What Happened To The GULF
Two Years After The World’s Greatest Oil-Slick
Co-edited by Prof. Abdulaziz
Abuzinda and Friedhelm Krupp
Pictures by M. McKinnon & Mike Hill
CLICK ON MAP TO FOR DETAIL (68k
JPEG)
The
Gulf War oil-slick was not only the largest such instance of human-induced
oil pollution ever, it was also one of the biggest news stories of a year
in which newsmen worldwide were having field-day after field-day. As so
often happens with such high profile news-stories however, there comes
a time when editors decide either they, or their public, have had enough.
The cessation of reporting on the oil-slick and its consequences was almost
as sudden as the events which led to its creation. Whilst news reporters
disappeared from the Gulf just as precipitously as they had arrived, the
oil itself was rather more persistent. Meanwhile a public who had avidly
followed the events of the war itself, and its terrible consequences for
both people and wildlife, were suddenly left in the dark. What had happened
to all that oil? Was it some sort of propaganda story? Was there really
as much as some reports had indicated, or was it a mere drop in the ocean
as others had suggested? And what of those poor birds – the bedraggled
oil-soaked cormorants who waddled along the black-tarred shores, chased
on television screens by protectively clothed wildlife workers? In short,
how was it that such a world-shattering story could become a virtual non-event?
Many of those who were in some way or other
engaged with these dramatic events have been confronted by confused members
of the public, in various parts of the world, who have raised such queries.
Some, if not all, of the answers are to be found in a fascinating report
published earlier this year in the journal of the Senckenberg Research
Institute of Frankfurt a.M. with the joint support of the National Commission
for Wildlife Conservation & Development (NCWCD), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia,
and the Commission of the European Communities in Brussels. The scientific
report, entitled, The Status of Coastal and Marine Habitats Two Years after
the Gulf War Oil Spill is jointly edited by Professor Abdulaziz Abuzinada
and Dr Friedhelm Krupp(see book-review)
This special feature for Arabian Wildlife magazine
takes a new look at the situation through the eyes and words of the report’s
authors.
Question:
So was there really as much oil as the more dramatic accounts claimed?
Answer: It was the “largest oil-spill
in human history” and: “Nobody will ever be able to determine
the exact amount of spilled oil. Estimates range from 2 to 11 million barrels
but 6 to 8 million barrels (c.1 million tons) seems most likely”.
Question: Where did all the oil go to?
Answer: The vast majority of it was washed
ashore. Over 700 kilometres of coastline from southern Kuwait to just north
of Jubail were covered by a continuous band of oil. And, “Contrary
to earlier predictions there is no evidence of any large-scale sinking
of oil…”
Question: What happened to it?
Answer: Much of it is still there, soaked
into the sand and inundating the inter-tidal. The fact that fresh white
sand now covers the sticky goo of oil congealed sediments that created
such a strong impression among visitors who came to see the slick’s sickly
bequest, does not mean that the oil has disappeared into thin air. It is
still very much present as anyone who attempts to walk on or dig into these
polluted shores will discover. That is not however the whole story for
where there were particular habitats or species at risk sterling efforts
were made to remove the oil to places where it could do no harm. Thus,
for example, on Qurma island, immediately after the spill, International
Maritime Organisation (IMO) contractors flushed free-flowing oil from heavily
impacted mangrove areas, saving “numerous mangroves”.
An even more dramatic operation took place on Karan island, famed nesting
site for hundreds of turtles and thousands of terns, where “14,000
cubic metres of oiled sediment were removed from the shoreline and replaced
by clean sand from the interior of the island”, thus allowing “turtles
a pollution free access to the beaches”. Incidentally, an additional
result of this most successful operation was that the accumulated debris
of several years flotsam and jetsam were also removed giving the fortunate
turtles not just a “pollution free access” but a clear run up
the beaches. The oil recovery operations were not only aimed directly at
wildlife protection however, but also at the primary aim of containing
the slick and reducing its consequences for both man and wildlife. As part
of this effort the report reminds us that: “By the end of June 1991
the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia had recovered a record amount of over one million
barrels of oil and managed to protect the coastal infrastructures successfully”.
Question: Wasn’t this all part of an international
effort?
Answer: Very much so. It was in fact a triumph
of national and international cooperation. As the report puts it: “Saudi
Arabia, with the help of many countries and international organisations,
managed to contain this oil spill”. The main organisations involved
were the Ministry of Defence and Aviation in Saudi Arabia, through its
agencies of the NCWCD and MEPA (Meteorological & Environmental Protection
Agency); the Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu (RCYJ); Saudi ARAMCO,
SABIC and the IMO, together with a number of private contractors. Organisations
such as the UK based Royal Society for Protection of Cruelty to Animals
(the RSPCA) played a valuable role in providing expertise on how to deal
with oiled sea-birds.
Question:
Well, what did happen in the end? Was the damage as great as everyone feared?
Answer: The report by Professor Abuzinada
and Dr Krupp is an interim one that takes us up to a period two years after
the Gulf War oil spill. It is not the final story and there will be further
scientific reports of the special team’s findings, but answers are beginning
to emerge. The good news is that underwater marine-life is in much better
shape than even the most optimistic of pundits could have predicted. Thus
the report tells us that; “….the damage to sublittoral benthic habitats
was very limited”; and “Macroalgal beds, seagrass beds and coral-reefs
escaped oil contamination…”; and “Two years after the war,
it is obvious that there are no long- term effects of the oil spill on
sublittoral ecosystems such as macroalgal beds, seagrass beds and coral-reefs.
Fish populations, turtles and marine mammals are in a healthy condition”.
In support of the above comment on marine mammal, readers of Arabian Wildlife
magazine (Vol.1 No.2) will have seen the report on the Gulf’s flourishing
post-war dugong population.
This is not however the complete answer to the question for just as life
below tide-level escaped almost “scotfree” (this is the author’s
description, not that of the scientific editors of this erudite report!),
so life in the intertidal, along over 700 kilometres of coastline was massively
affected. Thus, we hear that, for example, “Large areas of salt-marshes
and mangroves along with their associated fauna were killed. Among vertebrates,
marine birds suffered most from the spill and oil covered cormorants struggling
to escape from the slick will remain a symbol of this act of ecological
terror”.
Question: So what has been the recovery
rate in the heavily impacted inter-tidal zone?
Answer: Whereas the situation regarding recovery
in the sub- littoral is quite clear, “In the intertidal area the picture
is more complex”. As one might expect, lower down the shores, where
less oil settled in the first place and where the effects of twice daily
flushing by tides are more pronounced, there has been much better recovery
than near the heavily polluted strand line. Indeed, “The lower eulittoral
and sublittoral fringe have largely recovered”. On the other hand,
“The upper intertidal and the supralittoral fringe are still covered
by an almost continuous band of oil and tar”. The biological consequences
are clear. “Population densities on the impacted shores remain much
lower than on unaffected control sites, but in general there is a trend
towards recovery with species diversity and population densities increasing”.
Question: This does sound better than any
of us expected. Can we be sure that these results are correct?
Answer: Yes we can. A massive amount of research
has been undertaken by a multidisciplinary team of about 40 scientists
drawn from six countries of the European Union together with about 30 Saudi
Arabian and Kuwaiti scientists. Their detailed and comprehensive studies,
across a broad range of specialities, all draw the same basic conclusions.
As the report itself states: “The EC/NCWCD Wildlife Sanctuary Project
has carried out research, survey and monitoring programmes in the area
continuously for over two years and is thus able to provide authoritative
information on the effects of the oil-spill, on habitats, plant and animal
communities and the progress of recovery”.
Question: OK, that’s fine, but where do
we go from here?
Answer: As the report explains, “Before
the crisis, our knowledge of the Arabian Gulf environment was very limited,
but after the war more studies have been conducted than in the entire period
before 1991. The western Arabian Gulf will soon be one of the better known
subtropical seas”. This new found knowledge is being put to good use
in helping to ensure that the Gulf’s marine and coastal life is protected
for the future. “The overall aim of the Project is the restoration
and maintenance of the area’s biological diversity and productivity”.
Question: Do you think that is a feasible
objective?
Answer: It is certainly a worthy one. Whether
or not it can be achieved will depend very much upon measures which are
taken to preserve the Gulf’s marine environment as a whole. The report
alludes to potential problem areas including industrial developments, on-going
pollution and “possible overfishing”. The longer term view seems
to be that, whilst the patient has escaped on this occasion from what many
feared would be terminal illness brought on by a massive overdose of hydrocarbons,
the clinical prognosis is that chronic illness will only be prevented by
a more controlled regime involving better health-care combined with plenty
of “clean-seawater”.
Last Question: How did the Gulf’s dolphins
escape being decimated by all that oil.
Answer: It seems that they had the common-sense
to get out of the way of it. Let’s hope that their skills in this regard
will not be put to the test again!
CLICK ON IMAGE FOR DETAIL (54k JPEG)
The Status of Coastal and Marine
Habitats Two Years after the Gulf War Oil Spill. Abdulaziz H. Abuzinada
& Friedhelm Krupp (Editors). Courier Forsch.-Inst. Senckenberg, 166.
1994.