{ "id": "R41640", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R41640", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 379196, "date": "2011-02-17", "retrieved": "2016-04-07T01:04:19.655536", "title": "The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and the Gulf of Mexico Fishing Industry", "summary": "On April 20, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil drilling rig was destroyed by an explosion and fire, and the oil well began releasing oil into the Gulf of Mexico. The oil spill caused significant economic harm to the Gulf fishing industry because of fishery closures and consumer concerns related to the safety of Gulf seafood. Intermediate and long-term concerns are related to impacts on marine populations and degradation of fisheries habitat necessary for spawning, development of early life stages, and growth. \nThe closing and opening of fishing grounds has involved a tradeoff between ensuring public safety and providing fishing opportunities to recreational and commercial fishermen. In addition to public health concerns, uncertainties related to Gulf seafood safety could further compromise the reputation of Gulf seafood. Most areas have been reopened and landings of commercial and recreational species are recovering. For Gulf waters re-opened through November 15, 2010, sensory analyses of seafood samples have found no detectable oil or dispersant odors or flavors, and results of chemical analyses have been well below levels of concern. However, some scientists and the public remain skeptical of claims that Gulf seafood is safe. This may inhibit the recovery of Gulf recreational and commercial fisheries.\nUnder the Oil Pollution Act (OPA), harmed individuals and businesses may make claims for economic injuries to the responsible party, in this case BP. Although many in the fishing industry have benefited from their damage claims and associated payments, ongoing issues include the legitimacy of some claims, lack of transparency in the claims review process, eligibility to make a claim, and level of payments. Other assistance to the fishing industry includes BP grants to states, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) fishery disaster assistance, the BP Vessels of Opportunity Program, and Small Business Administration efforts. \nEnvironmental restoration of fisheries habitat and Gulf ecosystems would support the long-term recovery and productivity of Gulf fisheries. The federal government\u2019s role in restoration is defined in statute by OPA and in NOAA regulations, which require development of a Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA). NRDA restoration plans are currently being developed by state and federal trustees. The Obama Administration also has committed to developing a separate long-term Gulf of Mexico plan to restore the environment, economy, and public health of residents. Implementation of the plan will require sustained funding and a governance structure to oversee and coordinate restoration efforts. \nThe 112th Congress may continue to conduct oversight of efforts to promote fishing industry recovery, adequate compensation to fishermen and businesses, and Gulf restoration. Ongoing efforts by federal agencies and states to ensure seafood safety and to regain and maintain the reputation of Gulf seafood are the most immediate challenges currently faced by the fishing industry. As the NRDA process moves from the planning to restoration phase, questions may arise regarding the level of the potential settlement and the types of restoration activities identified by the trustees. In contrast to NRDA, three bills have been introduced in the 112th Congress to address elements of the Administration\u2019s restoration plan. All three bills would establish a Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Fund and require 80% of any amounts collected by the United States as penalties, settlements, or fines under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to be deposited into the fund. They would also establish a governing body to distribute funding and coordinate restoration efforts. Potential issues involve the allocation of funds, focus of restoration projects, and coordination with other restoration efforts.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41640", "sha1": "149c97c1de5fd99c6c7c74c9a2d4438119821e80", "filename": "files/20110217_R41640_149c97c1de5fd99c6c7c74c9a2d4438119821e80.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41640", "sha1": "f427f924e43fddcde312613d55ae8dac97b92815", "filename": "files/20110217_R41640_f427f924e43fddcde312613d55ae8dac97b92815.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] } ], "topics": [ "Economic Policy", "Science and Technology Policy" ] }