For Immediate Release
Miyoko Sakashita (415) 658-5308, firstname.lastname@example.org
Lawsuit Filed to Protect Gulf’s Whales and Turtles
Interior Department Failed to Analyze Oil-Spill Risk
"While Salazar's conclusion that exploration drilling in the Gulf posed little risk of a large oil spill was dubious at the time it was made, in light of BP's calamity that position is completely untenable," said Miyoko Sakashita, the Center's oceans director. "The public deserves disclosure and a full analysis of the true impacts of oil drilling off our coasts."
All drilling activities in the Gulf rely upon assumptions made in 2007 that oil spills would not put endangered species at risk. For coastal birds and nesting sea turtles, the former Minerals Management Service (now the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement) concluded that an oil spill would have "discountable or insignificant effects" because of its "extremely low" likelihood of reaching habitat for endangered species. Similarly, the government concluded that all Gulf oil activities were unlikely to jeopardize offshore species, including leatherback, loggerhead, green, hawksbill and Kemp's ridley sea turtles, Gulf sturgeon and sperm whales. This conclusion relied on the assumption that "MMS expects that approximately one major oil spill could occur over the 40 years of the proposed action." Accordingly, the endangered species analysis included the "unlikely" or "rare" event of one "large" oil spill equivalent to be 630,000 gallons (15,000 barrels). This analysis is flawed since it underestimates the risk of large spills, which can and do occur during offshore oil activities.
"Like Obama's April 2 statement that ‘oil rigs today generally don't cause spills,' the administration's assumption that the largest possible oil spill was 15,000 barrels - less than one day of oil spilled from the ruptured BP well - has been proven absurd by the Gulf oil disaster," added Sakashita. "The government must revisit its slipshod analysis that oil drilling poses no risk to the Gulf's endangered species."
The Endangered Species Act requires all federal agencies, including the former Minerals Management Service, to ensure that any action they carry out does not "jeopardize" a threatened or endangered species. Salazar concluded that oil drilling in the Gulf would not jeopardize species; the Endangered Species Act requires agencies to revisit their conclusions about an action's impacts if new information calls those conclusions into question. The recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico triggers a legal obligation for the government to revisit its approvals of offshore oil and gas activities.
This is the world we live in. This is the world we cover.
Because of people like you, another world is possible. There are many battles to be won, but we will battle them together—all of us. Common Dreams is not your normal news site. We don't survive on clicks. We don't want advertising dollars. We want the world to be a better place. But we can't do it alone. It doesn't work that way. We need you. If you can help today—because every gift of every size matters—please do. Without Your Support We Won't Exist.
Please select a donation method:
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature - to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law, and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters, and climate that species need to survive.