National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Publishes Misleading Information on Gulf of Mexico "Dead Zone"

TL;DR

This paper critiques NOAA's portrayal of the Gulf of Mexico 'dead zone,' arguing that their descriptions are misleading and do not accurately reflect the ecological reality of nutrient loading effects.

Contribution

It reveals NOAA's mischaracterization of the Gulf 'dead zone' by analyzing satellite imagery and scientific data, emphasizing the area's ecological productivity.

Findings

NOAA's 'dead zone' images are misleading and exaggerated.

The Gulf area supports 70-80% of fishery production despite hypoxia.

Satellite images show turbidity, not hypoxia, dominates the red areas.

Abstract

Mississippi River nutrient loads and water stratification on the Louisiana-Texas shelf contribute to an annually recurring, short-lived hypoxic bottom layer in areas of the northern Gulf of Mexico comprising less than 2% of the total Gulf of Mexico bottom area. Many publications demonstrate increases in biomass and fisheries production attributed to nutrient loading from river plumes. Decreases in fisheries production when nutrient loads are decreased are also well documented. However, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) persists in describing the area adjacent to the Mississippi River discharge as a "dead zone" and predicting dire consequences if nutrient loads are not reduced. In reality, these areas teem with aquatic life and provide 70-80% of the Gulf of Mexico fishery production. On June 18, 2013, NOAA published a misleading figure purporting to show the "dead zone" in an article predicting a possible record dead zone area for 2013 (http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2013/20130618_deadzone.html). This area is not a region of hypoxic bottom water at all nor is it related directly to 2013 predicted hypoxia. This figure appeared as early as 2004 in a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) article (http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/dead_zone.html) as a satellite image where the red area represents turbidity and is much larger than the short-lived areas of hypoxic bottom water documented in actual NOAA measurements. Thus, it is misleading for NOAA to characterize the red area in that image as a "dead zone." The NOAA has also published other misleading and exaggerated descriptions of the consequences of nutrient loading.