Louisiana to Lithuania and Back

January 29, 2010
What does the Baltic Sea ex-Soviet Union country Lithuania have in common with Louisiana? They border the largest and second largest human-caused areas of low oxygen waters in the world, respectively. These waters without enough oxygen to support fish, crabs, lobsters, shrimp, shellfish, or other organisms that live on or near the bottom are often termed “dead zones.” Dr. Nancy Rabalais, LUMCON Executive Director, visited Vilnius, Lithuania in January to share her knowledge with Baltic Sea researchers and policy makers and learn from their experiences. The group she addressed in plenary was Baltic BONUS, the Baltic Organisations Network for Funding Science, which was holding its annual conference on their Baltic Joint Research Programme. Dr. Rabalais compared the Louisiana area of low oxygen (also known as hypoxia) with other such areas around the world in coastal waters that receive an overabundance of nitrogen and phosphorus from human activities on the land and waters draining to the ocean. The Baltic Sea has been hypoxic in the geologic past and in the early 20th century, but the worsening and expansion of hypoxia in this and the last century are driven by human-driven excesses in nitrogen and phosphorus.  Hypoxia in the Baltic Sea covers an area at least three times the size of the zone off Louisiana, and many of the coastal waters and estuaries surrounding the Baltic also suffer from hypoxia, just as is the case along the coasts of the United States. The European Union and the Baltic Sea countries are dedicated to improving the water quality of the Baltic and its coastal waters. There are a number of international, European, and regional Conventions, agreements and other instruments aimed at sustainable development of the Baltic Sea region, especially related to the reduction of nonpoint source nitrogen and phosphorus. When asked by a member of the audience how the United States was dealing with the issue of the Mississippi River watershed and coastal hypoxia, all agreed that Europe was much better poised and effective in managing nutrients than the U.S.