Navy Admits Sonar Use

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

The website's been up for quite a while, but the ROD (Record of Decision) is pretty new (2002), and that's the key report to read. I've only glossed over it, but it appears to be very well written and informative. It should be a must-read for any college-level marine mammal courses that deal with environmental effects and/or acoustics.

I do not know if it that many cetacean biologists simply are unaware of this study, aware of it but haven't read it, or have read it and dispute it. What I do know is that every single marine mammal biologist I know (several) has jumped on the anti-sonar bandwagon. I have never been in a detailed discussion with any biologists regarding the Navy report, although I've TRIED to discuss it on more than one occasion. None of my pals has read the Navy reports, or remembers even visiting the Navy website. I find that quite strange.

It is true that there are quite a few mitigation procedures that the Navy has to follow when using it's LFA sonar, and some of these procedures seem rather inadequate or unduly complicated (which often equates to them not being practiced). However it's also true that the media and most environmental groups distort and over-hype sonar effects tremendously. It's a political hot-potato in California especially.
 
There was something on the BBC World service yesterday about a new situation with dolphins in Florida. Details were sketchy, but LFA sonar was mentioned again.
 
renpirate:
However, the Navy does have a point about those quiet diesel boats, they can sneak up on a carrier battle group or get real close to our shores and they are difficult to detect.
Diesel electric subs have always been regarded as being quieter than nuclear boats as there is no need to continously run reactor cooling pumps etc.
But, much like any sub they are nt quiet when moving fast due to water flow and cavitation and they have a very limted range on battery power. Plus given their need to rise to snorkel depth every day or two to recharge batteries, they are relatively easy to track. So the odds of them sneaking up on a carrier battle group are pretty poor. It would require the US Navy to lose track of the sub and then also have the battle group more or less run over the waiting sub.
 
Sonar Used Before Whales Hit Shore
Navy Changes Story but Still Denies Responsibility

By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 31, 2004; Page A03

The Navy has acknowledged that vessels on maneuver off Hawaii last month used their sonar periodically in the 20 hours before a large pod of melon-headed whales unexpectedly came to shore in the area. The acknowledgment added to an already contentious debate over whether the sound from sonar has been causing marine mammals to strand.

Navy officials said that a review of the July 3 incident indicates that two ships turned on their sonar between 6:45 and 7:10 a.m., by most accounts just before the unusual movement of almost 200 deep-water whales to the shoreline of a Kauai bay. The Navy had said earlier that no sonar was used until more than 90 minutes later, well after the animals came ashore.

Beachgoers watch as a pod of about 200 melon-headed whales swim near shore July 3 in Hanalei Bay, Hawaii. (Dennis Fujimoto -- Garden Island Via AP)


Lt. Cmdr. Greg Geisen, the Navy spokesman responsible for information about the maneuver, said a Navy review of the incident still concluded that the ships were either too far from the whales or were using the sonar at the wrong time to cause the mass movement.

"There is no evidence of a relationship here between the sonar use and the whale behavior," he said.

But the newly released information from Geisen and other Navy officials -- that the ships were testing their sonar in preparation for the maneuver on the day before the whales came ashore, and early on the morning of the near-stranding -- has caused some observers to question that conclusion.

"Every time the Navy changes its story, it reduces its credibility on this issue," said Cara Horowitz, a lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council, which has sued the Navy over a related sonar issue. "The Navy would be better off spending more time developing commonsense ways to protect whales from sonar and less time denying a connection that is unfortunately been repeatedly shown."

Officials at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is looking into the incident, said it remains uncertain what caused the near-stranding.

"At this point, we still know very little about what might have made those whales behave so unusually," said Donna Wieting, chief of the Marine Mammal Conservation Division of NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service.

"But saying that sonar played no role might be a premature determination," she said. "Even if we can't establish a clear cause and effect, we're having these coincidences [of unusual and sometimes deadly] marine mammal behavior around sonar, and we have to ask why."

Some marine mammals come to shore naturally, because they are following a sick lead animal or trying to avoid predators and such natural occurrences as potentially harmful red tides. Melon-headed whales are relatively small and highly social animals that normally live in deep waters, at least 15 miles from shore. Wildlife officials said it is highly unusual for such a large number of them to come to shore as they did on July 3, although there is one report of a similar mass movement in the 1850s.

The new Navy information about when the sonar was used off Hawaii was first made public in late July, at a meeting of the federal Marine Mammal Commission focused on how to limit the effects of ocean noise on whales and other sea creatures. Rear Adm. Steven Tomaszeski updated the information then, and said the Navy had concluded there was no connection between the sonar use and the unusual whale behavior.

He and Geisen said the July 2 sonar use could not have caused the whales to head into Hanalei Bay because the ships -- four Japanese and two American -- were too far away when the equipment was used. Geisen also said the Navy first learned of the stranding from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) at 5:30 a.m. on July 3, and not between 7 and 7:30 a.m., as earlier reported, making it impossible for the 6:45 to 7:10 a.m. sonar usage to have harmed the whales.

Wieting of NMFS said, however, that her office has received no reports of a 5:30 sighting, and still believes the whales were first seen after 7 a.m.

Navy officials are adamant about the need for sonar training. They say there is a substantial and growing threat from "quiet" diesel submarines that could menace the United States from coastal waters, and that only active sonar use can detect them. The Navy is planning a sonar training ground in the Atlantic Ocean, off the Carolinas.

Residents and government officials worked throughout July 3 to steer the whales back to open water, and all made it except one newborn calf that died of starvation. Officials say that some of the animals may have died at sea without a trace.

The Hawaii incident is the third significant one involving sonar and marine mammal strandings near the United States since 2000. The stranding of 17 whales of various kinds off the Bahamas in 2000, which resulted in the death of at least six of them, occurred during a major Navy maneuver. Navy officials at first said there was no connection between their exercise and the stranding, but later acknowledged that the loud sound from the sonar had caused the animals to flee ashore.

Another incident occurred off the coast of Washington state last year, where harbor porpoises unexpectedly came ashore after a sonar exercise. The Navy concluded that there was no connection between the two, but NOAA is still reviewing the incident.

The International Whaling Commission said in a report last month that there is "compelling evidence" that Navy sonar is harming some species of whales, but Navy officials dismissed the conclusion as "unscientific."
 
RIDIVER501:
Amazing how when I was growing up in the mid to late 70's all the marine mammal beachings were attributed to some viral or parasitic infection as verified by some autopsy methodology.
and these days there seems to be no apparant cause but it must be attibuted to sonars.
Funny in the late 80's and all through the 90's the ships i was on used to hammer away with active sonar practicing against the potential soviet threat. training in the caribbean and in the virginia capes op area, where there are lots of marine mammals and there never seemed to be a problem with our operations.
Well i guess with everything views have to shift. same in the environmentalist venues. like how rampant the reporting was on acid rain and nowadays when you mention it most people say " Acid who? are they that new band...."

but these new technologies make old sonar look like a model-T next to a late model Ferrari. On the other hand - I work closely with a lot of people in the military and I can't see them NOT raising objections if they thought these strandings were attributable to operational manuvers. I honestly don't think that anyone in the military or gov goes out of their way to make life miserable for ocean life; if the new SONAR is responible for these strandings I am SURE someone in the military is looking into it.

Also - How many times would you need to actually test a new technology (BTW - AFTER it has been installed on a great number of vessels) before you found it worked correctly.
 
Kim:
Well as you don't know I'll tell you. Due to the public outcry in Japan and the reluctance of the Japanese to continue buying dolphin and porpoise to eat, the practice of fishing for them (which had been going on for hundreds of years) stopped. The fishermen realized that they could earn the same money in a different way. They now do sightseeing dolphin spotting trips in the area you are referring to - it's extremely popular and the fishermen are earning much more money than they ever did before. Funnily enough there was a documentary on Japanese television about this last week. Several of the fishermen gave interviews and everyone is much happier with the new situation.
Just thought you'd like to know! ;)

Kim,
Not sure where you're getting your information from and I pray it to be true but to my knowledge this killing is still going on every year.
http://www.seashepherd.org/news/media_041028_1.html
 

Back
Top Bottom