Restrictions on Navy Sonar

By William Rossiter

The U.S. Navy must restrict mid-frequency sonar operations off Southern California. U.S. District Judge Florence-Marie Cooper's ruling in early January reflected her years of study of the sonar's impacts on marine animals, and the national security needs for operational sonar training. Her ruling was a balance between those conflicting interests, and hopefully settled a lawsuit brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and many others, including CSI. Expect the Navy to appeal, however, as they have already during this case that began in August.

Mitigations now imposed include no-sonar zones, such as a 12 nautical mile coastal zone, and the Catalina Basin, an underwater canyon between Santa Catalina Island and the Navy-owned San Clemente Island. There are no restrictions for Tanner and Cortez banks, the Westfall seamount, or low visibility operations, but passive acoustical detection systems have to be working. Trained observers have to be posted at least one hour before and throughout sonar transmissions. Sonar must be turned off if any marine mammals appear within a 2,200 yard buffer zone around the transmitting vessel.

See the photo below and think: under the best of conditions this is all those observers might see of a beaked whale, known to be vulnerable to sonar. How would they see this, or a turtle's head, in rough seas or fog a kilometer away?

Blainville's beaked whale, courtesy of Colin MacLeod

The Navy currently uses 29 procedures for avoiding harm to marine mammals; some are simply nonsense, such as the example above of visually detecting whales or turtles a kilometer away in the dark! But it's the best we've got to work with. As reflected in the court's decision, the simple mitigation measures sought by the NRDC-led coalition included: adopting larger safety zones to protect marine mammals close to sonar ships; avoiding key whale habitat; and seasonally avoiding the grey whale migratory routes. The judge doubled the pre-sonar monitoring time to one hour, but did not require reducing sonar power during times of low visibility. The Navy earlier had rebuked the CCC's request for these mitigations. The court's finding supports the commission's position that these mitigations are necessary to bring the Navy's exercises into compliance with California's coastal laws.

The Navy's war with marine life in California's rich and diverse waters near Channel Islands National Park began in 2006, when the California Coastal Commission (CCC) disagreed with active sonar training plans for 2007-2009, and requested some changes. CCC has unusually powerful, and necessary, jurisdiction over what goes on in the state's waters, but the Navy clearly objected to a state agency telling them what to do. Since CSI's experience began in 1996 the Navy has always fought being told what to do; it's their line in the sand. Pulling out the big guns, the Navy obtained from the deputy secretary of defense a formal exemption to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). NRDC filed suit in August, joined by CSI, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, League for Coastal Protection, Ocean Futures Society, Jean-Michel Cousteau and the CCC. The case bounced back and forth, confusing non-legal minds, but the essence is this: Does the Navy's definition of "national security" relieve them from following the law? Their response to being told "no" has been to get the laws changed. Is the Navy protecting the nation or themselves? Without venturing into political commentary, where will the Navy draw their line in the sand if the next administration is not so supportive?

California gray whale, courtesy of James Dorsey

Legal battles will continue, with the Navy fighting every challenge to sonar operations, playing the odds of winning in court, but certainly never surrendering to the environmentalists. Meanwhile, the Navy certainly spends a lot of money on research, and CSI hopes they learn how to avoid whales when sonar is in use, at least for tests and training.

CSI cannot express enough gratitude for the wisdom and skill exhibited by NRDC, our leaders in this and several other sonar lawsuits. Beyond saving marine life the decision demands that the Navy accept the challenge to defend national security while obeying the law, not use their definition of national security to do whatever they want.