Naval Sonar

[Garibaldi]

I agree, but there is nothing to lose right? The NOAA specifcally stated in a recent memo that the receipt of nearly 10,000 letters opposing LFA Sonar helped push them to explore this issue further ans take the actions they have thus far. It is never impossible Uncle Pug. I bet you are the type that just sits and lets the world go by, think nothing you will ever do will matter or make a difference. I had hoped my orignal post would at least be viewed by a large audience of divers and help the cause a little. If the members of this board do not care about an issue such as this, then maybe your right though and it is a hopeless cause?

Uncle Pug once bubbled...

I hate to be a realist here Garibaldi... but if this worked we would have had peace on earth milliniums ago.

The unconscionable abuse continues... above and below that surface of the sea.

 

[Rick Murchison]

Garibaldi once bubbled...
And if you do not believe me (just some "joe blow" on the Scuba BSS), here is a quote from U.S. Rep John Baldacci of Maine.
"A substantial body of convincing science exists points to the potential dangers of this system for whales and other marine animals"

"Truth appears in Washington with the frequency of Halley's comet, but when it does it shines like the tail of that infrequent celestial visitor." --Cal Thomas
Just one little scientific paper...? looking around the net I can find volumes of rhetoric, conjecture, political posturing and positively tons of totally baseless associations like your original "All of this within a week of the Navy's go ahead to use this low frequency sonar, Coincidence? I think not." And one single incident where a grounding may have been in response to sonar - maybe even likely... but you've been careful to word it correctly, because it was not LFA that was being used near the Bahamas, and no one is squalling about stopping the use of the sonar that was used there.... sorta makes one wonder what the underlying agenda of the folks attacking LFA might really be, doesn't it? If one were prone to believing conspiracy theories and coverups and such, one might begin to suspect those who are the targets of LFA, wouldn't one??? Hmmmm???
Rick

 

[Rick Murchison]

Garibaldi once bubbled...
I had hoped my orignal post would at least be viewed by a large audience of divers and help the cause a little. If the members of this board do not care about an issue such as this, then maybe your right though and it is a hopeless cause?

What cause?
My cause is truth. Truth. Nothing less. Show me some truth.
The aniti-LFA isn't a "hopeless cause" - it is a false cause, a cause based on lies, half-truths and innuendo, whose ultimate agenda has nothing whatsoever to do with protecting sealife.
Rick

 

[Northeastwrecks]

Garibaldi once bubbled...
While I am not going to spend the massvie amount of time required to research this topic (as many of you request proof) I short surf around the web will turn up plenty of evidence against LFA Sonar. [/B]

Are you honestly suggesting that the web is a remotely accurate source for scientific information. If so, then forget the whales. I'm worried because I just read a website about invading UFO's But its OK because I'm going to pay off the aliens using the millions that I will working part time from my house. The email I just read promised, so it must be true.

Garibaldi once bubbled...
The evidence and proof you request is out there and I could fill a room with it. However, this post is already becoming long enough as it is. Just a very basic understanding of marine mammal echolocation and sound waves is enough to make anyone question the impact LFA can have on marine mammals. I am surprised that a group such as this, filled with divers, who love the ocean would be so quick to put down such a notion.

If you are capable of filling a room with evidence, then please provide a representative sample. BTW, I'm not interested in quotations that may, or may not, be taken out of context.

Your statement that this is a "notion" is directly on point. I am not putting you down. I'm simply asking for reputable information before I put my name behind what appears to be yet another chicken little scare. Your unsupported claim that an as yet inoperable system caused whales to beach themselves on two different sides of the country causes me to question your credibility and to require proof from independent sources.

Garibaldi once bubbled...
And if you do not believe me (just some "joe blow" on the Scuba BSS), here is a quote from U.S. Rep John Baldacci of Maine.

"A substantial body of convincing science exists points to the potential dangers of this system for whales and other marine animals"

To quote another memorable figure in Washington. "I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky." Enough said about the honesty of politicians.

Beyond that, precisely what are Representative Baldacci's qualifications to expound on scientific research. Sitting on a committee, getting yourself elected or pandering to the masses does not make you an expert in anything but politics.

I'd rather hear from some of the other Board members than listen to the deluded ravings of a politician.

 

[Northeastwrecks]

Garibaldi once bubbled...
The NOAA specifcally stated in a recent memo that the receipt of nearly 10,000 letters opposing LFA Sonar helped push them to explore this issue further ans take the actions they have thus far.

I'm supposed to be impressed because NOAA allowed itself to be intimidated by 10,000 people who managed to properly address a letter? I wonder how many actually understand the issues and how many signed on the fad of the moment.

 

[boomx5]

Was that eastern bloke or eastern block?

 

[vicky]

But most sonars (and to some extent the phased array/towed ones) produce a spherical sound field. Thus, acoustic energy decreases as 1/r ("r"=distance/range from sonar). So what is considered a high level at several meters away is usually harmless from a distance of several hundred meters and unnoticeable from large distances. I am skeptical whether the LFA is responsible to all the phenomena you'be described. Tomorrow someone will accuse "El Ninio" as the responsible for killing the whales.

It is perhaps popular and eay to blame Naval activities for all Nature's mishappens, but not always true.

 

[Northeastwrecks]

Jonathan once bubbled...
careful Garibaldi, good job McCarthy's not about or you'd be locked up for subversive, communist tendancies.....

Interesting reaction you get round here when someone questions the US powers to be to do what the hell they want......

Dear Jonathan:

I'm surprised that you remember Senator McCarthy.

Please point out where in this thread any of us have suggested that anyone should be "locked up for subversive, communist tendancies." In addition, please identify the subversive and/or communist tendancies to which you refer.

No one here is rubber stamping what the USN intends to do. Instead, we have pointed out that the Navy has provided substantial research, while the opponents have provided 10,000 letters from people whose credentials are, as yet, unknown.

The original post requested that we put our names and reputations behind a petition that made various claims without bothering to provide any support. We are doing nothing more than requesting support for your argument (to the extent that you have one).

Vicky's point is well taken. It is my understanding that the strength of a wave signal at a given distance is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Thus, what might be dangerous at 100 yards is not dangerous at 1,000 yards. That is one reason why sounds get louder as you approach their source.

If you don't want to be questioned, that is fine. However, don't expect us to jump on your band wagon simply because you cite some unidentified studies by unidentified individuals with unknown credentials.

Finally, has it occurred to you that this is not a black and white issue. The costs and benefits must be weighed and a balance established. So far, it sounds like the USN has done that. Have you? If so, please advise.

 

[Rickg]

Rick Murchison once bubbled...

but you've been careful to word it correctly, because it was not LFA that was being used near the Bahamas, and no one is squalling about stopping the use of the sonar that was used there.... sorta makes one wonder what the underlying agenda of the folks attacking LFA might really be, doesn't it?


Rick is right on this. It was not LFA sonar that was attributed to the Bahamas grounding (LFA ops were still under NMFS review at this time) but rather the "standard" type of Naval combatant (FF/DD/DDG/etc) hull mounted sonar. A current jtrain of thought on why this occurred is that the ships were transmitting active sonar pulses while transiting through a confined (read strait or passage between 2 islands) area which caused the pulses to reverberate and reflect much more than what normally occurs. The sonar pulses didn't dissipate as normally would be expected in deep open water areas and this in conjunction with the sound being reflected from all different directions resulted in a sensory overload.

Rick G

 

[Northeastwrecks]

Dear Jonathan:

Personally, I'd be interested in hearing what your friend has to say. I have some knowledge of the field, but am not an expert. Hearing from someone who is might shed some light on the situation.

I suspect that everyone else would also be interested.

None of us were shouting. We were asking for proof. There is a difference.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the telling comment was that the LFA has not yet been used. Why is this factual allegation a problem?

As for Garibaldi, I would still welcome some actual support for his argument.