TY - JOUR T1 - Strategic use of Gulf restoration funds: Comparing benefits and costs for investing in coastal wetlands, hypoxia, oyster reefs, refuges, or island beaches JF - Journal of Soil and Water Conservation SP - 89A LP - 93A DO - 10.2489/jswc.67.4.89A VL - 67 IS - 4 AU - Clayton Ogg Y1 - 2012/07/01 UR - http://www.jswconline.org/content/67/4/89A.abstract N2 - Large oil spills, such as the 2010 BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico, cause damage to ecosystems and to wildlife that takes many years for recovery. Recognizing the time lags and the impossibility of restoring each damaged site, the Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) process specifies that responsible parties' restoration funding may be spent on compensatory restoration projects elsewhere, not just at damaged sites, as long as these projects benefit the area affected by the oil spill (Jones and Pease 1997). Federal trustees seek restoration services “of the same type and quality and of comparable value” as those ecosystem services lost in the oil spill. The Gulf spill was the largest offshore oil spill in US history and damaged a variety of deep water and coastal ecosystems. Popular options for Gulf restoration would address ongoing environmental and wildlife catastrophes (Brown et al. 2011; USEPA 2011). They include (1) restoring coastal wetlands, (2) reducing nutrient loads in the Mississippi river to reduce the Gulf's dead (hypoxic) zone, (3) restoring oyster reefs, (4) expanding wildlife refuges (Defenders of Wildlife and National Wildlife Refuge Association 2010), and (5) enhancing island beaches (Schleifstein 2011). NRDA funding may be insufficient to implement all five… ER -