Whales, salmon, seabirds recovered from Valdez spill
Date: 22-Apr-02
Country: USA
Author: Yereth Rosen
A draft report presented to a panel of state and federal trustees overseeing a spill settlement fund lists five species as recovered from the 11 million gallon (41 million liter) disaster.
Species newly designated as recovered are killer whales, pink salmon, sockeye salmon, common murres and black oystercatchers. They were added to a list of two other species, river otters and bald eagles, previously deemed recovered from the spill.
Also considered recovered are the area's archeological resources, which appear to have been undisturbed over, despite fears of vandalism, and subtidal communities, which are considered mostly free of lingering oil.
The report reflects improving conditions in Prince William Sound and outlying areas, said Molly McCammon, executive director of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, the panel that administers the $900 million that Exxon paid over 10 years to settle state and federal claims over natural resource damages.
She said nature deserves most of the credit for healing the area.
"That's the biggest lesson of all of this. When it comes to really hands-on restoration activities, there was very little that could be done," McCammon said.
Natural recovery was aided by the trustee council's purchases of more than 630,000 acres (255 hectares) of coastal land, which preserved it from logging, she said.
"If all of that logging had occurred, I think that could have had a dramatic effect on the recovery of all these species," she said.
The latest report also documents improvement in the vitality of some of Prince William Sound's other populations, such as otters and harlequin ducks.
In all six species, along with designated wilderness areas, intertidal communities and sediments are considered recovering, the report said. But harbor seals and three species of seabirds - common loons, cormorants and pigeon guillemots - show no improvement yet, according to the report.
McCammon said the trustee council in recent years altered its definition of recovery. That judgment now depends on whether populations are stable or increasing, instead of whether they are at pre-spill levels, and whether there is a significant difference between populations in oiled and non-oiled areas, she said.
The council's findings could have financial implications. The 1991 settlement called for Exxon to pay $100 million more if, after a decade, unanticipated ecological injury is discovered. That re-opener clause could go into effect as early as this year.
The council's status report pleased neither Exxon Mobil nor some environmentalists.
Exxon Mobil spokesman Tom Cirigliano said the trustee council uses a definition of "recovery" that is too narrow and misleading. Under the council's definition, he said, the spill could be blamed erroneously for unrelated ecological changes like climate shifts. The decline of species like harbor seals - which started long before the spill - should not be tied to the spill, he said.
But he said he was pleased with some of elements of the latest status report, including the affirmation of Exxon Mobil's long-held contention that salmon are healthy and free from oil's ill effects.
Others said the report was too rosy.
"If it were genuine and real, I would celebrate it with all my heart," said Rick Steiner, a biologist with the University of Alaska's Marine Science Advisory Program. But he suspected a pro-oil, Bush administration slant, he said.