Navy to Defend Sonar in Court (EnviroNazis hindering our security alert)

Wired ^ | 02:00 AM Jun. 30, 2003 PT | Noah Shachtman

[budanski]

For more than a year, the U.S. Navy and environmentalists have been in close combat over sonar and its effect on marine mammals. On Monday, their fighting will culminate in court.

The Navy says it needs a wide berth to test its controversial, ultra-loud, low-frequency sonar system. The Natural Resources Defense Council, or NRDC, and other green groups counter that the military has to be more mindful of whales and other marine mammals when it runs the tests. Whales depend on their ears to make their way around the oceans, after all. The sonar in question can be as deafening to marine mammals as a Saturn V moon rocket.

[sarasota]

Am I the only person who thinks humans and their safety are more important than mammals/fish, etc?

[bigfootbob]

"Am I the only person who thinks humans and their safety are more important than mammals/fish, etc?"

No. But out here at this battle's ground zero, I'm begining to think your idea is on the fringe with many of my neighbors. I cannot believe the stuff I see in our local paper about this issue. The freaks out here protest when the Navy tests anything, including torpedos they launch in the testing area on Dabob Bay. Sicko socialists.

[wm25burke]

Typical watermelon (green on the outside, red on the inside) communist subversion of the west.

Take a look at "Set up and Sold out" - which describes the long standing relationship between Environmentalism and Communism.

http://www.thealternativebookshop.com/envr0002.html

Using an environmental issue to undermine U.S. security is completely consistent with the tactics outlined in this book...

[steplock]

With my deepest aplologies to the Freepers on the left coast....

May kalifornia and all its perverted criminals, politician, LAWYERS, and judges, slide quickly into the cold deep waters never to darken our land again.

You can keep NAMBLA and their ilk there also.

[steplock]

Here's the communist bit*h that is the cause of all this:

Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte edlpo@cand.uscourts.gov

[wm25burke]

Excerpt of review:

"...Swanson has traced the matrix of connections between [environmentalist] movement leaders to its roots in the U.S. Communist movement. You don't have to be a genius to figure out that any movement that opposes the economic machine that fuels Capitalism American-style, has this connection. This is the first book that spells it out. "

[sarasota]

Anybody have Ann Coulter's take on this?

[squidly]

Utter BS such as this just flat pisses me off. These kinds of people would probably complain about the impact of the Inchon landings on the local crustacean population. This is what peace, prosperity and plenty gets you, a nation full of blithering idiots who forget where peace, prosperity, and plenty comes from.

[wm25burke]

>>who forget where peace, prosperity, and plenty comes from.

They have not "forgotten" anything - they simply do not care about "Peace, prosperity, and plenty".

When did the communists ~ever care about these issues?

Read the above referenced book.

[jimt]

Folks,

My Marks Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers lists 110 decibels as "deafening", the sound level of a nearby riveter, which I can attest to as unpleasantly noisy.

The decibel scale is a logarithmic one, where a DOUBLING of the pressure level computes to an increase of 6 decibels.

The Navy's widget, at 240 decibels, produces sound pressures of 2^21 greater than "deafening", or about 3 million times higher sound pressures.

While I detest the environuts, maybe they have a point this time.

[sergeantdave]

Nearly everything the eco-fascists claim is junk science.

How do we know this equipment is dangerous to whales? I assume that whales can swin, and they can move away from irritating noise.

Besides, the eco-fascists should bear the burden of proof in court that whales are harmed.

And since when are whales more important than 300 million Americans and their security?

We should get the Wisconsin out of mothballs, sail to Frisco and open fire on the Sierra Club watermelons, followed by a Marine amphibious landing.

[hchutch]

This is just infuriating.

I can just imagine a briefing:
"Now, I had requested the SURTASS LFA, but a federal judge, in all his wisdom, has denied it. Too dangerous for the whales. So, we're going to have to send some 688s in ahead of us, and hope they can handle the task."

[GovernmentShrinker]

There is good reason to believe they do. Autopsies of sea mammals exposed to these noise levels have shown total destruction in their hearing membranes. This is not just a touchy-feely "this upsets the poor critters" claim.

[hchutch]

But are the whales more important than our ships and sailors?

This could serriously compromise our ASW capabilities.

[GovernmentShrinker]

The "irritating noise" physically destroys the hearing membranes very quickly, sort of like how an extremely loud noise right next to a human ear can permanently damage hearing in less than a second. And once their hearing is destroyed, no, they cannot just leave the area, because they rely on their extremely sensitive hearing for navigation.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Being a lot smarter than whales, we should be able to find ways of defending ourselves that don't involve wholesale destruction of other species that aren't bothering us. I really find it hard to believe that these sonar frequencies are the ONLY way we can achieve our legitimate military objectives. Sometimes necessity is the mother of invention, and a ban or strict limitations on use of this technology is likely to spur energetic and successful human endeavours to discover a workable alternative. Environmentalism can be carried too far, but so can total disregard for the lives and well-being of other sentient creatures.

[hchutch]

Look, I DO respect the dolphins and whales - I eat veal, which has never resulted in injury, much less death, to any dolphin or whale.

But at the same time, the call has to be made in this case by the military professionals, NOT environmentalists. I'd consider saving the whales to be a VERY poor trade for losing a few ships and hundreds of sailors. Which could be very likely if we went head-to-head with the PRC over Taiwan.

The PRC, you see, has a lot of diesel-eelctric boats, and they'd have ashort logistical chain to that theater of operations. I do not think we should compromise our ASW capabilities unless other technology can be PROVEN to do the job as well as SURTASS LFA appears to do so.

[Poohbah]

I really find it hard to believe that these sonar frequencies are the ONLY way we can achieve our legitimate military objectives.

Tell us how to reliably locate and track diesel-electric submarines operating on battery power WITHOUT using SURTASS LFA.

[GovernmentShrinker]

I don't pretend to be an expert on the engineering/physics aspects of this problem. I just know that when humans, and particularly Americans, set their minds to finding a solution to a problem, they just about always do. Satellites, maybe?