Gorham research co. helps handle contaminants in Mexican resort region

Deep in a Maine winter freeze, it's easy to understand the allure of Mexican resorts towns like Acapulco and Ixtapa. But for one Gorham-based research organization, the connection to the Pacific resort communities is all business.

Since last October, Biodiversity Research Institute has been helping the Mexican state of Guerrero better understand the risks from contaminants in its heavily tourist-based economy. The organization, which studies pollutants and their effects on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, was a partner in a campaign to clean beaches and raise environmental awareness in the region. H. Bruce Rinker, a Ph.D. and BRI director of scientific advancement, collaborated with the Mexican government on a pilot study of chemical pollutants affecting Guerrero. A report, submitted in early December, showed significant mercury levels in local ecosystems, wildlife and women. Rinker has been invited to address the Mexican Senate on his findings.

BRI, which has 140 global clients, studied the effects on wildlife in the Gulf of Mexico of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. In Maine, it is better known for its migratory bird monitoring operation and educational outreach at River Point Conservation area in Falmouth and its study of stressed loon populations. Last fall, BRI received a $6.5 million grant from the Ricketts Conservation Foundation for extensive loon conservation and research.

We recently chatted with Rinker about the Guerrero project and other BRI initiatives. The following is an edited transcript.

Mainebiz: It's not common for non-governmental, foreign entities to conduct scientific research in Mexico. How did this project come about?

H. Bruce Rinker: One of my closest colleagues is 'ecopreneur,' Santiago Lobeira. Santiago is a member of our board of directors and through his network I've been invited repeatedly to Mexico. [BRI] had already proven itself in the state of Quintana Roo in the Yucatan Peninsula, and with the 2012 and 2013 Limpia Mahahaul campaigns against marine debris. We proved ourselves to be experts in addressing plastics pollution. The state of Guerrero heard about this and interviewed me; then the whole team came together, Mexicans and Americans focused together on three environmental contaminants: plastics, petroleum and mercury.

MB: This was in the wake of Tropical Storm Manuel that hit in September?

HBR: Yes, but our planning preceded tropical storm Manuel. The state of Guerrero was very advanced in its thinking — it wanted to get a handle on its plastics pollution and marine debris of all categories. I was able to convince them to include mercury and petroleum. These three are common pollutants anywhere. We could go to the coastline of Portland and study these; they're all here.

MB: Were you able to determine the origin of the contaminants on the western beaches of Mexico?

HBR: With plastics pollution, it came from the state of Guerrero itself. Tropical storm Manuel washed debris down from the highlands to the lower flood plain, out of the mouths of the rivers and into the nearby coastline, and then the surf brought it back in and dumped mountains of debris all over the place. The hospitality and tourism industry was gravely concerned about the visual impact of this debris. So literally within moments of the conclusion of the storm, they had armies of people, with massive clean up equipment, clearing this stuff away.

MB: And what was BRI's role?

HBR: Our concern was that they were doing a short-term fix, and I understand it, I'm not condemning them. But their short-term fix was to bulldoze it together, get it hauled off the beaches, dump it somewhere and burn it — burning metals, plastics, wood, clothing, you name it. So we tried to get in there as quickly as possible and pull the plastic out of the piles so it would not be hauled off and burned.

Then we engaged over 600 people who had lost their jobs because of the storm to do all of the detailed work. Those beaches are clean now, though many others are not.

MB: What's next for your work in Guerrero?

HBR: We're now starting the manuscripts for scientific periodicals; sharing our research is a large part of our mission. Guerrero has our full report and we may be going back to help with continued inventory. They want us to teach them the techniques of wildlife capture that we've perfected, and also show them how to run samples. We've also been invited to speak to the Mexican Senate this winter about these environmental contaminants and their effects. And we've completed a short documentary on the project, which is on YouTube.

Our three-week pilot was really just a snapshot. We know what happened in that moment of time with regards to plastics, mercury and petroleum. Now we need to know the long-term impacts. We have no idea where the mercury or petroleum came from. No idea. The only thing we know is that it is present in the environment and we detected it in fish, birds and humans.

MB: You tested humans for these contaminants as well?

HBR: We sampled 38 women of childbearing age for mercury, 70% of whom were above the minimum observable adverse effect level. We would like to go back and do a similar study on men, children and older people. You have mercury in your body, I have mercury in me; everybody in this part of Maine has levels of mercury. It depends on your fish intake, and on your home situation.

We're preparing letters to each of the women in the study giving them their numbers and how they compare to the overall analysis, and what they can do to lower their mercury levels. Now we need to go back in and do a long-term study — six months to a year — an isotopic study of mercury so we can figure out the point of origin.

MB: Are they just beginning to study these issues in Mexico?

HBR: Oh no, with regard to environmental issues such as climate change, Mexico has been ahead of us. They were signatories of the Cop 16 [United Nations Climate Change Conference in 2010] — the U.S. has not ratified the treaty. In many respects Mexico is a leader in Mesoamerica and throughout Latin America on issues of climate studies. They have a National Institute of Ecology and Climate Change. Can you imagine if our government had such an institution? So Mexico is ahead of the game.

MB: Where else is BRI conducting these types of investigations?

HBR: Nowhere are we doing a comprehensive study of these three toxins combined. We've been doing mercury studies for years and have been a leading player in studies in the Great Lakes, the Northeast, and now in western North America — Canada and Mexico are partners in that study. Guerrero has shown the value in looking at these urban toxins. We could do the same thing for Maine. We're very concerned about tar sands and petroleum pollution. Do we have the necessary baseline information on petroleum that we can refer to if, God forbid, a horrible coastline accident were to happen in and around Portland with transportation of petroleum products? Not that I know of.

MB: BRI's focus started in aquatic environments, but you've expanded?

HBR: In the early days of mercury studies, we focused on aquatic systems. Now we're finding that mercury is also moving into terrestrial ecosystems, in ways we had not imagined. Mercury is in all aspects of the environment. We're now seeing mercury as a pervasive, ubiquitous environmental contaminant and a toxin of the worst kind. It's a horrible neurotoxin that has all sorts of effects on reproduction, physiology, behavior — you name it.

MB: Where does BRI's funding come from?

HBR: The majority of our $5.6 million budget comes from federal, state and industry [the Guerrero project was a $45,000 contract], then foundation grants and corporate sponsorships. The nifty thing about the Ricketts Foundation grant is that it's a leadership opportunity. Governments cannot solve all of the problems; they don't have the funding. In these days of diminishing dollars for environmental concerns, it's individuals of means who can fill that void and provide funds for large-scale, long-term projects. In order to make any important statement about ecological change, it has to be based on a minimum of 10 years work. What government can provide funding for 10 years or more? Many politicians who make those decisions are focused on the short term, from one campaign to the next. Very few can afford to look at decadel impact of their funding, and yet that's what's required to make substantial reliable recommendations — not just conclusions but recommendations — it has to be based on at least a decade of study. With the Ricketts Foundation, they're committing long term, which is what ecologists need.

MB: Is BRI currently involved in any projects in the Northeast?

HBR: One of the ecological stressors that we're interested in is wind power. We're doing a big study off the coast of Maine looking at the waterways in the North Atlantic as to where to best situate these large wind turbine arrays to have minimal effect on wildlife. We're also looking at bald eagles and peregrine falcons and their contaminant loads. And we're banding owls and other raptors, as well as many other bird species, around the state.

MB: What's on the horizon for BRI?

HBR: More work in Latin America, where we have a lot of projects now, and other developing areas of the world. We have not yet developed Asia; we're beginning our interests in the Middle East and Africa.

We will never have to worry about running out of work. Wherever people are found, we have the uncanny habit of contaminating our environment with our physical, chemical and biological pollutants. We just can't seem to resist doing that, advertently or inadvertently. So we have an almost inexhaustible source of study.

And more work with plastics pollution. There's rising concern for micro plastics pollution and chemicals associated with them. Micro plastics are microscopic blobs of plastic, moving throughout the environment. Plastics degrade, they don't decompose. So the plastics we have in our environment now will be here for tens, hundreds, thousands of years. Single-use plastic is a real concern for me — plastic straws, plastic bags — we use them once and throw them away. But they never, ever decompose. They just degrade into smaller and smaller pieces of plastic. And they have this knack for attracting other chemicals like pesticides, to their surfaces. So when wildlife consumes these, they get not only the plastics in their system but also all of the stuff vacuumed up along the way. So they're getting a double or triple whammy in their systems. You have plastics in your bloodstream and it came from that food you put in your Tupperware, or that food wrapped in plastic from the grocery store, or that food you kept in that single-use plastic bag in your hot car.

MB: Education is an integral part of BRI's mission. How do you share your knowledge?

HBR: We publish in many scientific journals. Also, BRI staff are educating in school programs, at River Point in Falmouth, and on the college level. And when I say educating, I'm not limiting it just to information. I'm talking about effecting behavioral change so that long term we're doing a better job of relating to our environments.

That's ultimately the goal of environmental education. It's not just giving a young person a fact sheet on the characteristics of insects. It's asking the question, how are insects important to you? How are insects important to the environment and what can we do to protect insects? And why would we even think that creepy crawlies deserve protection? That steps from interpretation to behavioral change and that is the sustainable aspect of education we're ultimately trying to effect — linking heart and mind to a long-term commitment to the natural world.

Tina Fischer, a writer based in Portland, can be reached at editorial@mainebiz.biz.

Editor's note: This story was corrected from its original version, which misstated the location of BRI's work in the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.