Government personnel should not be concerned with who serves as the 

 "lead agency" in an oil spill situation. Our only concern should be that the 

 public demand for accurate and timely information is met. Agency information, 

 however, should be coordinated. For example, FWS should not comment on why 

 the spill happened, and the U.S. Coast Guard should not comment on estimates 

 of wildlife involved. No matter how tempted you may be to speculate on 

 matters outside your responsibility, as FWS employees, you should restrict 

 your comments to the effects of the spill on fish and wildlife resources. 



During major spills, it may be desirable to establish a central source of 

 information on all aspects of the spill. In the case of the Avgo Merchant 

 oil spill off Cape Cod, the number of different statements from different 

 sources was staggering. We cannot stop self-styled "experts" from making 

 comments to the news media, but we can advise news media representatives 

 through techniques in the contingency plan, that there will be a coordinated 

 flow of information from the scene. 



Oil and other forms of land and water pollution have had a major impact 

 on public concern about the environment. The Tovvey Canyons and the Santa 

 Barbaras of the past and the Three-Mile Islands of the present will maintain 

 a high level of public awareness and concern. Accurate information can pre- 

 vent distortion of the facts. Timely information can alleviate public con- 

 cern as well as benefit the pollution response effort and, ultimately, the 

 welfare of our country's fish and wildlife. 



REFERENCES 



Cohen, R. 1979. The truth and the lies about nuclear power. Washington 

 Post 1 April 1979, C-l. 



Fore, P.L., (ed.). 1977. Proceedings of the 1977 oil spill response work- 

 shop. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Services Program, FWS/ 

 OBS/77-24. 153 pp. 



150 



