'Quagmire Of Bureaucracy' Stifles Gulf Spill Research A year after the disaster, scientists are waiting for a promised $450 million from BP. Some of the research that has been done is tied up in legal proceedings, and researchers say they've missed the chance to gather critical data from the Gulf.
NPR logo

'Quagmire Of Bureaucracy' Stifles Gulf Spill Research

  • Download
  • <iframe src="https://www.npr.org/player/embed/135573152/135578864" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript
'Quagmire Of Bureaucracy' Stifles Gulf Spill Research

'Quagmire Of Bureaucracy' Stifles Gulf Spill Research

  • Download
  • <iframe src="https://www.npr.org/player/embed/135573152/135578864" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript


And that means we'll be studying the effects of the BP spill on the Gulf for decades to come. But some scientists say that so far efforts to do just that have been delayed or kept secret.

NPR's Christopher Joyce has that story.

CHRISTOPHER JOYCE: Michael Crosby is a senior scientist at Florida's Mote Marine Laboratory. The Gulf of Mexico is his baby. He was thrilled last year when BP promised to give scientists half a billion dollars to find out how the spill will affect marine life in the Gulf. Eleven months later, he's still waiting to see the money.

Dr. MICHAEL CROSBY (Senior Scientist, Mote Marine Laboratory): In a word, it's stalled.

JOYCE: Last year, BP did give $50 million to several research groups in the Gulf.

Dr. CROSBY: But the rest of the money has been just caught up in a quagmire of bureaucracy, politics, turf issues. Why the hell isn't that money out there? Why aren't we doing - we have lost a year. We have literally lost a year. That's a huge gap.

JOYCE: The first year after the spill was the best chance to track the oil and its effect on fish, shellfish, birds, marshes, the whole complex web of marine life. Crosby says more scientists need to be out in the Gulf now.

Dr. CROSBY: Listen to those men and women that work on the water and you'll hear them telling you they're seeing dazed crabs now that don't survive the transport, the massive miscarriages, fetuses, dead baby dolphins. Well, there's no hardcore data right now to make that link. And 10 years from now, you know, will they ever come back? Who knows?

JOYCE: Last year, BP and Gulf states set about appointing a board of scientists to review research proposals and hand out the remaining $450 million. Crosby and other scientists believe the process got bogged down by politicians and officials from Gulf states trying to influence the membership of the board and how much BP's money the Gulf states would get.

Board director and biologist Rita Colwell says, no, it wasn't politics, but a desire to get the best scientists that took so long.

In any case, BP and the Gulf states finally signed a deal last month on the process for giving out the money. The next step is to ask scientists to submit research proposals. Reviewing those could take months more. In the meantime, BP has distributed the $50 million to scientists. And the government's National Science Foundation has also paid for Gulf expeditions.

But Lisa Suatoni, a marine biologist with the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council, says most of that work was about oil and not marine life.

Dr. LISA SUATONI (Marine Biologist, Natural Resources Defense Council): What happened to the oil, what happened to the dispersants, what happened to the gases? But the biologists and the ecologists haven't even laid their puzzle pieces out on the table yet. So, there's no way of really knowing what the environmental harm was. The answers are slipping through our fingers. It is a very depressing subplot to the oil spill.

JOYCE: There's one other big source of money for studying the health of the Gulf, the federal National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. But the scientists who take NOAA money can't openly discuss or publish their conclusions yet. That's because the government is preparing legal action against BP under the Natural Resources Damage Assessment process.

Christopher D'Elia is a Gulf researcher at Louisiana State University. And he says the NRDA clamps a lid of secrecy on research that many scientists find stifling.

Professor CHRISTOPHER D'ELIA (Dean, School of the Coast and Environment, Louisiana State University): It may end up in court. You just can't publish your data. You don't get involved in the kind of normal scientific discourse that we have. So, it's a more constraining process. I don't think it works. I think it's a nightmare. I think the whole thing, it just grinds everything to a halt.

JOYCE: But NOAA officials point out that without NRDA, evidence against BP and its drilling partners could be compromised if published before a trial. They add that the data they pay scientists to gather does go on the NOAA website; only the scientists' interpretation of that data is secret.

Eventually, all that information will be released and the world will know just what happened to the Gulf. But Don Boesch, a biologist with the University of Maryland who sat on the official oil spill investigative commission, says the damage from the spill is only a small part of what ails the Gulf.

Dr. DON BOESCH (President, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science): Even in the worst case, the effects of the spill wouldn't have been as devastating as the tremendous loss of coastal wetlands, you know, the large dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico, and all of those kinds of things.

JOYCE: Those assaults on the Gulf started long ago, and are likely to continue long after the BP oil spill is just a statistic.

Christopher Joyce, NPR News.

Copyright © 2011 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.