RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT ALONG COASTS 



191 



trate in these areas. On the other hand, gulls 

 swimming along the surface are likely to take 

 wing before becoming seriously con- 

 taminated. 



Nelson-Smith (1972) reported that gannets 

 (Morus bassana), which collected oiled sea- 

 weed for building nest mounds, contaminated 

 themselves and their eggs. Behavioral prob- 

 lems associated with oil spills can be more 

 subtle, however, and Darling's (1938) conclu- 

 sions that the display of adjacent males con- 

 tributes to stimulation of the female during 

 courtship in seabirds breeding in massed colo- 

 nies, is a good example. If Darling was cor- 

 rect, this behavioral characteristic could 

 further impede the recovery of a population of 

 auks, for example, from mortalities resulting 

 from catastrophic losses to spills. 



On the basis of this information it is pos- 

 sible to predict that alcids, which make up the 

 bulk of the birds inhabiting the coastal areas 

 during winter (Sanger 1972), would be very 

 susceptible to oil spills from future tanker 

 traffic in these waters. The potential exists, 

 therefore, for a tremendous impact (from a 

 single inopportune oil spill) upon these species 

 and upon the entire ecosystem. Sea ducks too, 

 because of their diving behavior, propensity 

 for flocking, and flightless molt period, would 

 be very vulnerable to oil spills. Wintering 

 flocks of oldsquaws and several species of 

 scoters along the coasts of Alaska, British 

 Columbia, and Washington can be expected to 

 dwindle as North Slope oil begins to be trans- 

 ported to Puget Sound ports. 



It is recognized now that seabirds transfer 

 and recycle nutrients and energy between trophic 

 levels and between regions of an ocean (Sowl 

 and Bartonek 1974). Although the signifi- 

 cance of this role in the marine ecosystem can 

 only be surmised at present, conservative es- 

 timates by Sanger (1972) indicated that birds 

 consume from 0.6 to 1.2 million tons of food 

 and return from 0.12 to 0.24 million tons of 

 feces into the subarctic Pacific region an- 

 nually. G. A. Sanger's (personal communica- 

 tion) revised estimates of these bird popula- 

 tions indicated that his 1972 estimates should 

 be doubled. Regardless, it appears that the 

 disastrous effects of such a spill would extend 

 beyond the bird populations involved. 



Indirect Effects of Oil Pollution 

 and Petrochemical Developments 



By no means would direct losses attribut- 

 able to contamination by oil be the only threat 

 to marine bird populations as a result of 

 petrochemical expansions into these waters. 

 Some water birds that become contaminated 

 with nonlethal doses of petroleum during the 

 breeding season are not likely to breed (J. M. 

 Scott, comments by Pacific Seabird Group on 

 U.S. Department of the Interior Draft Envi- 

 ronmental Statement 74-90). Viability of em- 

 bryos is greatly reduced when the eggshell be- 

 comes smeared with oil from the contami- 

 nated plumage of the female (Hartung 1965). 

 Degradation of habitat, particularly to nest- 

 ing areas and food supplies, will certainly 

 occur, and its most pronounced effects will be 

 felt in the Arctic. Gravel removal for con- 

 struction of offshore drilling pads, causeways, 

 and onshore production facilities would dis- 

 place nesting birds and, combined with subse- 

 quent discharge of drill cuttings, perhaps 

 have an adverse impact on bottom food or- 

 ganisms. Nesting habitat loss through de- 

 struction or the inability of birds to accept 

 disturbance could be substantial, particularly 

 along the Beaufort Sea coasts of Alaska and 

 Canada, where offshore barrier islands and 

 tundra-covered islands provide protection 

 from mammalian predators for nesting by 

 Pacific eiders, Sabine's gulls (Xemia sabini), 

 Arctic terns (Sterna paradisaea), black guille- 

 mots (Cepphus grylle), and other species (Arc- 

 tic Institute of North America 1974). Flax- 

 man Island near the mouth of the Canning 

 River is a tundra island supporting a nesting 

 population of whistling swans (Olor colum- 

 bianus), and the only nesting colony of the 

 Alaska snow goose (Chen caerulescens) is on 

 Howe Island in the Sagavanirktok River 

 Delta (Arctic Institute of North America 

 1974). 



Although there would probably be little ac- 

 tual nesting habitat loss for cliff-nesting 

 species, human disturbance to colonies during 

 the nesting period, particularly from heli- 

 copter and fixed-wing aircraft flybys, could 

 have considerable impact (Sowl and Bartonek 

 1974). The "living waterfall" effect of thou- 



