OCS Report 

MMS 2004-015 

 

Minerals Management Service 

Environmental Studies Program: 

A History of Biological Investigations 

in the Gulf of Mexico, 1973-2000 

U.S. Department of the Interior

Minerals Management Service 

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 
About the Cover 

Images on the cover represent some of the variety of MMS biological studies in the Gulf of Mexico. 

From left to right: (1) Numerous studies have been directed at the study of how offshore oil and gas 

platforms act as artificial reefs. (2) The Flower Garden Banks are the northernmost corals reefs on the 

continental shelf of North America and are surrounded by oil and gas operations. They have been 

monitored continuously by MMS for the past 30 years and remain extremely healthy. (3) The first 

underwater image of chemosynthetic tubeworms in the northern Gulf of Mexico was taken in November 

1984 during a study funded by MMS. (4) The ice worm, Hesiocaeca methanicola, a new species to 

science, was discovered during a chemosynthetic community ecosystem study funded by MMS. 

All images by Gregory S. Boland (tubeworm image #3 for LGL/MMS) 
OCS Report 

MMS 2004-015 

Minerals Management Service 

Environmental Studies Program: 

A History of Biological Investigations 

in the Gulf of Mexico, 1973-2000 

Author 

Dr. Robert M. Avent 

Published by 

New Orleans

April 2004 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Minerals Management Service 

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

Foreword — Dedicated in Honor and Memory of Dr. Robert Avent...........................................................v 

Preface .........................................................................................................................................................ix 

1. Introduction..........................................................................................................................................1 

1.1. Nature and Direction of MMS Biological Studies......................................................................2 

1.2. Role of the U.S. Geological Survey and its Biological Resources Division ..............................2 

2. Environmental Mapping ......................................................................................................................3 

2.1. Western Gulf Environmental Mapping.......................................................................................3 

2.2. Eastern Gulf Environmental Mapping .......................................................................................3 

3. Marine Ecosystems Studies .................................................................................................................5 

3.1. Continental Shelf Ecosystems Studies........................................................................................6 

3.1.1. Eastern Gulf of Mexico Benchmark Program and the Mississippi-Alabama-Florida 

Shelf Ecosystems Study (MAFLA) ...............................................................................6 

3.1.2. South Texas OCS Benchmark Program (STOCS).........................................................6 

3.1.3. Topographic Features Program......................................................................................7 

3.1.4. Northeastern Gulf of Mexico and Mississippi-Alabama Programs ...............................8 

3.1.5. Southwest Florida Shelf Ecosystem Program................................................................9 

3.1.6. Texas-Louisiana Shelf Ecosystems Program...............................................................10 

3.2. Deep-Sea Ecosystems Studies ..................................................................................................10 

3.2.1. Deep-Sea Information Synthesis..................................................................................11 

3.2.2. Northern Gulf of Mexico Continental Slope Study .....................................................11 

3.2.3. Chemosynthetic Community Studies and Community Conservation..........................11 

3.2.4. Northern Gulf of Mexico Continental Slope Habitats and Benthic Ecology...............12 

3.2.5. Other Deep-Sea Efforts................................................................................................13 

4. Coastal Studies...................................................................................................................................15 

4.1. General Coastal Studies – Central Gulf Marshes .....................................................................15 

4.2. Texas Coastal Ecosystems Program .........................................................................................15 

4.3. Louisiana Coastal Ecosystems Program...................................................................................16

4.4. Northeastern and Eastern Gulf of Mexico Coastal Ecosystems Programs ...............................16 

5. Living Marine Resources...................................................................................................................19 

5.1. Protected Species......................................................................................................................19 

5.2. Fishes and Fisheries..................................................................................................................21 

5.3. Birds .........................................................................................................................................22 

6. Effects of Oil and Gas Activities .......................................................................................................25 

6.1. Effects on Biota ........................................................................................................................25 

6.2. Coastal Effects..........................................................................................................................26 

6.3. Marine Effects ..........................................................................................................................27 

6.4. Rig and Platform Monitoring Program.....................................................................................27 

6.5. Oil-Spill Effects Program .........................................................................................................28 

6.6. Effects Modeling Program........................................................................................................28 

7. Miscellaneous Biological Studies and Relevant Documents.............................................................29 

7.1. Miscellaneous Biological Studies.............................................................................................29 

7.2. Gulf of Mexico Region Coastal Marine Institute Program.......................................................29 

7.3. Other Documents......................................................................................................................30 

7.3.1. Regional Studies Plans and Studies Development Plans .............................................30 

7.3.2. Information Transfer Meeting Proceedings .................................................................31 

7.3.3. Workshops and Symposia............................................................................................31 

Appendix: An Overview of the Environmental Studies Program (ESP)....................................................33 

A.1. Early History and Development of the ESP .............................................................................33 

A.2. Regional Responsibilities and Organization.............................................................................34 

A.3. Studies Planning and Selection.................................................................................................34 

A.4. Studies Procurement, Conduct, Completion, and Dissemination.............................................35 
v

FOREWORD 

DEDICATED IN HONOR AND MEMORY OF DR. ROBERT AVENT

This dedication reflects memories of the colleagues that worked with Dr. Robert Avent during his career. 

Dr. Avent was completing this report for Minerals Management Service when he fell ill and subsequently 

died. 

 _______________________________ 

Bob Avent is recognized for his work at MMS for 

nearly three decades, and his devotion to biological 

knowledge of the Gulf of Mexico is evident from this 

volume titled: A History of Biological Investigations in 

the Gulf of Mexico: 1973–2000. When Bob did his 

doctorate at Florida State University (FSU), I was one 

of his mentors and co-authored with him a paper on the 

effects of pressure on marine organisms, presented at 

the 1971 Barobiology Symposium at Wrightsville 

Beach, North Carolina. We jointly sailed on several 

cruises in the Gulf of Mexico in the mid-sixties aboard 

R/V Tursiops from the then new Ed Ball Marine 

Laboratory of FSU (1967-70). His interest in the deepsea gained him an excellent job at the Harbor Branch 

Oceanographic Institution (Foundation) in Fort Pierce, 

Florida. 

Dr. Robert Avent was in charge of the Submersible 

Reconnaissance Program at Harbor Branch. With his enthusiasm and leadership, from 1974 to 1978 Bob 

supervised the Johnson-Sea-Link (JSL) submersible research program and helped to develop and evaluate 

new tools and instrumentation for the submersible, making the JSL one of the best-equipped research 

submersibles in the world for collection and photographic imagery. He developed a benthic biology 

program utilizing the JSL submersible and initiated high-density photographic transects and detailed 

observational reconnaissance of the eastern Florida continental margin, covering 4,300 square kilometers 

of ocean bottom from 30 to 300 m. His work established the fact that submersibles offered the scientist a 

precise collection tool with accuracy in navigation (not possible with remote surface or subsurface gear 

such as ROV and AUV), remarkable visual perception, and photographic and video documentation of 

biological and geological features of benthic communities. 

Most noteworthy of Bob Avent’s scientific accomplishments is his discovery and description in an 

international peer-reviewed journal of the deepwater Oculina reef off the central Florida Atlantic coast. 

This cold coral ecosystem is now the first protected area on the U.S. East Coast designated as an Essential 

Fishery Habitat–Habitat Area of Particular Concern, where groupers and snappers dwell and spawn. This 

was the first Marine Protected Area in the world to conserve and manage a deepwater coral reef, which is 

now known to have a wide cosmopolitan existence. 

As a member of the steering committee on Deep-sea Coral Conservation, I am pleased to announce that 

the 3rd International Deep-sea Coral Symposium will take place in the USA in 2005, and Dr. Avent will 

be recognized as one of the founders of the cold coral reef studies, which has recently gained rapid 

momentum and recognition by United Nation agencies, U.S. Federal Government agencies, academia, 

media, nongovernmental organizations, and stakeholders. 

Bob was an inspiration. John Reed, whom Avent mentored at the Harbor Branch Oceanographic 

Institute, proudly proclaims “Bob Avent was a great mentor and a good friend as I started my career as a 

marine biologist nearly 30 years ago.” 
vi

For 27 years Bob Avent worked for the MMS Environmental Sciences Section in New Orleans (a city and 

culture he enjoyed) and initiated a sound benthic program, including research on OCS activities, a 

western Gulf of Mexico deep-sea biology program, and the study of chemosynthetic communities found 

in the deep Gulf of Mexico. In the most recent 10th Deep-sea Biology Symposium in Coos Bay, Oregon 

(August 25-30, 2003), just a month after Bob Avent’s premature death, several scientists remembered 

Bob and acknowledged him with gratitude during a special session on the deep Gulf of Mexico. In 

Erlangen, Germany, in September 2003 several speakers at the 2nd International Deep-sea Coral 

Symposium, including myself and John Reed, dedicated our papers to the memory of a great 

oceanographer and friend, Robert Avent. 

On a personal note, I wish to add that I exchanged several E-mail letters in November 2002 with Bob, 

concerning the finding of Lophelia corals during the MMS-sponsored JSL and nuclear submersible 

research in the deep carbonate mounds in the Gulf of Mexico. In early December 2002, his voice was 

robust on the phone, and after his operation for cancer he came to his office to work in late December. 

His voice on the phone was not as he normally spoke, but neither his enthusiasm for science nor his 

warmth in friendship was dimmed. Bob proudly spoke of his family, especially his two beloved sons, 

Sean and David. Bob will be missed forever, and what he did in life will be remembered with love and 

gratitude. It is with an immense feeling of friendship that I dedicate this volume in honor and memory of 

Dr. Robert Avent. 

Robert Y. George, Ph.D. 

Professor of Deep-Sea Biology (1972–2003, UNCW) Rtd. 

President, George Institute for Biodiversity and Sustainability 

_______________________________ 

I first met Bob Avent in the 1970’s when he was employed by the National Marine 

Fisheries Service in Galveston, Texas. We worked on several projects together 

and enjoyed many cruises and post-cruise celebrations. Bob was envied by all of 

us in those days due to his ownership of a bright, nearly new, Mercedes-Benz 

automobile. Bob’s first love, however, was not reef-fish and shrimp ecology, but 

the deep sea. It was, therefore, not a surprise when he moved to New Orleans to 

join the Minerals Management Service (MMS). Never has a better match been 

made—Bob and New Orleans with all its traditions—and deep-sea work “to boot.” 

We were able to continue our professional relationship through the MMS Northern 

Gulf of Mexico Continental Slope Study, he as the Contracting Officer’s Technical 

Representative and I as Program Manager. We were also able to continue our 

friendship. Over the years, however, my envy of his Mercedes diminished. What a vehicle! If Bob was 

representative of the typical customer, I suspect the Mercedes-Benz Company is in a world of financial 

hurt. He didn’t give up on a vehicle just because it had a little age and a few dings on it. 

Bob was a good scientist, as well as a credit to his profession and to MMS. In matters of science, he paid 

attention to detail, was well informed, and remained open-minded throughout his career. He treated his 

contractors fairly, yet looked after MMS’s interests and the scientific credibility of the work he oversaw. 

He was very careful to keep his personal and professional relationships separated. I respected and 

admired Bob for his dedication to his work and his ability to “leave it at the office,” when appropriate. 

He will be missed. 

Benny J. Gallaway, Ph.D. 

President & Ecologist 

LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc. 

_______________________________ 
vii

Back in 1977, I was doing a foraminiferal study 

on a subcontract with Texas Instruments (T.I.), 

which then had a very lively ecological studies 

group. This group, of which Bob Avent was one 

of the youngest and nicest members, had won a 

major contract from the U.S. Bureau of Land 

Management to conduct a wide-ranging 

organismal benchmark study in the Georgia 

Bight. The investigators, from various 

universities and T.I., needed to meet periodically 

in Dallas to solve data management problems. 

I got to know Bob well during these gatherings. 

So it was a very pleasant surprise to see him 

many years later at an MMS Information Transfer 

Meeting (ITM), and find that his enthusiasm for 

field ecology had not diminished. It was a lucky 

break for me to be at sea with him in the fall of 2000 to take part in dives of the Alvin. We did not share a 

dive, but we had numerous mid-morning and after-dinner 

conversations on the deck of the mother ship, Atlantis. 

Many of the ideas that later found place in my MMS 

proposal to study hydrocarbon-seep forams germinated 

during those encounters with Bob. Unfortunately, I did not 

see much of him when he became my MMS project manager 

for this work; his health went into a decline at about this 

time. 

I will miss Bob, and I have one special regret. Soon after we 

renewed our acquaintance in New Orleans, he started 

inviting me to his personal post-ITM parties, but somehow 

the dates were never right for me. I now wish I had tried 

harder to adjust my calendar for those evenings. 

Barun Sen Gupta, Ph.D. 

H. V. Howe Professor of Geology 

Department of Geology and Geophysics 

Louisiana State University 

The two pictures were taken by Lorene Smith, LSU, on board the Atlantis in October 2000. 

_______________________________ 

The Environmental Sciences Section and the Office of Leasing and Activity mourn the passing of our 

colleague and friend, Dr. Robert Avent. 

Bob Avent worked at MMS for 27 years in the Environmental Studies 

Program. Bob was a recognized expert in benthic ecology and made 

significant contributions to marine mammal science. His work 

provided fundamental understanding of the benthic communities, in 

particular the chemosynthetic communities of the deep Gulf of Mexico. 

This information allowed for OCS activities to continue, while 

providing protection to the many different benthic ecosystems that are 

found in the Gulf of Mexico. 

In the spirit of the original “Jacques Cousteau” oceanographers, he 

enjoyed being at sea and working on the mysteries of the deep. He was 

born to explore the oceans of the world. From the time of his graduate 
viii

education at Florida State University, his career included working at the Harbor Branch Foundation, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, and most recently MMS. He never seemed to tire of working on the 

high seas and being involved with the ships and their equipment. 

At the same time, his love for New Orleans and the city’s finer points was legendary. For most of his 

time in this area, he was an active member and officer of the Jefferson City Buzzards. Many of us have 

memories of Bob sashaying down St. Charles Avenue on Mardi Gras dressed in full Buzzards’ regalia 

and stirring up the crowd with beads and doubloons. 

Bob became ill early this year and was diagnosed with lung cancer. He passed away on July 29, 2003. 

He is survived by two sons: Sean, an Oceanographic Technician on the Pacific coast, and David, a 

Financial Loan Agent and Reserve Police Officer on the northshore of New Orleans. Bob will be missed 

as a colleague and friend. 

Robert Rogers, Ph.D. 

Pasquale Roscigno, Ph.D. 

Environmental Sciences Section 

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 
ix

PREFACE 

This document, entitled Minerals Management Service Environmental Studies Program: A History of 

Biological Investigations in the Gulf of Mexico, 1973-2000, is intended to provide a brief history of more 

than a quarter-century of biological studies supported by the subject agencies since the inception of the 

Environmental Studies Program (ESP). It is written for those interested either in the entire “Biological 

Program” or in specific research conducted under one or more biological categories. (In reality, most 

“biological” studies have been interdisciplinary, relating biological data to the physical, geological, and 

chemical environment.) We trust it will prove useful to administrators, program reviewers and advisors, 

academicians, and the interested public. 

This document reviews historic and recent biological studies and is arranged to give individual 

descriptions of “series” of studies, such as Environmental Mapping, Marine Ecosystems, Coastal Studies, 

Living Marine Resources, and Effects of Oil and Gas Activities. 

Comments, suggestions, and corrections are welcome. These should be brought to the attention of 

U.S. Dept. of the Interior 

Minerals Management Service 

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region 

Chief, Environmental Sciences Section (MS 5430) 

1201 Elmwood Park Blvd. 

New Orleans, LA 70123-2394 
1

1. INTRODUCTION 

This review attempts to categorize (where possible) the biological studies conducted in the Gulf of 

Mexico by the Minerals Management Service (MMS). The intent is to illustrate the record of studies 

selections within MMS Environmental Studies Program (ESP) from the early 1970’s (when the question 

was “where do we start accumulating information?”) through 2000 and a little beyond. The ESP was 

administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), a U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) sister 

agency of MMS, until the 1982 creation of MMS. This review does not discuss costs or final results of 

individual projects, but it serves to document ESP direction and accomplishments. The costs of studies 

(by fiscal year) and the details of their purpose, procurement, methods, and results can be found for many 

reports received since 1992 on MMS Internet website: 

http://www.gomr.mms.gov/homepg/regulate/environ/techsumm/rec_pubs.html

This site is a listing of all reports conducted during the covered period (1992-present), with a 

collection of selected “Technical Summaries” written as required under contract. In a few cases, the 

entire text of a given volume is provided for direct printing. The Technical Summaries offer a great deal 

of insight into the management, fiscal, and scientific details of recent programs. 

For information on the availability of studies documents up to 1994, the reader is referred to Gulf of 

Mexico Programmatic Documents and Contract Deliverables, last updated in November 1994 and now 

superceded by the above website. This document lists studies into certain convenient biological 

categories or groupings, for example, Marine Ecosystems, Living Marine Resources, and Coastal Studies. 

We have attempted, when possible, to parallel those groupings in Sections 2 through 7 below, for those 

needing additional information on content or availability. Some studies or “tasks” within studies arguably 

fall into more than one category. Some of these are mentioned under two of the several categories (e.g., 

Protected Species and Effects of Oil and Gas Activities or Environmental Mapping and Marine 

Ecosystems). Under each of the categories of studies below, the report products are then discussed 

separately by geographical or resource subcategory. 

Some of the older studies are still available from the sources given in Gulf of Mexico Programmatic 

Documents and Contract Deliverable, but many are no longer readily available from any source1

. Some 

of the older studies are obsolete in whole or part, or have been updated. 

Many of MMS-sponsored studies have required the publication of interim or annual reports under the 

requirements of the respective contract or agreement, especially for the large, multiyear programs. This 

has been a convention over most of the course of the ESP, and these reports are listed in the website 

above. These were written as a public record of research progress. They also reflect MMS’s need for 

accountability in the extremely unlikely event that a contractor somehow failed or MMS elected to cancel 

a program. After final reports are published, the interim reports are not generally requested nor are they 

offered for wide distribution. For these reasons, we cite below only a final report title and the date of 

final report acceptance and publication. 

The reader must understand, then, that the date of procurement award and project startup may have 

been one to several years before publication and that the study planning and procurement might have been 

up to 3 years before that. While we have attempted to include all major biologically oriented programs in 

this review, other minor miscellaneous reports and some written mostly for internal planning may have 

been omitted. We trust that this review will provide some insight into the history and growth of the ESP 

in general and the “Biological Program” in particular. In reality, most “biological” studies have been 

interdisciplinary, relating biological data to the physical, geological, and chemical environments. 

 

1

 As of 2003, most have now been scanned and are available online at http://www.gomr.mms.gov/homepg/ 

regulate/environ/techsumm/rec_pubs.html. 
2

1.1. NATURE AND DIRECTION OF MMS BIOLOGICAL STUDIES

Many of the early ESP projects (“Benchmark Studies”) were interdisciplinary regional assessments of 

the hydrography, geology, chemistry, and biology of an area (e.g., south Texas and the MississippiAlabama-Florida area – MAFLA). These were designed to provide an overview of “baseline” conditions 

in “frontier” areas (those without significant histories of oil and gas development). The baseline data 

were to be used for environmental comparisons after development. But there has been a historical trend 

toward the study of selected resources and issues (but still sometimes on a regional scale). 

Most recent (1985+) biological programs have been directed at target species or habitats, or 

anthropogenic effects. A number of criteria may enter into a study’s selection for support. These criteria 

may include legal status (i.e., species listed as endangered or threatened), distribution and rarity (e.g., 

chemosynthetic communities), productivity (e.g., seagrasses), commercial or recreational use (e.g., fish 

communities at offshore platforms), importance as habitat (e.g., soft bottoms and platform jackets), 

sensitivity or vulnerability (e.g., mangrove forests and salt marshes), aesthetics (e.g., coral reefs), or status 

of knowledge (e.g., any newly discovered reefs or topographic features – this has happened several 

times), and/or the potential for environmental damage (e.g., modeling fates and effects of various 

operational discharges, spills, and noise; or the monitoring/measuring of actual effects under known 

conditions). Clearly, studies of some resources/effects are justifiable on the basis of a number of these 

criteria. (Miscellaneous, nonscientific considerations may influence the process as well, for example, 

congressional involvement, States’ objections, General Accounting Office (GAO) reports, or public 

perceptions.) 

Predictably, most of these studies (especially the early ones) focused on the shallow resources on the 

continental shelf. But, MMS now supported a number of generalized and resource-specific efforts 

pertaining to the ecology of the continental slope. Most field studies have been conducted entirely within 

the confines of Federal waters in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). However, both “paper” and field 

studies have been aimed toward States’ waters when their biological resources are believed to be 

(1) especially vulnerable to OCS activities (e.g., salt marshes, mangroves, and estuaries) or (2) when a 

knowledge of the shoreward distribution of index benthic communities offers a more complete picture of 

distribution and life requirements (e.g., seagrasses and shallow “live bottom”). Only recently have MMS 

studies ventured into the Mexican EEZ. One of these, a collaborative deep-sea effort by Mexican and 

U.S. scientists, investigates benthic ecology basinwide. Depending on the procurement conditions and 

nature of international research efforts, these studies may require a series of State Department actions and 

permitting. 

1.2. ROLE OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND ITS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 

DIVISION

A close working relationship between MMS and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) was established 

in response to Secretary Babbitt’s August 1994 request to all DOI Directors to strengthen the ties between 

DOI’s science bureaus (e.g., USGS) and resource management bureaus (e.g., MMS). A Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) between MMS and the newly created National Biological Service (NBS) was 

signed in 1995. (The initial reprogramming of funds from MMS began earlier in FY 1994.) The NBS, 

formed primarily from the research arm of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, was merged into USGS in 

1996 to become the present Biological Resources Division (BRD) of USGS. Since then, much of MMS 

biological research has been, and continues to be, conducted through or by the BRD. Research managers 

and staff of MMS and USGS meet regularly to discuss future research. 

Examples of USGS/BRD-administered studies for MMS in the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental 

Shelf (OCS) Region include studies of coastal wetland impacts from oil and gas pipelines, community 

structure of demersal fishes at pinnacles in the northeastern Gulf, the GulfCet study, Northeastern Gulf 

Coastal and Marine Ecosystem Programs — A Data Search and Synthesis, and the subsequent 

Characterization and Trends of Recreational and Commercial Fishing from the Florida Panhandle. 
3

2. ENVIRONMENTAL MAPPING 

The MMS environmental mapping program has provided many popular documents and maps to the 

public, including forty-one 1:250,000-scale bathymetric maps with the Federal OCS lease grid overprints, 

and a large series of reports and maps on geological features and geohazards, the latter produced mostly 

by USGS. These have little, if any, information of a biological nature per se, but they do provide general 

information of interest to all, including biologists and biological studies planners. 

The environmental mapping products described below accomplish much more than simply illustrating 

the distribution of given ecosystems and living resources in targeted areas. They frequently relate 

biological resources with geological, physical, chemical, sedimentary, and other nonbiological 

characteristics. All environmental mappings were done in waters from the beach or estuary to a depth 

characteristic of the subject resource or, at most, out to the edge of the continental shelf. None were deepsea efforts. 

2.1. WESTERN GULF ENVIRONMENTAL MAPPING

The six series of Submerged Lands of Texas mapping efforts were produced for as many areas of 

Texas by the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas at Austin. These areas were 

Corpus Christi, Galveston-Houston, Brownsville-Harlingen, Beaumont-Port Arthur, Bay City-Freeport, 

and Port Lavaca (published in 1983, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, and 1989, respectively). They plotted 

benthic macroinvertebrates and associated wetlands against sedimentary and geochemical characteristics. 

The mapping for the heavily-industrialized Galveston-Houston area also plotted the same communities 

against total organic carbon and the elements of barium, boron, calcium, chromium, iron, and lead. The 

latter chemical datasets are now likely obsolete, both in terms of age and original accuracy. 

Early studies of the South Texas OCS (STOCS program; Section 3.1.2 below) resulted in an early 

(1977) USGS environmental mapping volume (“atlas”), which accompanied the report entitled 

Environmental Studies, South Texas Outer Continental Shelf, Biology and Chemistry. 

Another mapping effort was the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico Shelf Bio-Atlas (1983), which plotted 

the distributions of demersal fishes and shrimps from information gleaned from several different reports. 

This is described in greater detail in Section 5.2. 

The Flower Garden Banks projects provided additional maps. In 1985, MMS received a final 

synthesis report, The Flower Gardens: A Compendium of Information, which included a summary report 

and nine map sheets at a scale of 1:48,000. 

2.2. EASTERN GULF ENVIRONMENTAL MAPPING

Towards the end of the early MAFLA Benchmark Program of BLM, a new series of mapping efforts 

were begun on the wide, carbonate, west Florida shelf platform. These addressed two benthic biological 

resources: hard-bottom communities and seagrasses. 

A preliminary mapping study, the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Marine Habitat Study, was conducted 

following the MAFLA studies to gather additional habitat information on the west Florida shelf from 

Pensacola south to Charlotte Harbor, with emphasis on selected hard-bottom areas that might harbor 

epifauna and demersal fishes. Ten areas (5 in the western panhandle of Florida and 5 in southwestern 

Florida) were selected for geophysical characterization (subbottom profiling and side-scan sonar). 

Following the geological work, photographic and videographic imaging of the bottom produced early 

estimates of the types and amounts of biota the areas held. This program was a precursor to the 

Southwest Florida Shelf Ecosystem Program (Section 3.1.5), a full-blown environmental field study with 

a great deal of faunal sampling, hydrographic work, and sediment and midwater measurements. A 

sizeable geophysical and imaging element produced two volumes of large-format maps (Marine Habitat 

Atlases) showing the relationships between attached hard-bottom animal and plant communities, bottom 

type and associations with depth, distance from shore, nutrients, illumination, currents, and other factors. 
4

This work was done offshore from St. Petersburg south to the Florida Keys and from Florida State waters 

to the shelf’s edge in water depths of more than 150 m (492 ft). In all, this program required a decade to 

complete. 

Another parallel final report, the 1991 Southwest Florida Nearshore Benthic Habitat Study, further 

extended the mapping efforts within Florida’s State waters, generally less than 20 m (66 ft) deep. 

Three surveys of seagrasses have been funded by MMS in the eastern Gulf. MMS has long 

recognized seagrasses as an ecologically important and potentially vulnerable resource. Besides being 

important primary producers, seagrasses are significant sources of forage for the West Indian manatee 

(Manatus trichecus), the green sea turtle (Chelonia midas), and a host of detritus feeders. Seagrasses 

also provide expansive and productive prairies within which myriads of small motile invertebrates and 

fishes live, and they support diverse communities of attached flora/fauna. Because seagrasses are shallow 

flowering plants, seasonal changes can be expected in seagrass beds. But even in the summer and fall, 

tropical storms can devastate great patches of prairie. Cumulative anthropogenic activities seem to have 

reduced estuarine seagrass densities in places such as the Laguna Madre, Mississippi Sound, and Tampa 

Bay. MMS surveys were conducted with combinations of photosleds, divers, and aerial overflights (in 

clear, shallow waters). These were the Western Florida Coast Seagrass Inventory; Anclote Key to 

Palmetto Island (1984); the Florida Big Bend Seagrass Habitat Study (1985); and the accompanying 

Florida Big Bend Seagrass Habitat Study Photographic Atlas (1985). 

Much of the Southwest Florida Shelf Ecosystem Program (Section 3.1.5) consisted of a series of 

photographic and geophysical surveys across and along the shelf, in addition to the extensive sampling 

and process-oriented studies. The several large reports received from this long, complex program were 

accompanied by two large-format Marine Habitat Atlases that displayed habitat and community sites. 

Several more-or-less distinct benthic habitats and epifaunal community types that varied in response to 

lighting, substrates, currents, nutrients, and other factors were identified. 

Following the identification of significant topographic features during the Mississippi-Alabama 

Marine Ecosystem Program (Section 3.1.4), itself an ecological mapping effort, additional mapping was 

done in western, muddy parts of the region, which differ considerably physiographically, from the coarser 

quartzose eastern parts. The mapping revealed the geological/geophysical structure and the nature of the 

fauna with remotely operated vehicles (ROV’s). The final report, Mississippi-Alabama Shelf Pinnacle 

Trend Habitat Mapping Study, was published in 1992. 
5

3. MARINE ECOSYSTEMS STUDIES 

In the 1970’s, BLM funded a series of ambitious descriptive regional field studies (“benchmark” 

programs) around the Gulf of Mexico and other regions. These were conducted in “frontier” areas (those 

with little or no history of oil and gas activity). In theory the bodies of data collected were the 

“benchmarks” against which future effects might be compared. In most cases, these studies of the 

continental shelf (and sometimes the uppermost slope) were the first truly systematic, multidisciplinary, 

multiyear studies of a given area. The study areas were based on a size that was realistic in terms of 

science (i.e., an area believed to have a contiguously distinctive or characteristic physiography and/or 

zoogeography) and logistically practical to study. For example, the continental shelf offshore TexasLouisiana is a wide, muddy expanse of shelf. The South Texas area is predominantly sandy. The wide 

southwestern Florida platform is characterized by sand and low-profile carbonate outcroppings, and the 

Georgia Bight, influenced by the Gulf Stream, is characterized by the distinctive subtropical Carolinean 

fauna. (In the early years, BLM Gulf of Mexico OCS Office funded a similar South Atlantic Benchmark 

Program (1977) in the Georgia Bight from Daytona Beach, Florida, to Cape Fear, North Carolina.) 

These benchmark programs often evolved from year to year based on existing data and new findings. 

Typically, these studies developed an early framework of biological and supplemental data upon which to 

build. (The early efforts of many regional ecosystem studies were designed with a paucity of hard, 

organized, regional information taken systematically.) During these studies, nearly all size and trophic 

classes of marine biota were described from the microscopic to the large megafauna and within the 

plankton, neuston, nekton, and benthos. Analyses of contaminants in water, biota, and sediments; the 

sediment type and chemistry; and the hydrographic structure were all used in multivariate analyses of 

biological diversity, biomass, and numbers. Virtually all combinations and types of organism/abioticfactor comparisons were made, especially in the early STOCS and MAFLA programs. 

In 1977, the GAO criticized BLM for relying too heavily upon very large, unfocused, 

multidisciplinary databases. BLM responded by contracting the National Research Council (NRC) to 

recommend changes to studies planning by restructuring the program and developing numerical criteria to 

tie study selection to OCS-related management decisions. To be selected, a study had to provide 

information useful for timely management decisions. Thereafter, studies tended to focus more directly on 

elements that made a region environmentally distinct or important in some way. The later studies also 

focused on many aspects of the Texas-Louisiana Shelf, with its well-developed offshore oil and gas 

industry. 

In biological studies and oceanographic studies with significant biological content, the biotic elements 

of greatest attention have since been mainly benthic and benthopelagic forms. The reasoning for this was 

that the benthos was most easily studied quantitatively, it was relatively immobile, and it would 

ultimately be the most likely component affected chronically by contaminants. As such, it was argued, 

the benthos would respond to environmental change in the most detectable way, if not the fastest. In 

more recent studies (a lesson from European researchers), some greater emphasis has been placed on fast 

growing, short-generation forms such as meiofauna and zooplankton to detect change. While the studies 

tended to be mission-oriented (related to environmental impact statements or technical petroleum 

operations, for example), they still had to be based on solid science and statistical convention. 

The sampling methodologies for benthic marine ecosystem investigations were most often 

conventional, accepted quantitative and semiquantitative trawls, box corers, water bottles, sensors, and 

cameras, in keeping with the MMS function as a regulatory (as opposed to a research and development) 

agency. Some studies have included experimental elements; biochemical assays; histopathology, 

productivity, genetic, and behavioral elements; and other types of information as the regional character 

and purpose would require. In some latter studies (starting in the mid-1980’s), it proved useful to deploy 

in situ monitoring systems and moorings to measure environmental processes that helped explain the 

biological observations made with conventional samplers. This was especially true for southwest Florida, 

Mississippi-Alabama, and later deep-sea programs. 
6

In some programs, ROV’s were effectively used; for the deep-sea studies, manned submersibles were 

required to study highly complex chemosynthetic communities. 

Final reports were typically published in sets of 4 to 10 volumes (including often voluminous 

appendices), each with a topical area or synopsis, although some information synthesis reports were 

single volumes. The ecosystems studies devoted to the northern Gulf of Mexico shelf are described in 

Section 3.1, and those devoted to the continental slope are described in Section 3.2. These are discussed 

separately because of the inherent differences in community structure, process rates, habitat and 

biological diversity, and trophic patterns, for example. 

3.1. CONTINENTAL SHELF ECOSYSTEMS STUDIES

3.1.1. Eastern Gulf of Mexico Benchmark Program and the MississippiAlabama-Florida Shelf Ecosystems Study (MAFLA) 

The MAFLA Program was one of the first BLM marine ecosystem programs in the Gulf of Mexico 

along with the South Texas OCS (STOCS) Program described below. One of the overriding 

considerations in developing the MAFLA Program was that, of all Gulf areas, it was believed to be one of 

the least affected by any human activities, including those related to oil and gas. (Well before the ESP, 

there were a handful of leases drilled in the southern southwest Florida area. In a small and brief study in 

1993, USGS relocated these undeveloped sites and made a favorable assessment of “health.”) In contrast 

to the eastern Gulf, most northwestern shelf areas west of Mississippi had been drilled extensively, and it 

was argued by many that chronic, low-level exposures to oil, metals, and other contaminants made 

reliable trend analyses impossible. The MAFLA Program measured and compared virtually every biotic 

and habitat compartment in the region. Beginning in 1975, BLM began to receive MAFLA reports in 

earnest. The early workshop report, Marine Environmental Implications of Offshore Drilling, Eastern 

Gulf of Mexico, became a landmark work. A pilot, a Multivariate Analysis of the MAFLA Water Column 

Baseline Data, was conducted in 1974, and in 1977, a study of hydrocarbon loads in animal tissues was 

completed. As a side note, the accuracy of all of the measurements of trace metals, hydrocarbons, and 

other contaminants made in the 1970’s has been called into question, compared with later measurements 

made with more advanced equipment and protocols. 

The massive, multidisciplinary, and multiyear MAFLA sampling programs were procured in 1975 

and 1977 (and published in 1977 and 1979, respectively). The first was published in 13 loosely 

connected volumes. In contrast to more recent studies, these studies described midwater plankton, 

neuston, and suspended matter, and emphasized the measurements of contaminants and natural chemical 

species in biota, sediments, and water. The second main report (1979) furthered the knowledge found in 

the first. 

Another major report in 1979 was related to ichthyoplankton distribution and abundance. While a 

large and expensive study for its time, there were some weaknesses in the comparisons of data and an 

apparent reluctance of investigators in differing areas of expertise to converse. After reviews of the 

MAFLA program, the STOCS program, and similar ones in other Regions, the BLM studies program, in 

its infancy, began to redesign programs and target resources to make determinations most useful for DOI 

management decisions. 

3.1.2. South Texas OCS Benchmark Program (STOCS) 

Procured from 1975 to 1978, the STOCS Program consisted of a massive and diverse series of 

multidisciplinary efforts. In the year-one studies, baseline efforts were combinations of information 

syntheses, atlases, and pilot field studies. These included works on plankton and fisheries (National 

Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS]); biology and geology (Texas A&M University [TAMU]); geology 

(USGS); zooplankton, ichthyoplankton, and eggs (TAMU and NMFS); and ground fishes (NMFS). The 

second year’s efforts produced a massive report containing 10 volumes on environmental biology and 

chemistry. It was entitled Environmental Studies, South Texas Outer Continental Shelf, Biology and 

Chemistry (1977) and was accompanied by a USGS mapping volume. The third year’s report (of the same 

name) was published as a 7-volume report in 1979, and a synthesis volume was produced in 1980. The 
7

major biological and chemical efforts described above were conducted by a consortium of Texas 

Universities (Rice, University of Texas, and TAMU). 

3.1.3. Topographic Features Program 

For many years before BLM’s systematic ecological investigations started, commercial snapper and 

grouper fishermen had been aware of a number of topographic prominences on the continental shelf from 

Texas to west Florida. Partly through oil and gas exploration, their presence became known to a wider 

group of oceanographers, recreational divers and fishermen, and even navigators (for anchoring -- a 

particularly destructive activity). By the early 1970’s, researchers, notably at TAMU, had begun to 

conduct topographic, biological, and geophysical investigations in the western Gulf. As early as the 

1950’s, other workers were describing other topographic features in the eastern Gulf. Regardless of their 

geological origins (e.g., salt domes, chemical or biological accretion, or erosion), these features provide 

substrates for attached and cryptic flora and fauna as well as a habitat for a rich demersal and pelagic fish 

population. The Topographic Features Program has been one of the highest profile and longest lasting of 

the ESP initiatives, second only perhaps to the Marine Ecosystems Studies (Section 3.1.1). 

Reefs and other topographic irregularities are seen by many as special places of great value for a 

number of reasons: (1) they often support a variety of attached epibenthic animals and plants not found 

on ubiquitous soft bottoms; (2) they often provide protective and trophic niches; (3) they collectively 

comprise only a tiny percentage of ocean bottom; (4) as disjunct features, they pose interesting 

zoogeographic questions; (5) they provide places for recreational activities including fishing and diving as 

well as commercial fisheries; and (6) they are deemed by many to be aesthetically pleasing. 

It has been argued that if the soft muddy bottom was the exceptional substrate it would get more 

attention. From the beginning of the ESP, BLM recognized that the management of the oil and gas 

industry in areas with topographic features would have to be inherently different than for the far more 

common soft-bottom areas, and it initiated a series of studies. In 1976, BLM received its first preliminary 

report on biological (and geological) reconnaissance of selected topographic features off Texas. Through 

1981, BLM had received six major reports on the topographic features in the western Gulf, their fauna 

and its vertical zonation, water and sediment dynamics, and chemical contaminants. The last of these, the 

Northern Gulf of Mexico Topographic Features Study, included studies of the two Flower Garden Banks, 

nine minor banks, and the eastern Gulf’s Florida Middle Grounds, in addition to other banks that had 

already been studied. By then, all known “banks” (as opposed to the lower-profile “hard bottoms”) had 

been investigated to one extent or another with photographic imaging, diver collections, and in situ

instrumentation. Detailed topographic and zonational maps were now available for most of them, and 

these were being employed to develop stipulations to manage exploration and drilling in and around the 

features. In 1982, under the new Minerals Management Service, topographic features studies continued 

with a special emphasis on the conspicuous Flower Garden Banks. 

The East and West Flower Garden Banks (FGB) are located at the edge of the continental shelf, 

slightly over 175 km (109 mi) south-southeast of Galveston, Texas. The banks are topographic 

expressions of uplift caused by underlying salt domes originating from Jurassic, Louann evaporite 

deposits 15 km (9 mi) below the seafloor. The crests of these isolated banks, which are 19 km (12 mi) 

apart, are occupied by submerged coral reefs that rise to within approximately 15 m (49 ft) of the surface. 

Together, the bank zones containing high diversity coral reefs cover over 450 acres. 

In 1984, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) formally announced its 

intent to consider the FGB as a marine sanctuary under the Marine Protection, Research & Sanctuaries 

Act of 1972. The two banks (East and West FGB) received formal designation in 1992. This was the 

tenth designated marine sanctuary and the first in the Gulf. Subsequently, in 1996, Stetson Bank was 

added to the Sanctuary. Much of the data obtained in MMS-supported studies were used in the arguments 

for designation. 

In 1985, MMS received a final synthesis report, The Flower Gardens: A Compendium of Information, 

that included a summary report and nine map sheets at a scale of 1:48,000. 
8

In 1992, MMS received the report Long-Term Monitoring 

at the East and West Flower Garden Banks, a multiyear 

investigation of the overall health and dynamics of the 

ecosystem. This work was the result of an initial 3-year field 

program begun in 1989. The objectives were to document 

long-term changes in coral and associated communities and 

long-term natural variation in reef-building and associated 

communities. Various monitoring stations and transects were 

established for monitoring lateral and accretionary coral 

growth. Percent cover data were acquired planimetrically for 

all coral species, leafy algae, sponges, and reef rock on the 

photographs. Measurements and calculations included 

number of colonies and relative dominance of each species, 

diversity and evenness, and trace metals. Growth, disease, 

bleaching, retreat, mortality, and mechanical damage were quantified. Fish and invertebrate populations 

were estimated on transects. Ancillary measurements included dissolved oxygen, salinity, temperature, 

light, and contaminants. The long-term monitoring of the Flower Garden Banks continues as a jointly 

funded effort with NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program, with additional reports being received 

in 1996 and 1999. Ongoing measurements of coral growth and other parameters continue. Virtually no 

significant long-term changes have been detected in coral reef populations, cover, or diversity at the 

Flower Garden Banks since quantitative surveys of the reefs began. No significant trends were observed 

in any parameters during the studies. 

3.1.4. Northeastern Gulf of Mexico and Mississippi-Alabama Programs 

In addition to the many western Gulf topographic features (primarily salt dome geology) and the 

Florida Middle Grounds (an accretionary system), there is a region east of the Mississippi Delta that is a 

transition area between the mud-silt deposits to the west and the siliceous and calcareous sediments to the 

east of DeSoto Canyon. Physiographically, the region known as the “Tuscaloosa Trend” or “pinnacle 

trend” is replete with relatively low (typically less than 15 m) “pinnacles” and benches from the middle 

shelf out to the shelf edge. 

While not as high as the western Gulf prominences, these features present hard substrates for the 

attachment of epifauna and algae, and a habitat for pelagic and demersal fish populations. These features 

are valuable for many of the same reasons as the western Gulf features, but environmentally they are not 

capable of sustaining high diversity coral reefs. In addition to being interesting scientifically, there have 

also been concerns for the laying of pipelines and other infrastructure in these areas. 

The program began in 1983, and the final report, Tuscaloosa Trend Data Search and Synthesis Study, 

was completed in 1985. This report presented a regional review of known information. The field studies 

were conducted under the 4-year effort, Mississippi-Alabama Marine Ecosystem Study, which produced 

the large Atlas of High Resolution Geophysical Data and a 3-volume set of data summary and synthesis 

(1991). 

Following the initial studies, a new study administered for MMS by USGS Biological Resources 

Division, Northeast Gulf of Mexico Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program: Ecosystem Monitoring, 

Mississippi/Alabama Shelf, was planned to build onto the two previous MMS-sponsored studies of the 

Mississippi-Alabama pinnacle trend area. The initial studies had emphasized location and mapping of 

these features. In addition, communities were described with some ancillary correlations between 

physical and chemical parameters. The overall goal of this new 4-year program on the 

Mississippi/Alabama shelf was to characterize and monitor biological communities and environmental 

conditions at selected sites along the Mississippi-Alabama OCS. Specific objectives were (1) to describe 

and monitor seasonal and interannual changes in community structure and zonation and relate these to 

changes in environmental conditions and (2) to characterize the geological, chemical, and physical 

environment of the mounds as an aid in understanding their origin, evolution, present-day dynamics, and 

long-term fate. The program consisted of three field-year phases (1997-1999) followed by analyses and 

final synthesis. 
9

Methods included the use of ROV’s to characterize habitats and populations of epifauna and fishes, 

with occasional sampling for species identifications. Geological sampling was conducted with grabs, 

sidescan sonar, and subbottom profiler. Accessory measurements were made with a wide variety of 

hydrographic, optical, and CTD’s, a variety of optical measurements at nine stations within five 

“megasites.” In addition, environmental moorings with 

current meters and other recording instrumentation were 

deployed and serviced regularly. This program was designed 

to monitor environmental conditions and dynamics at three 

distinct types of topographic features present along the 

Mississippi-Alabama OCS: (1) high-profile pinnacles of 

greater than 10-m relief; (2) medium relief, flattop features of 

approximately 5 m; and (3) low-relief hard bottoms of less 

than 5 m. Seasonal information was gathered regarding 

populations and diversity of biological organisms related to 

turbidity, zonation, and other physical environmental factors. 

After three annual interim reports, this program was 

completed in 2001 with the final synthesis. 

The northeastern Gulf ecosystems studies included two additional data search, synthesis, and reviewtype efforts of note. The 1996 seven-volume, multidisciplinary Northeastern Gulf of Mexico Marine 

Ecosystem Program: Data Search and Synthesis contains some biological elements. The final natural 

sciences volume (Appendix E) reviews the biology of the northeastern Gulf from about Tarpon Springs, 

Florida, to the Florida-Alabama line. 

3.1.5. Southwest Florida Shelf Ecosystem Program 

The study area for this program was the continental shelf from approximately St. Petersburg south to 

the tip of Florida. The region is a wide carbonate platform dominated by silt, sand, and gravel, and 

frequently encountered low-relief (<1 m) rocky outcroppings. The region varies ecologically with depth 

and from north to south. During the study, the several more-or-less-distinctive biotic assemblages were 

found to be explainable on the basis of seasonality, current regime, temperature range, depth and light 

penetration, nutrient upwelling, availability of rock substrate, and other variables. 

The Southwest Florida (SWFL) Shelf Program proceeded in several stages and was conducted under 

10 separate contracts (with numerous contract modifications) and by four primary contractors. Ten areas 

(5 in southwestern Florida) were selected for geophysical characterization (subbottom profiling and 

sidescan sonar). Following the primarily geological work, photographic and videographic imaging of the 

bottom produced early estimates of the types and amounts of biota the areas held. 

Begun as a new project in 1980, the SWFL research program continued until the receipt of the final 

synthesis report in 1991. This study began with systematic geophysical and photo-sled surveys of the 

SWFL shelf from approximately St. Petersburg, Florida, south to the southern tip of Florida, combined 

with traditional benthic samplings (box coring, dredging, trawling, etc.) and accessory measurements. 

Without going into intricate year-by-year detail, the study began with the surveying of five east-west 

transects and subsequent hard- and soft-bottom stations samplings. With annual input from, and 

consultation with, the Florida Governor’s office and Florida scientists, the program was adjusted each 

year. Modifications included additions of sampling stations and movements of transect locations from 

year to year, until all of the suspected communities and areas of the shelf were sampled—all the way to 

the Florida Keys and even into some shallow State waters. 

The SWFL program was one of the first in the Gulf that combined descriptive as well as true processoriented studies. During the middle phases of this program, in situ experimental benthic arrays were 

deployed to understand some benthic processes: sequences of larval settlement and growth, “benthic 

storms,” animal behavior, and bottom hydrographic extremes. The study produced numerous scientific 

reports, large-format habitat atlases of communities and habitats, and multidisciplinary syntheses. 
10

A workshop on the west Florida shelf was convened in May 1992 (final workshop report, 1994) at the 

Florida Institute of Oceanography in St. Petersburg. At that meeting, the immensity of the work done 

historically in the SWFL, MAFLA, and other MMS projects in the area became evident to the 60+ 

attendees. 

3.1.6. Texas-Louisiana Shelf Ecosystems Program 

The Texas and Louisiana continental shelf is the most highly developed region in the world for 

offshore oil and gas drilling and production. It is also known for its abundant fisheries, productive coastal 

wetlands, and its offshore hard banks. Many studies supported by MMS and others have been conducted 

in this region. However, there had never been a synthesis of information for the whole northwest Gulf 

continental shelf. For the 1988 Offshore Texas and Louisiana Marine Ecosystems Data Synthesis, the 

study area described by Continental Shelf Associates extended over 1,000 km (621 mi) of coastline from 

the Mississippi River Delta, westward and southward to Corpus Christi Bay, Texas (the approximate 

center of the early STOCS Study, described above). The report reviewed the state of knowledge of the 

natural marine and atmospheric sciences, socioeconomics, and the effects of the oil and gas industry and 

other activities offshore. It also discussed information gaps and data needs and drew conceptual models. 

As one of the later large regional syntheses of data (this time in a non-“frontier” area), it had the 

advantage of working with early, large datasets from the 1970’s and 1980’s. 

3.2. DEEP-SEA ECOSYSTEMS STUDIES

Most deep-sea animals live under conditions of total darkness, low temperature, nearly featureless 

mud, and sparse food resources. They are generally small and fragile and the structure of benthic 

communities is generally well known, if not satisfactorily 

explained, ecologically. Many of the same sampling and statistical 

methods used in shallow water apply well in the deepsea 

environment. However, the costs for sea time and sample 

treatments are usually significantly higher. The character and 

rarity of many deep animals, the high species diversity, and the 

relative paucity of qualified systematists add to the difficulties. 

Another problem, not often discussed, is that relatively few marine 

biologists working on the well-lighted, high-productivity, high 

biomass, seasonally variable, and physically dynamic shelves and 

estuaries appreciate some aspects of the deep benthos and 

processes. Studies approaches are somewhat different (for example, because of high diversity, diminutive 

and fragile animals, temporal stability, trophic structure, and slowed processes). 

The accelerated interest by industry in the development of the deep water of the Gulf of Mexico has 

proven a challenge for the exploration of hydrocarbon reserves in an environmentally sound manner. 

This heightened interest in the deepwater area has largely been triggered by the passage of the Deepwater 

Royalty Relief Act in 1995 and the development of technologies that allow for cost-effective development 

beyond the continental shelf. With this accelerating interest, leasing in waters deeper than 400 m (1,300 

ft) has proceeded at an unprecedented rate, with exploration and production following closely behind. 

The challenge is raised to ensure that the environmental information base is adequate to address 

management issues needed in these new areas. This offshore trend has been paralleled by MMSsponsored research since the early 1980's with studies of the deep sea in general, and chemosynthetic 

communities in particular. However, if predictions of even larger reservoirs are proven true, then during 

the next decade the Gulf of Mexico will experience a profound change in the patterns of development. 

In recent years, the oil and gas industry has drilled tracts in depths greater than 3,000 m (9,700 ft), has 

drilled wells in depths almost 2,000 m (6,562 ft), and has produced from at least 10 sites from 1,150 to 

2,520 m (3,800 to 8,300 ft). 

In the late 1970’s, it was already apparent to BLM that the industry was expanding onto the 

uppermost continental slope. Rapidly improving deep drilling and exploration technologies and large 

reservoir discoveries justified the higher cost. 
11

3.2.1. Deep-Sea Information Synthesis 

By 1981, MMS had awarded a contract to Dr. Willis Pequegnat of TerEco, Inc. to review the 

available information on deep-sea communities of the Gulf of Mexico. Based primarily on accumulated 

trawl data and bottom photographs collected on the R/V Alaminos from the 1960’s through about 1980, 

this report was received in final form in 1983. However, systematic faunal data, except for the 

megafauna, was lacking for the Gulf of Mexico deep-sea communities. 

3.2.2. Northern Gulf of Mexico Continental Slope Study 

In 1983, MMS awarded the first systematic study of the deep northern Gulf of Mexico. Conducted by 

LGL Ecological Research Associates and TAMU, the Northern Continental Slope Study (NGOMCS) was 

a classical descriptive field study designed largely to test or confirm the depth zonation scheme suggested 

before by Pequegnat. The continental shelf studies (Section 3.1, above) were conducted as a series of 

efforts based on regional physiological and zoogeographic character. At that time the Gulf was believed 

to change monotonously with depth. Consequently, it was anticipated that one large descriptive study 

with stations placed on transects and consistent methods would work for the deepsea. The geochemical 

and physiographic complexity we now recognize was unknown in the 1970’s. Consisting ultimately of 

stations on a few shallow-to-deep and east-west transects, the study concentrated on benthic and 

benthopelagic sampling. Included were sediment characteristics; meio-, macro-, and megafauna; 

contaminants; and hydrography with the usual comparisons of the nonbiological variables and community 

structure. 

3.2.3. Chemosynthetic Community Studies and Community Conservation 

It was during the latter phases of the NGOMCS field program (late 1984) that TAMU researchers, 

conducting separate but concurrent research, recognized chemosynthetic species in dredge and trawl tows 

from an area known to have sediments containing oil, gas hydrates, and hydrogen sulfide. Carbon 

isotopic analyses confirmed that the tube worms and molluscs lived via a chemosynthetic strategy. This 

was, at the time, a remarkable finding to the investigators and MMS. In 1986, MMS provided limited 

funding to the NGOMCS program for initial surveys using the Johnson-Sea-Link I research submersible. 

Six successful dives were made on two stations in the Green Canyon area (Blocks 184/185 and 233/234). 

These observations revealed the magnitude of the communities; 

their faunal composition; spatial variability; and relationships 

among the fauna, bacterial mats, seeps, and unusual geological 

formations. 

The MMS recognized the potential importance of these 

communities and their implication in the management of the 

petroleum industry. Early findings, accumulating at a rapid rate as 

more sites were visited, demonstrated high inter- and intra-site 

variability in community density and composition. The MMS 

concluded that protective measures and additional high-resolution 

information were needed. 

The MMS soon held discussions with the Offshore Operators Committee (OOC), a group 

representing companies conducting petroleum operations in the Gulf of Mexico. In cooperation with 

MMS, the OOC was instrumental in collecting and releasing geophysical information, and they 

commissioned TAMU to conduct a trawling study at 33 carefully selected sites. Chemosynthetic animals 

were found in 28 of 39 (72%) of the samples. These findings significantly expanded the known 1986 

distribution of these communities (or at least animals) across the northern Gulf. 

The MMS has at its disposal measures for the protection of valued resources. Among these measures 

are prelease stipulations and Notices to Lessees and Operators (NTL's). Stipulations are sale-specific 

protective measures that may or may not be adopted at each lease sale by the Secretary of the Interior. In 

contrast, because of its administrative nature, an NTL is exercised on all applicable leases (i.e., it is not 

lease-specific) and it is not an optional protective measure used at the discretion of the Secretary. 
12

In 1988 MMS issued NTL 88-11 (now refined as NTL 2000-G20), which became effective on 

February 1, 1989. It required ". . . avoidance or protection of chemosynthetic communities and avoidance 

of shallow hazards . . . ." It further required that, in depths greater than 400 m (1,300 ft), operators supply 

geophysical data to MMS to determine the possibility of the local existence of chemosynthetic 

communities. Prior to approvals of applications for permit to drill and pipeline applications, operators 

must delineate all seafloor areas to be disturbed, as well as all available geophysical and topographic 

features that might support chemosynthetic communities. If MMS review suggests that chemosynthetic 

communities could be harmed, the operator must (1) modify the application to relocate the operation, (2) 

modify the application to provide additional photographic or videotape information to determine the 

presence or absence of well developed communities, or (3) otherwise ensure that the operation does not 

impact a community (i.e., the precision placement of anchors). There have been no regulatory actions by 

agencies other than MMS to protect chemosynthetic communities. 

Following the early observations and imposition of protective measures, MMS funded the first 

Chemosynthetic Ecosystem Study (CHEMO I) in 1990. This was a two-field-year study concentrating on 

community descriptions and other determinations to address the most immediate management needs, 

which included the status of knowledge for the Gulf and literature review; the degree of community 

similarity to other areas; the distribution and degree of development from place to place; whether the 

communities are "permanent" or “ephemeral” and fragile (sensitive) or robust; and the extent to which 

communities can be harmed by or protected from OCS oil and gas activities. 

The contract required an information synthesis (completed as a separate report in 1992), conceptual 

modeling, quantitative composition of chemosynthetic communities, and spatial relationships among 

animals. Investigators used manned submersibles to allow for precision navigation, photography, 

sampling, and personal observation. They made the first quantitative studies of physical-chemical factors 

controlling the distribution, abundance, and growth of chemosynthetic communities. They also 

investigated associated heterotrophic fauna; some geochemical, biochemical, and physiological activity; 

and the reliability of methods for detecting communities. 

The 1995 Change and Stability in Gulf of Mexico Chemosynthetic Communities (CHEMO II) was 

designed to expand on the CHEMO I database. The MMS recognized that there were still few data on the 

ecological interactions in these communities, the temporal 

stability and change within the communities, and the 

physicochemical habitat that supports them. CHEMO II 

addressed both abiotic habitat and biotic questions to 

understand the conditions necessary for community 

establishment and maintenance. 

In addition to furthering the general objectives of 

CHEMO I, CHEMO II investigated the sources (e.g., deep vs. 

shallow or petrogenic vs. biogenic) of any necessary dissolved 

gases and the likelihood that petroleum production may 

ultimately deprive the animals of an energy source; the age, 

growth rate, turnover rates, reproduction and recruitment; the 

patterns of senescence and death in the dominant animals; and the recovery rates of communities 

damaged by physical disturbance. New experimental approaches and new instruments were deployed by 

submersibles, and more precision measurements were taken. All of these objectives were met, some 

beyond expectations. 

3.2.4. Northern Gulf of Mexico Continental Slope Habitats and Benthic Ecology 

In 1988, when the NGOMCS final report was received, MMS was already aware that the classical 

picture of the continental slope was changing. Many newer scientific findings had been made on the 

slope, among the most important being the discoveries of productive chemosynthetic communities in 

1984 and the collection of far better information on geological structural complexity and related 

The iceworm (Hesiocaeca methanicola)
13

biogeochemical processes. It was now generally conceded that the information available on the vast 

northern Gulf continental slope was inadequate in light of these findings. 

In addition, technological and engineering advances and economic factors had fueled the rapid 

expansion of the oil and gas industry into slope waters. As a result of the passage of the Deep Water 

Royalty Relief Act, the expansion of leasing activities on the continental slope had risen dramatically 

since 1995, especially in water depths greater than 800 m (2,600 ft). Furthermore, the discoveries of vast 

gas hydrate reserves on the slope suggested increasing industry interest. 

In April 1997, an MMS-supported Workshop on Environmental Issues Surrounding Deepwater Oil 

and Gas Development was convened in New Orleans to identify oceanographic and sociological data 

gaps, and to recommend new investigations to fill them. The discussion group on deep-sea ecology 

focused on the state of knowledge of benthic communities, their composition and complexity, associated 

biogeochemical processes, habitat heterogeneity, and trophic considerations. 

A study initiated in FY 1999, Deepwater Program: Northern Gulf of Mexico Continental Slope 

Habitats and Benthic Ecology (Deep Gulf of Mexico Benthos or DGoMB), was developed with the 

guidance of the workshop recommendations. This study has many of the same objectives as the 

NGOMCS study, but there are significant differences in approach. The DGoMB study began with a 

series of models and testable hypotheses. The sampling scheme is designed to detect known changes in 

depth, topography, current features, etc. It is built on the NGOMCS study and all other available 

information, including the presence of seeps. In addition to the main benthic and hydrographic 

descriptions, it has a significant process-oriented component (e.g., respirometry and sulfate reduction) 

designed to supplement and explain the quantitative faunal data. As DGoMB developed, there were other 

fortuitous additions, notably an extension of the sampling and experiments into Mexican waters, and the 

deployment of the DSV Alvin to make pertinent observations. 

3.2.5. Other Deep-Sea Efforts 

Additional (nonfield) MMS-sponsored studies discussed in the 1997 workshop included (1) a review 

of management usage of deep-sea information and (2) a Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Information 

Resources Data Search and Literature Synthesis. These projects were conducted by the cooperative 

Louisiana State University/Coastal Marine Institute (CMI) program (Dr. R. Carney) and Continental 

Shelf Associates, Inc. (CSA), respectively. In 2001, CSA completed a large report, Deepwater Gulf of 

Mexico Environmental and Socioeconomic Data Search and Synthesis. Of the 11 topical chapters, 5 were 

devoted to various aspects of biology, including water column, benthos (seep and nonseep), protected 

species, and fishes and fisheries. The CMI report, Management Applicability of Contemporary Deep-Sea 

Ecology and Reevaluation of Gulf of Mexico Studies, reviewed selected historic research efforts by 

Federal agencies and the works by Pequegnat and LGL (NGOMCS) in the Gulf. 
15

4. COASTAL STUDIES 

BLM and MMS coastal studies have produced a diverse series of reports and maps that describe the 

important characteristics, assets, and resources of specific segments of the coast around the Gulf of 

Mexico from south Florida to south Texas. Mapped topics varied from area to area reflecting regional 

environmental differences, for example, the presence of distinctive landforms and shallow ecosystems, 

estuaries, seagrass beds, mangrove forests, coral reefs, and marshes. In addition to the reviews of 

ecological and biological resources, many of these studies included topics such as socioeconomic 

features; oil and gas infrastructure; climatology; minerals, soils, and geological character; and coastal 

processes. But the studies listed below review only those of a biological nature, region by region. These 

study series have also been referred to as the Coastal Characterizations. 

There have been several major reasons for the development of coastal environmental data. Initially, 

knowledge of the distribution of environmental resources is the first step in managing and protecting 

them. The shallow-water communities and coastal lowlands are the resources most vulnerable to oil spills 

and other contaminants and physical disturbance (e.g., the digging of canals and pipeline corridors). They 

are also very productive in terms of natural carbon flow as well as the Nation’s fisheries (especially in the 

northern Gulf of Mexico). Ultimately, the shallow water and continental shelf production of biomass and 

detrital carbon feeds even the deep-sea fauna. The coastal areas also provide critical habitat for several 

protected species including bald eagles, osprey, bottlenose dolphins, manatees, and beach mice. Finally, 

coastal areas are local centers of human populations and recreational resources. MMS coastal studies 

were not begun until the late 1970’s, just a few years after the early baseline marine ecosystem studies 

(Section 3). Many have been conducted by, for, or in consultation with MMS’s sister DOI agency, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and many resulted in publications with FWS report numbers. The 

hundreds of maps produced under the relevant MOU’s and contracts are standardized at a detailed scale 

of 1:100,000. Several of these reports are also mentioned in the ecosystems studies (Section 3). 

4.1. GENERAL COASTAL STUDIES – CENTRAL GULF MARSHES

Of the most productive natural ecosystems, the coastal marshes are high on the list of coastal studies. 

They have been highly researched worldwide and are among the best understood in terms of their 

biological processes and composition value to humans. In its realization of the oil and gas industry’s 

partial implication in the loss of wetland habitat, MMS set out to determine the extent of the problem and 

possible remedies. A final report, Causes of Wetland Loss in the Central Gulf of Mexico, became 

available in 1988. In contrast to the four largely descriptive regional programs that follow below, these 

studies were more ecosystem-specific and related to specific, known operational effects. 

4.2. TEXAS COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS PROGRAM

In the Texas coastal studies, FWS focused appropriately on the Texas sandy barrier islands, estuarine 

lagoons, and marsh systems. From south to north, the seaward coastline changes from a medium-to-highenergy environment to a marshy region north and east of 

Galveston. The dynamic southern Laguna Madre environment 

is governed largely by a relative lack of freshwater input and 

high evaporation rates. The 1981 final report, Texas Barrier 

Island Regional Ecological Characterization: Environmental 

Synthesis Papers, was followed (1983) by the 3-volume, 48-

map atlas of the same title. Volume II contains the biological 

resources narrative. In 1989, the program ended with the 

Texas Barrier Island Regional Characterization, which went 

beyond the previous characterization by (1) updating and 

improving upon the previous work and (2) including a large 

volume of conceptual ecosystem models. The Texas reports 

covered the entire coast from Mexico to Louisiana. Source: Galveston County, Office of Emergency Mgmt. 
16

4.3. LOUISIANA COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS PROGRAM

The Louisiana coast is predominantly a low-energy coastline with extensive coastal marshes and 

riverine input. This notably increases rates of production for the wide continental shelf, but it can also 

produce seasonal hypoxia and nutrient excesses. The Mississippi Deltaic Plain Region Ecological 

Characterization: A Habitat Mapping Study was completed by FWS in 1980 with a companion 

socioeconomic report. In 1981, FWS published a review of the environmental literature, and by 1983, 

FWS and others had published the final report series: a narrative report with management 

recommendations, a volume of ecological models, and a 72-map ecological atlas. 

4.4. NORTHEASTERN AND EASTERN GULF OF MEXICO COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS 

PROGRAMS

The eastern Gulf of Mexico (essentially the entire coastline east of the Mississippi River) has a wide 

variety of shallow ecosystems not seen elsewhere in the Gulf, or seen here in greater abundance or 

density. Some of these ecosystems, notably the oyster reefs, seagrasses, and mangroves, are not only 

highly vulnerable to oil spills, they are believed to be very 

sensitive if exposed. From the barrier islands, coastal 

marshes, and shallow bays in Alabama, Mississippi, and 

northwest Florida, to the wide carbonate platform, mangroves, 

Everglades, coral reefs, and tropical flora in south Florida, the 

eastern Gulf is generally more diverse ecologically than the 

western Gulf, and MMS coastal studies program reflects this. 

Continuing eastward into Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida, 

FWS and MMS focused on certain valuable environmental 

resources and communities in addition to the general 

multidisciplinary characterizations described elsewhere. No 

fewer than 23 coastal ecosystems studies have been published 

under MMS support for the eastern Gulf. These include regional characterizations, community-specific 

descriptive profiles, inventories, and ecological characterizations as follows: 

 Alabama Coastal Region Ecological Characterization (1983); 

 Ecological Characterization Atlas of Coastal Alabama (1984); 

 Northwestern Florida Ecological Characterization: An Ecological Atlas (1984): 1 

volume, 90 map sheets; 

 Southwest Florida Ecological Characterization Atlas (1984), 100 map sheets at 

1:100,000; 

 Synthesis of Available Biological, Geological, Socioeconomic, and Cultural 

Resource Information for the South Florida Area (1990); 

 An Ecological Characterization of the Lower Everglades Florida Bay and Florida 

Keys (1982); 

 An Ecological Characterization of the Caloosahatchee/Big Cypress Watershed 

(1984); 

 An Ecological Characterization of the Florida Panhandle (1988); 

 An Ecological Characterization of the Tampa Bay Watershed (1990); and 

 An Ecological Characterization of the Florida Springs Coast (1990). 

The FWS published coastal Seagrass Inventories for northwest Florida (1981), Louisiana and 

Mississippi (1982), western peninsular Florida (1984), and south Florida (1982). In the southernmost 

areas, the corals were added to the inventories in the Florida Keys Seagrass and Coral Reef Inventory

(1983). 

Two reports discussed the many protected species harbored in southwest Florida ecosystems and 

possible effects of OCS activity: Rare, Threatened and Endangered Vertebrates of Southwest Florida 

and Potential OCS Activity Impacts (1983), and Rare, Threatened and Endangered Plant Species of 

Southwest Florida and Potential OCS Activity Impacts (1981). 
17

A notable series of seven “community profiles” was published during the 1980’s and 1990’s, 

describing the ecology of selected ecotypes in the northern and eastern Gulf of Mexico and western 

peninsular Florida: 

 The Ecology of the Mangroves of South Florida: A Community Profile (1982); 

 The Ecology of the Seagrasses of South Florida: A Community Profile (1982); 

 The Ecology of the South Florida Coral Reefs: A Community Profile (1984), 10 

color map sheets at 1:30,000; 

 Ecology of Flooded Salt Marshes of the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico: A Community 

Profile (1984); 

 The Ecology of the Seagrass Meadows of the West Coast of Florida: A Community 

Profile (1989); 

 The Ecology of Oyster Reefs of the Northern Gulf of Mexico: A Community Profile 

(1989); and 

 The Ecology of the Live Bottom Habitats of the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico: A 

Community Profile (1999). 

The Northeastern Gulf of Mexico Coastal Characterization and Data Information Management 

System (1999) is an update of older works above for all counties and parishes from Apalachicola west to 

the Chandeleur Islands. Data sets are categorized into two types: seagrass habitat maps and natural 

resource/socioeconomic features. 
19

5. LIVING MARINE RESOURCES 

While the “Marine Ecosystems” studies attempt to gather relevant information necessary to describe 

the natural complex structure and components of identifiable (usually benthic) ecotypes, the “Living 

Marine Resources” studies focus on the distribution, abundance, and biology of conspicuous forms 

protected under law, or having commercial, recreational, or “charismatic” value. “Living Marine 

Resources” studies may seek to estimate potential effects of anthropogenic activities or events, thus 

overlapping with certain “Effects” studies. 

5.1. PROTECTED SPECIES

In response to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) of 1972, the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA) of 1973, and numerous biological consultations required under Section 7 of the ESA, the ESP has 

funded a series of studies to obtain information on protected species possibly affected by OCS oil and gas 

operations. These studies have emphasized use of fixed-wing aircraft and ships to estimate distribution, 

relative abundance, and behavior of cetaceans. 

Questions have arisen on the effects of the oilfield structures, noise, explosive detonations for the 

severing of platform elements for removal, pollution, lighting, seismic exploration, effluents as attractants 

or repellents, and the overall physical effects of industry (e.g., boat traffic, midwater structures, and 

pipelines) on daily cetacean movements and behavior. The need to evaluate potential impacts of offshore 

oil and gas activities on protected species has resulted in an aggressive MMS marine mammal and turtle 

research program in the Gulf of Mexico. 

The MMS studies have complemented years of shallow water dolphin studies completed by NMFS 

around the Gulf perimeter. Only two delphinids, the bottlenose and the Atlantic spotted dolphins, are 

found routinely on the shelf (< 200 m). Most of MMS concerns result from the development of 

deepwater tracts. The considerations here were (1) the rapid expansion of the oil and gas industry onto 

the slope, (2) development of new deepwater structures and technologies, and (3) the deepwater 

distribution of most of the Gulf species. Some of the deepwater species (e.g., beaked whales and Kogia

spp.) are quite rare, evasive, and difficult to identify and count. In addition, the topography, geology, 

current structure, and even the chemistry of the continental slope are proving to be very complex, and 

little is known about how deepwater forms react to these features. 

Numerous Gulf of Mexico species are protected under the ESA, MMPA, or both. While there are 

several species of birds protected under the ESA (e.g., the bald eagle), MMS has not undertaken any 

specific field studies on them, relying instead on FWS data, for example. 

The West Indian manatee of the Caribbean and western 

Florida is the manatee subspecies of great interest in the region. It 

grazes in the shallow Gulf, but spends great amounts of time in 

Florida estuaries and rivers. Rarely, stragglers swim into the 

coastal northern Gulf waters. 

There are at least 27 species of cetaceans (whales and 

dolphins) representing five families that might be expected in the 

Gulf at some time or another; however, there are only about 20 

species that might be expected regularly (there are no porpoises or river dolphins in the Gulf). All Gulf 

species are protected under the MMPA and six are protected under the ESA*: 

Odontocetes (toothed whales)

Physeteridae Sperm whale*, and dwarf and pygmy sperm whales 

Delphinidae Dolphins, at least 14 species, very rare to common 

Ziphiidae Blainville’s, Gervais’, Sowerby’s, and Cuvier’s beaked whales 
20

Mysticetes (baleen whales)

Balaenidae North Atlantic right whale* 

Balaenopteridae Minke, sei, Bryde’s*, blue*, fin*, and humpback* whales 

Sea turtles include the loggerhead, green, hawksbill, 

Kemp’s ridley, and leatherback. Of these, the Kemp’s ridley is 

the most endangered, and the loggerhead is the most common. 

All species are listed under the ESA. 

The MMS has funded literature reviews and syntheses; 

field studies on cetaceans, manatees, and sea turtles; and three 

workshops directed at cetaceans and sea turtles in 1982, 1990, 

and 1999. The MMS studies have greatly expanded our 

knowledge of the distributions, abundances, natural histories, 

and behaviors of many of the more common cetaceans and, to 

a lesser degree, turtles. 

Prior to 1977, there were no large-scale efforts to survey Gulf of Mexico marine mammals – the 

sparse information available was a mix of opportunistic sightings, whaling records, and stranding reports. 

An early synthesis report by David Schmidley (1978) provided MMS with basic information on most of 

the known cetaceans zoogeographically expected to occur in the Gulf. 

The first dedicated field studies were conducted by FWS with fixed-wing, aircraft overflights. 

Beginning with a small pilot study (published in 1981) and then a larger followup research effort 

(published in 1984), the research focused simplistically on relating sightings to geographic location, 

depth, and distance from shore in three polygons around the Gulf. While most of the cetacean 

identifications are believed to be of good quality, reviewers have expressed less confidence in the bird 

and turtle identifications. 

Another early FWS study on manatees off western peninsular Florida was published in 1981. A 1982 

Proceedings of a Workshop on Cetaceans and Sea Turtles in the Gulf of Mexico: Study Planning for 

Effects of Outer Continental Shelf Development gave MMS guidance for a continuing protected species 

program. 

Two regional reviews discussed the many protected species harbored in southwest Florida ecosystems 

and possible effects of OCS activity: Rare Threatened and Endangered Vertebrates of Southwest Florida 

and Potential OCS Activity Impacts (1983), and the Rare, Threatened and Endangered Plant Species of 

Southwest Florida and Potential OCS Activity Impacts (1981). 

Following the results of these early field and review programs, continuing in Section 7 consultations, 

and the 1982 workshop recommendations, MMS contracted with NMFS in Pascagoula to conduct modest 

preliminary field studies (aerial and shipboard). These were aimed at (1) associations of sea turtles and 

petroleum platforms (published in 1990), (2) the distribution of cetaceans and sea turtles on the slope 

(published in 1991), and (3) the behavior and distribution of sea turtles in relation to the distribution of 

platforms. This tagging and tracking program was cancelled because of technical difficulties. However, 

under a contract modification, the program produced the much-needed workup of extensive Mexican data 

on Kemp’s ridley turtles: Synopsis of Data on the Kemp’s Ridley Turtle, Lepidocheles kempi. This was 

one of the top recommendations of the 1982 workshop. 

In 1991, MMS initiated a major field study, Distribution and Abundance of Marine Mammals in the 

North-Central and Western Gulf of Mexico (GulfCet I). Funding limitations and the imposition of 

drilling moratoria in the eastern Gulf restricted aerial aspects of this study to the Central and Western 

Gulf of Mexico Planning Areas in water depths from 200 m to at least 2,000 m. The GulfCet I study 

(1991-1995) was the most intense field effort to date. It was conducted jointly under a contract with 

TAMU, (Galveston) and an MOU with NMFS. This work elucidated distribution and relative abundance 

of the more common cetaceans and their habitat preferences. Observations included seasonal aerial and 
21

shipboard line transects and concurrent passive acoustic surveys. An added task supported attempts to tag 

and track the endangered sperm whale. While the tagging effort was unsuccessful, there were some 

preliminary observations on distribution and possible effects of a seismic ship on movements. 

Observations were analyzed through proven line-transect statistics. The addition of hydrographic surveys 

on TAMU ship surveys and AVHRR satellite data (sea-surface temperature) gave the investigators at 

least a preliminary look at Loop Current eddies, and chlorophyll a measurements gave estimates of 

primary productivity. Aerial observational efforts included the estimates of sea turtle numbers and 

recorded the presence of manmade trash and pollution. The multifaceted effort was a significant 

improvement over FWS work conducted a decade earlier. However, because of the limitations in 

available airtime, the sparse populations of a majority of the known species, and limitations in the 

statistical operations, excellent estimates of population numbers existed for only the most common and 

ubiquitous species. 

Following GulfCet I, a new project, Cetaceans, Sea Turtles, and Seabirds in the Northern Gulf of 

Mexico: Distribution Abundance, and Habitat Associations (GulfCet II), was conducted by the same 

organizations and investigators. There were renewed industry interests in the western parts of the Eastern 

Gulf of Mexico Planning Area so the effort in the western Gulf was reduced in favor of getting 

concentrated data off Pensacola and Mobile well into shallow waters, and as far east as Cape San Blas, 

Florida. Shipboard and aerial overflights and acoustic surveys were continued. In GulfCet I, the primary 

production measurements offered no insight into cetacean distribution, and it was surmised that the higher 

trophic levels might be more indicative of whale foraging areas. Consequently, midwater trawls were 

towed on “focused” cruises in the eastern Gulf and the hydrographic effort was modified materially in 

GulfCet II. Satellite sea-surface temperature and dynamic height measurements, nutrient determinations, 

expendable bathythermographs, and acoustic Doppler current profiler measurements were made 

specifically to define preferred cetacean habitat. Associations were observed between sperm whale 

distributions and eddies, upwelling, nutrients, and paralarval cephalopod abundance. 

It had been increasingly obvious that a substantial sperm 

whale population existed in the Gulf, with total modern 

population estimates ranging from 300 to 500 animals. During 

a 1989 workshop, the “Sea Turtles and Marine Mammals of 

the Gulf of Mexico,” a panel of experts identified the 

endangered sperm whale as a species of particular concern for 

proposed deepwater development in Gulf of Mexico waters. 

The continuing need for sperm whale data brought together a 

multi-institutional study known as the Sperm Whale and 

Acoustic Monitoring Program (SWAMP). This multifaceted, 

joint Federal agency research program was begun in 2000. It 

was designed to study the resident population of sperm whales 

and the underwater acoustic environment. The population 

structure, biology, population genetics, diving and social behaviors, vocalizations, and movements are 

being studied using short- and long-term tags, satellites, and various acoustic receivers to determine 

natural behavior of the animals and the possible effects of geophysical seismic devices and other emitters. 

A concurrent shipboard survey continues in conjunction with NMFS ichthyoplankton surveys. 

Difficulties with the Interagency Agreement with NMFS resulted in a new Cooperative Agreement with 

TAMU in 2002. The new Sperm Whale Seismic Study (SWSS) is researching the same parameters as 

SWAMP but includes the use of a seismic survey ship, provided by industry, to study directly the effects 

of sound from seismic boats. 

One other study directed toward protected species was an extensive literature review of the Effects of 

Noise on Marine Mammals (1991), which was rewritten as an authoritative hardbound volume, Marine 

Mammals and Noise (Academic Press, 1995). 

5.2. FISHES AND FISHERIES

Generally, fisheries studies have been the purview of NMFS, and two research laboratories exist 

along the Gulf at Pascagoula, Mississippi, and Galveston, Texas. However, when MMS and NMFS 
22

interests interconnect (especially on issues pertaining to protected species and fish stocks), cooperative 

agreements can ensue. General descriptions of Gulf fish populations can be found in the topographic 

features studies. A wealth of information is found in the fishery management plans of the Gulf of Mexico 

Fisheries Management Council. 

The BLM and MMS have supported a number of widely dissimilar studies that had fish and fishery 

components, including the early STOCS and MAFLA benchmark programs (Section 3.1). Many of the 

1975-1979 reports, and specific volumes therein, were devoted to demersal fishes, fish eggs, 

ichthyoplankton, histopathology, and contaminant body burdens. Only one project, Ichthyoplankton 

Abundance and Diversity in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, was devoted solely to ichthyoplankton. Many of 

the fish studies were conducted by NMFS, but substantial input came from universities. Virtually all of 

the large “Marine Ecosystems” projects had trawling 

components, and the several profiles of the ecology of 

petroleum platforms and natural ecosystems contained 

information on fishes in selected ecosystems (e.g., seagrasses 

and mangroves). 

A 1983 report, Northwestern Gulf Shelf Bio-Atlas, was a 

study of the distribution of demersal fishes (62 families of 

cartilagenous and bony fishes) and penaeid shrimps 

(12 species). The report is unique in its combination of 

explanatory text (species-by-species) along with detailed 

mappings of the calculated seasonal catches and densities for 

all species where data were adequate. Stations were restricted to soft-bottom habitats. Limited mappings 

of seasonal surface and bottom temperatures and salinities were also provided. Species were classified 

into different ecological groupings (e.g., nektonic, demersal, estuarine-dependent, and cryptic), and the 

maps showed seasonal shifts in densities, regional dominance, depth patterns, etc. The large-format 

report displays the area from south Texas to the Mississippi River. 

A recent study, Estimation of Fisheries Impacts Due to Underwater Explosions Used to Sever and 

Salvage Petroleum Platforms (2000), was a field fish-mortality study conducted by NMFS at nine 

platform removal sites from 1993 to 1999. It determined the species composition and abundance of fish 

communities at platforms and made calculations of the adverse effects of cumulative detonations to fish 

stock productivity, especially for the commercial red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus). A much earlier 

effort, Study of the Effects of Oil and Gas Activities on Reef Fish Populations in the Gulf of Mexico

(1982), was one of the first studies to enumerate fish outside of the several ecosystems studies. 

Occasional fishes and fisheries data (e.g., local fisheries values or catch statistics) were found in many of 

the socioeconomics studies. 

5.3. BIRDS 

The MMS Gulf of Mexico Region has supported few stand-alone studies on bird populations, but two 

surveys conducted by TAMU at Galveston (Section 5.1) included seasonal surveys using the primary 

surface ship as an opportunistic platform for bird observations in addition to the dedicated studies of 

cetaceans. These studies were the Distribution and Abundance of Marine Mammals in the Northwestern 

Gulf of Mexico (GulfCet I, 1996) and Cetaceans, Sea Turtles, and Seabirds in the Northern Gulf of 

Mexico: Distribution, Abundance, and Habitat Associations (GulfCet II, 2000). As indicated above, 

GulfCet II placed considerable emphasis on the definition of animals’ preferred habitats and demonstrated 

geographic and seasonal distributions of birds reflecting seasonal migration patterns, oceanographic 

features, and surface productivity. While there were earlier attempts with the 1980’s FWS cetacean 

surveys conducted for MMS, it has been debated whether the opportunistic aerial bird sightings could 

have been made with acceptable taxonomic accuracy at the adopted altitude and speed. An “Effects” 

study (Section 6.1) was titled Seasonal Abundance and Habitat-Use Patterns of Coastal Bird Populations 

on Padre and Mustang Island Barrier Beaches. This was a distribution and abundance study completed 

in 1984 following Mexico’s Ixtoc I oil spill. 
23

A nearly complete project conducted through the Gulf of Mexico CMI, Interactions Between 

Migrating Birds and Offshore Oil and Gas Structures, at present is using in-place radar and visual 

observations aboard platforms to assess the abundance of migrating neotropical birds. 
25

6. EFFECTS OF OIL AND GAS ACTIVITIES 

The “effects” studies are perhaps the most diverse grouping of studies in terms of issues, methods, 

and purposes. These studies typically stem from specific issues (often quite unrelated) that are brought to 

MMS’s attention in consultations, meetings, workshops, or through the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) process. If a given study concerns the “effects of X on Y,” the terms X and Y can be almost 

anything reasonably related. It is important here that X is an anthropogenic factor or event and Y is some 

measure of an ecological feature, natural resource, or process; the study may also involve modeling or 

monitoring of effects. This approach is different from the several ecosystems modeling programs in 

which natural processes and variations are monitored over time to estimate trends and variability (Section 

3). While some “effects” studies were begun in the early 1980’s, they tended to increase in quality and 

number in the late 1980’s and 1990’s. This phenomenon parallels the general trend throughout the 

history of the ESP, which was to begin with massive descriptive field ecosystems programs and 

information reviews followed by smaller studies focusing on specific operations, ecological questions, 

and living resources. 

Note that there are a number of purely physicochemical studies under the general banner of “fates and 

effects studies.” These seek to determine the range of distribution and movements of oils, drilling muds, 

produced waters, industrial chemicals, trace metals, and natural radioactivity. However, they do not 

directly relate the fates to the biota, and they are intentionally omitted in these biological reviews. 

Several opportunistic investigations have been the result of accidental oil spills on the environment or 

the collection of unidentified harmful materials. These opportunities have been very uncommon because 

of the excellent Gulf of Mexico operations safety record. The two spills thoroughly researched happened 

in Mexico and Panama. A number of questions have arisen about the physicochemical effects (physical 

presence, or the issuing of toxic products from platforms). Some investigations have been devoted to 

arguably positive effects, such as reef-building and fish attractant effects. Some of the efforts have relied 

on field data/sampling efforts, while others are inherently information reviews or data syntheses, and still 

others are laboratory experiments. “Effects” studies are perhaps the most problematic group of studies 

done by MMS (or anyone else for that matter). The accuracy of the results and the effectiveness of their 

application will vary with the perceived problem. But no results are “good” unless they are based on 

accurate assumptions, impeccable testing and statistical methods, elimination of complicating or 

confusing factors, and with acceptable biological “noise.” 

The “effects” investigations fall, more or less logically, under several different themes (a few which 

could also easily be lumped under other categories), such as those discussed below. 

6.1. EFFECTS ON BIOTA

These studies attempt to measure the effect(s) of platform presence or exposure to contaminants on 

selected species or living resources. Some examples are discussed below: 

• Effects of Petroleum on the Survival of Marine Turtle Embryos (1982). This 

experiment by FWS involved an actual exposure of eggs to crude oil with adverse 

effects. The results of this program have been questioned on methodological and 

statistical grounds. Further, spills rarely impinge far enough above the high tide 

mark to affect viable eggs. If that happened, the salt water alone would decimate the 

egg clutch. 

• Results from Chemical Analysis of Oily Residue Samples Taken from Stranded 

Juvenile Sea Turtles Collected from Padre and Mustang Islands, Texas (1983). This 

set of opportunistic hydrocarbon “fingerprint” analyses of weathered oils ingested by 

unhealthy turtle hatchlings suggested a tanker discharge. 

• The Investigation on the Source of Beached Tar Samples (1982). This was another 

chemical study with toxicological implications. 
26

• Seasonal Abundance and Habitat-Use Patterns of Coastal Bird Populations on 

Padre and Mustang Island Barrier Beaches (1984). This was a distribution and 

abundance study following Mexico’s Ixtoc I oil spill. 

• Study of the Effects of Oil on Marine Turtles (1986). This was a laboratory study of 

physiological and biochemical effects. 

• Association of Sea Turtles with Petroleum Platforms in the North-Central Gulf of

Mexico (1990). Aerial overflight studies of sea turtle distributions were compared 

with platform locations. 

• Potential Impacts of OCS Oil and Gas Activities on Fisheries (1991). This fivevolume information synthesis included various biological and operational topics, 

modes of exposure and toxicity of various discharges, and other potential operational 

effects. 

6.2. COASTAL EFFECTS

These are studies on the erosional, hydrologic, and toxic effects of infrastructure development 

nearshore and in coastal habitats. The study titles that follow were all approaches to the measurement (or 

estimation) of various ecological or physical effects on coastal habitats or biota onshore or near to shore. 

Causes of Wetland Loss in the Coastal Central Gulf of Mexico (1988) and Pipelines, Navigation 

Channels, and Facilities in Sensitive Coastal Habitats: An Analysis of OCS Impacts (1990) were 

investigations of the effects of navigational canals, pipeline throughways, and other marsh engineering on 

wetlands loss compared with subsidence, loss of sediments, and other causes. 

Residual “produced” brines that are trapped in oil- and gas-bearing formations are brought up to the 

surface, separated from the petroleum, and typically discharged into the environment, sometimes on the 

order of thousands of barrels per day. At least three studies of produced water have been funded: 

Produced Waters in Sensitive Coastal Habitats: An Analysis of Impacts, Central Gulf of Mexico (1989); 

Fates and Effects of Nearshore Discharges of OCS Produced Waters (1991); and Bioavailability and 

Genotoxicity of Produced Water Discharges Associated with Offshore Production Operations (1995). A 

later CMI study, Long-term Effects of Contaminants from OCS Produced-water Discharges at Pelican 

Island Facility, Louisiana (1998), compared levels of contamination and macrofaunal community 

changes in a canal adjacent to the subject facility, two and nine years after abandonment, to document a 

return near to normal. 

Effects of Oil Spills of Coastal Wetlands and Their Recovery (1993) was an opportunistic study of the 

effects and recovery of a brackish Louisiana marsh following a 300-bbl spill from a broken pipeline in 

1985, with emphasis on recovery in a multiyear program. Permanent study plots were reexamined over 

four years for plant recovery, photosynthesis, species composition, and residual oil, and were compared 

with nearby non-oiled areas. Landloss was measured with geographical information system techniques. 

The Experimental Investigation of the Effects of Aromatic Hydrocarbons on a Sediment Food Web

(1995) focused on the meiofaunal (nematode/copepod) component of the benthos and its important 

trophic links between the microbiota (food) and juvenile fishes (predators) taken from a Louisiana salt 

marsh. The laboratory microcosm experiments measured behavioral, abundance, biochemical, 

physiological, and reproductive indicators of effects following contamination with differing 

concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH’s). 

It was demonstrated that two- and three-ring PAH’s are degraded by sediment microorganisms 

adapted to chronic exposure. This was the finding in another laboratory microcosm experiment, 

Assessment of PAH Composition of Diesel Fuel Sorbed to Marine Sediments and Their Toxicity to 

Aquatic Food Webs (1998). The setting of the collected samples was a marsh, but not a “marine” one. 
27

6.3. MARINE EFFECTS

These are studies of various offshore (mainly continental shelf, as opposed to the coastal effects, 

above) ecological effects. While not strictly “marine effects” studies, two early general overview efforts 

documented the epifaunal and nektonic communities associated with shelf petroleum platforms. These 

were An Ecosystem Analysis of Oil and Gas Development of the Texas-Louisiana Continental Shelf 

(1981) and The Ecology of Petroleum Platforms in the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico (1982). In a way, 

these are “effects” studies that describe, largely in positive terms, the substrate and attractant effects of the 

physical structures. 

A recent study, Estimation of Fisheries Impacts Due to Underwater Explosions Used to Sever and 

Salvage Petroleum Platforms (2000), was a field fish-mortality study conducted at nine platform removal 

sites from 1993 to 1999. It determined the species composition and abundance of fish communities at 

platforms and made calculations of the adverse effects of cumulative detonations to fish stock 

productivity, especially for the commercial red snapper, Lutjanus campechanus (e.g., a mean of 515 

snappers/removal). A much earlier effort, Study of the Effects of Oil and Gas Activities on Reef Fish 

Populations in the Gulf of Mexico (1982), was one of the first studies to enumerate fish populations. 

6.4. RIG AND PLATFORM MONITORING PROGRAM

The following projects are evaluations of effects of offshore platforms during operations or remaining 

effects afterwards. 

The environmental studies South Texas OCS (STOCS) Rig 

Monitoring (1977), the Baseline Monitoring Studies, Mississippi, 

Alabama, Florida Outer Continental Shelf, 1975-1976 (1977), 

and Ecological Investigations of Petroleum Platforms in the 

Central Gulf of Mexico (1981) are reports of early effects 

monitoring around selected platforms in the respective regions. 

The first two were relatively minor efforts embedded into much 

larger regional programs. They depended largely on the 

measurement of habitat contamination, body burdens, and 

community descriptors. 

Impact Assessment of Exploratory Wells Offshore South 

Florida (1990) was an investigation of the physical and community effects decades after drilling and 

platform removals on the shallow west Florida shelf. The primary approach was photogrametric. 

The GOOMEX Program, or Gulf of Mexico Offshore Operations Monitoring Experiment, was a very 

successful, two field-year study of the sublethal effects of routine platform operations. The title of the 

final report (1995), Phase I: Sublethal Responses to Contaminant Exposure, is somewhat misleading, in 

that a “Phase II” was deemed unnecessary and never pursued. Some details of this program are worthy of 

mention. The program was truly multifaceted, and all facets were carefully selected and designed to 

detect sublethal responses to chronic, low-level exposures to various contaminants at three sites having 

histories of long-term oil and gas exploration and development. Approaches were two-fold: (1) to 

analyze benthic sediments in conventional radial patterns to determine the contaminant field, assessing 

the community structures of meio- and macrofauna and aspects of their life histories and genetic 

diversity; and (2) to provide for near-field (impacted) and far-field (unimpacted) pairwise comparisons of 

a wide variety of suspected indicators of exposure; e.g., histological, contaminant burdens, detoxification 

responses, and bioassays. An offshoot of the GOOMEX program was the study How Does Produced 

Water Cause a Reduction in the Genetic Diversity of Harpacticoid Copepods? Tests for tolerance to 

heavy metals and PAH’s detected some differences in tolerance among genotypes of a benthic copepod. 

The single deep-sea effects study to date was begun in the Gulf in 1999. Known as the Deepwater 

Program: Effects of Oil and Gas Exploration and Development at Selected Continental Slope Sites in the 

Gulf of Mexico, this study examines the fates and effects of deepwater discharges that may be much 

different from those on the continental shelf. New technological approaches to drilling and production 
28

may result in volumes and characteristics of discharged material quite different from those approaches 

used for decades in shallower water. A three-phased approach to understanding such issues involves 

modeling the fate of chemical discharges, establishing reliable indicators of impacts, and undertaking 

field studies. 

6.5. OIL-SPILL EFFECTS PROGRAM

These studies are efforts to assess ecological effects after exposure to spilled oil: 

• Ixtoc Oil Spill Assessment (1981) was a general study of the remaining biological and 

chemical effects of the 1979 Mexican oil spill on the Texas shelf. The results failed 

to clearly demonstrate benthic cause and effects on the Texas continental shelf. 

• Long-Term Assessment of the Oil Spill at Las Minas Panama (1993) was a large 

study of the biological and chemical effects of a tank farm spill in a Panama 

embayment. Mangroves, seagrasses, and coral reefs were special targets of the work, 

and the results were applied to the Gulf of Mexico with certain limitations. 

6.6. EFFECTS MODELING PROGRAM

Variously, these efforts involved the testing of animals in laboratory conditions, calculations of zones 

of contaminant effects, and measurements of lethal or sublethal biological effects. 

• A Numerical Mud Discharge Plume Model for Offshore Drilling Operations (1985) 

was not a biological study per se, but it did estimate the equivalent of the expected 

maximum range of biological effects. 

• Dispersed Oil Toxicity Tests with Species Indigenous to the Gulf of Mexico (1994) 

was a laboratory study using various concentrations of crude oil and dispersants. 
29

7. MISCELLANEOUS BIOLOGICAL STUDIES AND RELEVANT 

DOCUMENTS 

7.1. MISCELLANEOUS BIOLOGICAL STUDIES

The studies described here are those that do not fall conveniently under any of the above categories 

(e.g., “Marine Ecosystems” or “Living Marine Resources”). 

Historically, Environmental and Socioeconomic Baseline on the Gulf of Mexico Coastal Zone and 

Outer Continental Shelf (1975) was one of the very first attempts at organizing existing Gulfwide 

information into a synthesis. As the title suggests, this multihabitat, multidisciplinary, whole-Gulf data 

gathering effort was to be an initial source document for the Region. Now well-dated, the title suggests a 

“shotgun approach” with little early focus, but it was useful to the Government for early NEPA 

documents and future studies planning. 

A Review and Annotated Bibliography of Benthic Studies in the Coastal Areas of Florida, with a 

Selected Compilation of Worldwide Benthic Methodological References and Southeastern U.S. Benthic 

Taxonomic References was received in 1984. This report was a mid-program review of the subject, 

concurrent with, but separate from, the Southwest Florida Ecosystems Program, a field effort. This 

procurement revealed the perceived importance for MMS study programs to focus on the benthic 

environment as opposed to midwater processes and biota that are more difficult to accomplish logistically 

and are of lesser management use. 

Some surface productivity synthesis (as opposed to field) studies were pursued and completed in 1990 

and 1991: A Comparison of Marine Productivity Among Outer Continental Shelf Planning Areas (1990) 

and A Comparison of Marine Productivity Among Outer Continental Shelf Planning Areas; Feasibility 

Analysis of Secondary Measures (1991). These synthesized and compared plankton productivity values 

for the Gulf of Mexico and all other planning areas. 

Assessment of Hurricane Damage in the Florida Big Bend Seagrass Beds (1987) was an opportunistic 

study to determine the extent of damage that had been inflicted by a hurricane and the natural rates of 

regeneration in the absence of any development. 

7.2. GULF OF MEXICO REGION COASTAL MARINE INSTITUTE PROGRAM

The current Coastal Marine Institute (CMI) program in the Gulf of Mexico Region was established in 

1992 as a cooperative agreement between Louisiana State University and MMS. The basic intent of the 

CMI is to direct the considerable research talents of a major research university towards Federal and State 

information needs in a State where OCS oil and gas development is a major factor. Funding for all 

projects undertaken has been equally divided between MMS and Louisiana resources. Dozens of 

projects, some biological, have been funded, employing the talents of faculty researchers, postdoctoral 

associates, Ph.D. and masters candidates, and undergraduate workers. 

The studies tend toward the academic side, and sometimes produce rather unclassifiable 

miscellaneous works on methodologies, often-overlooked taxa, and critiques of past efforts using existing 

data. The several innovative efforts described below reflect the range of researcher interests. 

Development and Characterization of Sea Anemones as Bioindicators of Offshore Resource 

Exploitation and Environmental Impact (1999) was designed to assess the value of common anemones 

from California, west Florida, and Louisiana to verify the existence of a cytochrome P450 system and 

other biochemical indicator responses to several contaminants, including cadmium and organic toxins. 

This marks the interest in the measurement of sublethal responses to exposure, as did the GOOMEX 

program (Section 6) and the following CMI study. 

Development and Application of a Sublethal Toxicity Test to PAH Using Marine Harpacticoid 

Copepods (1999) tested the sensitivity of two meiofaunal species exposed to various PAH’s. It examined 
30

several reproduction, development, and feeding indicators in controlled experimental conditions. The 

study was a great departure from the usual U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lethal 

concentration or lethal dose approaches, which use relatively large animals having much longer life 

history cycles. 

Other meiofauna, the foraminiferal protozoans, are the subject of the ongoing study, Foraminiferal 

Communities of Bathyal and Abyssal Hydrocarbon Seeps, Northern Gulf of Mexico: A Taxonomic, 

Ecologic, and Geologic Study. This is a CMI investigation of community structure and tolerance of 

unusual or extreme conditions, primarily deep Gulf hydrocarbon and sulfide seeps. This study further 

extends the use and value of unexamined cores taken with submersibles during the chemosynthetic 

community studies CHEMO I and II (Section 3.2.3). 

The Taxonomic Guide to the Polychaetes of the Northern Gulf of Mexico was a 1984 report based on 

early BLM/MMS collections. The benthic macrofaunal polychaetes comprise one of the most numerous, 

diverse, and ecologically important groups with which systematists must contend. Upon the completion 

of early, large ecosystem studies, notably the MAFLA and STOCS programs, there remained among 

workers and studies programs questions of taxonomic consistency. This remarkable seven-volume report 

was written to review and standardize the systematics of the many collections of polychaete taxa from 

across the Gulf up to that time. The polychaetes are also the subject of an ongoing CMI computerized 

effort on taxonomic error. 

The CMI study Potential for Accelerated Bioremediation and Restoration of Oil-Impacted Marshes 

through the Selection of Superior Oil-Tolerant Vegetation (2000) was a new approach for the Gulf of 

Mexico (although preliminary restoration plantings have been done before). Some brackish and salt 

marsh (Spartina spp.) genotypes proved relatively resistant when tested for growth, leaf damage, 

productivity, and oil degradation potential after experimental oiling in the laboratory. 

The report Spatial and Temporal Variability of Plankton Stocks on the Basis of Acoustic Backscatter 

Intensity and Direct Measurements in the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico (2001) investigated the utility of 

Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (ADCP’s) to estimate the relative abundance and spatial and temporal 

variability of zooplankton stocks in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico using backscatter intensity. 

Designed originally to determine current velocities and ship speed, the ADCP has been used successfully 

in investigating vertical migrations as well as tracking masses of advected plankton. This physical and 

biological oceanographic study was an integral part of Northeastern Gulf of Mexico Physical 

Oceanography Program: DeSoto Canyon Eddy Intrusion Study, which investigated the complexities of 

the regional currents in an area proposed for oil and gas development. 

Management Applicability of Contemporary Deep-Sea Ecology and Reevaluation of Gulf of Mexico 

Studies is a 2001 CMI report reviewing and reevaluating the utility of past MMS studies for agency 

decisionmaking. Two general studies from the 1970’s and 1980’s required conventional deep-sea 

sampling (the results of which are technique-sensitive), and two studies on chemosynthetic communities 

(CHEMO I and II) have concentrated primarily on “shallower” sites accessible to available manned 

submersibles (Section 3.2.3). 

7.3. OTHER DOCUMENTS

There are three types of programmatic information documents that provide public information on 

studies program planning and the results of ongoing and completed research projects. These are the Gulf 

of Mexico Regional Studies Plans, the proceedings of the annual Information Transfer Meetings, and the 

proceedings of occasional topical workshops. The latter are mentioned also within the bodies of topical 

information given above (Sections 2-6). 

7.3.1. Regional Studies Plans and Studies Development Plans 

Regional Studies Plans were prepared by BLM and MMS to document and describe the studies 

planned by the ESP for the following fiscal year. In recent years, MMS has prepared a Studies 

Development Plan to describe studies that will address information needs during the following two fiscal 
31

years. The Regional Studies Development Plan ultimately becomes a part of the annual National Studies 

Plan. These have always been internal planning documents and are not published for general public 

consumption. However, they are public documents and, as such, may be made available to those 

interested in the progress of the ESP. Begun in 1978 by BLM, these documents are the records of the 

codified process that plans the course of the ESP. The study plans have little lasting scientific value once 

implemented, but they offer an insight into a process that produces scientific information for management 

of the offshore petroleum industry. These have recently been made available on MMS web site for those 

interested. Periodically, updated ongoing studies information is also available on the web. 

7.3.2. Information Transfer Meeting Proceedings 

The Information Transfer Meetings (ITM) are held annually to document the progress and findings of 

funded studies of all types (including biological ones) and provide a forum for the discussion of many 

other issues important to MMS. These meetings were begun by BLM’s Gulf of Mexico office in 1980 as 

a modest midstream review of ongoing research programs and were continued by MMS. The ITM has 

since grown into a major annual meeting with several concurrent sessions. The ITM Proceedings always 

have some topics of interest to biologists, and the information therein is at least marginally available in 

abstract form prior to publication of final reports. 

7.3.3. Workshops and Symposia 

One of the most useful processes MMS uses in future studies planning are workshops convened in 

various areas of social and natural sciences. The workshops provide independent outside guidance for 

(and often, affirmation of) MMS regional planning efforts, and the proceedings stand as public records 

against which future performance of the ESP can be measured. These have been successful in delineating 

the state of knowledge and identifying data gaps. Invited participants typically recommend and describe 

needed studies (whether or not MMS is the appropriate agency to support the work). They also discuss 

appropriate objectives, methods, approaches, and timing. Workshops are scheduled according to 

perceived gravity, adequacy of knowledge of the subject, and anticipated funding. 

The biological topic engendering the most frequent workshops has been protected species of the Gulf. 

A 1982 Proceedings of a Workshop on Cetaceans and Sea Turtles in the Gulf of Mexico: Study Planning 

for Outer Continental Shelf Development (1983) gave MMS guidance for a continuing protected species 

program. The proceedings of this workshop resulted in several productive studies (Section 5.1). The 

MMS revisited the subject in a second meeting, producing the report, Sea Turtles and Marine Mammals 

of the Gulf of Mexico: Proceedings of a Workshop, 1989 (1990). The Gulf of Mexico Marine Protected 

Species Workshop (2001) was held in 1999 to guide that work into the new millennium. 

Three predominantly deep-sea workshops have been convened. The first, the 1989 Northern Gulf of 

Mexico Environmental Planning Workshop (1990), followed the first synoptic Northern Gulf of Mexico 

Continental Slope Study that was completed in 1986. The second was the 1997 Workshop on 

Environmental Issues Surrounding Deepwater Oil and Gas Development (1997). This workshop was 

convened largely as a result of accelerated interest in deepwater leases in the 1990’s, new scientific 

revelations in the deep Gulf, and new offshore technologies. A separate session on deep-sea ecology 

directly resulted in the Northern Gulf of Mexico Continental Slope Habitats and Benthic Ecology Study

initiated in 1999, the first major study with a joint U.S.-Mexico sampling effort called Joint Sampling of 

the Sigsbee Deep (JSSD). The third was the 2002 Workshop on Deepwater Environmental Studies 

Strategy: A Five-Year Follow-Up and Planning for the Future (2003); it reviewed the status of the 

deepwater program. Many important studies were still underway, and it was suggested that topic-specific 

workshops be held after the completion of these studies. 

Symposium Proceedings: Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Oil Spills in Coastal Ecosystems: Assessing 

Effects, Natural Recovery, and Progress in Remediation Research, 1994 (1995) focused on the ecological 

effects of oil spills in mangroves, coastal marshes, and seagrass ecosystems, and possible remediation 

techniques. It is widely believed that these tropical/subtropical resources are the most vulnerable and/or 

sensitive compared to deeper water ecosystems, especially considering their importance as habitat for 

associated animal populations. 
32

Proceedings: An International Workshop on Offshore Lease Abandonment and Platform Disposal: 

Technology, Regulation, and Environmental Effects (1997) was devoted predominantly to oil and gas 

operations with a small section on biological pressure wave effects. 

Physical/Biological Oceanographic Integration Workshop for the DeSoto Canyon and Adjacent Shelf 

(2000) provided MMS with an area-specific synthesis of physical, geological, chemical and biological 

understanding of a scientifically complex region in the politically sensitive Eastern Gulf of Mexico 

Planning Area. The conclusions have not yet produced a definitive field study, as the region in question 

may remain subject to a continuing drilling moratorium. 
33

APPENDIX: AN OVERVIEW OF THE 

ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES PROGRAM (ESP) 

A.1. EARLY HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE ESP 

The first open-water oil and gas drilling operations in the United States were conducted in Louisiana 

State waters in 1938. In 1945, President Truman signed executive papers declaring that the natural 

resources of submerged lands on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) were owned by the Nation and that 

these resources would fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI). By 1947, 

the first oil and gas operation was installed in Federal waters out of the sight of land (in 18 ft of water, 

Ship Shoal Block 32). The U.S. Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Program was initiated in 1953 with 

the passage of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), which established Federal jurisdiction 

over submerged lands on the OCS. A key consideration of the Act is balancing orderly energy resource 

development with protection of the human, marine, and coastal environments. The OCSLA designated 

the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) as the DOI administrative agency for leasing and the 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for supervising offshore activities. Section 20 of the OCSLA requires 

the Secretary of the Interior to “conduct a study of any area or region included in any oil and gas lease 

sale in order to establish information needed for assessment and management of environmental impacts 

on the human, marine, and coastal environments . . . .” 

The legal definition of the OCS, for purposes of offshore leasing, exploration, and development, is the 

submerged land seaward of acreage under the respective States' jurisdictions. The Gulf of Mexico OCS 

begins at the Federal-State boundaries (3 mi from land off Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, and 

3 marine leagues—about 10 mi—off Texas and the western coast of Florida, according to the 

arrangements under which the respective States entered the Union). The OCS actually extends into 

abyssal depths greater than 3,000 m (9,800 ft). The Gulf of Mexico OCS occupies about 2.2 million 

statute square miles, or 5.7 million square kilometers, of ocean bottom out to the limits of the U.S. 

Exclusive Economic Zone. The submerged Federal lands in the Gulf of Mexico are further divided into 

four leasing planning areas (Western, Central, Eastern, and Straits of Florida) and numerous named 

“protraction” areas (e.g., Ship Shoal and Green Canyon), and then into thousands of numbered “lease 

blocks” that are nominally 3 statute miles on a side. The latter are the geographic references for all 

leasing and future financial, operational, and management activities. 

In 1954, following the passage of the OCSLA, BLM opened its New Orleans OCS Regional Office, 

and USGS’s Conservation Division concurrently established its Gulf Coast Regional Office. Since 1954, 

Gulf of Mexico OCS lease sales have been conducted annually except for 1956-1958. BLM was 

primarily responsible for prelease activities, notably leasing and environmental activities (impact 

statements and environmental studies). USGS governed postlease activities such as inspections, 

permitting of operations, resource evaluation, and a myriad of other functions. 

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) has as its primary objective “to declare a 

national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his 

environment; [and] to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment . . . .” 

The Act requires that Federal agencies prepare environmental impact statements for all of their actions 

having the potential for significant environmental impact; it also established the Council on 

Environmental Quality. 

In 1973, BLM established the Environmental Studies Program (ESP) to support the collection and 

analysis of information needed for the accelerated OCS leasing program. The main objectives of the ESP 

have been (1) to provide relevant environmental information to decisionmakers in the Agency’s OCS 

minerals management program and (2) to obtain environmental data on the direct and indirect impacts of 

petroleum exploration and production activities. From 1973 through 2001, studies funding in the Gulf 

Region has totaled roughly $180 million, about one-fourth of the $713 million expended nationwide. Of 

the Gulf’s $180 million, over 50 percent has been expended on biological studies, a relatively higher 
34

percentage than that spent on biology nationwide (~40%). Some biological studies have been directed 

toward the description of regional resources, studying manageable geographic units, usually of a 

relatively homogeneous habitat type. Other studies are specifically directed at the understanding of 

particular habitats, ecotypes, or species groups. All are intended to provide data useful for the 

management of OCS activities. 

In 1982, under Secretary of the Interior James Watt, BLM and USGS were reorganized into the new 

Minerals Management Service (MMS), bringing pre- and postlease offshore activities under the same 

roof, a recommendation of the Administration’s “Linowes Commission.” Under DOI, MMS is now 

responsible for the regulation and permitting of most offshore oil and gas activities, the collection of 

leasing and royalty monies due to the Federal Government, and certain other functions on the OCS. 

A.2. REGIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES AND ORGANIZATION

The entire OCS has been managed through four original regional BLM/MMS OCS Offices; Alaska 

(Anchorage), Pacific (Los Angeles, later Camarillo, California), Atlantic (New York, New York; later 

Vienna and Herndon, Virginia), and the Gulf of Mexico (New Orleans, Louisiana). All Regional Offices 

reported to the Headquarters Office (Washington, D.C., and Herndon, Virginia). At first the New Orleans 

Office had responsibility for both the Gulf and the southern U.S. Atlantic Planning Area (from Mexico up 

to Cape Hatteras, North Carolina). The Atlantic Office later acquired responsibility for the entire east 

coast. Upon that office’s devolution in the 1990’s, the office of the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region in New 

Orleans was assigned the responsibility for all Gulf and Atlantic Planning Areas. The descriptions of 

marine biological studies programs in this document are restricted regionally to the Gulf of Mexico and 

almost entirely to the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. 

A.3. STUDIES PLANNING AND SELECTION

The MMS is mandated to manage the offshore using acquired, rather than internally generated, data. 

That is, MMS has no research arm per se. Within the funding limits of the ESP, MMS attempts to gather 

descriptive, experimental, monitoring, or synthesized information to attain an understanding of the natural 

and socioeconomic environment that it is mandated to preserve. Procurement regulations and policy 

promote a culture of open, competitive procurement, especially for large programs (e.g., greater than 

$500,000). These studies are usually conducted by consulting firms and universities, not infrequently in 

cooperation with each other. 

Through a formal nomination process, studies are scheduled for procurement based on available 

funding and perceived importance to MMS. Needed studies are proposed to MMS through internal and 

external nominations. These are sorted and prioritized through MMS management, both regionally and 

through Headquarters, according to immediacy of scientific need, application to MMS information and 

operational issues, estimated cost, available funding, and practicality. Public and internal documents are 

prepared (e.g., Strategic Studies Plans and the Regional and National Studies Development Plans). These 

are reviewed annually, and a proposed study may be assigned to personnel for development and 

procurement, deferred, or even cancelled. 

The competitive studies selection process is the norm for MMS, and it is generally prescribed by 

Agency policy. There are exceptions, however. One notable (but very rare) exception is that a sole 

source exists, or one that has competitive advantage by virtue of patented or proprietary supplies or 

services. 

Other exceptions to the competitive selection process have been the cooperative investigations 

conducted by States’ agencies and (more often) other Federal agencies including the research arms of the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), bureaus of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(notably the National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS]), and USGS. These studies are supported by 

Memorandums of Understanding (MOU’s) or Interagency Agreements (IA’s) and benefit, and fall under 

the respective mandates of, these agencies. 
35

The MMS biological programs most obviously procured by research agencies have been the protected 

species and coastal studies MOU’s and/or IA's to FWS, USGS, and NMFS. These agencies have parallel 

interests in sea turtles, cetaceans, and manatees in all U.S. waters, and the jointly funded studies have 

fiscal benefits (two justifications for MOU’s and IA’s). 

Various State agencies (mostly of Texas and Florida) have prepared a number of information research 

documents under cooperative agreements. Another notable exception to the competitive selection process 

has been the 1992 establishment of the Louisiana State University Coastal Marine Institute, a StateFederal matched cooperative agreement through which nominated studies are selected. 

A.4. STUDIES PROCUREMENT, CONDUCT, COMPLETION, AND DISSEMINATION

Legal and policy decisions determine the mode of studies procurement, whether through full and open 

competition or not. The procurement mode is determined by MMS Procurement Operations Branch 

(Headquarters) with input from the ESP. Studies are procured by a studies procurement team. An MMS 

regional staffer with expertise in the subject area is assigned to assess regional MMS information needs, 

the status and availability of information, the needs of outside State and Federal agencies, and the specific 

applications of the resulting information by his/her customers—the analysts, planners, and managers. The 

staffer who writes the technical aspects for a Request for Proposal (RFP) typically becomes the 

Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COTR) after award. A Headquarters Contracting Officer 

(CO) is assigned to complete legal and instructional parts of the RFP, announce it publicly, receive and 

distribute proposals, and preside over all aspects and stages of the procurement, including the technical 

and financial reviews of proposals, selection of contractor, and award of contract. The CO and COTR 

respectively monitor the progress of the contracted effort from the legal and scientific angles, including 

the mid-program recommendations of contract modifications, inspections for program conformance to the 

RFP, and proposal content and schedule, and review and approval of expenditures. 

Upon the completion of the final reports and other products, the CO formally accepts the work and 

closes the contract. MMS announces the availability of the products and distributes them internally as 

needed, and externally from MMS Regional Public Information Offices. The MMS web site lists all 

reports conducted from 1992 to the present, with a collection of “Technical Summaries” written as 

required under contract. Many reports are also available through interlibrary loan. All MMS studies 

reports, maps, CD’s, and other products are public property. 

A number of planning documents (e.g., the Regional Studies Plan) can be found on MMS web site, 

including periodically updated accounts of ongoing research projects. 
The Department of the Interior Mission

As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility 

for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering 

sound use of our land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, and biological diversity; 

preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places; 

and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses 

our energy and mineral resources and works to ensure that their development is in the best 

interests of all our people by encouraging stewardship and citizen participation in their care. 

The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities 

and for people who live in island territories under U.S. administration. 

The Minerals Management Service Mission 

As a bureau of the Department of the Interior, the Minerals Management Service's (MMS) 

primary responsibilities are to manage the mineral resources located on the Nation's Outer 

Continental Shelf (OCS), collect revenue from the Federal OCS and onshore Federal and Indian 

lands, and distribute those revenues. 

Moreover, in working to meet its responsibilities, the Offshore Minerals Management Program 

administers the OCS competitive leasing program and oversees the safe and environmentally 

sound exploration and production of our Nation's offshore natural gas, oil and other mineral 

resources. The MMS Minerals Revenue Management meets its responsibilities by ensuring the 

efficient, timely and accurate collection and disbursement of revenue from mineral leasing and 

production due to Indian tribes and allottees, States and the U.S. Treasury. 

The MMS strives to fulfill its responsibilities through the general guiding principles of: (1) being 

responsive to the public's concerns and interests by maintaining a dialogue with all potentially 

affected parties and (2) carrying out its programs with an emphasis on working to enhance the 

quality of life for all Americans by lending MMS assistance and expertise to economic 

development and environmental protection.