Nobody actually wants to see any spills, not even BP. And this report is of major signficance to folks in places like Florida, where the type of impact of the BP spill should be similar to the effect of Ixtoc on the Texas coast.
And at risk of belaboring the point, the impacts of location, depth, and current of the BP spill all work to lessen the impact compared to Ixtoc, because the oil is given more chance to disperse, dissolve, etc, as it rises from depth to the surface.
But I'd still like to find a report of the effects of Ixtoc on the shallow water area immediately around the well, which should be more reflective of the impacts on the Louisiana wetlands. Of course, the Gulf War I release "does" give some info, but that spill was so much worse, I'm not sure if it can be compared.
If it remains significantly concentrated on and just beneath the surface and hits the area with 40% of the nation's marshlands, this is not true. Location, depth and currents will cause much more damage than Ixtoc.
I'll grant the significance, if any, of plumes remains to be determined.
I should have added that the upper coast including Florida are much more economically valuable than South Texas. Again a factor of location and currents.