Judge says Navy must limit sonar use

[tmsmalley]

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- The Navy must follow environmental laws placing strict limits on sonar training that opponents argue harms whales, despite President Bush's decision to exempt it, a federal judge ruled Monday.

A federal judge ruled that the Navy must limit sonar training that some say hurts whales.

The Navy is not "exempted from compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act" and a court injunction creating a 12 nautical-mile no-sonar zone off Southern California, U.S. District Judge Florence-Marie Cooper wrote in a 36-page decision.

"We disagree with the (exemption) judge's decision," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said. "We believe the (exemption) orders are legal and appropriate."

Navy spokeswoman Lt. Cmdr. Cindy Moore said the military was studying the decision.

The president signed a waiver January 15 exempting the Navy and its anti-submarine warfare exercises from a preliminary injunction creating a 12 nautical-mile no-sonar zone off Southern California. The Navy's attorneys argued in court last week that he was within his legal rights.

Environmentalists have fought the use of sonar in court, saying it harms whales and other marine mammals.

"It's an excellent decision," said Joel Reynolds, attorney for the National Resources Defense Council, which is spearheading the legal fight. "It reinstates the proper balance between national security and environmental protection."

The Navy last week wrapped up a training exercise by the carrier strike group of the USS Abraham Lincoln in which sonar was used. There are currently no task force training exercises off the coast of California using sonar.

When he signed the exemption, Bush said complying with the law would "undermine the Navy's ability to conduct realistic training exercises that are necessary to ensure the combat effectiveness of carrier and expeditionary strike groups."

Said Reynolds: "I've always felt that the president's actions were illegal in this case, and the judge has affirmed that point of view with the decision today."

[mylo]

The ocean is pretty big,

The ocean is pretty big, you would think the Navy could play SONAR games someplace other than where whales hang out. I could see where those SONAR pulses would wreak havok on the poor buggers. .....it would be like trying to sleep with a marching band parading through your front room.

Mylo

[JWLaRue]

I want to know how

I want to know how the Navy is going to negotiate with the whales for use of ocean space. As Mylo says, the ocean is a big place....so how will the Navy know in advance that there are whales in the area?

-Jeff

[hakkikt]

It's much worse than trying

It's much worse than trying to sleep with loud noise in your front room - more like having gunshots going off inches from your head (sonar can be that loud), but nowhere to run and nowhere to hide, and without hands to even cover your ears.
Whales have been found stranded with heavy ear injuries after Navy manoeuvres. Probably not only totally disoriented but crazy with pain.

[JWLaRue]

I am not trying to

I am not trying to downplay the harm that might be done to whales, etc., but seriously....how does one know if there are whales in the area?

Maybe the idea is that the whales are smart enough to only stay within the 12-mile limit (exclusion zone)?

-Jeff

[aeroengineer1]

National security or a few

National security or a few whales? Tough decision. Plus when the whales beach we could sell them to the Japanese for food. In all honesty I have absolutely no problem with the use of sonar even though it may, or may not cause the whales to have a problem. I think that this judge is trying to make laws that do not exist. This is a current problem here in the US. Judges are not here to make laws, they are there to determine if there has been an infraction against the laws, and then decide the punishment. For me, this judge is way out of line. If this were illegal in another country, then I think that they should abide by that law, but the only reason that it has been stated that it is illegal here in this country is because a judge decided to make a law on the bench.

Adam

[mylo]

It sounds like this Judge

It sounds like this Judge was basing his authority on this National Enviromental Policy Act and didn't "make the law on the bench". Whether this "12 nautical mile No SONAR" zone is specified in that act is unclear...as I read it in this little blurb.

For sure, if National Security was in jeopardy over a "few whales", then the whales must lose, no question ....but if it's just a matter of them staying kind of clear of each other, then why not....for the sake of....being somewhat humane. I'm pretty sure that whales gather in certain areas, and migrate to feeding areas in specific lanes......why not just pick a different part of the ocean and leave the beasts alone ? Having said that, if the whales go wandering into the Navy's part of the bath tub, then that's too bad.

.....can't help it, I'm an animal lover. Give me a dog over a human any day of the week.

Mylo

[aeroengineer1]

I cannot say that I

I cannot say that I am not an animal lover. I do hope that the points that were made in my previous post which were sarcastic could be recognized as such. I have had many pets in my life including dogs, cats, ferrets, birds, snakes, and fish. I do have issues with this judge because he IS making law from the bench. In my research efforts I have found that this whole issue began with a group called Natural Resources Defense Council (a lobbyist group) which sought an injunction against the Navy. This group, as well as other lobbyist joined in the fight. This was not the State of California bringing suit against the Federal government, but a lobbyist group. The fight has gone back and forth, with the President giving an exemption.

There are a few things to consider here, the first is that there are differing frequencies that can be used in these exercises, and that higher frequencies attenuate at faster rates than do lower frequencies. Remember how everyone wants to use the 27MHz because it is thought to penetrate the water better than 75 MHz? It is similar, but using sound as opposed to radio. The next thing is that the legal issue is pending on the supposed violation of a few different laws, but only one is specifically a law against sonar. The first is that the state of California has tried to create a no sonar zone that is 12 miles from their coast. Remember that here it is supposed to be that there is a chain of command in the way that laws are passed. Federal laws are greater than any state law. A federal law may be created by executive order if an only if it is within the bounds that are given for presidential orders. These orders are limited and typically deal with issuing instructions during war time. Whether or not there is agreement about the war is irrelevant, the fact exists that the US and many other countries are at a state of war. Therefore the Presidents issue of executive order is valid. The second area law that is at state is the Marine Mammals Protection Act. This is a trick one, because of 35,000 independently instances of beached mammals, only one has been directly tied to a probable beaching due to the use of sonar (Bahamas, 1991, http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/n/navysonar.htm). Due to the fact that this has not been established as scientific fact, I think that further investigation is in order before judgment is made.

So I do stand by the fact that this judge is making law from the bench. In effect he is saying that the states now have power to govern in federal issues, and that a person or entity can be responsible for potentially harmful acts, though it has not been proven scientifically nor statistically (1/35000 is very small). and lastly we are now advocating that individual lobbyist groups take up legal issues that should be the responsibility of the state and giving them authority to file a lawsuit.

[hakkikt]

@ aeroengineer:
If what you think

@ aeroengineer:
If what you think is true and that judge is acting totally out of bounds, then we can rest assured that his decision will be appealed and overthrown. We can lean back and watch the show.
Interesting to note that the Navy spokesperson said that they are "studying the decision", and not using stronger vocabulary. So my suspicion is that the legal points are a lot less clear than you describe them.

The fact that there is a war going on somewhere half around the globe and the US is involved (not a rare occurrence, you will admit) does not mean that the US Navy can throw the law out of the window, in a matter that concerns US interests right on the front porch. And intact wildlife in Californian waters is an interest, if not to you, then certainly to others.

@ Jeff:
My understanding is that the zone along the coast was defined because marine animals are already there. Californian coastal waters are famous for their Orcas, for example. Also, the animals will learn fast that the terrible noise will not happen in that area and prefer it to others. The creation of exclusion zones is an important tool in wildlife protection.
As to the other provision: if the Navy is unable to detect whales in the area that is supposed to be whale-free before they can use sonar, it certainly cannot be held liable for using it in good faith.

-Harald

[JWLaRue]

Harald,

re: Navy "whale spotting"

That makes

Harald,

re: Navy "whale spotting"

That makes sense.

Adam,

While the U.S. is at war, technically there is no "state of war" as only Congress can declare war....and they are clearly not inclined to do so. This legally limits the powers of the President.

-Jeff

[navy2000]

I would like to say

I would like to say that after serving for 8 years onboard US Navy subs that we never did just go around using active sonar after all that would give us away to who ever else may be out there under thw water with us. I only remember about 3-4 times that my sub ever used active sonar just for practice only. I have done many things while on the subs that I served on even track subs from other nations when the Pres. said that we weren't do that. HA HA. After all to be stealthy one must be as quite as they can be while submerged. As for the whales they are almost always making there vocal calls underwater and I have sat in the sonar shack and heard them up to 12 miles away and even some times a little further than that. SO yes we can tell were the whales are at when we are out there in the deep blue ocean.

Duane
QM2/SS

[scott t]

http://www.isa.org/Images/InTech/2008/0207whale.jpg

http://www.isa.org/Content/ContentGroups/News/20082/February28/Whale_of_a_time_listening.htm


Whale of a time listening
By

http://www.isa.org/Content/ContentGroups/News/20082/February28/Whale_of_a_time_listening.htm

Whale of a time listening
By using computer models to mimic the effects of underwater noise on an unusual whale species, there may soon be a new way to initiate underwater communication.

Advances in Finite Element Modeling (FEM), Computed tomography (CT) scanning, and computer processing have made it possible to simulate the environment and anatomy of a Cuvier’s beaked whale when a whale sends out or receives a sonar signal, according to researchers at San Diego State University and the University of California.


Cuvier’s beaked whale
This discovery could be a catalyst for future research that could end years of speculation about the effects of underwater sound on marine mammals.

FEM is a technique borrowed from when engineers use it to simulate the effect of an earthquake on a building. By inputting the exact geometry and physical properties of a building, researchers can accurately predict the effect of forces such as an earthquake, or in this case, noise vibrations.

Dr. Ted Cranford of San Diego State University triggered the research into Cuvier’s beaked whales almost 10 years ago when he undertook the first ever CT scan of a large whale, which provided researchers with the very complex anatomic geometry of a sperm whale’s head.

“I think that the methods developed for this research have the potential to revolutionize our understanding of the impact of noise on marine organisms,” Cranford said.

Since 1968, researchers thought noise vibrations travel through the thin bony walls of toothed whales’ lower jaw and onto the fat body attached to the ear complex. This research shows however that the thin bony walls do not transmit the vibrations. In fact, they enter through the throat and then pass to the bony ear complex via a unique fatty channel.

Despite the Cuvier’s beaked whale being a rare and little-known mammal, Cranford and his team started the work on it because over recent years there have been instances when this type of whale has stranded after exposure to intense sound, making them an ideal starting point for research into underwater communication.

[tabledancer]

Isn`t it just amazing what

Isn`t it just amazing what comes from California,I`m surprised that some group hasn`t tried to stop the Navy from using the the whole coastline.

TD

[raalst]

<withdrawn>

[mylo]

LET THEM LIVE !!! LET

LET THEM LIVE !!! LET THEM LIVE !!

*Parading in front of the San Diego Naval Base with a picket sign that has above slogan and picture of whale on it *





<----- thinking of poor whales.


Mylo