Effects of Exxon Valdez oil spill linger in Alaska.

Yereth Rosen / Reuters 24jan02

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Oil from the Exxon Valdez, some of it nearly as fresh as when it spilled in 1989, still lingers on the once pristine beaches of Prince William Sound, harming sea ducks and otters, according to scientists who presented their findings at a conference here this week.

Surveys last summer by the National Marine Fisheries Service found there was twice as much oil remaining from the spill as had been predicted eight years earlier, said Jeff Short, a research chemist from the agency's laboratory in Auke Bay, Alaska.

"We did indeed find quite a lot of oil in Prince William Sound,'' said Short, who presented his findings at a week-long conference held by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council.

That was no surprise to Gary Kompkoff, a tribal leader from the neighboring village of Tatitlek. "All you would have to do is ask anyone from Chenega Bay, and they would have told you how much oil's out there,'' he said. Kompkoff noted that over the past five years, unhappy villagers have even been carrying oil samples to various public meetings.

Short's survey team sampled beaches that were heavily or moderately contaminated by the spill and found oil in various states remained. It ranged from fresh mousse and sheens to weathered tar balls and asphalt on at least 53 of the 96 beaches surveyed.

Of the 11 million gallons spilled in 1989, about 10,000 gallons remain, according to Short's preliminary estimates. It is spread over 4.3 miles of shoreline and is vanishing at a rate of 26 percent a year, he estimated.

That may seem a tiny amount, but the oil is in ecologically sensitive areas. Instead of finding a so-called "bathtub ring'' of contamination in the upper intertidal zone, his team found the most significant and fresher oil lower on the beaches and below the surface, Short said.

CONTAMINATING THE FOOD CHAIN

Oil there does more damage to wildlife because those underwater beach sections hold clams and other sea life that pass contaminants up the food chain.

Studies of sea otters and harlequin ducks in western Prince William Sound last summer also showed continued harm from the oil, according to other scientists at the conference. They found the otters and ducks from contaminated areas had higher levels of enzymes associated with hydrocarbon exposure and lower survival rates. Even sea otters born long after 1989 were suffering from oil exposure, said Brenda Ballachey of the U.S. Geological Survey.

Ballachey's team took tissue and blood samples from live animals as well as internal photographs with tiny medical cameras mounted on scopes. Veterinarians who saw the images ''just shook their heads and said, 'We would not expect this animal to survive another winter,''' she said.

Survival rates of harlequin ducks from spill-affected areas are still lagging, said Dan Esler, a biologist from Simon Fraser University. "There's no indication that things are getting any better out there than they were in 1998,'' he said.

The studies by Short, Ballachey, and Esler were among those funded by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council, established in 1991 when Exxon settled civil and criminal charges filed by the Alaska and the U.S. governments. The council has administered the $900 million that Exxon paid to settle the state and federal civil cases from the disaster, the worst tanker spill in U.S. waters.

One scientist on contract to Exxon Mobil said it is wrong to blame all Prince William Sound's ecological problems on Exxon Valdez oil. "To say you have effects 12 years after an event, I think, is not really very scientifically credible," said David Page of Bowdoin College in Maine.

Page argued that other sources of contamination could be affecting the wildlife of Prince William Sound, such as leaking oil from abandoned mine and dock sites and spills from fishing vessels. Also, he said the marine ecology is "dynamic," with changes occurring from climate shifts and other factors.