Lessons Learned in Ecological Risk Assessment Planning Efforts

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Hayward Walker ◽  
Debra Scholz ◽  
Don V. Aurand ◽  
Robert G. Pond ◽  
James R. Clark

ABSTRACT There is growing interest in the United States for using the full mix of environmentally appropriate countermeasures during spill response to achieve the highest level of environmental protection and recovery possible. Determining the right mix of technologies, including mechanical recovery, shoreline cleanup, dispersants, and monitoring (no active response), is particularly challenging in sensitive and valuable estuaries through which high volumes of bulk oil shipment transit. This paper summarizes an ecological risk assessment (ERA) project to consider the potential effectiveness and effects of using dispersants, in addition to conventional countermeasures, to mitigate the impacts of oil spilled into the marine and nearshore environments and to facilitate preparedness efforts at the federal, state, local, and industry level. Sponsored by industry and federal and state agencies, the primary goal was to bring technical and resource experts together to use their collective knowledge and experience in methodically comparing the trade-offs associated with the use of various countermeasures in Puget Sound, Washington. The ERA process used for Washington State waters was the first ERA that specifically addressed oil spill response options in U.S. coastal estuaries. It occurred as a follow-up to several other preparedness activities jointly sponsored by government and industry. The project team learned several important lessons, which were used to refine the process as it subsequently was applied in California and Texas in 1999.

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (1) ◽  
pp. 177-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Kraly ◽  
Robert G. Pond ◽  
Ann Hayward Walker ◽  
John Caplis ◽  
Don V. Aurand ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT This paper summarizes the process of a cooperative ecological risk assessment (ERA) that was used to examine the potential environmental consequences of oil spill scenarios in San Francisco Bay, California; Galveston Bay, Texas; and Puget Sound, Washington. The purpose of the ERA process is to evaluate the ecological trade-offs associated with the use of each of five potential oil spill removal options—natural recovery, on-water mechanical recovery, shoreline cleanup, dispersant use, and on-water in situ burning. The desired outcome of the evaluation is identification of the optimum mix of response options in reducing injury to each specific environment. Evaluations at each location were accomplished through a series of facilitated workshops involving technical experts and resource managers from as many stakeholder organizations as possible. At these workshops, the participants developed relative ecological risk evaluations for response options. At the conclusion of each ERA, the workshop participants felt that the cooperative ERA process had the potential to become an integral part of the area contingency planning process by facilitating the assessment of the effectiveness of response strategies contained in an Area Contingency Plan (ACP). Repeated application of the process for various scenarios should enable an area committee to optimize response strategies over time by maximizing net environmental benefit. This paper describes the process used by the participants and presents a simplified version of the ERA process amenable to shorter timeframes and consequently more scenarios.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (43) ◽  
pp. eabc1299
Author(s):  
Janet L. Miller ◽  
Travis S. Schmidt ◽  
Peter C. Van Metre ◽  
Barbara J. Mahler ◽  
Mark W. Sandstrom ◽  
...  

Insecticides in streams are increasingly a global concern, yet information on safe concentrations for aquatic ecosystems is sparse. In a 30-day mesocosm experiment exposing native benthic aquatic invertebrates to the common insecticide fipronil and four degradates, fipronil compounds caused altered emergence and trophic cascades. Effect concentrations eliciting a 50% response (EC50) were developed for fipronil and its sulfide, sulfone, and desulfinyl degradates; taxa were insensitive to fipronil amide. Hazard concentrations for 5% of affected species derived from up to 15 mesocosm EC50 values were used to convert fipronil compound concentrations in field samples to the sum of toxic units (∑TUFipronils). Mean ∑TUFipronils exceeded 1 (indicating toxicity) in 16% of streams sampled from five regional studies. The Species at Risk invertebrate metric was negatively associated with ∑TUFipronils in four of five regions sampled. This ecological risk assessment indicates that low concentrations of fipronil compounds degrade stream communities in multiple regions of the United States.


2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 271-276
Author(s):  
Leigh Stevens ◽  
Mark Gibbs ◽  
Julian Roberts ◽  
Dayne Maxwell ◽  
Rob Service

ABSTRACT Cooperative oil spill Ecological Risk Assessment (C-ERA) is a preparedness tool that seeks consensus-based decisions regarding potential spill and spill response impacts. The established US Coast Guard ERA approach has generally used 1–2 multi-day workshops, several weeks apart, to identify and work through key issues. In New Zealand (NZ), funding limitations required a faster approach. This paper describes the advantages and disadvantages encountered during a modified 1-day version of the ERA conducted for the Fiordland region. Fiordland is a highly valued and remote National Park and World Heritage Area of 1.25 million Ha, with ∼200km of exposed coastline, and ∼1800km internal coastline including 15 main fiords. The unique climate, topography, bathymetry and oceanography, in addition to limited access and infrastructure, make marine pollution response inherently difficult. Recent increases in cruise ship and commercial maritime activity has increased the spill risk, especially for fuel oil. Information previously gathered from interest/advocate groups and government agencies was used to identify priority resources and summarise the spill risk. Then, at a 1-day workshop, six experts in Fiordland ecology, spill response and ERA processes defined the most ecologically important areas and priority resources across the region, and their susceptibility to oil. Levels of concern were applied to each area and identified resource, and the preferred response options and their feasibility defined. Outputs were presented on a series of planning maps and site sheets completed for each priority area after the workshop which were circulated for stakeholder review. The approach enabled a defensible response plan to be generated quickly and cheaply. It secured input from agencies who would not have participated had a greater time input been required and generated a concise document for public consultation and a template for ongoing refinement. The success of the approach was due largely to the high level of trust between scientific and response agencies in NZ, and a shared desire to rapidly improve response planning outcomes. Disadvantages were the inability to fully review and include all available technical information, limited public consultation, and tight time pressures. Examples are given of the benefit of the plan following its use during a recent spill of marine diesel.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document