, remote-controlled aircraft is positioned exactly over a nearby patch of open water, the operator kills the motor and the Puma splashes down safely.
During the exercise Arctic Shield 2013, the U.S. Coast Guard Research and Development Center (RDC) brought a group of scientists and specialists together to demonstrate technologies that potentially could be used for oil spill response in the Arctic Ocean’s severe conditions. This is my third and final post detailing my experiences and involvement in the mission aboard the Healy; you can read the previous posts, “Arctic-bound” and “Breaking Ice.”Existing Technology, New Applications
Increased marine transportation and oil exploration in the Arctic increases the likelihood of, along with the responsibility to be prepared for, potential oil spills. Operating in an area as remote and ice-filled as the Arctic poses new logistical and tactical challenges for safe ship transit, search and rescue efforts, resource extraction, and oil spill response. For those of us working in oil spill response, this means developing new methods and technologies for surveying, assessing, and responding in these settings.
The RDC, coordinating efforts by the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) programs at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the University of Alaska Fairbanks, demonstrated the Puma as one method to survey, identify, and monitor oil on and around the ice floes from above. The Puma is a battery-powered, aerial survey technology with military roots that is now being used for a variety of environmental applications.
The Puma’s advantages for oil spill response in the Arctic are many. With its capacity for high resolution and infrared imagery, the Puma could help identify and monitor oiled environments and wildlife during response efforts, while simultaneously creating a visual record of environmental injury that could be used during a Natural Resource Damage Assessment.
The NOAA Office of Response and Restoration’s Emergency Response Division has a long history of recording aerial imagery of oil spills by using trained observers aboard helicopters or airplanes to find and photograph oil on the water’s surface. Using a UAS like the Puma removes the risk to human safety, requires batteries and not fuel, and has been shown to have little-to-no influence on the behavior of wildlife. In fact, NOAA has already used Pumas to great effect during marine mammal and sea bird surveys.
This last point is especially important when you consider an animal like the Pacific walrus. With recent, dramatic summer losses in sea ice, Pacific walruses have been seen congregating en masse on the shoreline of Alaska, a behavior happening earlier and earlier in the year. Disturbance of these large groups of walruses, which could be caused by noisy surveying techniques, creates panic in the animals, causing a stampede that could end up trampling and killing young walruses.Pumas Fly but Jaguars Swim
While the Pumas were busy scanning the ice and sea from the sky, scientists from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute were fast at work deploying their “Jaguar” beneath the water. The Jaguar is an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) designed to map the Arctic sea floor, but during Arctic Shield 2013, the science team instead used it to map the curves and channels on the underside of the sea ice.
For example, if an oil spill occurred near an ice floe, responders would need to know where oil could pool up or be funneled in the curves or channels beneath the sea ice. The Jaguar uses acoustic technology to map the differences in sea ice thickness or “draft” as it travels along its programmed path under the ice. A suite of oceanographic sensors are also installed that measure water temperature, conductivity, pressure, and salinity along the way. In addition, scientists can install an optical back-scatter sensor that can detect oil in the water column.
To top things off, the Jaguar’s footprint is relatively low. The entire system is easily shipped, only requires a three-person team to operate, and doesn’t need a large vessel like the Healy to be deployed. Having a highly functional, low-impact tool is a major advantage out on the Arctic Ocean.A Mapping Tool Made for the Arctic
It was with remote environments like the Arctic in mind that the Office of Response and Restoration developed Stand-alone ERMA, an internet-independent version of our Arctic ERMA online mapping tool used in response efforts for oil spills, hazardous waste spills, and ship groundings. My role in Arctic Shield was to integrate and display the data collected by the technologies I just described into Stand-alone ERMA. ERMA integrates multiple data sources and displays them in a single interactive map. With the resulting data-rich map, I could demonstrate the advantage of establishing a common operational picture during an oil spill response scenario—all without an internet connection.
During Arctic Shield 2013, Stand-alone ERMA was integrated into the ship’s local network, and as new data were recorded and displayed, everyone on the ship, from the bridge to the science decks, could view the same results on their computer screens.
In a typical oil spill response, you can have decision makers from federal, state, and local governments; private industry; and a multitude of scientists and technicians all working together. Everyone needs access to the same information, especially when it is constantly changing, in order to make the most informed decisions. But if internet availability is sporadic or nonexistent (not unusual in the Alaskan Arctic), most common operational pictures are rendered inoperable. Stand-alone ERMA bridges that gap, while providing the same experience and tools found with the online version. Demonstrating the utility of Stand-alone ERMA aboard the Healy made the advantages of a flexible common operational picture very clear.Mind the Gaps (and Bridge Them)
The purpose of these demonstrations during Arctic Shield 2013 was to identify technologies that could improve oil spill response capabilities in the Arctic environment. Not all of the technologies being demonstrated were recently developed or even developed specifically for oil spill response. The Coast Guard Research and Development Center, which organized the demonstration, has taken a critical look at the difficulties and challenges associated with operating in an icy ocean environment. As a result they have identified a wide variety of technologies—some of which we demonstrated on this trip—that could potentially improve response during an actual oil spill. Still, a great deal of work remains as we work to better understand Arctic ecosystems and overcome the challenges of stewardship in a new and uncertain period in our history.
Looking over the bow of the Healy as the ship fractured the ice beneath, I caught a brief glimpse of polar bear tracks in the snow. The animal itself was nowhere to be seen, but as I watched the tracks fade into the distance, I was reminded of why I was there. When you’re out on the ice, breathing in the frigid air, knowing that polar bears are out there hunting and raising cubs, you realize what is right in front of you is the only place like it in the world. Being a part of Arctic Shield 2013 was an incredibly rewarding and humbling experience, one that is helping me figure out what data we still need and develop the tools to strengthen our ability to respond to an oil spill.
Zach Winters-Staszak is a GIS Specialist with OR&R’s Spatial Data Branch. His main focus is to visualize environmental data from various sources for oil spill planning, preparedness, and response. In his free time, Zach can often be found backpacking and fly fishing in the mountains.
The impacts of an oil spill can be varied: closed beaches, dead fish, oiled birds and wildlife—just to name a few. But the impacts can also be emotional, often drawing out of people feelings like anger, sadness, frustration, or an eagerness to help. Those of us at NOAA who work to minimize the impacts of oil spills on America’s water, coasts, plants, and animals are not immune to these impacts either. But we are glad to know that people care.
Here a few examples of letters written by school kids after they learned about oil spills in Alaska and California—and how these spills affected them.
On April 13, 1989, second grader Kelli Middlestead of the Franklin School in Burlingame, Calif., let her feelings be known after hearing about the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska. She addressed her letter, illustrated with her beloved sea otters, to Walter Stieglitz, Alaskan Regional Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (Hat tip to the National Archive’s excellent Tumblr.)
In November of 2007, middle school students on a science camp field trip to a San Francisco beach were upset instead to find oil on the water, beach, and even the birds. Days earlier, the cargo ship Cosco Busan had crashed into the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge and spilled 53,000 gallons of thick fuel oil into the marine waters nearby.
While they were saddened by the events, the seventh grade students from Old Orchard Middle School in Campbell, Calif., decided to help by writing hand-written and illustrated thank you cards to the people cleaning up the oil spill. According to a press release about their efforts [PDF]:
“Everyone started pitching in and we came up with the idea to write cards,” said seventh grade student Erin.
“We felt helpless that we couldn’t go and help the animals or clean up the beach,” said Alex, another seventh grader from Old Orchard School. “We saw birds staggering and people trying to catch them.”
“These cards did a lot for the morale of our cleanup crew,” said Barry McFarland of the response company O’Brien’s Group, which worked to clean up the spill at Muir Beach and received the students’ cards. “Some of our crew were actually moved to tears.”
You can read more of the thank you notes from the concerned students [PDF].
Four federal and state trustee agencies have announced $3.7 million in funds following a natural resource damages settlement to restore natural resources and habitats harmed by hazardous substances released from a manufacturing site in McIntosh, Ala.
The funds are part of a $5 million settlement with BASF Corporation, the company that acquired the Ciba-Geigy Corporation’s McIntosh facility. Beginning in the 1950s, the facility manufactured DDT, a pesticide used to combat disease-carrying insects, as well as other pesticides, herbicides, and various agricultural and industrial chemicals. During those years, hazardous wastes from the facility were released into unlined pits on the property and discharged into the Tombigbee River and its adjacent floodplain.
The settlement was negotiated by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division on behalf of the trustees.
The natural resource trustees—NOAA, Department of Interior’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, and Geological Survey of Alabama— began a cooperative natural resource damage assessment with the responsible party in 2005 to identify resource injuries and the amount of restoration needed. The trustees act on behalf of the public to protect and restore natural resources.
Nearly $3.2 million of the $5 million BASF settlement will be used to plan, implement, and oversee restoration projects and/or acquire lands within the Mobile Bay watershed to compensate for resources injured as a result of exposure to contaminants from the facility.
The state of Alabama will receive $500,000 to fund additional ecosystem restoration efforts through support of the Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center. The remaining funds will reimburse the Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA for their past assessment costs.
The use of DDT was banned in the United States in 1972 because of its harmful effects on the environment, wildlife and the public. Once released, DDT persists in the environment for a long time and increases in concentrations up the food chain.
In 1984, EPA listed the McIntosh facility as a Superfund site. Early investigations on this site found elevated concentration levels of DDT in fish and sediments within the floodplain, bottomland hardwood forests, and areas of the Tombigbee River adjacent to the site.
The settlement agreement is available on NOAA’s Damage Assessment, Remediation, and Restoration Program website at www.darrp.noaa.gov/southeast/ciba/index.html. The trustees will develop a draft restoration plan with proposed projects, which will be released for public review and comment.
Top photo: Jeffrey Reed, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.
Bottom photo: Used with permission from Alabama Media Group.