Wildlife and Habitat Issues for Planning and Response

1. Wildlife and Habitat Issues for Planning and Response Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife Oil Spill Advisory Council September 16, 2008

2. Why Care About “Critters” in the Middle of an Oil Spill? • Altruist: Direct and indirect loss of Maine’s natural resources • Capitalist: NRDA – source of funding to benefit wildlife/habitat • Realist: Public perception

3. AltruistDirect Losses = Dead Birds • Most critical for Endangered/Threatened species • Easiest type of loss to document • and claim for NRDA • Most visible to the public

4. AltruistIndirect Losses from Habitat Damage • Potentially catastrophic deaths, but after-the-fact • Much harder to document and claim for NRDA • Less noticed by the public

5. CapitalistNatural Resource Damage Assessment • Not being used to full potential • Priority during a response?

6. RealistPublic Perceptions • Largely beyond our (IFW’s) control • Media focuses on what sells (dead birds) • Press releases controlled from ICP • (IFW staff in Planning/Operations)

7. Oil Spill Planning at IFW • Mapping the natural resources • - Geographic vulnerabilities • - NRDA baselines • Response

8. Vulnerability of Wildlife & HabitatsImplications of Loss • Endangered/Threatened Species • High value habitats • - Critical to E/T species • - High biodiversity • - Unique areas • - Regulated habitats

9. Vulnerability of Wildlife & HabitatsSusceptibility to Damage • Species – behaviors & physiology affect: • - Likelihood of being oiled • - Extent of oiling • - Ability to survive being oiled • Habitats – type & location affect: • - Likelihood of being oiled • - Difficulty of clean-up • - Ability to recover from being oiled

10. Response Planning • Many similarities to efforts of others • Big Difference: surveys for EVI • - LARGE task • - Always dealing with incomplete/outdated information • Have only 1 dedicated staff member

11. IFW Staff Resources • Oil Spill Biologist (Bangor) • Regional Staff • - 3 Coastal Regional Offices • - 2-3 Staff per office • Bird Biologists (2-3)

12. Response – Typical Sequence • Initial Damage Assessment • - Based on EVI maps • - Superficial (no direct observation) • - Limited by accuracy & completeness of pre-mapped data • - Good start

13. Response – Typical Sequence • Secondary Damage Assessment • - Field reconnaissance • - May not occur (depends on EVI, DEP responders) • - With so few staff & other priorities, may take time • - May conflict/compete with other response activities • - Hotzone training

14. ResponseRecover & Rehabilitate Oiled Wildlife • Rehabilitation is challenging • Limited facilities with local • rehabilitators • IBRRC for anything big (facilities • still an issue) • Even in best possible situation, • success rate is low • IFW’s primary roles: • - Collecting oiled wildlife • - Supervising volunteers to transport • wildlife

15. ResponseCollect/Document Dead Wildlife

16. Response:Continue Surveys for Additional Oiled Wildlife & Habitat

17. IFW Oil Spill Response Issues • Training • - Hotzone? • - Most exercises simulate Day 1-2; • Wildlife response really begins later • Long Deployment • - Union contract doesn’t allow OT • - Other priorities • “Big” vs. “Little” incident/response

18. Conclusions • Planning for and dealing with the effects of oil spills • on wildlife & habitat are big, challenging tasks • but we are just a small agency • We do have a dedicated Oil Spill Biologist • Contract with IBRRC • Increased awareness among participants