Sonar
U.S. Navy representatives are holding a public meeting in Eureka on Thursday to gather public comment a Northwest training and testing project that would engage in sonar testing off the coast of Washington. The original project -- the subject of a suit filed by public interest law firm Earthjustice -- only focused on training and drew concern from local residents because it included waters off the North Coast. The expanded project now includes the testing of various equipment and vessels. Liane Nakahara, a public affairs specialist with the Navy, said scientific experts will be present Thursday to discuss concerns and information with residents. The meeting is scheduled for 5 to 8 p.m. at the Wharfinger Building, 1 Marina Way. The Navy's Northwest Training Range Complex has been in use since World War II. It is about 122,000 nautical square miles, stretching from the Olympic Peninsula in Washington to approximately the northern border of Mendocino County. Nakahara said the sonar testing, which advocates said will harm marine mammals, will occur off the coast of Washington. All training in the southern part of the range occurs out beyond 12 nautical miles. ”You won't see that out in California,” she said. “If anything, the ships will be transiting down past your area to San Diego or elsewhere.” The Navy is currently holding public meetings up and down the West Coast to gather input for a draft environmental impact statement and expects to release the draft in fall 2013. The comment period closes on April 27. The environmental analysis looks at both training and testing. The National Marine Fisheries Service issued a permit for the training project in 2010, but the Navy is re-doing its environmental analysis of the project before the 2015 expiration date in preparation of a renewal, Nakahara said, adding that the Navy decided to include analysis for the testing activities to reduce costs. According to the Navy, ship-mounted mid-frequency sonar would be used for a maximum of 108 hours a year. The Navy is not permitted to kill any marine mammals, but 13 incidences of injury to whales are expected each year. According to the Navy, 99 percent of the effects of sonar would disturb whales' behavior. To mitigate the harm caused by sonar, the Navy establishes lookouts who watch for signs of whales. When Navy lookouts spot whales within 1,000 yards of a ship using sonar, the sonar is required to be powered down, and if whales come within 200 yards, it must be immediately turned off. The sonar testing is a key component of the Earthjustice lawsuit, which was filed against the fisheries service for issuing the Navy's 2010 permit. According to Earthjustice, marine mammals have been stranded or stopped feeding after being exposed to mid-frequency sonar. Earthjustice attorney Steve Mashuda -- who is representing the InterTribal Sinkyone Wilderness Council, Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth, Friends of the San Juans, Natural Resources Defense Council, and People For Puget Sound -- said placing lookouts on ship decks with binoculars is not enough. He said mammals do not always surface, even if they are in the area. ”Our case is aimed at the fisheries service for failing to take some -- what we think are very reasonable and common sense -- mitigations measures to ensure that their activities don't harm whales and other marine mammals,” Mashuda said. A National Marine Fisheries Service spokesman said the agency does not comment on ongoing lawsuits. Mashuda said the service should have added restrictions to when the Navy can conduct their activities based on known mammal migration schedules or where marine sanctuaries are located. According to Mashuda, the suit's next day in court is scheduled for May 15 before U.S. Magistrate Nandor Vadas in Eureka. Comments on the training and testing
project's environmental impact statement can be made online
at www.nwtteis.com
IF YOU GO: What: U.S. Navy Training and Testing
open house Source: www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_20201307/navy-holding-eureka-meeting-training-testing-eis-sonar
The Obama administration has approved a U.S. Navy plan to increase military training along the Northern Pacific Coast and many environmentalists are outraged. The Navy says it needs to try out new technology critical to national security, but critics say the training threatens whales and other species and they want the Navy to stay out of the most sensitive underwater habitat. The Navy's northwest training range stretches from Humboldt County in Northern California up to the Canadian border and more than 280 miles west into the Pacific Ocean. A Navy video shows the training that has been going on there for decades. Now the Navy wants more frequent exercises involving aircraft, submarines, and new advanced weapons -- such as underwater mine fields and air to air missiles. ABC7 spoke via satellite with John Mosher, the environmental program manager for the Navy's Pacific fleet. "It's a wide variety of training events that are conducted, absolutely critical to the Navy's mission and to be ready to do that mission at any time," says Mosher. But while they are doing that training, many environmentalists believe the Navy should also be doing more to protect the ocean from toxic chemicals, explosives and sonar. "It's such a big range that the Navy is operating in up there. It's roughly the size of the state of California and they are not proposing to set aside even a square inch for important biological habitat for marine mammals," says Taryn Kiekow from the Natural Resources Defense Council. The Natural Resources Defense Council is especially concerned about the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary - a treasure trove of biological diversity used by 29 species of marine mammals, including a pod of endangered killer whales. When ABC7 asked, "Why can't the Navy just stay out of that area altogether, do you really need to be there?" Mosher responded, "Based on its proximity to where the ships and aircraft are based, out of Puget Sound, it doesn't make it practical to avoid it entirely." The Navy environmental impact statement says the increased training could affect up to 130,000 marine mammals a year. They might be disturbed or harassed or injured in some way, but the Navy does not believe any will be killed. Still, environmentalists are worried, especially about sonar which the Navy already uses in the Pacific Northwest. "We know sonar harms marine mammals. We know that it disrupts behavior and feeding and mating and can lead to even injury and death," says Keikow. The Natural Resources Defense Council helped produce a video which cites numerous cases in other areas of animals reacting strangely during sonar testing, sometimes washing ashore dead in the days that follow. The Navy does not expect that kind of result in the Pacific Northwest training. Mosher was also asked, "Does some of the Navy's research show the sonar the Navy uses kills or severely injures whales?" He answered, "Under the operating parameters and the mitigations that are in place, generally not. The marine mammal would have to be extremely close to the sonar system to allow injury of that sort. So that's why we have mitigations in place that require powering down the sonar or shutting down the sonar if marine mammals are detected coming close." The Navy uses shipboard lookouts to watch for animals that may be too close. ABC7 then asked Mosher, "Whales can be underwater and tough to spot. Is that just a P.R. move to placate critics?" Mosher said, "We feel it is a very effective mitigation right now with the information we have. It's not just a simple lookout on the deck of the ship, it's multiple lookouts and if we are using active sonar, then the number of lookouts is increased. The lookouts have very specific training in what to look for." Only a small percentage of the training will be done off the Northern California Coast. Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Humboldt County, represents that area and agrees the Navy needs to train, but thinks the expansion is moving too fast "The Navy seems to think because they are the Navy and because they have a mission, that everything else be dammed, that they are going to go ahead and do what they want to do," says Thompson. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, otherwise known as NOAA, has issued a permit for the increased training. However, at the same time, the agency is starting a comprehensive review of the effects of sonar. Thompson wants the Navy to wait for the results. "The science has to drive this. I'm not willing to take a wink and nod from the Navy that everything is going to be fine, 'Just trust us,'" says Thompson. The Navy told ABC7 they use the best available science and their training cannot wait. They also say they might change their procedures depending on what future research shows. The Navy will be holding public meetings in Fort Bragg and Eureka in the next two days to answer questions about the training. Notice of Public Meeting 12/15 and 12/16 from Rep. Mike Thompson: A representative from the United States Navy will hold public meetings regarding the Northwest Training Range Complex (NWTRC) on Wednesday, December 15th from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the Wharfinger Building in Eureka and on Thursday, December 16th from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. at Pentecost Hall at 822 Stewart Street in Fort Bragg. The NWTRC is one of many Navy Range
Complexes used for training of operational forces, equipment
and other military activities. Based at Whidbey Island, near
Puget Sound in Washington, the Navy has been training in the
NWTRC since World War II. The bulk of the air, surface and
subsurface activity takes place in waters off the state of
Washington but the scope of influence covers approximately
122,400 nautical miles and extends from Washington to the
southern tip of Humboldt. Training exercises vary in scope
and effect, and in California are carried out between 12 and
250 miles offshore.
Dear EarthTalk: Is it true that military sonar exercises actually kill marine wildlife? -- John Slocum, Newport, RI Unfortunately for many whales, dolphins and other marine life, the use of underwater sonar (short for sound navigation and ranging) can lead to injury and even death. Sonar systems—first developed by the U.S. Navy to detect enemy submarines—generate slow-rolling sound waves topping out at around 235 decibels; the world’s loudest rock bands top out at only 130. These sound waves can travel for hundreds of miles under water, and can retain an intensity of 140 decibels as far as 300 miles from their source. These rolling walls of noise are no doubt too much for some marine wildlife. While little is known about any direct physiological effects of sonar waves on marine species, evidence shows that whales will swim hundreds of miles, rapidly change their depth (sometime leading to bleeding from the eyes and ears), and even beach themselves to get away from the sounds of sonar. In January 2005, 34 whales of three different species became stranded and died along North Carolina’s Outer Banks during nearby offshore Navy sonar training. Other sad examples around the coast of the U.S. and elsewhere abound, notably in recent years with more sonar testing going on than ever before. According to the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which has campaigned vigorously to ban use of the technology in waters rich in marine wildlife, recent cases of whale strandings likely represent a small fraction of sonar’s toll, given that severely injured animals rarely make it to shore. In 2003, NRDC spearheaded a successful lawsuit against the Navy to restrict the use of low-frequency sonar off the coast of California. Two years later a coalition of green groups led by NRDC and including the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), the League for Coastal Protection, Cetacean Society International, and Ocean Futures Society upped the ante, asking the federal courts to also restrict testing of more intense, harmful and far ranging mid-frequency types of sonar off Southern California’s coastline. In filing their brief, the groups cited Navy documents which estimated that such testing would kill some 170,000 marine mammals and cause permanent injury to more than 500 whales, not to mention temporary deafness for at least 8,000 others. Coalition lawyers argued that the Navy’s testing was in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act. Two lower courts upheld NRDC’s claims, but the Supreme Court ruled that the Navy should be allowed to continue the use of some mid-frequency sonar testing for the sake of national security. “The decision places marine mammals at greater risk of serious and needless harm,” says NRDC’s Joel Reynolds. Environmental groups are still fighting the battle against the sonar, lobbying the government to curtail testing, at least during peacetime, or to at least ramp up testing gradually to give marine wildlife a better chance to flee affected areas. “The U.S. Navy could use a number of proven methods to avoid harming whales when testing mid-frequency sonar,” reports IFAW’s Fred O'Regan. “Protecting whales and preserving national security are not mutually exclusive.” Contacts: NRDC -
www.nrdc.org
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Northern California. It claims the National Marine Fisheries Service failed to protect thousands of whales, dolphins, porpoises, seals and sea lions from U.S. Navy warfare training exercises along the coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington. The groups filing the lawsuit include Earthjustice, the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth, Friends of the San Juans, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and People For Puget Sound. NRDC staff attorney Zak Smith said Navy sonar and other training is harming the mammals. "The Navy's Northwest Training Range is the size of the State of California, yet not one square inch is off-limits to the most harmful aspects of naval testing and training activities," said Smith. "We are asking for common-sense measures to protect the critical wildlife that lives within the training range from exposure to life-threatening effects of sonar. Biologically rich areas like the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary should be protected." The lawsuit challenges National Marine Fisheries Service approval of the Navy's training activities in its Northwest Training Range Complex. The lawsuit calls on the federal agency to mitigate anticipated harm to marine mammals and biologically critical areas within the training range that stretches from Northern California to the Canadian border. The Navy uses the Pacific Ocean off the entire West Coast for training activities, including anti-submarine warfare exercises involving tracking aircraft and sonar; surface-to-air gunnery and missile exercises; air-to-surface bombing exercises; sink exercises; and extensive testing for several new weapons systems. "The marine mammals are being significantly disrupted from their day-to-day activities- mating, feeding and avoiding predators," said Smith. "The Navy training is not just an annoyance to the mammals." A spokeswoman for the Navy declined to comment, saying she had not seen the lawsuit, and the fisheries service did not immediately return an email from The Associated Press seeking comment. Smith said the lawsuit, as with previous legal challenges to the use of sonar, is not intended to prevent the training exercises. "This particular lawsuit does not request the activities (Navy training) to cease," said Smith. "We just want certain areas off limits to the training." He said the initial lawsuits challenging the use of sonar by the Navy started with legal cases in Southern California. In late 2010, NMFS gave the Navy a permit for five years of expanded naval activity that will harm or "take" marine mammals and other sea life. Smith said the permit allows the Navy to conduct increased training exercises that can harm marine mammals and disrupt their migration, nursing, breeding, or feeding, primarily as a result of harassment through exposure to the use of sonar. The groups said the Navy's
mid-frequency sonar has been implicated in mass strandings
of marine mammals and have caused whales to stop
feeding.
A group of conservationists and American Indian tribes are suing over the Navy's expanded use of sonar in training exercises off the Washington, Oregon and California coasts, saying the noise can harass and kill whales and other marine life. In a lawsuit being filed Thursday, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Earthjustice and other groups claim the National Marine Fisheries Service was wrong to approve the Navy's expanded training plan. They say regulators should have considered the effects repeated sonar use can have on those species. The groups want restrictions on where and when the Navy can conduct sonar and other loud activities to protect orcas, humpbacks and other marine mammals. Instead, the Navy is only required to
look around and see if whales are present before they
conduct the training.
Environmentalists asked a federal judge Thursday to decide whether the Navy must halt plans to build a $100 million offshore training range because of potential threats to endangered right whales. The Navy wants to install an undersea array of cables and sensors for training warships, submarines and aircraft about 50 miles off the Atlantic coast of southern Georgia and northern Florida. Environmentalists have sued to block the project, saying it's too close to waters where right whales migrate near shore each winter to birth their calves. Experts say only about 400 right whales remain and a single death could bring the entire species a big step closer to extinction. "It's possible we could find lots of right whales out on the range" along with their babies, said Catherine Wannamaker, an attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center, in legal arguments Thursday before the judge. The law center filed suit in 2010 on behalf of a dozen conservation groups, saying the Navy approved construction of the range before it finished studying how frequently right whales swim through the proposed 500-square-mile site. Wannamaker said naval training concentrated in that area could put whales at risk of lethal collisions with warships, entanglement with parachutes and cords attached to military buoys and possible harm from mid-frequency sonar. The Navy has concluded that installing 300 sensors and attached cables on the undersea range would pose virtually no threat to the whales because construction would be suspended during the calving season from November to April. It also concluded the risks of ship strikes would be minimal based on computer models showing few whales would be in waters that far out to sea. But it said further study was needed before training begins. "There's no reason the Navy should be punished for saying it will engage in further (environmental) review," said Joanna Brinkman, a Justice Department attorney representing the Navy. Brinkman told the judge the military believes its computer models overestimated the frequency of right whales on the training site. The Navy's lawyers also insist vessels from nearby Naval Station Mayport in Florida and Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay in Georgia routinely post lookouts to watch out for whales during calving season. No collisions between Navy ships and whales have been reported since those precautions were implemented 15 years ago. Environmentalists argue even trained spotters have trouble seeing right whales swimming just below the ocean's surface. Their fears of whales swimming near the training site were bolstered in March 2010 when biologists recorded a right whale giving birth about 10 miles from the proposed range. Judge Lisa Godbey Wood peppered attorneys on both sides with questions Thursday. She said she understood the environmentalists' argument — if the Navy is allowed to go ahead and spend $100 million building the offshore range, would it abandon the project if studies later found training there would put whales at risk? However, the judge also cautioned that just because the Navy has called for future studies that doesn't mean it approved the project rashly. "Surely you don't want to hold it against someone that they will continue to evaluate and reassess in the future," Wood said. The judge said she planned to rule "fairly quickly" but did not specify exactly when. Before filing suit, conservationists had asked the Navy to suspend training at the site during the five-month calving season and to comply with offshore speed limits the government imposes on private and commercial ships. The Navy refused, saying the precautions would interfere with its ability to train effectively and maintain readiness. "The Navy's need to maintain battle-ready sailors ... is a hard fact not to be taken lightly," the Navy's attorneys said in a written motion in the case. The U.S. Supreme Court has weighed in an earlier case involving military training vs. protecting whales, siding with the Navy in a 2008 decision. Its ruling threw out restrictions on sonar use that lower courts had imposed on the Navy during training exercises off the coast of southern California, saying the need for a well-trained military trumped possible harm to an unknown number of marine mammals. Some environmentalists argue that
sonar can disrupt whale feeding patterns, and in extreme
cases can kill whales by causing them to beach themselves.
However, scientists don't fully understand how sonar affects
whales. National Resource Defense Council
|
,
or sent to Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Northwest,
ATTN: Mrs. Kimberly Kler -- NWTT Project Manager, 1101
Tautog Circle, Silverdale, WA 98315-1100.