Identifying evaluation considerations for the recovery and restoration from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill: An initial appraisal of stakeholder concerns and values

Key challenges and developments in wildlife ecological risk assessment: Problem formulation

Problem formulation (PF) is a critical initial step in planning risk assessments for chemical exposures to wildlife, used either explicitly or implicitly in various jurisdictions to include registration of new pesticides, evaluation of new and existing chemicals released to the environment, and characterization of impact when chemical releases have occurred. Despite improvements in our understanding of the environment, ecology, and biological sciences, few risk assessments have used this information to enhance their value and predictive capabilities. In addition to advances in organism-level mechanisms and methods, there have been substantive developments that focus on population- and systems-level processes. Although most of the advances have been recognized as being state-of-the-science for two decades or more, there is scant evidence that they have been incorporated into wildlife risk assessment or risk assessment in general. In this article, we identify opportunities to consider elevating the relevance of wildlife risk assessments by focusing on elements of the PF stage of risk assessment, especially in the construction of conceptual models and selection of assessment endpoints that target population- and system-level endpoints. Doing so will remain consistent with four established steps of existing guidance: (1) establish clear protection goals early in the process; (2) consider how data collection using new methods will affect decisions, given all possibilities, and develop a decision plan a priori; (3) engage all relevant stakeholders in creating a robust, holistic conceptual model that incorporates plausible stressors that could affect the targets defined in the protection goals; and (4) embrace the need for iteration throughout the PF steps (recognizing that multiple passes may be required before agreeing on a feasible plan for the rest of the risk assessment). Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:658-673. © 2022 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC). This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Identifying shared priorities for a bioregional approach to restoration in the Northern Gulf of Mexico

Natural resource management is often challenged with a mismatch between the scale of decision-making and the scale of the biological, ecological, and physical processes that control a system. Bioregional approaches to adaptive management have emerged as an approach to inform natural resource management at ecologically relevant scales and across multi-level governance structures. The implementation of adaptive management requires the determination of ecological and social priorities that can inform a desired system state across multiple governing bodies. We use the Northern Gulf of Mexico, United States, as a case study for a bioregional approach to adaptive management and illustrate a method for developing objectives and management priorities across programs and jurisdictions. Through this synthesis, using qualitative coding methods to develop a shared vocabulary across the diverse dataset, we identified commonalities and differences in ecological and human community priorities across the five states which line the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Using these shared priorities, we conceptualize a network of priority-focused objectives as a starting point for further stakeholder engagement and effectively monitoring and evaluating progress across boundaries. This approach serves as a framework for cross-program adaptive management by illustrating a desired system state that reflects the shared priorities among decision-making authorities in this region and offering individual programs or projects a method to articulate their contributions to the broader set of shared priorities Gulf-wide. This method can be used by restoration managers in any region of the world to align project objectives within cross-jurisdictional boundaries and illustrate the value of a bioregional approach to restoration.

Reprint of: Overview of avian toxicity studies for the Deepwater Horizon Natural Resource Damage Assessment

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 establishes liability for injuries to natural resources because of the release or threat of release of oil. Assessment of injury to natural resources resulting from an oil spill and development and implementation of a plan for the restoration, rehabilitation, replacement or acquisition of natural resources to compensate for those injuries is accomplished through the Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) process. The NRDA process began within a week of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which occurred on April 20, 2010. During the spill, more than 8500 dead and impaired birds representing at least 93 avian species were collected. In addition, there were more than 3500 birds observed to be visibly oiled. While information in the literature at the time helped to identify some of the effects of oil on birds, it was not sufficient to fully characterize the nature and extent of the injuries to the thousands of live oiled birds, or to quantify those injuries in terms of effects on bird viability. As a result, the US Fish and Wildlife Service proposed various assessment activities to inform NRDA injury determination and quantification analyses associated with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, including avian toxicity studies. The goal of these studies was to evaluate the effects of oral exposure to 1-20ml of artificially weathered Mississippi Canyon 252 oil kg bw^-1 day^-1 from one to 28 days or one to five applications of oil to 20% of the bird's surface area. It was thought that these exposure levels would not result in immediate or short-term mortality but might result in physiological effects that ultimately could affect avian survival, reproduction and health. These studies included oral dosing studies, an external dosing study, metabolic and flight performance studies and field-based flight studies. Results of these studies indicated changes in hematologic endpoints including formation of Heinz bodies and changes in cell counts. There were also effects on multiple organ systems, cardiac function and oxidative status. External oiling affected flight patterns and time spent during flight tasks indicating that migration may be affected by short-term repeated exposure to oil. Feather damage also resulted in increased heat loss and energetic demands. The papers in this special issue indicate that the combined effects of oil toxicity and feather effects in avian species, even in the case of relatively light oiling, can significantly affect the overall health of birds.

Overview of avian toxicity studies for the Deepwater Horizon Natural Resource Damage Assessment

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 establishes liability for injuries to natural resources because of the release or threat of release of oil. Assessment of injury to natural resources resulting from an oil spill and development and implementation of a plan for the restoration, rehabilitation, replacement or acquisition of natural resources to compensate for those injuries is accomplished through the Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) process. The NRDA process began within a week of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which occurred on April 20, 2010. During the spill, more than 8500 dead and impaired birds representing at least 93 avian species were collected. In addition, there were more than 3500 birds observed to be visibly oiled. While information in the literature at the time helped to identify some of the effects of oil on birds, it was not sufficient to fully characterize the nature and extent of the injuries to the thousands of live oiled birds, or to quantify those injuries in terms of effects on bird viability. As a result, the US Fish and Wildlife Service proposed various assessment activities to inform NRDA injury determination and quantification analyses associated with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, including avian toxicity studies. The goal of these studies was to evaluate the effects of oral exposure to 1-20ml of artificially weathered Mississippi Canyon 252 oil kg bw^-1 day^-1 from one to 28 days or one to five applications of oil to 20% of the bird's surface area. It was thought that these exposure levels would not result in immediate or short-term mortality but might result in physiological effects that ultimately could affect avian survival, reproduction and health. These studies included oral dosing studies, an external dosing study, metabolic and flight performance studies and field-based flight studies. Results of these studies indicated changes in hematologic endpoints including formation of Heinz bodies and changes in cell counts. There were also effects on multiple organ systems, cardiac function and oxidative status. External oiling affected flight patterns and time spent during flight tasks indicating that migration may be affected by short-term repeated exposure to oil. Feather damage also resulted in increased heat loss and energetic demands. The papers in this special issue indicate that the combined effects of oil toxicity and feather effects in avian species, even in the case of relatively light oiling, can significantly affect the overall health of birds.