Navy proposal could harm local cetaceans
Dennis B. Chan’s June 10, 2015, article “Humpback whales sightings suggest breeding ground in Marianas” evidences that at least one step toward achieving progress with protecting marine mammals in the Marianas is being made. Substantially more time, effort, and thought to further survey marine mammals in the region by the scientific community is needed, however, because no one really knows and understands just how harmful Navy-produced active sonar and underwater detonations will be to our humpback whale population and a host of other marine mammal species that share the Marianas Islands environment with our people.
There is little information on humpback whale and other marine mammal populations in the Marianas region and this is adequate reason to be gravely concerned because MITT related Navy undersea training proposals and the Navy’s waiver request to NOAA are incomplete. The Navy has not presented enough empirical evidence to amply justify its desire to conduct 12,000 underwater explosions and to conduct over 17,000 active sonar events each year.
Chan’s article is important because it acknowledges the hard work performed by at least one scientist, Dr. Erin Oleson, who is contributing new information and knowledge to help grow the collective understanding of how marine mammal populations breed and live in the Marianas region. This represents life-sustaining, and thus life-giving work as opposed to life-damaging or life-destroying activities proposed by the Navy in the MITT.
It is important to note that the sample size being discussed in Chan’s article may represent just a small or very small representation of exactly how many marine mammals live and transit throughout the Marianas region. It is equally important for us to assume that even moderate amounts of active sonar and underwater demolition activity in the area could be irreparably harmful to the long-term health of the undersea marine mammal ecosystem in the region. Until we have a long trail of historical data to evidence how the Navy does not harm or injure or kill marine mammal populations in the region, NOAA should not approve the Navy’s five-year letter of authorization waiver request. It is unreasonable and unsubstantiated because not every nook and cranny of the planet is a threat to American military security and we must protect our total environment because once it is damaged or destroyed it cannot be remediated to its original condition.
Rick Perez
Hanover, NH
It should be no surprise that this writer over exaggerates and misrepresents data. The 12 thousand underwater explosions per year he cites includes over 10 thousand medium caliber bullets hitting the water. The Navy in their application included all sources of impulse noise. To include training air guns and ship and aircraft mounted defense weapons like 50 caliber machine guns. His exaggerations also cover the sonar “events”. The number 17,000 sonar events per year is hours of noise by individual ships, submarines, helicopter dropped sonar, torpedoes etc and includes low level sound events that do not harm marine life. Everyone is free to read the LOA here.
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/permits/mitt_loa_application2013.pdf
I do agree with his idea that we must protect our “total environment”. In order to protect it and our way of life we must have a fully capable military. If we do not allow it to train properly we will lose our edge of having the most capable military in the world. And then what? We will no longer have the freedom to criticize the very institution that allows us to have the freedom to criticize.
My brother RC. You talk about commenters scare tactics on any issues dealing with US Military training and Tinian/Pagan. Yet you do the same by saying ; ” If we do not allow it to train properly we will lose our edge of having
the most capable military in the world. And then what? We will no
longer have the freedom to criticize the very institution that allows us
to have the freedom to criticize.”
Also, since when does the US Navy or entire US Mil for that matter really fully disclose in detail their maneuvers, incidents, and so on? Again, you are trying to play the innocent and wise owl part providing links to gov studies funded by the government. What is your interest ombre? Ai’ si Che’lu. LOL!
My interest is open and truthful discourse that is all. I rebut what I feel are untruthful or misrepresentations of facts. I try not to misrepresent data, which is what this particular writer often does. If what I write is wrong just point out where my mistakes are. You are free to do the same and you are free to provide links to studies. BTW most worthwhile studies are in fact funded by the Government. They are the ones with the deep pockets and are the ones mandating the studies. But when you do link to studies please try to use reputable sources unlike our mutual acquaintance Russ Mason. Have a good one my friend!
We see through different eyes my friend. I don’t think CNMI should not give up another part of her beautiful self to be trampled, bombed, strafed, and so on. Where is the wrong in not wanting that to happen? Are we at war? No. And you telling the public that in a sense we must pay homage and bow to the American yoke and destroy our CNMI because this or that… No my friend.
You state “My interest is open and truthful discourse that is all. I rebut what I feel are untruthful or misrepresentations of facts.” Is trying to maintain CNMI intact not a truthful discourse enough? Again, via your fervor of championing US Mil and how advantageous of its presence in the Marianas negating destruction of our very precious and limited resource/treasure in this great ocean is disturbing to say the least. Esta agupa Amigo.
I agree we have different perspectives and that is good, fine and well. I also agree there is nothing wrong with your wish to not have the ranges. You are entitled to want that. And I am entitled to want our military to have training ranges where they are needed.
What I object to is opposition to the ranges based on untruths and misrepresentation of facts and data. I want the undecided to form their opinions based on open discussion and facts that are not misrepresented. Take care.
Sure want all you want my friend. But you should shy away from trying to force folks that are of that land in just accepting something to the tune of Patriotism. Your lack of respect and empathy of CNMI’s children is really childish. All because you want to enrich your pockets.
Sure; want all you want my friend. But you should shy away from trying to force folks that are of that land in just accepting something to the tune of Patriotism. Misinterpretation of facts and data? Different strokes for different folks is what my sarge used to say. This is our fight and maybe best to leave it to us is my advice.