Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tzmfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-30T05:02:18.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - Characterizing ecological risks, significance, and recovery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2013

By
Mark A. Harwell ,
John H. Gentile  and
Keith R. Parker
Edited by
John A. Wiens
John A. Wiens
Affiliation:
PRBO Conservation Science, California and University of Western Australia, Perth
Get access

Summary

Introduction

When the Exxon Valdez oil spill occurred in 1989, there was no accepted framework for conducting ecological risk assessments. The primary guidance for assessing effects from oil spills was Oil in the Sea (National Research Council, 1985), which emphasized individual species but provided little information on communities or ecosystem processes. More importantly, it did not provide a systematic, risk-based methodology for assessing relationships between exposures to oil and their effects. The United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) risk-assessment framework had been developed specifically for determining human cancer risks from chemical exposures (National Research Council, 1983). Assessing ecological risks, however, presents significant additional challenges: diverse ecological systems are subjected to multiple natural and anthropogenic stressors, each potentially causing many different effects on many different ecological attributes. Consequently, EPA developed a new framework and guidance designed for conducting ecological risk assessments (ERAs) (US Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, 1998), but this did not occur until several years after the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

Another decade passed before we applied this ERA framework to evaluate the ecological significance of any remaining effects of the Exxon Valdez spill. Now, 20 years after the ERA framework was developed, the process has matured considerably into an integrated environmental-assessment framework (Cormier and Suter, 2008). The integrated framework no longer simply assesses exposures and effects, but now provides a more comprehensive approach to thinking about ecological incidents. This expanded construct focuses on identifying the system attributes that matter ecologically or societally and provides a means to assess both immediate and long-term effects on those important attributes. It also places spill risks in the context of other natural and anthropogenic stressors and incorporates a process to account for uncertainty. It ultimately provides a means to characterize recovery in light of natural variability over time.

Type
Chapter
Information
Oil in the Environment
Legacies and Lessons of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
 , pp. 383 - 419
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ballachey, B.E. and Bodkin, J.L. (2006). Lingering Oil and Sea Otters: Pathways of Exposure and Recovery Status. Anchorage, AK, USA: Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council Restoration Project //620 Draft Final Report; April 2006.
Barnthouse, L.W., Munns, W.R., Jr., and Sorensen, M.T, eds (2007). Population-Level Ecological Risk Assessment. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press; ISBN-10: 1420053329; ISBN-13: 9781420053326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bence, A.E. and Burns, W.A. (1995). Fingerprinting hydrocarbons in the biological resources of the Exxon Valdez spill area. In Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Fate and Effects in Alaskan Waters. Wells, P.G., Butler, J.N., and Hughes, J.S., eds. Philadelphia, PA, USA: American Society for Testing and Materials; ASTM Special Technical Publication 1219; ISBN-10: 0803118961; pp. 84–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bence, A.E., Page, D.S., and Boehm, P.D. (2007). Advances in forensic techniques for petroleum hydrocarbons: the Exxon Valdez experience. In Oil Spill Environmental Forensics: Fingerprinting and Source Identification. Wang, Z. and Stout, S.A., eds. San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press; ISBN-10: 0123695236; ISBN-13: 9780123695239; pp. 449–487.Google Scholar
Bodkin, J.L. and Ballachey, B.E. (1997). Restoration Notebook: Sea Otter (Enhydra lutris). Anchorage, AK, USA: Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council.Google Scholar
Bodkin, J.L., Ballachey, B.E., Dean, T.A., Fukuyama, A.K., Jewett, S.C., McDonald, L., Monson, D.H., O’Clair, C.E., and VanBlaricom, G.R. (2002). Sea otter population status and the process of recovery from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. Marine Ecology Progress Series 241: 237–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodkin, J.L., Ballachey, B.E., Coletti, H.A., Esslinger, G.C., Kloecker, K.A., Rice, S.D., Reed, J.A., and Monson, D.H. (2012). Long-term effects of the Exxon Valdez oil spill: sea otter foraging in the intertidal as a pathway of exposure to lingering oil. Marine Ecology Progress Series 447: 273–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burn, D.M. and Doroff, A.M. (2005). Decline in sea otter (Enhydra lutris) populations along the Alaska Peninsula, 1986–2001. Fishery Bulletin 103(2): 270–279.Google Scholar
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (1996). A Framework for Ecological Risk: General Guidance. Winnipeg, MB, Canada: The National Contaminated Sites Remediation Program; PN 1195; ISBN-10: 0662242463.Google Scholar
Cormier, S.M. and Suter, G.W., II (2008). A framework for fully integrating environmental assessment. Environmental Management 42(4): 543–556.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dale, V.H., Swanson, F.J., and Crisafulli, C.M., eds (2005a). Ecological Responses to the 1980 Eruption of Mount St. Helens. New York, NY, USA: Springer; ISBN-13: 9780387238685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, V.H., Swanson, F.J., and Crisafulli, C.M. (2005b). Ecological perspectives on management of the Mount St. Helens landscape. In Ecological Responses to the 1980 Eruption of Mount St. Helens. Dale, V.H., Swanson, F.J., and Crisafulli, C.M., eds. New York, NY, USA: Springer; ISBN-13: 9780387238685; pp. 277–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, T.A., Bodkin, J.L., Fukuyama, A.K., Jewett, S.C., Monson, D.H., O’Clair, C.E., and VanBlaricom, G.R. (2002). Food limitation and the recovery of sea otters following the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Marine Ecology Progress Series 241: 255–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeAngelis, D.L. (1980). Energy flow, nutrient cycling, and ecosystem resilience. Ecology 61(4): 764–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeAngelis, D.L., Bartell, S.M., and Brenkert, A.L. (1989a). Effects of nutrient recycling and food-chain length on resilience. American Naturalist 134(5): 778–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeAngelis, D.L. and Gross, L.J. (1992). Individual-Based Models and Approaches in Ecology: Populations, Communities and Ecosystems. New York, NY, USA: Springer; ISBN-10: 041203171X; ISBN-13: 978–0412031717. Also, London, UK: Chapman and Hall; ISBN-10: 0412031612, ISBN-13: 9780412031618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeAngelis, D.L. and Mooji, W.M. (2005). Individual-based modeling of ecological and evolutionary processes. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 36: 147–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeAngelis, D.L., Mulholland, P.J., Palumbo, A.V., Steinman, A.D., Huston, M.A., and Elwood, J.W. (1989b). Nutrient dynamics and food-web stability. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 20: 71–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esler, D., Bowman, T.D., Trust, K.A., Ballachey, B.E., Dean, T.A., Jewett, S.C., and O’Clair, C.E. (2002). Harlequin duck population recovery following the Exxon Valdez oil spill: progress, process and constraints. Marine Ecology Progress Series 241: 271–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estes, J.A., Tinker, M.T., Williams, T.M., and Doak, D.F. (1998). Killer whale predation on sea otters linking oceanic and nearshore ecosystems. Science 282(5388): 473–476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council (2002). Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration Plan Update on Injured Resources and Services, April 10, 2002. Anchorage, AK, USA: Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council.Google Scholar
Finney, B.P., Gregory-Eaves, I., Sweetman, J., Douglas, M.S.V., and Smol, J.P. (2000). Impacts of climatic change and fishing on Pacific salmon abundance over the past 300 years. Science 290(5492): 795–799.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forbes, V.E., Calow, P., Grimm, V., Hayashi, T., Jager, T., Palmqvist, A., Pastorok, R., Salvito, D., Sibly, R., Spromberg, J., Stark, J., and Stillman, R.A. (2010). Integrating population modeling into ecological risk assessment. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 6(1): 191–193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gentile, J.H. and Harwell, M.A. (1998). The issue of significance in ecological risk assessments. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 4(4): 815–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentile, J.H. and Harwell, M.A. (2001). Strategies for assessing cumulative ecological risks. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 7(2): 239–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentile, J.H., Harwell, M.A., Cropper, Jr W.P.., Harwell, C.C., DeAngelis, D., Davis, S., Ogden, J.C., and Lirman, D. (2001). Ecological conceptual models: a framework and case study on ecosystem management for South Florida sustainability. Journal of Science and the Total Environment 274(1–3): 231–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harwell, M.A. and Gentile, J.H. (2006). Ecological significance of residual exposures and effects from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 2(3): 204–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harwell, M.A., Gentile, J.H., Cummins, K.W., Highsmith, R.C., Hilborn, R., McRoy, C.P., Parrish, J., and Weingartner, T. (2010a). A conceptual model of natural and anthropogenic drivers and their influence on the Prince William Sound, Alaska, ecosystem. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 16(4): 672–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harwell, M.A., Gentile, J.H., Johnson, C.B., Garshelis, D.L., and Parker, K.R. (2010b). A quantitative ecological risk assessment of the toxicological risks from Exxon Valdez subsurface oil residues to sea otters at Northern Knight Island, Prince William Sound, Alaska. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 16(4): 727–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harwell, M.A., Gentile, J.H., Parker, K.R., Murphy, S.M., Day, R.H., Bence, A.E., Neff, J.M., and Wiens, J.A. (2012a). Quantitative assessment of current risks to harlequin ducks in Prince William Sound, Alaska, from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 18(2): 261–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harwell, M.A., Gentile, J.H., and Parker, K.R. (2012b). Quantifying population-level risks using an individual-based model: Sea otters, harlequin ducks, and the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 8(3): 503–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayes, M.O. and Michel, J. (1999). Factors determining the long-term persistence of Exxon Valdez oil in gravel beaches. Marine Pollution Bulletin 38(2): 92–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegmann, G., Cocklin, C., Creasey, R., Dupuis, S., Kennedy, A., Kingsley, L., Ross, W., Spaling, H., and Stalker, D. (1999). Cumulative Effects Assessment Practitioners Guide. Hull, QC, Canada: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.Google Scholar
Holling, C.S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 4: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Integral Consulting, Inc. (2006). Information Synthesis and Recovery Recommendations for Resources and Services Injured by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. Mercer Island, WA, USA: Integral Consulting, Inc.; Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration Project 060783 Final Report.
Johnson, C.B. and Garshelis, D.J. (1995). Sea otter abundance, distribution, and pup production in Prince William Sound following the Exxon Valdez oil spill. In Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Fate and Effects in Alaskan Waters. Wells, P.G., Butler, J.N., and Hughes, J.S., eds. Philadelphia, PA, USA: American Society for Testing and Materials; ASTM Special Technical Publication 1219; ISBN-10: 0803118961; pp. 894–929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, K., Pitois, S., Scott, C., Frid, C., and Mackinson, S. (2006). Characterizing regime shifts in the marine environment. Fish and Fisheries 7(2): 104–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lirman, D. and Fong, P. (1995). The effects of Hurricane Andrew and Tropical Storm Gordon on Florida reefs. Coral Reefs 14(3): 172.Google Scholar
Lovelace, J.K. and McPherson, B.F. (1996). Restoration, Creation, and Recovery: Effects of Hurricane Andrew (1992) on Wetlands in Southern Florida and Louisiana. Washington DC, USA: United States Geological Survey; National Water Summary on Wetland Resources; USGS Water Supply Paper 2425.Google Scholar
Michel, J., Nixon, Z., and Cotsapas, L. (2006). Evaluation of Oil Remediation Technologies for Lingering Oil from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska. Juneau, AK, USA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service; Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council Restoration Project 050778 Final.Google Scholar
Miller, A.J., Di Lorenzo, E., Neilson, D.J., Kim, H-J., Capotondi, A., Alexander, M.A., Bograd, S.J., Schwing, F.B., Mendelssohn, R., Hedstrom, K., and Musgrave, D.L. (2005). Interdecadal changes in mesoscale eddy variance in the Gulf of Alaska circulation: possible implications for the Steller sea lion decline. Atmosphere-Ocean 43(3): 231–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mundy, P.R., ed. (2005). The Gulf of Alaska: Biology and Oceanography. Fairbanks, AK, USA: Alaska Sea Grant College Program, University of Alaska; Publication AK-SG-05–01; ISBN-10: 156612090x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munns, W.R., Gervais, J., Hoffman, A.A., Hommen, U., Nacci, D.R., Nakamaru, M., Sibly, R., and Topping, C.J. (2007). Modeling approaches to population-level risk assessment. In Population-Level Ecological Risk Assessment. Barnthouse, L.W., Munns, Jr W.R.., and Sorensen, M.T., eds. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press; ISBN-10: 1420053329; ISBN-13: 9781420053326; pp. 179–210.Google Scholar
National Marine Fisheries Service (2010). Interim Endangered and Threatened Species Recovery Planning Guidance. Version 1.3. June 2010. Silver Spring, MD, USA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service.Google Scholar
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (1996). Guidance Document for Natural Resource Damage Assessment under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, August 1996. Washington DC, USA: General Counsel for Natural Resources, Office of Habitat Conservation, Office of Response and Restoration, Damage Assessment Remediation and Restoration Program.Google Scholar
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2010). Guidance Document for Natural Resource Damage Assessment under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Revised July 2010. Washington DC, USA: General Counsel for Natural Resources, Office of Habitat Conservation, Office of Response and Restoration, Damage Assessment Remediation and Restoration Program.Google Scholar
National Research Council (1983). Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. Washington DC, USA: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
National Research Council (1985). Oil in the Sea: Inputs, Fates, and Effects. Washington DC, USA: National Academy Press; ISBN-10: 0309034795.Google Scholar
National Research Council (1990). Managing Troubled Waters: The Role of Marine Environmental Monitoring. Washington DC, USA: National Academy Press; ISBN-10: 0309074789; ISBN-13: 9780309074780.Google Scholar
National Research Council (2002). The Missouri River Ecosystem. Exploring the Prospects for Recovery. Washington DC, USA: National Academy Press; ISBN-10: 0309083141; ISBN-13: 9780309083140.Google Scholar
Nelson, B.D., Short, J.D., and Rice, S.D. (1999). Hydrocarbon Data Analysis, Interpretation and Database Maintenance for Restoration and NRDA Environmental Samples Associated with the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. Juneau, AK, USA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service; Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration Project 98290 Annual Report.Google Scholar
Ogden, J.C., Davis, S.M., and Brandt, L.A. (2002). Science strategy for a regional ecosystem monitoring and assessment program: the Florida Everglades example. In Monitoring Ecosystems: Interdisciplinary Approaches for Evaluating Ecoregional Initiatives. Busch, D. and Trexler, J.C., eds. Washington DC, USA: Island Press; ISBN-10: 1559638516; ISBN-13: 9781559638500; pp. 135–166.Google Scholar
Page, D.S., Boehm, P.D., Douglas, G.S., and Bence, A.E. (1995). Identification of hydrocarbon sources in the benthic sediments of Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska following the Exxon Valdez oil spill. In Exxon Valdez Oil Spill: Fate and Effects in Alaskan Waters. Wells, P.G., Butler, J.N., and Hughes, J.S., eds. Philadelphia, PA, USA: American Society for Testing and Materials; ASTM Special Technical Publication 1219; ISBN-10: 0803118961; pp. 41–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paine, R.T. (1980). Food webs: Linkage interaction strength and community infrastructure. Journal of Animal Ecology 49(3): 666–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, G.J. and Goudie, R.I. (1999). Harlequin duck (Histrionicus histrionicus). In The Birds of North America. Gill, F. and Poole, A., eds. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Birds of North America, Inc.; No. 466. [The Birds of North America Online; ]Google Scholar
Short, J.W., Maselko, J.M., Lindeberg, M.R., Harris, P.M., and Rice, S.D. (2006). Vertical distribution and probability of encountering intertidal Exxon Valdez oil on shorelines of three embayments within Prince William Sound, Alaska. Environmental Science & Technology 40(12): 3723–3729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, P.C. and Fineberg, H.V., eds (1996). Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington DC, USA: National Research Council, National Academy Press; ISBN-10: 030905396X.
Stubblefield, W.A., Hancock, G.A., Ford, W.H., and Ringer, R.K. (1995a). Acute and subchronic toxicity of naturally weathered Exxon Valdez crude oil in mallards and ferrets. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14(11): 1941–1950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stubblefield, W.A., Hancock, G.A., Prince, H.H., and Ringer, R.K. (1995b). Effects of naturally weathered Exxon Valdez crude oil on mallard reproduction. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14(11): 1951–1960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, E. and Reimer, D. (2008). Oil persistence on beaches in Prince William Sound: a review of SCAT surveys conducted from 1989 to 2002. Marine Pollution Bulletin 56(3): 458–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Upper Mississippi River Basin Association (1995). Forging a New Framework for the Future: A Report to the Governors on State and Federal Management of the Upper Mississippi River. St. Paul, MN, USA: Upper Mississippi River Basin Association.Google Scholar
US Army (2000). Standard Practice for Wildlife Toxicity Reference Values. Washington DC, USA: US Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine, Environmental Health Risk Assessment Program, Health Effects Research Program; Technical Guide Number 254. [(Oct00final).pdf]Google Scholar
US Army Corps of Engineers (1999). Central and Southern Florida Project, Comprehensive Review Study, Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, April 1999. Washington DC, USA: Jacksonville District, South Florida Water Management District.
US Environmental Protection Agency (1991). Chemical Concentration Data near the Detection Limit. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Environmental Protection Agency Region III, Office of Superfund Hazardous Waste Management, Hazardous Waste Management Division; Region III Technical Guidance Manual, Risk Assessment; EPA/903/8–91/001. [, search by title]Google Scholar
US Environmental Protection Agency (1992). Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment. Washington DC, USA: Risk Assessment Forum; EPA/630/R-92/001.Google Scholar
US Environmental Protection Agency (1998). Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. Washington DC, USA: Risk Assessment Forum; EPA/630/R-95/002F.Google Scholar
US Environmental Protection Agency (2002). Waquoit Bay Watershed Ecological Risk Assessment: The Effect of Land-Derived Nitrogen on Estuarine Eutrophication. Washington DC, USA: National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development; EPA/600/R-02/079.Google Scholar
US Environmental Protection Agency (2003). Guidance for Developing Ecological Soil Screening Levels (Eco-SSL). Washington DC, USA: Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response; OSWER Directive 9285.7–55.Google Scholar
US Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Ecological Soil Screening Levels for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). Washington DC, USA: Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response; Interim Final OSWER Directive 9285; pp. 7–78.Google Scholar
US Fish and Wildlife Service (2005). Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; determination of threatened status and special rule for the southwest Alaska Distinct Population Segment of the northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni). Federal Register 70(152): 46365–46386; August 9, 2005; Final Rule and Proposed Rule.Google Scholar
von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General System Theory. Foundations, Development, Applications. New York, NY, USA: George Braziller, Inc.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×