A Boston lab hired by the United Commercial Fishermen's
Association to analyze coastal fishing waters says findings
suggest the government's claim that Gulf of Mexico seafood is
safe to eat may be premature.
The lab, Boston Chemical Data Corp., said it found dispersant in
a sample taken near Biloxi, Miss., almost a month after BP said
it had stopped using the toxic chemical to break up the record
amounts of crude spewed by the Gulf oil spill. The leak was
finally capped on July 15.
The lab posted its data today on the website of the Louisiana
Environmental Action Network in a move that could fuel the
debate over the status of the cleanup in the Gulf of Mexico.
Parts of the gulf have been reopened to fishing and shrimping
after the federal government declared the waters safe.
The lab's findings "again point to evidence that the 'all clear'
is being sounded way too early," said Stuart Smith, attorney for
both the fishermen's union and LEAN, which is suing BP on their
behalf. "I do not believe a robust statistical sampling has
occurred to prove that it's safe."
Water samples analyzed by Boston Chemical show oil and toxins in
crab. But the key finding, according to Marco Kaltofen, the
lab's president, is the presence of the Corexit dispersant used
to break up the oil in coastal water near Horn Island, off
Biloxi.
BP has said repeatedly the last day it used any dispersant was
July 19. Environmental Protection Agency spokeswoman Alicia
Johnson confirmed the agency believes that to be the case.
But Kaltofen said the time frame raises a question.
"Why on Aug. 9 did we find on a relatively concentrated pool of
dispersant on the surface, well outside where the dispersant was
going to be sprayed? It shouldn't have been there," Kaltofen
told AOL News. He added that the high concentration in the
sample suggested the dispersant was not carried inland from open
water.
"What person or process got this dispersant with such a high
concentration into inshore waters?" Kaltofen said.
Fishermen working the gulf say flatly they don't believe that BP
actually stopped using the dispersant. But Kaltofen said he has
talked to scientists who are searching for a more scientifically
sound reason. One possibility: Could the dispersant have
reconstituted itself on the surface?
"We just don't know enough about this yet," he said.
In all, Boston Chem has taken 250 samples from western
Louisiana to the
Florida Keys. The EPA has taken 300 water samples near
shore, and found one "indication of a possible dispersant
constituent near Louisiana," according to an e-mail from the
agency.
"The location was sampled several other times with no other
detection," the agency said, adding that it is continuing to
monitor the region for "any possible safety and
health threats."
Between June 27 and July 20, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration sampled 153 fish in the area reopened
to fishing and is continuing to test samples of fish caught
throughout the gulf. NOAA scientists have found no oil in the
area reopened for fishing since early July, according to a
report by the agency.
The Food and Drug Administration said in a statement that
seafood samples from reopened fishing waters have passed sensory
testing for contamination with oil and dispersant.
Scientific data gathered by the government "indicate that the
dispersants used in the Deepwater Horizon response are unlikely
to build up in the flesh of the fish," the FDA said. "This is
primarily based on the assessment of their physical properties,
which indicate that these compounds do not penetrate the gills
or bodies of fish, and will not be concentrated in edible
tissues of seafood."
The credibility of an analysis by a firm hired by attorneys
suing BP will inevitably be challenged in court by the oil
giant. Yet there is so much suspicion about the government's
conclusion that much of the oil had disappeared that any report
justifying those fears carries added weight.
Anecdotally, fishermen recount episodes where fishermen and
cleanup crews have worked the same waters.
"My cousin was working in Grand Isle. He told me they had people
who were shrimping alongside people who were skimming oil," said
Louis Molero, a Louisiana oysterman.
"Everybody believes the government is sugar-coating this," he
said. "If we get one person sick due to oil, our business is
really going to be in a mess."
2010 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.aolnews.com