Sonar+2

12/12/08 The Navy's use of low frequency active sonar will remain restricted to certain military training areas of the Pacific Ocean, according to an agreement approved by a U.S. district court in San Francisco on August 12, 2008, according to the Chicago Tribune. A separate lawsuit challenging the U.S. Navy's use of mid-frequency active sonar is currently under consideration in the U.S. Supreme Court. Under the agreement, LFA testing and training is limited to defined areas of the North Pacific Ocean, and the Navy must adhere to other protective measures, including seasonal and coastal exclusions that will protect breeding grounds and other important whale habitat. In Hawaii, for example, LFA training cannot occur near the Hawaii Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary or the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument, and is limited to waters beyond 50 nautical miles of the main islands, an area known to contain vital habitat for several unique marine mammal populations. According to Navy studies, the LFA system generates noise intense enough to disrupt whale behavior more than 300 miles away. Scientists have observed that, under certain oceanic conditions, sound from a single LFA system could be detected across entire oceans. "Limiting sonar use in breeding grounds and other key habitat areas is essential for the conservation of whales, dolphins, and other marine mammals," said Naomi Rose, Ph.D., marine mammal scientist for The Humane Society of the United States. "This agreement protects both national security and our most treasured natural resources." The lawsuit asserted that a permit issued last year by the National Marine Fisheries Service, allowing deployment of the sonar system around the world, violated a number of federal laws including the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. Environmentalists warn that the Navy's midfrequency sonar can harm or kill whales in a number of ways. One is by forcing the mammals to dive deep to avoid the sound, causing decompression sickness or "the bends." The electronic devices also interfere with mammals' ability to navigate underwater and prompt them to change breeding habits The case was prompted when the Navy decided last year not to perform a detailed study on sonar's effects on marine creatures. Federal law generally requires such a study before actions that could significantly affect the environment. The Navy argued that dolphins, whales and other marine life faced "harassment" from the sonar but that bigger problems weren't likely and, therefore, an official environmental impact statement wasn't necessary. The Bush administration, though, saying there's an "emergency" need to provide seamen with hands-on training, challenged a federal judge's order forbidding use of the sonar within 1¼ miles of marine mammals in Navy exercises off the Southern California coast. Sonar is "vitally important to the survival of our naval strike groups deployed around the world and therefore critical to the nation's own security," said Solicitor General Gregory Garre, arguing for the government. The administration says thousands of sailors' lives could be at risk from a single submarine attack. The importance of the case goes beyond the almost-complete training exercises, because it will decide who has the final say -- the courts or executive agencies -- in deciding when an environmental impact statement is required before a government action. The Supreme Court's decision in the case could dictate how much latitude federal judges have to stop military exercises on environmental grounds.
 * Sonar 2 **