TsengBPDisasterResearchAnnotation3

Big Fish, Little Fish, Blue Fish, Oiled Fish Amongst the impacts of the BP Deepwater Horizon spill, the fish has to be the one that takes the hardest hit, but people don’t talk about them as much, because most fish live under the surface of that viscous black and most fish, are not seen. Unfortunately among these various fishes, one is the blue fin tuna, who had just returned to the Gulf to spawn, and who has already been on the critically endangered list for quite some time and if we have learned anything from Exxon Valdez, we will know that it is not until four to five years after, will we know the actual impact of the Deepwater spill. Although the [|Recovery Plan] (1)for Atlantic blue fin tuna is already at hand, the recovery plan for the blue fin tuna after the spill is almost impossible to compile, there has not been any report on the impact of the blue fin shortage yet, [|Bloomberg Businessweek] (2) magazine has pointed out that the impact is long-term, from the fishmongers in Tokyo to the fisheries managing director of the World Wildlife Fund, Bill Fox, who said "The oil plus the dispersants are likely to have a huge effect," says Bill Fox, managing director for fisheries at the World Wildlife Fund. For the Atlantic blue fin, "this is a real blow." Here Fox has also mentioned “dispersants” which rid the surface of the ugly crude oil mentioned above, but dispersants do no dissolve the oil and make it disappear. Essentially, dispersants work as detergent, and they break the oil molecules on the surface down into tiny hydrophilic drops so they can sink to the bottom of the ocean where no one can see. The problem with that is, once it sinks, it will either be absorbed by the fish more easily, or they can be carried in the underwater current and spread farther. While EPA has over and over again reassured us the safety, or rather, [|the lesser-of-the-two-evils] (3) of the dispersants, and that NALCO, the company that makes Corexit is happy for the [|endorsement] (4), we should take a closer look at the dispersants usage worldwide. NALCO stated that the “ [|rumor] ” (5) of banning Corexit in UK is completely false, saying that NALCO is “unaware” of any ban, yet in a letter sent from Rep. Edward J. Markey to Lisa Jackson, Administrator of EPA, stated that Corexit has been **__removed__** from the UK list of oil clean up products. Here’s the [|letter]. (6) With that acknowledgment and the experience we have learned from the Exxon Valdez clean-up (in which Corexit was used as well). It is not to draw a conclusion of the toxic impact of the oil dispersant. How do we evaluate the long term impact of the recovery for the fish? The [|Large Pelagics Research Center] of University of New Hampshire, has made seven recommendations to promote further research, these [|seven recommendations] (7) are: • Including both demographic and abundance data when diagnosing causes of population decline

• Emphasizing the cumulative effects of threats

• Using new tools in genetics, tracking and statistical models to discover links among and within populations

• Revising the process to reduce peer-review and permitting times to speed conservation efforts

• Encouraging data sharing

• Improving assessment tools for evaluating human impact on ecosystems

• Prioritizing investments to address long-term management needs for each species.

"[ Dispersants] make the oil more soluble in water, so it won't just sit on the surface," Jackie Savitz, Senior Campaign Director at [|Oceana] told //CNN//. "Whether that's good or bad depends on whether you're a fish or a seabird." What about the birds then? Let’s not take a look on the impact and the recovery of the oiled birds, and what future holds for these feathered beings.

References: (1) EU Business on Atlantic Blue Fin Tuna Recovery Plan [] (2) Bloomberg Businessweek Magazine, Jun. 24, 2010 [] (3) EPA Statement on dispersants, testing and results. [] (4) NALCO’s statements on its official website []

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">(5) NALCO’s statements on its official website <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">[] <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">(6) Letter About Dispersants From Rep. Markey to EPA, ProPublica [] <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.25in;">(7) Seven Recommendations, UMass, Amherst, []