Fisheries and Mariculture Affected by Oil Spills1

Abstract

An increasing number of oil spills affect commercial fisheries and mariculture activity. With the growth of mariculture and an accompanying emphasis on high-value species, the economic repercussions of oil spill damage have risen. This is particularly true in Southeast Asia, where seafood cultivation is widespread in coastal waters, which are also noted for navigational hazards and dense maritime traffic, leading to a higher than average incidence of mariculture damage. Perceptions of the value of seafood vary from one region to another and at least partly explain why claims for compensation for mariculture damage can reach very high levels. Differences in the sensitivity of fisheries and mariculture activities depend on the species, mariculture methods, spill cleanup methods employed, the location, and other external factors. The differences in mariculture methods and species call for different approaches to spill cleanup; the proper approach can minimize later compensation claims. Knowledge of mariculture and fisheries activities affected by a spill also is a key component of assessing compensation levels.

Contamination of Fish and Shellfish Following Oil Spill Incidents

“…Most likely to be affected are fish and shellfish that cannot evade the oil, and so contamination is likely to be particularly serious in areas with extensive inshore shellfisheries or mariculture (International Petroleum Industry Environmen-tal Conservation Association, 1991). Farmed stocks were widely contaminated, for instance, in Shetland in 1993 (the Braer ; caged salmon [Whittle et al, 1997]), in Spain in 1992 (the Aegean Sea ; farmed mussels, oysters, scallops, salmon, and turbot [Hermida-Ameijeiras et al, 1994;Alvarez-Piñeiro et al, 1996]), in Alaska in 1989 (the Exxon Valdez ; salmon fry released from hatcheries [Carls et al, 1996]), in France in 1978 (the Amoco Cadiz ; farmed mussels and oysters [Berthou et al, 1987]), and in many incidents along the coasts of China, Japan, and South Korea (Moller et al, 1989), where areas of extensive mariculture and heavy shipping activity occur side by side (International Tanker Owner's Pollution Federation, 1996). Damage to seafood on a scale similar to that experienced after the 225,000-tonne spill from the Amoco Cadiz in France has been recorded after spills of 50 tonnes or less in Japan and Korea due to their extensive mariculture (Moller et al, 1989).…”

Impact of the Deepwater Horizon well blowout on the economics of US Gulf fisheries

“…As mentioned above, ecological recovery can take decades, especially for organisms associated with sediments such as crustaceans and mollusks. Market recovery time, on the other hand, depends on the length of fisheries closures after a spill, public perceptions of seafood safety, and the degree of tainting (both visible and with respect to taste and smell of seafood; Moller et al 1999).…”

“…The oil industry typically touts the quick recovery of organisms to an "untainted state" as evidence of the safety of seafood after an oil spill (e.g., Moller et al 1999). However, after the Exxon Valdez spill, fisheries for salmon, herring, crab, shrimp, rockfish, and sablefish were closed, with some commercial fisheries remaining closed through 1990.…”

Factors that Determine the Cost of Oil Spills

“…This lack of relationship between these two parameters is not surprising since, although tanker size is indicative of potential spill volume, it is rare that an entire cargo is lost as a result of an accident. White & Nichols, 1983;Moller, Parker & Nichols, 1987;Moller, Dicks & Goodman, 1989;Grey, 1999;and Purnell, 1999). Other authors have also addressed the same topic, including Etkin (1999) who reviewed the interacting factors that affect the cost of cleaning up spills in order to establish a costestimation model.…”