Case Study

The Impact on Native Alaskan Wildlife Populations

Following the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
Timothy Hoover
1
Hoov1288@vandals.uidaho.edu

Abstract: The impact on Alaska’s wildlife survival rate was undoubtedly one of greatest
impacts following the Exxon Valdez oil spill. I studied the research of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Park Service (NPS), and other various governmental
agencies that encompassed population trends in the species that experienced the greatest
impact. The species that will be discussed include the bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus), the northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni), and the harbor seal
(Phoca vitulina). Studies that were conducted obtained their results from methods such as
aerial survey, survey by boat, radio tagging, and recording carcasses that were collected.
Some information on population surveys were included from before the oil spill, though
most data included was collected between the years of 1989 and 2000.

Keywords: PWS, Exxon Valdez, bald eagle, harbor seal, sea otter, USFWS, population
trends, visual survey,

1. Introduction
Alaska has been coined as “the last frontier” for being able to support one of the most
biologically diverse and delicate ecosystems in the United States. While there is no exact
count, almost 1,000 vertebrate species reside in the state. The Prince William Sound (PWS)
located in the Gulf of Alaska is infamously known for what was at the time, the largest oil
spill to occur in the history of the United States. In the early morning hours on March 24,
1989 the Exxon Valdez oil tanker collided with the Bligh Reef ultimately resulting in the
release of over 11 million gallons of oil [5]. This directly impacted roughly 1300 miles of
shoreline where oil can still be found today as only 750,000 gallons were recovered during
remediation. The coastline of PWS in its entirety, is land protected federally and by the
state due to the presence of a delicate ecosystem. While there is no exact figure regarding
casualties, the “best estimation” is that over a quarter million animals and billions of fish
eggs died. This includes 2,800 sea otters, 300 harbor seals, and 250 bald eagles [6]. The
region in which engulfs the PWS remains closely monitored to this day while we just
surpassed the 30th year anniversary of this traumatic historic event.

2. Materials and Methods

A study carried out by USFWS offices in Alaska monitored the population dynamics
and survival rates of bald eagles between the years of 1989 and 1992. The eagle population
was estimated to be about 5,000 birds at the time of spill, most of which residing within
200 meters of the shoreline. Simple raptor banding has proven inaccurate when sampling
survival rates due to small sample sizes, low return rates, and lack of adult banding [1].
Thus radio-tracking telemetry was determined to be the most adequate method of tracking

Sustainability 2020, 12, x; doi: FOR PEER REVIEW www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 4

their survival rates. This process involves tracking wildlife by radio signals from devices
they have been tagged with. During the first year of the study 69 nesting bald eagles were
tagged at approximately 8 weeks of age. An equal number of nestlings were tagged in
Eastern PWS which was not severely impacted, and Western PWS where shores were
directly oiled [1]. In the following years, during the months of July-October 1989-91 79
adult and 3 eagles between the ages of 3-4 (subadult). Finally, in January of 1992 6 adults
and 2 subadults again ages 3-4 were tagged bringing the total number of surveyed eagles to
159. Adults were determined to be eagles with a definitive plumage and presumed to be
over 5 years of age. It was predicted by the USFWS that by 1992 there would be a recovery
in the bald eagle population relative to before the spill [1].
The information found on population estimates of sea otters came from aerial surveys,
taking surveys by boat, and recording the number of carcasses collected. The study area
included the oiled beaches of PWS as well as areas bordering the spill area. The study area
totaled 2358 km² of sea otter habitat with a focus on two areas, northern Knight Island and
southeast Bay of Isles [9]. At an altitude of 300 feet traveling 65 mph an observer surveyed
how many otter groups were present, group size, and whether the otters were diving or not.
One or more sea otters together, separated by less than 4 meters was defined as a group [9].
The first method of determining mortality rates was comparing this survey to what was
previously known about sea otter populations. The other method was after recording the
number of carcasses collected in PWS, determine what percentage of those were a death
resulting from the Exxon Valdez.
Alaska’s Department of Fish and Game monitored the population trend of harbor seals
between the years of 1990 and 1997. The most effective method for population sampling of
harbor seals was again determined to be aerial survey [10]. Previous studies had provided a
bases for the most opportune time for surveying, or what was referred to as their “survey
window”. Harbor seals engage in a behavior known as “hauling-out” in which they rest on
rocks or the shore for various reasons, making them most visible [11]. A trend-count path
was routed within the PWS which consisted of 25 total haul-out locations. Out of all the
sites observed 7 of which were within the primary affected area and the other 18 had been
unoiled [10]. These surveys were taken between the months of August and September
which is the molting period for the seals. At altitudes of between 200-300 meters seals were
counted manually and pictures were taken for large groups over 40 for later reference.
Overall, 2,014 aerial survey counts were taken in total [10].

3. Results

In September of 1992 the USFSW studied the survival rate of the 159 eagles that were
radio tagged during the previous years. As of September 1992, 34 eagles had died
consisting of 15 adults, 2 subadults, and 17 first year. Necropsies performed on 16
recovered carcasses revealed no deaths as a result from oil contamination [1]. A study
published in the Marine Ecology Progress Series in October of 2002 states that the
scientists who surveyed WPS believe that the sea otter population did not begin to fully
recover until 2000 [9]. The collection of sea otter carcasses was a systematic process
between the years of 1976 and 1985 then 1989 and 1998. Age estimations made from the
collected teeth displays the annual age distribution of dying otters. Data showed that the
survival rate declined following the spill especially for otters of older age. As well, otter
pups born after the spill were less prone to survival than those previously born. Aerial
surveys were conducted in the summer between the years of 1993 and 2000 to estimate
recovery efforts. The years up until 1996 appeared relatively stable for sea otter populations
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 4

while the major increase coming after 1996. There was a recovery estimation of 600 sea
otters as of 2000 with an annual growth rate of 0.05 [9]. The results interpreted by Alaska’s
Department of Fish and Game were adjusted with a correction factor due to factors that
may have affected population counts during surveys. Factors included weather condition,
height of sea tide, and the time of day when population could be surveyed. The adjusted
population count displayed a trend that slowly decreased throughout the course of the
study. In 1990 the count was 1,299 sea otters which declined to only 935 in the year 1997.
The unadjusted count fluctuates constantly starting at 779 in 1990, peaking at 920 the
following year, then remains relatively steady with a final count of 751 in 1997 [10]. It is
apparent that results collected were affected by the variables that were later adjusted for.

4. Conclusions

The evidence found in these several studies present an overall population decline due
to a decreased rate of survival as a result from the oil spill, in the species that were
examined. The method of population survey collection were species specific based on what
was determined to have been most effective. Any variables that were suspected to skew
results were adjusted for post survey collection. While all results collected were considered
the “best estimations” an exact mortality rate could not be determined for any species that
was impacted. Regarding the studies that were analyzed, it would appear that the harbor
seal was the species impacted the greatest in the years following the spill.

Acknowledgements: Statistics were provided by the National Park Service within the Department of the Interior, The
United States Fish and Wildlife Service within the Department of the Interior, The United States Environment
Protection Agency, and various departments within the State of Alaska.

Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest

Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 4

References
1. Bowman, T. D., Schempf, P. F., & Bernatowicz, J. A. (1995). Bald Eagle Survival and Population Dynamics
in Alaska after the "Exxon Valdez" Oil Spill. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 59(2), 317. doi:
10.2307/3808945
2.
Murphy, S. M., Day, R. H., Wiens, J. A., & Parker, K. R. (1997). Effects of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill on
Birds: Comparisons of Pre- and Post-Spill Surveys in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The Condor, 99(2),
299–313. doi: 10.2307/1369936
3. Esler, D., Ballachey, B. E., Matkin, C., Cushing, D., Kaler, R., Bodkin, J., … Kloecker, K. (2018). Timelines
and mechanisms of wildlife population recovery following the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Deep Sea Research
Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 147, 36–42. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2017.04.007
4. Bowman, T. D., Schempf, P. F., & Hodges, J. I. (1997). Bald Eagle Population in Prince William Sound
after the Exxon valdez Oil Spill. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 61(3), 962. doi: 10.2307/3802206
5. Exxon Valdez Spill Profile. (2017, January 19). Retrieved April 10, 2020, from
https://www.epa.gov/emergency-response/exxon-valdez-spill-profile
6. 20 YEARS LATER… EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL. (2009, March 1). Retrieved April 10, 2020, from
https://www.nps.gov/kefj/learn/nature/upload/kefj_evos_1989-2009_qa.pdf
7. Dfg.webmaster@alaska.gov. (n.d.). Alaska's Animals, Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Retrieved
April 10, 2020, from https://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=animals.main
8. Demonstration of Satellite/GPS Telemetry for Monitoring Fine-Scale Movements of Lesser Prairie-
Chickens. (n.d.). Retrieved April 10, 2020, from https://www.fs.fed.us/t-
d/programs/im/satellite_gps_telemetry/wildlifetrackingtelementry.htm
9. Bodkin, J., Ballachey, B., Dean, T., Fukuyama, A., Jewett, S., McDonald, L., . . . VanBlaricom, G. (2002). Sea
otter population status and the process of recovery from the 1989 ‘Exxon Valdez’ oil spill.  Marine Ecology
Progress Series, 241, 237-254. Retrieved April 19, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/24866121
10. Frost, K. J., Lowry, L. F., & Hoef, J. M. (1999). Monitoring The Trend Of Harbor Seals In Prince William
Sound, Alaska, After The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. Marine Mammal Science, 15(2), 494–506. doi:
10.1111/j.1748-7692.1999.tb00815.xNoaa. (n.d.). Harbor Seal. Retrieved April 17, 2020, from
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/harbor-seal
11.
12.
© 2020 by the authors. Submitted for possible open access publication under the terms and conditions
of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).