Scientists urge new research policies in wake of Gulf disaster
Scientists are having a difficult time gauging the recovery of marine species from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico because they lack sufficient data about historical population size and the distribution, growth rates and reproduction rates of many species.
In a forum paper published this week in the journal Science, they call for a new research agenda that prioritizes systematic acquisition of baseline data for marine species.
"It is impossible to diagnose whether a species is recovering or floundering if you don't have good data on their status and trends," said Selina Heppell, an Oregon State University fisheries biologist and one of the authors of the article. "Too much of the funding in this country goes toward putting fires out instead of gaining basic biological information, which is what resource managers need to identify and diagnose changes at the population level.
"This is not just about the Gulf of Mexico," Heppell added. "It is a problem for protected species everywhere."
Heppell, lead author Karen Bjorndal from the University of Florida, and eight other authors point to the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska, where scientists encountered difficulty evaluating the effects on wildlife because of limited data on abundance and demography the rates of survival, growth and reproduction that are primary indicators of population change.
"Sadly," they wrote, "the situation in the (Gulf of Mexico) is similar more than 20 years later."
Heppell, who is a professor in the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife at Oregon State University, said doing an ecological and biological assessment of all marine species would be difficult and expensive. Therefore, she says, the emphasis should be on those species that are the most endangered, or those that have an economic impact, such as those creatures that interact with important fisheries.
"We spend millions of dollars assessing fish stocks," she said. "If we want to monitor endangered species in the same way, we need to focus resources on the aspects of biology that provide the best information about population recovery. That involves research on demography, not just efforts to count individuals."
In their Science article, the authors describe the assessment of sea turtle populations as a microcosm of the larger issue. Sea turtle populations are monitored almost exclusively by counting nests on beaches, but when those populations increase or decrease, scientists often don't know why because nesting females are such a tiny fraction of the total population. In Florida, the number of loggerhead turtles, for example, increased from 1989-98, then plummeted.
Several factors could have contributed, but a lack of knowledge about age distribution, reproduction rates, mortality rates and other data have made it difficult to determine what triggered the changes and impossible to create management strategies to deal with them, noted Heppell, who has worked with the National Marine Fisheries Service on turtle conservation issues since 1995.
In contrast, Australian researchers have logged 30 years of demographic data on loggerhead turtles and when a steep decline in their population on the Great Barrier Reef took place in the 1980s and 1990s, they were able to attribute it to predation by foxes on nests and incidental capture in trawl fisheries.
"Both hazards have now been mitigated by government agencies," the authors wrote," resulting in an apparently recovering stock."
The authors list seven elements that should be considered in crafting new research priorities for protected marine species, including sea birds and mammals, as well as turtles:
- Integrate demography with abundance trends for the species at all life stages and determine environmental effects on those parameters;
- Emphasize analyses of cumulative effects instead of focusing on individual threats such as pollution, bycatch or habitat loss;
- Elucidate links among and within populations since oceans have greater movement, genetic exchange and dispersal than terrestrial systems;
- Revise permitting processes to allow more rapid and flexible response to environmental concerns;
- Encourage data sharing and increase access to data as a prerequisite for funding;
- Improve assessment tools for evaluating anthropogenic impacts on populations;
- Prioritize investments to focus on long-term population management needs.
"We can use money from the resulting fines to develop a new strategy for monitoring and assessment that can identify the specific causes of population decline and make management more efficient," she added.
Shifting the priorities of federal agencies to focus on research that emphasizes how and why populations change over time is a key, the authors say.
Conclude the authors: "In the wake of the BP oil spill, the need for this policy shift is as clear as it is compelling. If the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history is not enough to effect this policy shift, what would it take?"
Provided by
Oregon State University
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
30 comments
-
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments,
3 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
42 comments
-
Climate scientists say they have solved riddle of rising sea,
30 comments
-
Research team claims to have found evidence Lake Cheko is impact crater for Tunguska Event,
18 comments
-
More human population = greater mass?
May 25, 2012
-
Conversion from aircraft bearing to normal degrees
May 23, 2012
-
Interpretation/Analysis of the Lab results(HEPA filter)
May 22, 2012
-
Has anyone here attended the The Urbino Summer School in Paleoclimatology?
May 22, 2012
-
Earthquakes: Mag 6 N. Italy and Mag 5.6 W. Bulgaria
May 21, 2012
-
determining time frame for most recent geological layers
May 17, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - Earth
More news stories
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say (Update)
SpaceX's Dragon cargo vessel smells like a new car, said astronauts at the International Space Station after opening the hatches Saturday following the spacecraft's landmark mission to the orbiting lab.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
12 hours ago |
4.6 / 5 (18) |
0
Australia hails surprise super-telescope decision
Australia has hailed a surprise decision giving it a role in a radio telescope project aimed at revolutionising astronomy, vowing to draw on its decades of experience in space science.
12 hours ago |
5 / 5 (2) |
0
Astronomers seize last chance in lifetime for Venus Transit
Astronomers are gearing for one the rarest events in the Solar System: an alignment of Earth, Venus and the Sun that will not be seen for another 105 years.
12 hours ago |
5 / 5 (1) |
0
Astronauts enter world's 1st private supply ship
(AP) -- Space station astronauts floated into the Dragon on Saturday, a day after its heralded arrival as the world's first commercial supply ship.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
12 hours ago |
5 / 5 (5) |
0
Dragon arrives at space station in historic 1st (Update 2)
The privately bankrolled Dragon capsule made a historic arrival at the International Space Station on Friday, triumphantly captured by astronauts wielding a giant robot arm.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
May 25, 2012 |
5 / 5 (10) |
19
Dell tablet leak: 10.1-inch display, two-battery choice
(Phys.org) -- Headline after headline talks about vendors tablets in the wings as likely number-one contenders for the iPad. Such claims have justifiably been taken with a grain of salt, considering ...
Scientist: Evolution debate will soon be history
(AP) -- Richard Leakey predicts skepticism over evolution will soon be history. Not that the avowed atheist has any doubts himself.
SpotterRF debuts Radar Backpack Kit (w/ Video)
(Phys.org) -- SpotterRF has announced a special radar backpack kit designed to enhance situational awareness for soldiers on the ground. The company says its special radar is designed for warfighters as part ...
Keep food safety in mind this memorial day weekend
(HealthDay) -- Picnics, parades and cookouts are as much a part of Memorial Day weekend as tributes to the United States' war veterans.
Thousands of shellfish found dead in Peru
Thousands of crustaceans were found dead off the coast of Lima following the mystery mass death of dolphins and pelicans, the Peruvian Navy said Friday.
Family history of Alzheimer's affects functional connectivity
(HealthDay) -- Cognitively normal individuals with a family history of late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) may display lower resting state functional connectivity in the default mode network (DMN) of the brain, ...
Feb 03, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
Feb 03, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Start using your mind.
Feb 03, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
I guess it's just a question of priorities...
Feb 03, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
We use all kinds of money (in every nation) for things which aren't related to jobs or making sure the average citizen can pollute the environment as cheaply as possible. Might as well use it for something useful like the article suggests.
Yes. It's a question of priorities. Try to get some ethical ones and not just ones that satisfy your greed.
Feb 04, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
I'm not saying I disagree with this paper--I don't. I'm just saying that the incentive structure isn't designed to reward this sort of data collection.
Feb 04, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Yes, I do. Researchers are interested in their research (I know, I am one and know this to be true of any and all researchers I am acquainted with). We do _exactly_ what we have always wnated to do. having a career beyond that is (to us) pointless as it would be a step back from what we really want to do.
OK, we take the promotions or pay raises if someone offers - but I know of no researcher who would actively sacrifice their area of interest to take up an area that does not interest them just so that they can have better pay or a more 'prestigious' position.
(Mostly because we laugh at the people with 'prestigious' positions - like 'science managers' - behind their backs. And anyone bucking for such a position coming from a full reseasrch background would know this)
The make more money, but we get to (effectively) play. We have the better end of the deal.
Feb 04, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
No they're not. What the hell makes you think I felt that way? Or were you just being a presumptuous jerk?
"Useful" in this case is highly debatable...
I think it's unethical to have people without jobs living in dire straits rather than to piss money away on yet another idiotic government study. Greed doesn't come into it bubba.
Feb 04, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
I'm just saying that if you get riled up over this (which arguably even will bring great benefits) you should have been in Washington, personally burning down the capitol years ago. Your outrage over this is completely out of whack.
Sure we could sink all money into creating jobs. Would that help? Basically you are saying: take X dollars (plus bureaucracy friction Z because they are tax dollars) and give them to people to do jobs no one needs....of which they will pay Y percent back as taxes (with Y being much smaller than Y+Z)
You'd be wasting even more.