90-22.3
Bioremediation Treatability Trials Using Nutrient Application to Enhance
Cleanup of Oil-Contaminated Shoreline
Albert D. Venosa, John R. Haines, John A. Glaser, Edward J. Opatken
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Parmely H. Pritchard
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Gulf Breeze, FL 32561
Charles Costa
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Radiation Programs
Las Vegas, NV 89114
-------
90-22.3
INTRODUCTION
On March 24, 1989, the supertanker Exxon Valdez went aground in Prince William Sound, Alaska releas-
ing approximately 11 million gallons of Prudhoe Bay crude oil. The spilled oil spread over an estimated 350
miles of shoreline. The oil settled into the beach gravel and on rock surfaces and the faces of vertical
cliffs. Contamination occurred primarily in the intertidal zone. Initial weathering of the oil resulted in
a loss of approximately 15 to 20X of the oil by volatilization. Components lost through volatilization
included normal aliphatic hydrocarbons of 12 carbon atoms and less and low molecular weight aromatic hydro-
carbons (benzene, toluene, xylene, and some naphthalenes). The residual oil consisted of approximately 40
to 50% high molecular weight waxes and asphaltenes.
Siodegradation of oil has been.extensively studied over the last 20 years1. As a result, the fate
and microbial decomposition of oil in aquatic environments is well understood. Studies have shown that oil
degradation can occur in cold-water environments.2"12
The
In response to the spill, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency assembled a panel of experts to
determine what could be done to accelerate the natural biodegradation process in Prince William Sound T
panel recommended the creation of a bioremediation research plan with the following major objectives:"
• Examine the extent to which natural biodegradation of oil on the contaminated beaches was occur-
ring.
• Determine if nutrient addition enhanced natural biodegradation of contaminated beaches in the
field. <*'>•>
• Develop methodology for full-scale application of nutrients to contaminated beaches.
FERTILIZER SELECTION AMD CHARACTERISTICS
An important aspect of this project was the selection of fertilizers for the field test. The goal
was to find fertilizer formulations that would release nitrogen and phosphorus nutrients over extended time
periods or would hold nutrients in contact with surface microbial conmunities over extended time periods.
It was essential that fertilizer formulations be practical and cost-effective for large scale application to
contaminated shorelines and have minimal impact on eutrophication potential. Three types of fertilizer were
selected:
. -Solid, slow-release fertilizer, in which nutrients would be released slowly from a point source and
tidal action and rainfall would distribute the nutrients over the beach surface.16
• Liquid oleophilic fertilizer, in which nutrients would partition to the oil covering the rock and
gravel surfaces and would not be washed away by tidal fluxes.4.17
• Fertilizer solutions, in which inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus would be dissolved in seawat'er and
distributed via fixed sprinkler systems.
Several commercially available fertilizer formulations that satisfied these requirements were
selected and their nutrient-release characteristics determined.
IBDU Briquettes.
This fertilizer formulation is manufactured in the form of briquettes containing isobutylidene diurea
(IBOU), a chemical that spontaneously hydrolyzes into isobutyl aldehyde and urea when released from the
briquette matrix into water. Hydrolysis is temperature dependent, being slower at lower temperatures but
still significant. The source of phosphorus is a citric acid soluble phosphate fertilizer. Each briquette
weighs approximately 17 grams and has a specific gravity of 1.5 to 1.8. The N:P:K ratio is 14:3:3.
Granular Fertilizer.
This fertilizer formulation consists of inorganic nutrient sources
-------
90-22.3
Inipol EAP 22 is a mixture of nutrients encapsulated by oleic acid. Oleic acid and surfactants in
the product formulation cause the nutrients to become partitioned to the oil phase, preventing rapid release
into the aqueous phase and subsequent washout, Inipol EAP 22 is a clear liquid with a specific qravitv of
0.996 and a pour point of 11°C. The N:P:K ratio is 7.3:2.8!0. The chemical condition is given in Tab°e
Table 1. Chemical Composition of Inipol EAP 22.
INGREDIENT CHEMICAL FORMULA PURPOSE
Oleic Acid CH37CCCH Oleophilic phase
(continuous)
Lauryl Phosphate C12H25P04 Phosphate source, .
surfactant
2-Butoxy-1-Ethanol HO-C2H4-0-C4H9 Co-surfactant,
emulsion stabilizer
Urea NH2-CO-NH2 Nitrogen source
Uater "2° Hydrophilie phase
SITE SELECTION AND CHARACTERISTICS
Criteria for the selection of the test sites were based on the following:
• Typical shoreline of Prince William Sound; i.e., mixed sand and gravel and cobblestone beaches.
• Sufficient area with fairly uniform distribution of sand, gravel, and cobble for the test plots.
• Protected embayment with adequate staging areas and sufficient size to support several test and
' control plots.
• Uniform oil contamination. _,
Two test sites were selected for the field demonstration project, Snug Harbor and Passage Cove Snug
Harbor was selected to serve as an oiled beach that approximated the degree of contamination remaining after
a heavily oiled beach had been physically washed. In July, a second site was selected that had been
physically washed by the Exxon operations. This site. Passage Cove, served as the main reference beach for
the large-scale application of fertilizers and as a means to evaluate a sprayer system for liquid fertilizer
application. ,
SNUG'HARBOR PROJECT SITE
Site Characterization.
Snug Harbor is located on the southeastern sida of Knight Island. The shoreline used for the demon-
stration was located on the western aide of this harbor (Figure 1). Th« area is surrounded by mountains
reaching an elevation of approximately 2,000 feet with steep vertical ascents. Major sources of freshwater
runoff are fron precipitation and snowmelt, which is typical of islands in Prince William Sound.
One of the primary reasons for selecting Snug Harbor as a project site was that it contained a long
expanse consisting of sand and gravel and another of cobble. Table 2 identifies the plot dimensions and
types of treatment used at Snog Harbor. Each plot was divided into 21 blocks, 7 across and 3 deep with
each row of blocks occupying a different tidal area: high, intermediate, and low.
-------
90-22.3
Table 2. Description of Fertilizer Treatment Plots at Snug Harbor.
Assigned
name
Eagle
Otter
Otter
Seal
Seal,
Seal
Beach
type
Sand, gravel
Sand, gravel
Sand, gravel
Cobble
Cobble
Cobble
Fertilizer
Treatment
None,
control
Oleophilic
fertilizer
1BOU
briquettes
I SOU
briquettes
Oleophilic
fertilizer
None,
control
Length, m
21
21
35
28
28
21
Depth, m
12
12
12
12
12
8
Fertilizer Application.
Slow-release fertilizers used in this project were briquettes that were applied in mesh bags and
granules that were broadcast. The following paragraphs describe the methods used to place these fertiliz-
srs •
Large mesh bags composed of herring seine filled with slow-release fertilizer briquettes (IBOU) Here
placed on the beach in a manner that was intended to provide complete exposure of the beach material to
nutrients leaching from the bags. Each bag contained approximately 33 pounds of briquettes. Application of
the briquette bags occurred on June 11, 1989. The total quantity of briquettes applied to the 35 m x 12 m
plot (Otter Beach) was 800 pounds, representing approximately 100 pounds nitrogen and 24 pounds phosphorus
(as PjOs). The bags were tethered to 3-foot sections of ste«l rods that were buried 6 inches below the
surface of the beach. Figure 2a indicates the positioning of the 24 bags in the experimental plot.
On June 20 and 21, 1989, the bags were repositioned according to the layout in Figure 2b as the bags
located at the top most row were not being submerged consistently by the high tide (see below). Addition-
ally, preliminary data indicated that the nutrients were being channelled vertically down the beach Four
more bags were added to the beach, resulting in 920 pound* of fertilizer (130 pounds N).
The same arrangement and repositioning was used for th« briquette bags on Seal Beach. This beach was
7 m narrower than Otter beach, and the weight of briquette* applied per bag was proportionately reduced.
Figures 3a and 3b represent the significant tidal fluctuation* typical of Snug Harbor. These tidal
fluctuations affected the amount of tin» each zone was under w»t«r, which in turn affected nutrient dissolu-
tion and transport. For example, in the sand and gravel plot treated with the fertilizer briquettes the
top row of fertilizer bags was placed at a relative tidal height of 13 feet. As shown in Figure 2a the top
row of bags was only underwater approximately one-fourth of th« day* in June. Consequently, precipitation
was the primary factor controlling th* dissolution and transport of the nutrients in this zone.
Oleophilic fertilizer (Inipol EAP 22) was first applied to Otter Beach in Snug Harbor (mixed sand and
gravel) on June 8, 1989. A total of 10 gallons (83 pound*) we* applied, which represented approximately 5X
of the estimated weight of th« oil on the treated bemch. A Mcond application of 10.5 gallons of Inipol was
made on June 17, 1989 to the Otter Beach plot based on recooHndation* from Elf Aquitaine representatives.
An application of 14 gallons at Seal Beech in Snug Harbor (cobble) occurred on June 9 and a second
application of 13 gallons on June 18.
Inipol was applied to the plots in the evening •* th« tlda WM ebbing. Application was initiated at
the top of the beach, an hour after the tide wa* p**t tf>« lowest rone in the plot. A backpack sprayer with
a capacity of four gallons was used to apply th« liquid .Inipol. Th« product was warmed to a temperature
higher than the pour point to ensure uniform application and to pr«v»nt clogging of the spray nozzle.
-------
90-22.3
The weather during the first applications was rainy and cool. During the second application both
days were clear and sunny with temperatures around 60°F. Examination of the plots the day after the second
application revealed a gelatinous sheen on the surface of the treated rocks. The sheen lasted for two davs
during which time wave action.was minimal. This sheen was not observed with the first application.
PASSAGE COVE PROJECT SITE
Site Characterization.
Passage Cove is located on the northwestern side of Knight Island. This site was originally heavily
contaminated with 01 and was subjected to physical washing by Exxon. Even after physical washing^ eons d-
erable amounts of oil remained at this site, distributed on the surface of rocks and in beach material Llow
the rocks. Pools of oil and mousse-like material were minimal on the surface. Contamination extended about
50 cm below the beach surface. The shoreline area and the designated beaches in Passage Cove are shown in
Figure 1b. All of the beach areas tested consisted of cobblestones set on a mixed sand and gravel base
Table 3 lists beach types, plot dimensions, and fertilizer treatments at Passage Cove.
Table 3. Description of Fertilizer Treatment Plots at Passage Cove.
Assigned
name
Raven
Tern
Kittiwake
Beach Type
Cobble over mixed
sand and gravel
Cobble over mixed
sand and gravel
Cobble over mixed
sand and gravel
Fertilizer
Treatment
None,
control
'Inipol and
water soluble
.Nutrient soln.
sprinkler system
Length, m
28
35
28
Depth, m
21
21
21
Guillenot
Mixed sand/gravel
with patchy cobble
Inipol and
slow-release granules
21
Fertilizer Application.
Slow-release granules (Sierra Chemical Co.) and Inipol EAP 22 were both applied to Tern Beach in
Passage Cove. The Inipol was applied at the same rate used on the Snug Harbor plots. The granular
fertilizer was applied using a commercial broadcast fertilizer spreader at a rate of approximately 0 0033
lbs/ft*. The total application of nitrogen and phosphorus by slow-release granules in Passage Cove was
approximately 400 Ibs and 40 Iba, respectively. The granules stuck to the oil on the rock surfaces and were
not easily displaced from the beach or redistributed by the tidal action.
Kittiwake Beach in Passage Cove was used to'evaluate the effectiveness of application of nitrogen and
phosphorus by spray irrigation. Inorganic salts of nitrogen and phosphorus were dissolved in seawater and
sprayed onto the beach daily; Th* spray irrigation system used sprinkler heads typical of lawn sprinklers
The fertilizer solution was pumped by a gasoline-driven well pump to four sprinkler heads set on each side"
of the plot. Typical applications were about 0.4 inch of water per day. Application rates were established
to supply 7 mg/L of nitrogen and 4 mg/L of phosphorus to pore water in the saturated beach material to a
depth of 2 m.
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
Oil Chemistry. •
Beach samples of either mixed sand and gravel or cobble were preserved by freezing. The samples were
thawed and mixed thoroughly prior to th« initiation of oil analysis. A weighted 100 g subsample was removed
and mixed thoroughly with 300 mL of methanol in a separatory funnel. The slurry was shaken for five
minutes, and the methanol was decanted into a 2 L sepuratory funnel. The samples were similarly re-
extracted two times with 300 mL HPLC gracte methylene chloride. The three organic fractions were combined
and back-extracted with 100 mL of 3% aqueous sodium chloride. The phases were separated and the aqueous
portion was extracted with 50 mL of fresh methylene chloride. This aqueous extraction in methylenTchloride
was added to the combined organic fraction.
-------
90-22.3
The combined organic fractions were reduced in volume within a-1 L round bottom flask fitted uith a
three-ball Snyder column. The volune of solvent was reduced until the color was approximately the color of
dilute weathered oil (ca 15 mg/2 ml methylene chloride). The final votune of the MrlcTlls measur^ with
a synnge having an appropriate graduated cylinder, and an aliquot was transferred to a GC autosampter vial.
All of the cobblestones were extracted using the same procedure (methanol, followed by methylene
chloride), except that shaking was replaced by gentle swirling to remove oil from the rock surfaces.
Gas chromatographic (GC) analysis was accomplished uith an instrument capable of reproducible tencer-
ature programming with a flame ionization detector and a reliable autosampler. The GC conditions were:
Column: DB-5, 30 m X 0.25 nw, film thickness 0.25 urn '
Initial Temperature: 45°C, 5 min. hold
Temperature Rate: 3.5°C/min
Final Temperature: 280°C, 60 min. analysis
Injector: splitless, 1 minute valve closure
Injector Temperature: 285°C
Injection: 2.0 microliter
Detector: FID, 350°C
Those samples that demonstrated significant, evidence of biodegradation were fractionated to allow
separate determination of aliphatics and aromatics. Extracts selected for fractionation were solvent-
exchanged to hexane. A volume of 50 microliters of hexamethylbenzene (80 ng/microliter) and 25 microliters
of n-decyclohexane (1 microgram/micriliter) was added to each sample extract prior to fractionation The
fractionation was accomplished using a 60/200 mesh silica gel activated at 210 C for 24 hours The'al
phatic fraction was eluted with 30 mL of hexane and the aromatic fraction was eluted with 45 mL of hexa-
ne/benzene (1:1). Aliphatic and the aronatic fractions were analyzed using the GC methods described above.
Subsamples of the final concentrated extract were subjected to mass spectral analysis. The analyti-
cal procedure is given in the Fucus oil analysis protocols. anaiyti
Subsamples (5-15 mL) of the final concentrated extract were also removed, filtered through sodium
sulfate, and placed in tared watch glasses. After passive evaporation of the solvent, the oilresidue
weight was determined. -«iuue
Changes in oil composition were determined by comparing the total weight of all alkanes appearing on •
the chromatograph, normalized to the total residue weight of oil, on a sample by sample basis.
FIELD TEST RESULTS -- SNUG HARBOR
Visual Observations.
Test beaches at Snug Harbor were moderately contaminated. Visually, the cobble plots had a thin
coating of dry, sticky, black oil covering rock surfaces and gravel areas under the cobble Oil did not
penetrate more than a few cm below the gravel surface. In mixed sand and gravel plots oil was well
distributed over exposed surface areas and commonly found 20-30 cm below the surface, 'in many areas of the
test plots small patches of^thick oil and mousse (emulsified oil) could be found. This material was very
viscous and mixed with extensive amounts of debris. y
Approximately 8-10 days following oleophilic fertilizer application to the cobble beach plot reduc-
tions in the amount of oil on rock surfaces were visually apparent. It was particularly evident from aerial
observation* where the contrast with oiled areas surrounding the plot was dramatic. A clean rectangle was
etched onto the the beach surface. The contrast was also impressive at ground level, where a precise
demarcation between fertilizer treated and untreated areas was clearly visible.
Close examination of the treated cobble plot showed that much-.of the oil on the surface of the rocks
was gone. There were still considerable amounts of the oil under rocks and in the mixed gravel below the
rocks. The remaining oil was not dry and dull as was the case with oil in other areas of the beach but
appeared softened, more liquid, and sticky to the touch. It had little tendency to come off the rocks At
the time of these observations, oil slicks or oily materials were observed leaving the beach during tidal
flushing.
The mixed sand and gravel beach treated with oleophilic fertilizer exhibited visually reduced amounts
of oil in an 8-10 day period. Differences between treated and untreated plots, however, were not as
dramatic as on the similarly treated cobble beach. Loss'of subsurface oil in treated areas was visuallv
apparent. 7
-------
. 90-22.3
All other plots looked as oiled as they did at the beginning of the field study There were essen-
tially no visual indications of oil removal on plots treated with slow-release fertilizer briquettes.
Over the next 2-3 weeks, the cleaned rectangle on the cobble beach remained clearly visible Oil
below the rocks remained but was less apparent. '
»•. Sl"il?0 !l9hu W"*kS 8!ter f!rtilfzer application, the contrast between the treated and untreated areas
on the cobble beach narrowed. This was due to reoiling from subsurface material concurrent with the slow
removal of oil on the beach material surrounding the plot. It was evident, however, that the total amount
of oil on the treated plots had decreased substantially relative to control plots. The cor respond ing ri«d
sand and gravel plot was also reoiled but to a lesser extent. All of the other plots still had^ervabU
oil contamination but generally lesser than that seen at the beginning of the study. ooservaoie
Toward the end of the summer season, the area used for the nutrient application study became steadily
cleaner, including most of the area surrounding the test plots as well. This was attributed to several
storms and more frequent rainfall. A heavily contaminated area to the south, which was never treated
remained heavily contaminated by all visual criteria. '
Changes in Oil Composition.
Data analysis for oil residue weight and chemistry has not yet been completed. Over 1100 samples
have been analyzed and the resulting information is being incorporated into the data base. Six different
approaches for analyzing trends in the data are being used. These involve analysis through time of the
following:
• Oil residue weights
-------
90-22.3
Changes in Oil Composition.
•• Over 600 samples have been analyzed and the resulting information has been incorporated into the data
base. The approaches for evaluating trends in the data are the same as those used for Snug Harbor only a
few chromatographic profiles were available for this paper. " y
Figures 6a and 6b present the respective profiles of the untreated control plot (Raven) prior to and
three weeks after sprinkler application began in Passage Cove. Blocks with no profiles indicate that data
for such blocks were unavailable for plotting. Since a floating concentration scale was used in these
plots, changes in relative concentrations for the hydrocarbons can be visualized by comparirxi the overall
profile of the peaks to a profile typical of a relatively undegraded but weathered oil. This is shown as
the solid line in the figures. From comparison with the control plots, it is clear that significant
degradation has taken place within two weeks even with no fertilizer treatment.
Figures 7a and 7b present the profiles of the treated beach (Kittiwake) before and three weeks after
sprinkler application of dissolved nutrients, respectively. In contrast to the control plots the biodeqra-
dation appears to have been substantially more extensive, and this corresponds to the visual disappearance
from the rock surfaces. This suggests that degradation of other fractions (aromatics, waxes, asphaltenes
polars) of the oil may be degrading. As additional chemical and mass spectral analyses of the oil are
completed, more insight into this supposition will be provided.
CONCLUSIONS
Information presented is preliminary in nature. Conclusions drawn are done so purely from a specu-
lative standpoint and may change once all the data are tabulated, evaluated, and analyzed statistically"
Visual observations suggest enhanced biddegradation occurred on the beaches treated with Inipol
slow-release briquettes, and dissolved solutions of inorganic nutrients. Clean-up was especially visual on
the Inipol plot at Snug Harbor and the sprinkler plot at Passage Cove. It is unclear that the differences
between the treated and control plots were statistically significant. Analysis of oil from control plots
showed that changes in oil composition were substantial and progressed steadily through time This sua-
gested that natural biodegradation of the oil occurred at a surprisingly rapid rate.
Samples of oil from fertiIizer-treated beaches, particularly from cobble surfaces, taken at about the
time when the oil was visually disappearing, showed substantial changes in hydrocarbon composition indicat-
ing extensive biodegradation. This suggests that biodegradation was effecting removal of the oil both
through direct decomposition and possibly through the production of biochemical products (bioemulsifiers)
known'to be produced by bacteria as they consume oil and hydrocarbons as sources of food.
REFERENCES
1- Petroleum Microbiology;: Atlas, R.M., Ed.; Macraillan, Inc., New York, 1984.
2. R.M. Atlas, "Effects of temperature and crude oil composition on petroleum biodegradation", Appl.
HjLcrooi ol, 30; 396 ( iy73)»
3. R.M. Atlas and RvBartha, "Degradation and mineralization of petroleum in seawater: limitation by
nitrogen and phosphorus", Biotechnol. Bioeno. 14:297 (1972).
4. R.M. Atlas and R. Bertha, "Stimulated biodegradation of oil slicks using oleophilic fertilizers"
Environ. Sci. Technol. 7:538 (1973). '
5. R.M. Atlas, P.O. Boehn and J.A. Calder, "Chemical and biological weathering of oil from the Amoco
Cadiz oil spillage within the littoral zone", Estuarine Coastal Mar. Sei, 12:589 (1981).
6. M. Bluster, M. Ehrhardt and J.H. Jones, "The environmental fate of stranded crude oil" Deep Sea
Res. 20:239 (1972). —SH
7. C.F. Gibbs, "Quantitative studies in marine biodegradation of oil. I. Nutrient limitations at
14°C", Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B. 188:61 (1975).
8. C.F. Gibbs, K.B. Pugh and A.R. Andrews, "Quantitative studies in marine biodegradation of oil
II. Effects of temperature", Proc. R. Soe. Land. Ser. 8. 188:83 (1975).
9. J.R. Haines and R.M. Atlas, "Biodegradation of petroleum hydrocarbons in continental shelf
regions of the Bering Sea", Oil Petrochem. Pollut. 1:85 (1983).
7 •
-------
30-12,3
10. A. Jacobsor,, M. McLaughlin, F.O. Cook and O.W. Westlake, "Effect of amendnents on the microbial
utilization of oil applied to soil", Appl. Hierobiol. 27:166 (1974).
11. D.N. Ward, R.M. Atlas, P.O. Boehm and J.A. Calder, "Hicrobial biodegradation and chemical evolu-
tion of oil from the Amoco spill", Ambio. 9:277 (1980).
12. J.O. Walker and R.R. Colwell, "Microbial degradation of model petroleum at low temperatures",
13. R. Olivieri, P. Bacchin, A. Robertiello, N. Oddio, L. Oeggen and A. Tondo, "Microbial degrada-
tion of oil spills enhanced by a slow-release fertilizer", Acct. Environ. Hierobiai. 31:629
(1976),
*
U. A. Sirvins and H. Angeles, Strategies and Advanced Techniques for Marine Pollution Studies-
Mediterranean Sea; C.S. Gram and H.J. Dou, «ds. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986, pp. 357-404.
15. B. Tramier and A. Sirvins, "Enhanced oil biodegradation: a new operational tool to control oil
spills", in "Proceedings of the 1985 Oil Soill Conference", U.S. Coast Guard, Amer. Petrol
Inst., Environ. Prot. Agency, Los Angeles, CA, 1985, pp. 115-119.
16. R.D. Hauck, Organic Chemicals in the Soil Environment. Vol. 2; C.A.I. Goring and J.W Hamaker
eds. Marcel Dekker, Mew York, MY 1972, pp. 633-690. namaicer,
17. P. Sveum, AcgitJentaUv SPJUed gas-oil in a shoreline sediment on Sm'tzbergen: natural fate and
enhancement of biodegradation, M-7034, Sintef, Applied Chemistry Div.,Trandheim, Norway, pp.
I ~ IO» *
8 ,
" . v\
-------
1 a
Passage Cove
1b
Guillemot
Figure la. Snug Harbor, Knight Island, with treatment beaches
identified.
\t
Figure Ib. Passage Cove,' Knight Island, as above.
-------
2 a
7 \
r \
7 \
7 \
7 ^
7 \
7 ^
7 \
r \
7 \
7 \
7 \
7 \
7 \
r \
7 \
7 \
T \
7 \
7 \
7 \
2 b
Figure 2a,. Placement of the Bags of Water-Soluble Fertilizer
on Otter and Seal Beaches
Figure 2b. Repositioning of the Bags of Water-Soluble Fertilizer
on Otter and Seal Beaches
10
\
-------
3 a
5
u.
10
DATE
-3
DATE
Tidal Fluctuations for Snug Harbor, June 6-30, 1989,
Figure 3a. High tides.
\
Figure 3b. Low tides. . . -• '- •
11 Vs-
-------
90-22.3
1 a
1b
Passage Cove
Guillemot
Kittiwake
Figure la. Snug Harbor, Knight Island, with treatment beaches
identified. x
I
Figure Ib. Passage Cove> Knight Island, as above*
12
-------
90-22.3
2 a
7 ^
r \
7 \
7 \
7 T
7 \
7 ^
r 1
7 \
7 \
7 ^
7 \
7 \
7 \
7 \
7 \
7 \
7 \
7 \
7 \
r \
2 b
Figure 2a» Placement of the Bags of Water-Soluble Fertilizer
on Otter and Seal Beaches
Figure 2b. Repositioning of th« Bags of Water-Soluble Fertilizer
on Otter and Seal Beaches
, 13
\
-------
90-22.3
3 a
ID
it!
10
3 b
if
-3
DATE
Tidal Fluctuations for .snug Harbor, June 6-30, 1989,
Figure 3a. High tides.
Figure 3b. Low tides.
.14 •'.'•''.
-------
90-22.3
•LOCK-1
SLOCK—4
BLOCK.3
BLOCK.*
4 a
cn
=>
BLOCK. 7
•LOCK
•LOCK'S
3
T2
"to
o»
Figure
Figure
n-Alkanes (n-C12 to n-C32)
4a. Seal beach, cobble, before fertilizer application.
4b. Seal beach, cobble, four weeks after oleophilic fertilizer application.
15
-------
90-22.3
•LOCXBl
•LOCK-2
•LOCK-3
•LOCK.*
•LOOC.S
ILOCKBC
5a
CO
o
J
BLOCK-7
IT !•
BlOCKal
5 b
o>
=3
CO
o>
J
o
"5
-------
90-22.3
•LOCK«1
•LOCK. 7
6a
'co
•o
"in
•LOCX«7
•LOCK««
•LOCK*14
o>
c
o
Figure 6a. Raven beach, cobble, before fertilizer application.
Figure 6b. Raven beach, cobble, three weeks later, no fertilizer.
17
V
-------
90-22.3
•LOCX-1
7 a
-o
'to
cr
o
•LOCK-2
•LOCK.3
BLOCK.4
•LOCK-S
BLOCKi
• LOCK-7
»LOCK.«
•LOCK»»
•LOCK. 1O
•LOCK. 1 1
•LOCK.12
•LOCK. 13
BLOCK>
•LOCK»t
•LOCK.3
•LOCK.S
•LOCK.*
7 b
•o
*
a:
CT>
Figure
Figure
n—Alkanes (n-Cl2 to n-C32)
7a. Kittiwake beach, sand and grav«l, b«for« f«rtilizer application.
7b. Kittiwake beach, sand and gravel thr«« v««ks after application of
water soluble fertilizer.
18
\
------- |