Natural Resource Damage Assessment: Methods and Cases

More documents

Recommendations

Info

for settlement purposes. http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wm/lowerfox/sediment/jsa_final_offset_report_111 300.pdf . Desvousges, William, Douglas MacNair, and Ginger Smith. Lower Fox River and Bay of Green Bay: Assessment of Potential Recreational Fishing Losses and Restoration Offsets. Prepared for Fort James Corporation, for settlement purposes. http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wm/lowerfox/sediment/ter_final_offset_report_111 500.pdf. Stratus Consulting. 1999. PCB Pathway Determination for the Lower Fox River / Green Bay Natural Resources Damage Assessment. http://www.stratusconsulting.com/Staff/PDFs/pathway.pdf. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Consent Decree for State of Wisconsin v. Fort James Operating Company and Fort James Corporation. http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wm/lowerfox/sediment/nrd_cd_final.pdf. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. U.S. EPA’s Superfund Role: Lower Fox River Cleanup. http://www.epa.gov/region5/pdf/lowerfox.pdf . Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 2000. Summary of Basis of Natural Resources Damages Settlement Among State of Wisconsin and Fort James Corporation. http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/water/wm/lowerfox/sediment/summary_nrd_settlement_fi nal.pdf. 95
C. Lake Barre/Texaco Site: The site is Lake Barre, Louisiana, part of the Barataria – Terrebonne estuary system on the Gulf Coast, south and slightly west of New Orleans. The lake averages a depth of about two meters and consists mostly of salt marsh. Many species of plants and animals inhabit the lake and the adjacent marshes, including several listed as endangered or threatened, such as the bald eagle. The area is an important site for both commercial and recreational fishing, hunting and trapping, and of wildlife viewing and other forms of tourism. Release: A sixteen-inch crude oil pipeline operated by Texaco Pipeline, Inc. ruptured in Lake Barre and dispersed oil over the surface of the lake and onto the surrounding marshland. An estimated 4,165 acres of vegetated marsh were lightly oiled, and 162 acres of vegetated marsh were heavily oiled. Injury: Crude oil dispersed over the surface of the lake and onto the surrounding marshland. In small areas of the affected marsh acreage, oil collected in “streamers”, resulting in the death of all above ground biomass. Across most of the affected marshland the damage was less dramatic. Two oiled birds were found dead, along with some brown shrimp. Other oiled birds were observed alive. Small numbers of dead fish, brown shrimp, and blue craps were recovered in the cleanup process. Commercial oyster harvesting in Lake Barre was halted for 74 days. The cleanup operations prevented recreational access to the affected area for a few days. The oil caused increased stress to plants, which lowered their productivity and resulted in a partial loss of the services provided by the marsh land. Attachment of Liability: NRDs are permitted under OPA because there was a nonexempt “discharge” of oil on the navigable waters or adjoining shorelines of the United States covered by OPA. Trustees: • The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration • The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Several agencies of the State of Louisiana Potentially Responsible Parties: Texaco Pipeline, Inc., the entity responsible for the discharge. Damages: Pursuant to OPA, Texaco was invited to join in the damage assessment process and participated throughout. To calculate the amount of marsh restoration that would compensate the public for the damage caused by the spill, the trustees and Texaco each calculated the amount of aquatic animal and bird life destroyed, and translated the total loss of life into an equivalent in marsh acre-years. The trustees and Texaco cooperated to calculate the amount of marsh acreage affected by the oil, 96
Page 1 and 2:
WMRC Reports Waste Management and R
Page 3 and 4:
RR-108 Natural Resource Damage Asse
Page 5 and 6:
Acknowledgments Funding was provide
Page 7 and 8:
Chapter 1: Tables and Figures Table
Page 9 and 10:
staff of agencies that are just beg
Page 11 and 12:
All: 64 Nevada Division of Environm
Page 13 and 14:
Table 1.5 Number of Cases Settled b
Page 15 and 16:
Table 1.9 Number of Potentially Res
Page 17 and 18:
Table 1.14 Cost to Trustee of Perfo
Page 19 and 20:
Mean Settlement (million $) 90 80 7
Page 21 and 22:
V. Conclusions Trustees have had re
Page 23 and 24:
Appendix: Materials in Information-
Page 25 and 26:
NRD: Natural resource damages. Guid
Page 27 and 28:
Survey of State Natural Resource Da
Page 29 and 30:
19) Has this case been settled? (Ch
Page 31 and 32:
I. Introduction Chapter 2 Simplifie
Page 33 and 34:
Number of Spills 1,000 800 600 400
Page 35 and 36:
damages not quantifiable at reasona
Page 37 and 38:
(b) Columbia River Estuary: Bird, f
Page 39 and 40:
Example of the Washington method in
Page 41 and 42:
% of All Cases 35 30 25 20 15 10 5
Page 43 and 44:
preventing excessive expenditures o
Page 45 and 46:
Example of the Florida formula in u
Page 47 and 48:
damages to natural resources at con
Page 49 and 50: discharge on receptors studied in t
Page 51 and 52: Information for this calculation is
Page 53 and 54: ased funding for the program was pr
Page 55 and 56: a spill occurs in a high income are
Page 57 and 58: References Cozine, M. H. 1999. “N
Page 59 and 60: Chapter 3: Tables and Figures Table
Page 61 and 62: This chapter will examine the exten
Page 63 and 64: Comprehensive Environmental Respons
Page 65 and 66: Output price P0 C D S0 is the suppl
Page 67 and 68: Travel-cost analysis can be used fo
Page 69 and 70: area B and computing willingness to
Page 71 and 72: Table 3.1: Summary of Studies Estim
Page 73 and 74: Schultz and Lindsay (1990) estimate
Page 75 and 76: Table 3.3: Using Benefits Transfer
Page 77 and 78: Number of Cases 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
Page 79 and 80: Table 3.4 Groundwater Case Studies
Page 81 and 82: and overall protection of the resou
Page 83 and 84: References Abdalla, C. W. 1991. “
Page 85 and 86: Nielson, E. G. and L.K. Lee. Octobe
Page 87 and 88: United States, adjoining shorelines
Page 89 and 90: Once there is a “release” of a
Page 91 and 92: 1997). Second, there can be no reco
Page 93 and 94: settlement of NRD claim prior to an
Page 95 and 96: egulations divide the assessment pr
Page 97 and 98: Damages: The trustees calculated th
Page 99: The State hired consultants (ARCADI
Page 103 and 104: would be inefficient and unnecessar
Page 105 and 106: Damages: The U.S. Coast Guard requi
Page 107 and 108: Creek and the cultural importance o
show all

Natural Resource Damage Assessment: Methods and Cases

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?