AP PHOTOS: Remembering the Exxon Valdez oil spill | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

AP PHOTOS: Remembering the Exxon Valdez oil spill

Associated Press
912417_web1_912417-d835488618544be6800741a87867d5f1
In this April 1989, file photo, an oil covered bird is examined on an island in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The Exxon Valdez oil spill 30 years ago produced striking images of sea otters and birds soaked in oil and workers painstakingly washing crude off beaches. (AP Photo/Jack Smith)
912417_web1_912417-f7ea29edff894a2b87a94acd02bd9b47
In this April 4, 1989, file photo, the grounded tanker Exxon Valdez, left, unloads oil onto a smaller tanker, San Francisco, as efforts to refloat the ship continue on Prince William Sound. The Exxon Valdez tanker struck Alaska’s Bligh Reef on March 24, 1989, while bound for California. It spilled about 11 million gallons of crude oil, which storms and currents smeared across about 1,300 miles of shoreline. (AP Photo/Rob Stapleton)
912417_web1_912417-53ce18c89734449abe10731f7e9b2a10
In this photo taken April 9, 1989, file photo, a local fisherman inspects a dead California gray whale on the northern shore of Latouche Island, Alaska. The whale was found in the oil-contaminated waters of Prince William Sound. (AP Photo/John Gaps III)
912417_web1_912417-203c4470e638462e8af95d000abf041a
In this May 27, 1989, file photo, people carry signs to protest the Exxon oil spill in Anchorage, Alaska. It’s been 30 years since the disaster, at the time the largest oil spill in U.S. history. (AP Photo/Marion Stirrup)
912417_web1_912417-5e7a8d66149d48898d0236e9e6e8e45b
In this April 17, 1989, file photo, a worker makes his way across the polluted shore of Block Island, Alaska, as efforts are underway to test techniques to clean up the oil spill of the tanker Exxon Valdez in Prince William Sound. The Exxon Valdez tanker struck Alaska’s Bligh Reef on March 24, 1989, while bound for California. It spilled about 11 million gallons of crude oil, which storms and currents smeared across about 1,300 miles of shoreline. (AP Photo/John Gaps III)
912417_web1_912417-8c66fafa830c4aafbadc4b42782691aa
In this April 9, 1989, file photo, crude oil from the tanker Exxon Valdez, top, swirls on the surface of Alaska’s Prince William Sound near Naked Island, days after the tanker ran aground, spilling millions of gallons of oil and causing widespread environmental damage. (AP Photo/John Gaps III)
912417_web1_912417-c75868095024431db78bb736512ff847
In this April 11, 1989, file photo, thick crude oil that washed up on the cobble beach of Evans Island sticks to the boots and pants of a local fisherman in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The Exxon Valdez tanker oil spill on March 24 blackened hundreds of miles of coastline. (AP Photo/John Gaps III)
912417_web1_912417-4c4b302522bc49fc83bfb1091a9a8684
In this April 21, 1989, file photo, crews use high pressured hoses to blast the rocks on this beachfront on Naked Island, Alaska. Just after midnight on March 24, 1989, an Exxon Shipping Co. tanker ran aground outside the town of Valdez, Alaska, spewing millions of gallons of thick, toxic crude oil into the pristine Prince William Sound. (AP Photo/Rob Stapleton)
912417_web1_912417-5d72f53b59344902a0f140d5061bee44
In this April 2, 1989, file photo, sea lions get oil on them as they swim in the water and sit on the rock at Prince William Sound, Alaska. The Exxon Valdez oil spill 30 years ago produced striking images of sea otters and birds soaked in oil and workers painstakingly washing crude off beaches. (AP Photo/Jack Smith)
912417_web1_912417-c84ec32c69cc449fb4111f9c0fe598ee
In this July 17, 1989, file photo, around 200 people showed up at Fiesta Island in San Diego, to protest the use of Exxon products. The Exxon Valdez tanker struck Alaska’s Bligh Reef on March 24, 1989, while bound for California. It spilled about 11 million gallons of crude oil, which storms and currents smeared across about 1,300 miles of shoreline. (AP Photo/Brent Clingman)

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — It was just after midnight on March 24, 1989, when an Exxon Shipping Co. tanker ran aground outside the town of Valdez, Alaska, spewing millions of gallons of thick, toxic crude oil into the pristine Prince William Sound.

The world watched the aftermath unfold: scores of herring, sea otters and birds soaked in oil, and hundreds of miles of shoreline polluted. Commercial fishermen in the area saw their careers hit bottom.

It’s been 30 years since the disaster, at the time the largest oil spill in U.S. history. Only the 2010 Deep Water Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico has eclipsed it.

The 986-foot Exxon Valdez tanker was bound for California when it struck Alaska’s Bligh Reef at 12:04 a.m. It spilled 11 million gallons of crude oil, which storms and currents smeared across 1,300 miles of shoreline.

The oil also extensively fouled spawning habitat in Prince William Sound for herring and pink salmon, two of its most important commercial fish species.

Fishermen and others affected by the spill dealt with ruined livelihoods, broken marriages and suicides. Exxon compensation checks, minus what fishermen earned on spill work, arrived too late for many.

Most of the affected species have recovered, but the spill led to wide-scale changes in the oil industry. Today, North Slope oil must be transported in double-hull tankers, which must be escorted by two tugs. Radar monitors the vessel’s position as well as that of icebergs.

Categories: News | Daily Gallery | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.