Long-Term Ecosystem Response to the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
- Charles H. Peterson1,*,
- Stanley D. Rice2,
- Jeffrey W. Short2,
- Daniel Esler3,
- James L. Bodkin4,
- Brenda E. Ballachey4,
- David B. Irons5
- 1 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Institute of Marine Sciences, Morehead City, NC 28557, USA.
- 2 National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, Auke Bay Laboratory, Juneau, AK 99801–8626, USA.
- 3 Centre for Wildlife Ecology, Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC, Canada, V5A 1S6.
- 4 U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 99503, USA.
- 5 U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK 99503, USA.
- ↵* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: cpeters{at}email.unc.edu
Abstract
The ecosystem response to the 1989 spill of oil from the Exxon Valdez into Prince William Sound, Alaska, shows that current practices for assessing ecological risks of oil in the oceans and, by extension, other toxic sources should be changed. Previously, it was assumed that impacts to populations derive almost exclusively from acute mortality. However, in the Alaskan coastal ecosystem, unexpected persistence of toxic subsurface oil and chronic exposures, even at sublethal levels, have continued to affect wildlife. Delayed population reductions and cascades of indirect effects postponed recovery. Development of ecosystem-based toxicology is required to understand and ultimately predict chronic, delayed, and indirect long-term risks and impacts.
