Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0449.025 2000-2002 01i06i2002 12:11 40824?1?43 CHERYL A MAGILL PAGE 01 January b, 2002 . Fax `I'r^ansmissionSeanto: ~QZ u!]~`i rl ('~lT+ 1-808-961-8912 Ilawai' i County Council ~ , Comanittee on Public Works and lt~er ental Relations ~~^'J' i r °.-~ti. Attn: Chairman Lenirgrad Elariono~'a~ Members of tine Corrntnittee Re: Resolution 155 O1 A RES®LUTJON OPP®SING T~ iJNITED STATES OF AMERICA°S I?EPARTMENT OF Tl~ NAVY°S PROPOSED i~l~PLOYMENT OF SURVEiL.LANCE TOWED ARRAY SENSOR SYSTEM LOW FREEgL~NCY ACTIVE (SURTASS LFA) SONAR Dear Chairraaan Leningrad, This message is intended to let you know that we appreciate the enorrmity of the task facing your committee at this tune and we oII'er our resources eo you so that you may josn our e#1`orts to oppose the u~ of Low Frequency Active Sonar. `The Stop Ll AS Worldwide Network is an iratertnational, unincorporated associatiotn of individuals and affiliated or ions dedicated to the task of creating public awareness about the risks ed with gray country deploying Lour Frequency Active Sonar (LEAS), including the United States. While rraost Network associates live within the United States, the membership seeks to oeganize citizens irateranationally so as to save our oceans and Dear planet from the perceived acoustic threat of LEAS. For this reason, tht Stop LEAS Worldwide Network coor~diaaates its information resources with cetacean protection groups and environrraental organizations. Each individual raaember is encouraged to interact with governanent l~dership encouraging resolution of this global threat through peaceful negotiation. Associates irnclude authors, jour~saali~ts, nausiclans, wildlife photographers and groups which focus on animal rights. seed aquarium issues as well as spiritual and heafling groups. The Network provides regular updates on developrrtents relaeed to LEAS to associates, non-associates ~bscribers to the Network newsletter, govertanrents of the world, the UN grad media. The Network maintains an extensive, publicly accessible web site containing information related to LEAS. Associates recently sponsored participants at floe US l'•Iouse sub-comrraittee on Oceans which was held October l 1, 2001 in Washirngeon, D.C.. Additionally, the networks contributions helped to sponsor attendatnce by members at rraarinc 1 workshops have beesa attended in Vancoaaver and Rome. Members took the podium at each of h before the National Marine Fisheries Service in Los Angeles, Honolulu and Silver Springs. Associates participated ire Navy workshops discussing LEAS. The Stop LEAS Worldwide Network also conducted and participated in the litigation fried to challenge the Navy's Phase III testing program off the Island of I-Iawai'i. Individual members appeared at public hearings condancted by tine Navy as part of the EIS process, grad filed comrraerats on both the dra$I and final EIS reposes which were issued for deployment of SUTASS LFA SONAR. Associates participated with marine rraanaaraal experts from other organizations in a California Coastal Commission workshop on LEAS. So in one sense, Chairman Le ~ ,this network is a protest group. We are opposing a military weapons system which is deertaed to be a threat to our coastal habitats and thereby to nearby coastal cotnnaunities. In another sense we oars conservatives, opposing these u potential charsges which would create a complete underwater acousti~araarchy. ®Ve sittnply respect ocean life. It represents the majority of life ors our plar~e and we want to kip the oc~aas as quiet as we cars in order that they may coratiraue to sustain life. Of course, in even another scrax we are very mucks an advocacy group, trying to snake pimple aware of acoustic pollution issues in much flee same way that chemical and light pollution are known and reco ~~f. T`o: 01~'06i2002 12:11 40824?1?43 CHERYL A MAGILL PAGE 02 _ by everyone. ]3ut by perhaps the tallest order of all, we are a transformed coalition,~which hags discovered a world within our own. fi is a world, which is govereaed by depth, by ~ ~ ~lins~, tapera~aare and distance. 'Those who call this aquatic place borne have a relaance on sdaand said' use l ' to ~ 3 needed inforanation. in so discovering this most ~aormous part of our plane, we have marveled at veer own evolution into a culture wteieh may be ready to descover the sensitivities ~ag~c~timns ®flseings in another more watery realm. ~,l~~lr"`o i `y` We in the Stop LFAS Worldwide Network are concxrned that the potential for a from these acoustic energy sources will be recognized too Late. We feel that itescarch and I3evelopmeiat efforts, which are deliberately designed to simply glide-by goveraement guidelines, are seabstitutirag real scientific studies. We know fleet those guidelines were established in an earlier era before the problems associated with damaging anthropogenic acoustic transmissiotas were tcnown or understood. And n®w, we surest that these who seared, to profit most from the new emerging sound technologies are simultaneously responsible foe studying these complex issues and setting a mew marine management standard of care. For example, Glee Navy is tryirep to convince (NMFS) National Marine Fisheries Service that it's not necessary to go through a forrraal review process when brief exposears levels are less than 18® dE. This lobbying is without foundation as there is plenty of docurnemation which show that whales will avoid sounds at much lower levels. The Stop LFAS Worldwide Network fiuther comeiads that the National Marine Fisheries Service isill-equipped to manage on a beaurocratic level flee comprehensive issues associated with this decision. Noise level impacts have become negotiable sticking points as NMFS bends over backwards to enabfle every Navy r~egaaest areal this is demonstrated by their turning a bland eye (os a deaf car if you will...); ere every available opportunity. NMFS has openly stated that it's very costly and time consuming to handle so many environmental challenges. 'dVe are mare~ging the fiscal challenge to insis8 on compliance with environmental law through ieedividual donations, T-shirt sales grad a "name-that-whale" comsat. By contrast, NMFS and the US Navy have beers spending hundreds of millions of dollars to fund the means to break environmental safeegeaards. Not surprisingly, this has corns to the attention of the t~"ece of Management and Eudget (OIt~) which is currently conducting an investigation regardir~ the massive spending ianvolved by these Federal Agencies, (Worth noting, those same snvirontiasntal laws, if they ass followed, also serve as fiscal guidelines to prevent unnecessary spending.) We continue to point out to Congsess, to NMFS and to the OMI3 shat the omissions regarding economic impact errs alarming. One ayxarriple of this is the fact fleet an Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the tlS Navy failed to report on any projected economic impacts. 'The Navy contends that there will be rao economic impact on a project which teas already spent over 3SO million dollars in preliminary review and which involves tandem research efforts through vsudoes in nations asaand the world. Imami a if you will, the loudest rumbling and most intensely sustained sound energy aver created by humans. Now imagine the properties of that sound in water... where varying t s cause sound to bounce and echo within tightly confined channels. Now imagine ebe body of a living being; a body that is comprised primarily of water but which also has air cavities; and imagine that being... possibly a whale or a huneara or a save snake; submsrsasd deep in a dark sound channel and vibrating with the intense energy pressure of an active low frequency sound wave. Escauss air vibrates a4 a diffsrerat rats than water, flea; rats of vibration wittain the body would vary imffienssly. Tissue shearing, hemorrhaging and imbalances in pressure would t9e immediate in close proximiey to the sound source. At a distance, repeated easposure would assure deafness, increased stress and an eventual inability to locate food sources which in turn would restelt in weight loss and possibly a redua•~ iriemunology or resistance to diseases. 'The technology in question is the US Navy's grad it has a long officious Hams. It's called the Surveillance Towed Areray Low Frequency Active (SURTASS LFA) Sonar. The system involves 18 giant speakers all hanging beneath a ship and a receiver array wtaich pies up the long 45 second tones wteen they are echoed bmck to the ship. LFAS treily is designed to carry tones over long distances. The Navy warns to use this technology throughout most of the world°s oceans. They say it away help them in locating quiet enemy submarines. Wteile passive sonar technology is e~°ective ire accorreplishing the serene thing, the Navy contends float passive sonars are not as ee'fecient and robust. ©1i ©6i2Q0^_ 12:11 ~1©$24?1?~33 CHERYL A MAGILL PAGE D3 Marty of us who became immediately concertted about the harm that was being dons by LFAS and wha chose to take action did so when we 1 that ilea US Navy's experimentation with SURTASS LFA Sonar was being tested in I~awaiian waters in 19911. It was the Navy's objective as part of their "Scieattifac Research Project" (S~tP) t0 targ~ the ed and supposedly protested Humpback i~rhales as they were passing through a 1Vlarine Sanctuary. (Fitly the Heals whales ware the intended targets of this potentially daanaging sound cxpetSiaxaenq, or so the Navy assured everyor~. And while the Navy insisted that the t~hnology was safe, the inforrrtation we were discovering through groups like the 0ceart A~Iarnmal Institute proved that the invasive power of sound if used in the suggested application could be ittamensely damaging to the whales. Additionally, pimple objected because the female Humpback i1lThales along with their babies were travelling along a rraigraiion route in the intended test ate. Quite y, all of this raised cortcerrts. P~pls protested by jur>Bping into the water in front of the Navy's ship, Mir Corey ChOUest, so as to stop the Navy's broomcasts. 'They did what Americans have always done. They treed to protect our shoves from a perceived thr~t. In this instance that threat was bring transratitted from the Navy ships. `The swimmers sustained the Cott for days, often expending addeiional energy to wave a tall American flag as they swam. Eventually, we sadly discovered that some of the people who were in the water, even close to shore for recreational-purposes, were ensonified 400. `The exposure lead to health problems and to litigation. 'These disco ~"ries did not prevent the Navy from going ahead with their places to use this new technology. And t0 this day, the Navy fails to acctrrate@y sits the court documentation which is an available publrc record regarding the people who were boat by this experiment in 1998. In related active !ow frequency acoustic tests, which had taken place a few years prior 0ffthe California Coast, a recreatiorsaf diver had similar exposure symptoms. At least One Navy diver had heart hurt in earlier a is too. In both of the civilrara incidents. the ships we?~e below the hoeizon so people could not ace any ships around them. Several of the protestors who in 1995 jumped into flee water in Hawaii during Navy testing became i!1 for weeks afterwards. And some of those sarrae people began this network which i now cxaordinate. Since that time, during the past tae$rly four years, we have worked as a focus group dr open forum in an effort to guide and to assist thou individuals and organizations who wished to defend our shor+~ines and coastal comrrtunities from ties careless use of this invasive technology. Along the way, we've rr~de quite a few discoveries regarding these rawly ernergin$ soured technologies and the eesulting marketplace response as this technology found new applications. i~1e've watched big businesses move into place through a corporate levering method use by defense contraa~ors around the globe. It's a clever which enables nations to develop technologies in tandem. All of this assures the escalation of in sound technology in the water, regardless as to the resralts such escalations may have on the marine envirorrmerrt. Repeatedly, stranded whales, seals, sea lions, turtles and dolphins have coincided with the experimentation of these new underwater acou~ics. VVe urge you to please do anything and everything your committee can to restrain the Willy Hilly race toward the destnrc;tion of acoustic aquatic habitats. Respectfully, C11~~1 ~~1 ~h 1 ~...,~.®r,~ Coordiaat$tor St®p Ll~AS V'~®rldwide I~l~te~®rk 155E l~l~tf®rd Avenu~,13®x 322 Saner C1a~., CA 95051 ~011p51bA716