Photo: bbum
In a big setback for whales and environmentalists, the U.S. Supreme Court has yanked restrictions on sonar use in Navy training exercises near the California coast. The court, which split 5-4, didn't quibble with the Navy's own estimates that sonar can lead to substantial and irreparable harm to whales. However, the majority opinion stated that those concerns are "plainly outweighed by the Navy's need to conduct realistic training exercises."
source: Associated Press, Bloomberg, Agence France-Presse, Reuters
see also, in Grist:Appeals court rules against Navy in sonar case
Comments
View as Threaded
Tom Twigg Posted 6:05 am
12 Nov 2008
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 6:23 am
12 Nov 2008
Does the welfare of human beings so far outweigh the welfare of non-human animals that even a very slight risk to the former justifies action that certainly will harm the latter?
Does one kind of good for human beings, viz. defense against whatever danger is presented by enemy submarines, so far outweigh another good for human beings, viz. harmonious and responsible fellowship with non-human living creatures, that providing for the former is justified, even if it means damaging the latter?
Permalink
catman Posted 8:44 am
12 Nov 2008
Course he'll have hell to pay if some subs, that can elude our older sonar, start showing up on the coasts armed with nukes.
Permalink
archigeek Posted 9:46 pm
12 Nov 2008
Permalink
Its Simple Posted 3:18 am
13 Nov 2008
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 4:06 pm
13 Nov 2008
Permalink
Annimal Posted 5:26 pm
13 Nov 2008
Whales, Dolphins and Sonar - A Note from Ann Novek
Posted by Paul, at 11:32 PM
Mid-frequency sonar signals linked to new pathologic entity in cetaceans.
An ongoing battle has been fought between environmental NGOs , mainly NRDC , and the US Navy for more than a decade.
The first rumours re the harmful impact of LFA ( Low -frequency Active) sonar on marine mammals, began already in 1994 , when NRDC investigated sound experiments off California coast. Even 300 miles from the source , these sonic waves have an intensity of 140 decibels , and some mid -frequency sonar systems can put over 235 decibels , as loud as a Saturn V rocket at launch.
The use of deadly sonar in the world's oceans is spreading. The US Navy states ,the sonar is needed to detect hostile diesel -electric submarines from China, Iran and North Korea and other potential hostile countries.
In late January 2008, a dead Northern Right Whale Dolphin washed ashore off California , and this death was linked to ongoing naval exercises.
Sonar possible cause in death of rare dolphin
" The lesions that we have seen to date are consistent to what has been found in the Canary Islands and the Bahamas", said lead veterinarian , Rowles , with the National Oceanic and Athmospheric Administration.
"Scientists in the journal Nature theorized that these deep-diving whales might have panicked and bolted to the surface, causing decompression sickness, similar to the "bends" or air embolisms that can affect human divers. The problem arises when gas bubbles, compressed under the pressure of depth, expand rapidly and tear delicate tissues"
Excerpt from Nature : " Macroscopically, whales had severe , diffuse congestions and hemorrhage , especially around the acoustic jaw fat , ears , brain , and kidneys . "
Vetinary Pathology:
"Gas and Fat Embolic Syndrome" Involving a Mass Stranding of Beaked Whales (Family Ziphiidae) Exposed to Anthropogenic Sonar Signals
Severely injured whales stranded and died due to cardiovascular collapse.
Another useful link :
LA Times: Dolphin dies near sonar site
Cheers,
Ann Novek
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 6:12 pm
13 Nov 2008
As though president-elect Obama does not have enough impossible labors to look forward to, he is going to have to deal with preserving a progressive presence in the already woefully unbalanced Supreme Court maybe as many as three times.
Thanks, Ann, for your research. Unfortunately, the US Navy and the Supreme Court seem to accept the conclusion of scientists, that sonar harms cetaceans; it is just something that they seem to care little about.
Whether or not Archigeek's suggestion is quite the best way to go about educating Roberts & Co., the sentiment behind it is most understandable.
Permalink
jimhadden Posted 6:30 pm
13 Nov 2008
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 11:55 pm
13 Nov 2008
Listening for the enemy is much more effective as a warfare technique. Diesel-electric subs are noisy and have very limited range, they pose very little threat to our state of the art nuclear subs.
Robotic subs that stealthily listen for the enemy in critical passages and relay the information gathered back to the defending sub would be much more effective than active sonar.
This extremely loud, marine life destroying sonar is antiquated and worse than unecessary. It exposes our navy personnel to needless danger.
The military is continuing these programs in order to keep crony military contractors in business.
The Roberts/Alito court is all about the rights of corporate "citizens". So anytime human interests or animal interests threaten those absolute rights of corporations to pursue profit at all costs, the vote has been and will be the same.
These bogus corporate "citizens'" rights must be removed from our legal system, they have no constitutional basis.
The navy ought to move into the information technology era to protect US from underwater threats. Forget the dumb concept of overwhelmingly powerful active sonar, it's not effective from a warfare standpoint.
Underwater robots indistinguishable from marine life are a much better defensive technology. Cancel that whale/dolphin killing sonar. In fact the navy has underwater listening systems protecting our shores already. It is now used to study whales.
Kind of ironic. And cruel, and just plain ignorant. But that's the nature of corporatism.
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 3:12 am
15 Nov 2008
Police state fascists constantly invent false threats in order to pursue their illegitimate agendas. This is just another one.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 4:09 am
15 Nov 2008
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 1:42 am
16 Nov 2008
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 7:15 pm
17 Nov 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/15/opinion/15sat3.htm
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-ed-so ...
Permalink
jimhadden Posted 7:57 pm
18 Nov 2008
Permalink
burncoal Posted 2:22 am
19 Nov 2008
As for "Police state fascists constantly invent false threats in order to pursue their illegitimate agendas. This is just another one." Please keep your eye on Obama and his "Civil Security Force equal to the military" to assist them and our police. That's how Hitler got started, got elected and created the SS, of course I'm using the same stretched analogy expressed on a post within this bolg.
Who has silent subs and would they attack? Use your imagination while you shop Wal Mart - `China's golden egg'.
For decades the USN has employed tracking devices now anchored around the world. In fact each sub and surface vessel (think one world as well as inclusion) has a noise print on file that has been around for at least 30 years.
Try this link out: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE3DB16 ...
Attack sonar needs to be tested and employed to make sure you have the right to question it.
This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it. Abraham Lincoln
Permalink