Update on the Navy Sonar In The San Juan Islands

UPDATE TO MY LAST POST

Throughout the night of April 7th, anyone listening to the hydrophones at Lime Kiln State Park heard 8 uninterrupted hours of underwater voices followed by echoing pings of military sonar every ten minutes.  You can listen to a clip of the recorded exercises by clicking this link, but be sure to TURN DOWN YOUR VOLUME.

According to Dr. Val Veirs, president of The Whale Museum board and professor emeritus of physics at Colorado College, decibel levels of sonar pings recorded off the west side of San Juan Island April 7-8 may have been the same level as sonar pings implicated in the deaths of several beaked whales in the Bahamas in October 2003. “The received levels of the signals at Lime Kiln Lighthouse were about the most intense sounds that the hydrophones there have recorded in the past several years of continuous operation,” he said. "The highest received levels came from sonar pings and were approximately 140 dB re 1 microPascal." This is approximately the same as the most intense sonar signals recorded in May 2003 when the (USS) Shoup transited the waters of Haro Strait. Biologists on the water at the time reported that killer whales seemed to be fleeing from the sound. Since then, Navy ships are required to receive permission from fleet commanders before operating sonar in Puget Sound. That was in 2003.

"The garbled voices we heard today were communications between the submarine and a surface tender," Veirs said. "We estimate that the distance between our hydrophone at Lime Kiln Lighthouse and the submarine was in the neighborhood of 10 nautical miles and for our hydrophones to pick up the strong signals that they did, the submarine was emitting sound with source level in the range 175 dB to 225 dB re 1 microPasca1.”

Veirs said the sounds were heard for many miles in a variety of underwater locations — from the east at Whidbey Island to the north of San Juan Island and out toward the ocean in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. And of significant concern was the fact the sonar was taking place where there were reports of Transients, a minke, & 2 gray whales only hours before the episode began.

By 8:00pm on the 8th, Navy spokeswoman Sheila Murray confirmed that the fast-attack submarine USS San Francisco, accompanied by a surface ship, was operating its sonar last night as it passed through the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The sub was conducting “required training dives” and did not enter Haro Strait, she said. The Navy undertakes precautions to protect marine mammals, she noted.  The full story has been covered locally and throughout the Pacific Northwest- you can click HERE for more details.

This past December, The Navy and several plaintiffs, including the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Cetacean Society International, the League for Coastal Protection, the Ocean Futures Society, and Jean-Michel Cousteau, entered into a settlement agreement to resolve a worldwide challenge to the Navy's testing and training with mid-frequency active sonar. The settlement essentially adopts the long range program for environmental analysis and research , forcing the Navy to continue to implement a variety of protective measures in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. That agreement does not require any additional mitigation measures. General Counsel for the Navy, Frank Jiminez commented after the settlement, "The Navy welcomes an approach that relies more upon scientific research than litigation."

Just this week, researchers issued a study indicating sonar causes temporary hearing loss in dolphins. Findings show that when the dolphins were exposed to progressively louder pings of mid-frequency sonar up to 203 dBs, neurological data showed the mammal had become deaf, for its brain no longer responded to sound.

While concerns are heightened right now, it is important to stress that the Navy has been proposing a substantial increase in these types of exercises throughout the Pacific Northwest. Plans to expand operations such as adding dummy minefields, scheduling hundreds more training flights and warfare simulations over land and sea, and increasing the use of sonar are scheduled, adding potential threats to endangered and threatened whales and other marine mammals throughout the region.

The Navy says that the pending increases in warfare activities are necessary and their draft environmental impact statement, released Dec. 29, concludes (with no surprise) that expanded training won't harm marine life or the public. But environmental groups, fishermen and some politicians are wary, stating that the military sprang the 1,000-page environmental review of its increased training plan with little notice and has provided only minimal assessment periods or input from residents.

At risk are the southern resident orcas and nine marine mammal species listed as threatened or endangered, including seven whales. And thanks to George Bush and more recently, The Supreme Court, it certainly appears as though the Navy's plans may go completely unchallenged despite the incongruity of the situation at hand. There is hope, however. The comment period, once limited to a couple of weeks between January 27 and mid-February, has now been extended to April 13, 2009, to allow for additional public input. Should you be so inclined, please take a look at the Draft Impact Statement (as ugly as it is) and send your comments to the Government. You can also send an email or fill out a comment form online. 

Subscribe in a reader

Sonar Heard For Six Hours in The Salish Seas

Following a magnificent day in the Pacific Northwest- temps in the 70's and hours spent watching a shiny ball of heat in the sky which we rarely see but is apparently known to others as "the sun," (smiles) I snapped this photo just as the sun fell fell behind the profile of Vancouver Island at 7:02pm. All was right with the world- spring temperatures had welcomed back a myriad of frogs and it was to their chorus I that I fell asleep.

This morning, however, I was forced to see the other side of what had been my reality only hours beforehand; underwater, the night had not been so peaceful. Logging on to Facebook (feel free to add me as a friend if you'd like!) I was astounded by what I was seeing and hearing. As you already know, if you have read this blog before, we have been actively advocating public response to proposed increases in military training exercises planned in and around the area as well as trying to focus efforts on public awareness- explaining impacts on this tenuous marine environment called the Salish Sea.

Last night proved the efforts must continue. Listeners tuning in to the Lime Kiln Hydrophones  anytime after 6:55 pm were afforded the chance to acoustically engage in active military training for six +hours. While listening, one could have enjoyed listening to repeated sonar pings and underwater voices emanating from Navy vessels training exercises in the area, exercises which later confirmed by the military as having taken place in these waters. Jeanne Hyde provided an overview of the events as they occurred on her blog, staying up through the morning hours to follow it. Scott Viers, lead instructor and acoustics expert at Beam Reach, a Marine Science and Sustainability School, also tracked this event and provides a significant story HERE. So, if you're curious about what it sounds like, LISTEN HERE but beware, there are loud pings of sonar on the soundclip- TURN DOWN YOUR VOLUME.

Which brings up back to the ocean inhabitants that are being further stressed in their already deteriorating environment. Just yesterday, transient killer whales were seen throughout the afternoon right in the same area where the exercises were being conducted- within hours of one another.  

Some excellent further reading on the issue if you are still on the fence about sending your thoughts to the Navy:

NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL PUBLIC STATEMENT

GREAT ARTICLE INTERVIEW OF NAVY

ACOUSTIC ECOLOGY OCEAN NOISE OVERVIEW : SCIENCE, POLICY LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS

AEI FACTCHECK

Bottom line: Navy: Clinging to exceedingly hard line as it embraces stewardship

The Navy seems truly mystified at the uproar being made over sonar training, given the very few incidents over the past decades of mid-frequency active sonar deployment. Many seem to feel that judges who imposed additional safety measures did not really understand the modeling of impacts and scientific minutia used by the Navy and NMFS in designing current safetey measures. There really is a sense within the Navy that this is not a huge problem, thought it clearly deserves attention, and that their famous "29 Measures" are sufficient to minimize future risk. Whether the adoption of these formal standards emerged from within after the Bahamas and later incidents, or was triggered by the outside scrutiny spurred by NRDC and others, there appears to be an authentic desire to do what needs to be done to protect whales. We can assume additional mitigation measures suggested by others, and even those adopted by allies, are truly considered to be excessive and of little practical value in protecting whales from harm.

Even if all this is true, there remain a few areas in which the Navy's approach to the issue leaves much to be desired.

First is the focus on being satisfied with avoiding physical injury, which leads inevitably to discounting behavioral disruption as a cause for concern.

Second is the seeming deaf ear the Navy turns to any suggestion that it put some areas off-limits to sonar training. Look again at the map near the beginning of this report; can it really be true that every square mile of all those ranges off the US east coast contains crucially unique training opportunities, and that putting biologically rich or seasonally important areas off-limits would cripple our training abilities? This attitude cannot help but undermine the public's faith in the Navy to make balanced, prudent decisions on its own.

Third is the vagueness contained in the 29 Protective Measures concerning changes in procedure when the Bahamas-like "contributing factors" are encountered. As noted above, the language here does not inspire confidence that the Navy is taking the threat of injury seriously even in the one very specific set of circumstances that it is convinced is the only situation in which sonar can kill whales. The lack of extended aerial surveys prior to powering up sonar is especially troubling, since beaked whales are so difficult to spot at the surface. Most likely, the Navy simply feels that the likelihood that whales will be present is so low that it does not justify exerting the effort to look for them, or it trusts that in nearly all cases, the whales will hear and avoid the sonar without injury. Even if they are correct in these assumptions, this is a key place where going the extra mile would indicate a level of good faith that is sorely needed to build confidence in their commitment to safe practices.

Related to this is the small size of the US Navy's safety zones, compared to those used by other Navies. As noted above, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, in deferring to the lower court's increase of the shut-down zone from 500 yards to 2000 meters, noted that "NATO imposes a 2,000 meter shutdown zone when a marine mammal is detected–the same zone that the district court’s preliminary injunction requires. The Australian Navy goes farther, mandating a shutdown of activities if a marine mammal is detected within 4,000 yards of a sonar-emitting vessel," and further calculated that the 2000 meter zone would only lead to one or two shut-downs per week of training, hardly crippling training preparedness.

Finally, the Navy's reluctance to encourage more investigation—or even acknowledge enduring ambiguity—of stranding events that do not fit the current clear-cut model of sonar-induced stranding is short-sighted, also undermining pubic confidence in its commitment to do its best. While it is difficult to ever really know what caused many—perhaps most—strandings, the Navy seems too eager to brush aside questions about events that don't fit its simple, specific picture. Acknowledging our uncertainty about the ways that animals may react to sonar, and so treating some of the ambiguous events as possibly sonar-induced, would certainly complicate things for the Navy, but it would not tie them to making operational changes based on these uncertain events. It would, however, show that the Navy is authentically considering the full spectrum of possible impacts that its activities may be having, and would allow the Navy to engage more honestly with scientists and environmental advocates as we slowly unravel some of the mysteries and uncertainties that currently limit our understanding.

This last point was starkly highlighted during a June 2008 press event in which the Navy took reporters and several scientists on a sonar training exercise off Virginia. In its briefings, the Navy repeated its well-known mantra: Only five stranding events have been "linked scientifically" with sonar since its inception in 1939....No strandings have been "linked scientifically" to the U.S. Navy since 2000....And, finally, "No scientific evidence exists proving mid-frequency active sonar has ever killed any marine mammals as a direct and sole cause of death." (i.e., they are injured by the changes in their dive patterns, and/or by being tossed about on the beach after stranding, rather than by direct acoustic impact/trauma). Even the scientists that were hand-picked by the Navy to participate in this PR exercise could not abide the stridency of the Navy's message: Nina Young, of the Consortium for Ocean Leadership (a multi-agency coordinating group) said the Navy uses uncertain cause of death rulings to downplay possible links between sonar and mammals. "It's unfortunate that the threshold for the Navy seems so absolute, and the burden of proof so high, that it undermines efforts to engage in a productive discussion," she said, while Andrew Wright, a marine mammal scientist who has worked for the Marine Mammal Commission and NOAA, said definitive proof of sonar's effect on whales didn't exist until recently. "We've only really known about the problem since 2000, 2002. We don't have long-term information, even on humans. There's so much uncertainty around this, and it all depends on where you place the burden of proof."

Remembering the crucial point that routine use of active sonar far exceeds the use of sonar in training situations, the Navy could dramatically advance its own cause by being less adament in all these ways as it conducts its training missions. Of course, that would require a long-term institutional commitment to minimize potential harm; and indeed, there are many within the military with authentic desires to work constructively with scientists, regulators, and other civilians, as well as in balance with Congressional and judicial oversight. So far, however, the decision-making apparatus, appears to remain in the hands of those more commited to maintaining the Pentagon's autonomy in the face of public or judicial opinion.

For more information, see AEI Special Report: Active Sonars - Includes continually updated news items, tracking of range-specific EIS releases, technology descriptions, current deployment, and links to military, agency, and NGO websites. [GO THERE]

You can read the Proposed EIS Plan or go directly to the comment page here.

Northwest Navy Training Range Comment Period Extended to APRIL 13

The Northwest Navy Training Range Comment Period HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY EXTENDED TO APRIL 13TH DUE TO PUBLIC INTEREST!!!

For information on the project, and ways to provide public comment, visit http://www.NWTRangeComplexEIS.com/. 

Want more information about the draft and the proposed impact in the Pacific Northwest and the Puget Sound? CLICK HERE.

We're having an impact, folks!!!! Please take some time to send your thoughts to the military by clicking THIS LINK.

Deadline for Comment Period on Increased Naval Presence in the San Juan Islands Coming up Shortly- MARCH 11

Postcards From Friday Harbor: Postcards From Friday Harbor: NAVY Plans to Increase Training Exercises over the San Juan Islands

NAVY Plans to Increase Training Exercises over the San Juan Islands

Imagine a beautiful summer day in the San Juan Islands....calm waters, the echoing blow of killer whales, tiny fins of cavorting porpoises bouncing along the water. Rejuvenating and peaceful, you sit at Lime Kiln State Park embracing the concurrent peace with joy...that is, until the shoreline begins to tremble with the vibrations of afterburners of an E-18 Growler, on a practice mission to simulate jamming enemy radar. Below the flat waters that bring you comfort, missiles fly and sonar resounds, deafening the wildlife that affords you such serenity on shore. Think of the region as a 21rst century combat computer game, only using real planes, ships, munitions and ordinance.

It is no surprise that the Navy has been conducting warfare training exercises in our region for decades, including firing missiles and machine guns, dropping bombs and practicing sonar detection of submarines. But if the Navy has their way in the next month, their training playground and exercises in the Pacific Northwest will be increased with vigor. Plans to expand these operations and others such as adding dummy minefields, scheduling hundreds more training flights and warfare simulations over land and sea, and increasing the use of sonar will add potential threats to endangered and threatened whales and other marine mammals throughout the region. Specifically at risk are the southern resident community of orca whales, whose number have continued to drop to alarming levels. Factoring in to this the Navy's plan to dump depleted uranium in the region, you begin to get the bigger picture.

The Navy says that the pending increases in warfare activities are necessary and their draft environmental impact statement, released Dec. 29, concludes (with no surprise) that expanded training won't harm marine life or the public. But environmental groups, fishermen and some politicians are wary, stating that the military sprang the 1,000-page environmental review of its increased training plan with little notice and has provided only minimal assessment periods or input from residents.

The biggest environmental concern is the Navy's use of midfrequency active sonar, which would significantly increase under the plan. Environmental groups have been engaged in litigation over the sonar use, arguing that it damages whales and other marine mammals that use sound to communicate and navigate. The Navy's plans for increased training would boost potentially harmful mammal sonar exposures from about 110,000 a year to nearly 130,000. But they are quick to predict little damage since they promise to limit sonar use when mammals are spotted near ships and submarines. How do they know when whales are in the area during training exercises? That's right..."trained" spotters on the decks. 

At risk are the southern resident orcas and nine marine mammal species listed as threatened or endangered, including seven whales.  And thanks to George Bush and more recently, The Supreme Court, it certainly appears as though the Navy's plans may go completely unchallenged despite the incongruity of the situation at hand. There is hope, however. The comment period, once limited to a couple of weeks between January 27 and mid-February, has now been extended to March 11, 2009, to allow for additional public input. Should you be so inclined, please take a look at the Draft Impact Statement (as ugly as it is) and send your comments to the Government. You can also send an email or fill out a comment form online. And in the meantime, enjoy your shellfish and salmon while you still have the chance.

Six Southern Residents Officially Termed "Missing"

This just in today...

Six orcas have apparently disappeared from the Southern Resident orca pods this year, dropping the population to 83, the lowest since 2003. The Center for Whale Research and others are blaming marine pollution, depleted salmon runs, and acoustic impacts from dredging, seismic testing and military sonar for the decline in the population. The Southern Resident orcas are listed as endangered in Canada and the U.S.

"It's a hard hit," said Dave Ellifrit, senior staff assistant at the center.

The news comes amid dire reports in Canada and Washington state that depleted salmon runs are leading to the orcas' starvation. And in Vancouver, B.C., the environmental advocacy group Ecojustice today sued Canada's Department of Fisheries and Oceans, alleging the agency has failed to legally protect critical habitat of the endangered Southern Resident and threatened Northern Resident orcas. The orca pods are called "residents" because they spend a majority of the year here, chasing the salmon runs.

Three Southern Resident orcas didn't show up with their pods at the beginning of the season — K7, believed to be 98 years old and the oldest of all the orcas; J43, a calf born late last fall; and L101, a juvenile male that had been photographed in Monterey, Calif. Jan. 27. By Sept. 30, when the Center for Whale Research concluded its annual survey of the Southern Resident population, three more were missing: L67, the 30-something mother of L101; J11, a female born in the early 1970s; and L21, a female born in 1950.

L67 appeared to be malnourished the last time center staff members saw her; she had "peanut head," a term for a depressed area behind the blowhole that normally stores fat.

In addition, L111, a calf born in August to L47, is believed to have died. (Calves are not included in the population count until they survive a year). All told, L47's last four calves have died, according to Ken Balcomb, executive director of the center.

The resident orcas have long been beleaguered. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, fishermen saw them as competition and shot them. Later, orcas were captured for marine parks.  Their population, believed to have once been in the 120s, plummeted to 71 by 1973. It rebounded to 99 in 1995, then plummeted to 79 six years later.  The population rebounded to 80 in 2002, 83 in 2003, 85 in 2004 and 89 in 2005, then seesawed around 88 since then. The local pods were declared endangered by the U.S. and Canada by 2005 and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration has been patrolling the area to enforce rules requiring boats to maintain a distance of 100 yards from the whales.

Howard Garrett, director of Orca Network, told the Victoria Times-Colonist in a story published today that Southern Resident orcas he's observed are "looking sick."  "There is usually a thick layer of blubber just behind the skull, and that seems to be the first place to be drawn from when they need to draw down blubber," he told the Times-Colonist. "In some of them, there's a dip right behind the blowhole and, when you see that, you know the whale has been hungry."

An adult orca can eat four chinook salmon a day, Balcomb said. But the Puget Sound chinook salmon run is expected to be about 22,000 this year; that's slim pickings when shared with commercial and recreational fishers. It's also a far cry from the standard stock of 1 million salmon that Balcomb remembers in the 1970s.

Balcomb said the ups and downs of the orca population over the last 30 years parallels the ups and downs of the chinook salmon population. "If the chinook population doesn't do well, the whale population doesn't do well," he said.

Balcomb suggested that a 10-year moratorium on salmon fishing would enable salmon populations to rebound. But even a suggestion of a moratorium by fisheries managers would be politically difficult, he said.

Regarding that Ecojustice lawsuit: Representatives of the organization said they and other plaintiffs are frustrated by the Canadian government’s failure to take steps under its Species at Risk Act to protect the orcas. The lawsuit claims that on Sept. 10, DFO declined to issue an order to “protect the orcas’ critical habitat from destruction.”

Ecojustice is joined in the lawsuit by the David Suzuki Foundation, Environmental Defence, Greenpeace Canada, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Raincoast Conservation Society and the Wilderness Committee.

“This is the first lawsuit ever of its kind in Canada,” Ecojustice staff lawyer Lara Tessaro said in a press release. “We hope to force the federal government to legally protect the critical habitat of endangered species, like the Southern Resident killer whales.”

Bill Wareham, senior marine conservation specialist at the David Suzuki Foundation, said Canada needs to legally protect areas that serve the orcas’ basic needs for food and rest.  “Comprehensive marine-use plans that include new protected areas are essential, if we hope to recover populations of these magnificent whales.”

Subscribe in a reader

Postcards From Friday Harbor: Bush's Last Stand..thankfully!

Postcards From Friday Harbor: Bush's Last Stand..thankfully!

Bush's Last Stand..thankfully!

A very disconcerting story.....

Wednesday morning repeatedly sounded sympathetic to Pentagon officials who want to run large-scale Navy exercises off the Southern California coast. While the resulting underwater sonar storm disturbs marine mammals, it also helps prepare sailors for combat.

"I thought the whole point of the armed forces was to hurt the environment," Justice Stephen Breyer said, half-jokingly. "Of course they're going to do harm."

The Pentagon and environmentalists disagree over exactly how much mid-frequency active sonar injures marine mammals, and justices Wednesday couldn't resolve the conflict. An apparent majority of justices, though, did appear ready to defer to military expertise in matters of national security.

Chief Justice John Roberts raised the specter of an undetected "North Korean diesel submarine to get (closer) to Pearl Harbor" if sailors couldn't train with sonar, and Justice Samuel Alito asked pointedly if a judge could be considered "an expert on anti-submarine warfare." Alito added that there is "something incredibly odd" about a trial judge making a decision "contrary" to the Navy's requirements.

Even Breyer, who at times has been skeptical about other claims of executive authority, suggested that "an admiral (who) comes along with an affidavit that seems plausible" might outrank a "district judge who just says" the training should stop.

"You're asking us (for a decision), who know little about whales and less about the Navy," Breyer told Los Angeles-based attorney Richard Kendall, who is representing environmental groups.

The technical but crucial legal question in Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council is when a federal agency can sidestep conventional environmental protections by declaring an emergency. A Pentagon victory could make such emergency declarations more common, and on more than just military matters.

Even before the hourlong oral arguments Wednesday, legal scholars were predicting the conservative-led court was likely to defer to military necessity in time of war. The prediction is enhanced by the fact that Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council arises from the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which the Supreme Court reversed in eight out of 10 cases last year.

It's the conflict between whales and sailors, though, that gives the case its sizzle.

Underscoring the stakes - and perhaps as part of a bit of courtroom staging - an array of uniformed Navy officers sat prominently in the front row of the visitors section Wednesday.

The Navy needs the Southern California Operating Area for training exercises, which prepare naval strike groups for deployment to the Pacific Ocean and Middle East. Sailors use mid-frequency active sonar to detect otherwise hard-to-find submarines.

The Southern California coastal waters are also home to at least 37 species of marine mammals, including pygmy sperm whales, coastal bottlenose dolphins and endangered blue whales.

The Navy's sonar produces piercing underwater sounds that Kendall said was 2,000 times louder than a jet engine. Some scientists say sonar use can cause hearing loss, cranial bleeding, behavioral modifications and mass strandings.

A district court imposed additional safety measures on the Navy, including stopping sonar use when marine mammals were spotted within 2,200 yards and powering down the sonar under certain other conditions.

"The Navy is perfectly able to train under these circumstances," Kendall said.

The Bush administration's Council on Environmental Quality declared "emergency circumstances" existed, which the administration argues should dissolve the district court's training limitations. Administration officials also dispute the extent of harm, noting that Navy exercises have been taking place off the Southern California coast for the past four decades.

"No marine mammals will be killed as a result of these exercises," Solicitor General Gregory Garre told the court. "They hear the (sonar) sound, and they go in the opposition direction. It also has some temporary effect on their feeding patterns."

Justice David Souter pressed Garre vigorously, insisting that the Navy may have brought the emergency circumstances on itself, but Justice Anthony Kennedy added that a presidential declaration of military necessity "certainly must be given great weight."

Kendall predicted the court should rule within two months, prior to the next - and final - training session planned for the Southern California Operating Area.