U.S. ordered to lower Navy sonar levels to protect whales
Source: SF Gate
U.S. officials have wrongly allowed the Navy to use sonar at levels that could harm whales and other marine mammals in the worlds oceans, a federal appeals court in San Francisco has ruled.
The decision Friday by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals would scale back the Navys use of low-frequency sonar in the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans and the Mediterranean Sea under authority that was granted in 2012.
Sonar, used to detect submarines, can injure whales, seals and walruses and disrupt their feeding and mating. Environmental groups led by the Natural Resources Defense Council filed suit in San Francisco in 2012, arguing that the Obama administration had approved emissions at sound levels that violated the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
A federal magistrate disagreed but was overruled Friday by the appeals court, which said government officials had disregarded their own experts warnings about the potential impacts of sonar.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/U-S-ordered-to-lower-Navy-sonar-levels-to-8381417.php
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Calista241
(5,584 posts)My impression was that the Navy didn't use active sonar all that often, but if it helps the whales and other wildlife, i'm all for it.
PersonNumber503602
(1,134 posts)I take it that these rules would go away if there was ever a major war with a country that has a navy, aye?
reddread
(6,896 posts)reddread
(6,896 posts)PersonNumber503602
(1,134 posts)I was just thinking how much damage a large scale war like WW2 must have caused.
Although reading that wiki link, I didn't see anything mentioned about WW2. I wonder if that was just because they didn't do any studies/pay attention, or if if the older technology didn't have the same negative effects.
Statistical
(19,264 posts)The lower the frequency the further is goes. Honestly the ocean is reallllllllllly big so the sheer size of it helps sea life because statistically a sub can only be covering a small portion of it. Ultra low frequency gear greatly increases the ping range. So part of it is that newer tech is just more dangerous.
However I doubt anyone really cared to do any studies with a war going on so it probably was pretty damaging to aquatic life.
PersonNumber503602
(1,134 posts)reddread
(6,896 posts)"American low frequency sonar was originally introduced to the general public in a June 1961 Time magazine article, New A.S.W.[Note 1] Project Artemis, the low-frequency sonar used at the time, could fill a whole ocean with searching sound and spot anything sizable that was moving in the water. Artemis grew out of a 1951 suggestion by Harvard physicist Frederick V. Hunt (Artemis is the Ancient Greek goddess of the hunt), who convinced Navy anti-submarine experts that submarines could be detected at great distances only by unheard-of volumes of low-pitched sound"
Igel
(35,191 posts)"If we just stopped the war there wouldn't be nuclear subs off the coast of California and ships wouldn't be sinking. So it's not our fault, we have a solution, just do it."
Of course, what's more likely is that if there is a war with somebody with (a) a coastline and (b) submarines that they'd be very close to the US borders and do a lot of serious damage before somebody authorized the rule changes and ordered the use of sonar.
But that's okay. It's not the fault of the regulations but the failure to develop a high-tech way of detecting subs without sonar. You can always blame somebody else if you're creative enough.
Duppers
(28,094 posts)About whales?
Wtmil.
PersonNumber503602
(1,134 posts)At first I was wondering how long these rules would last during a war with a sea power. Which then got me thinking about the scale of WW2 and how so many warships were sailing around on-edge pinging away.
I hope you didn't ignore me over this, but whatever if you did. I was like sooooooo going to post some really awesome cool stuff someday, and now you won't be able to see it. Now that was "snark"... I think. Maybe?
Duppers
(28,094 posts)Thanks!
WhiteTara
(29,676 posts)Rhiannon12866
(202,970 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)There's an exercise that involves robust use of sonar and next thing ya know, there's dead whales and dolphins about.
You'd think they'd take a little time to figure out how the damn WHALES do it--they manage to navigate the seas and know what's in their path and proximity without killing one another.
I don't argue that we need "the technology" that sonar provides, but maybe we can figure out a better way to make it happen. Man on the moon, and all that....
Judi Lynn
(160,211 posts)These precious animals have no place to go to hide from this form of murderous torture. I hope someday they will be able to live in a better world. They are innocent. Those who would hurt them are not, and they shouldn't be allowed to terrorize them endlessly.
Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)I've been distressed about this since I first heard about this about 25 years ago.
Now to make it stick.
. . and apply to businesses, too. (I read something this past year about oil companies wanting to use sonar to explore for oil along the southeastern coast of the U.S.. . the answer to that is also NO.)
lark
(23,000 posts)Hope this goes to the SCOTUS, a divided court means the whales win. AWESOME! After all the horrific things that are happening, including terrorism, drumpf, unprovoked killings, coup attempts, its really good to see a piece of sanity. Great and brave and unexpected news,
It's about time!