2/4/2009
Navy training expansion draws criticism
By Justin Burnett
Examiner Staff Writer
Photo: Howard Garrett
Ruffles, the oldest known male orca in the world, swims past Fort Casey Lighthouse in October 2008. The U.S. Navy recently released its plans to increase operations in its Northwest Training Range Complex and the news has many people wondering what the impact will be to marine wildlife and the environment.
Justin Burnett / The Whidbey Examiner
Clinton resident John Hurd speaks at a public hearing in Oak Harbor concerning the U.S. Navys plans to expand activities at the Northwest Training Range Complex.
Public comment
Mail comments about the plan by Feb. 11 to Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest, Attn: Kimberly Kler, 1101 Tautog Circle, Silverdale WA 98315-1101, or submit comments online at www.nwtrangecomplexeis.com.
As many as 150 orcas are known to inhabit the waters of Puget Sound and the coast of Washington at various times of the year.
Among them is Ruffles. He belongs to a small family group called J-pod. At 57, he is the oldest known male orca in the world, according to Howard Garrett, president of Orca Network, a Whidbey Island based nonprofit group dedicated to raising awareness about whales in the Northwest.
Ruffles’s exact age has been confirmed through photographic evidence. The characteristic ruffled back edge of his dorsal fin not only makes him easy to identify but also earned him his name.
He is usually spotted traveling on the outskirts of the pod. It may be that he is a loner or it may be that his position serves some special function within the group. It’s one of the many mysteries about orcas that scientists have yet to discover, Garrett said.
The U.S. Navy recently released its plan to expand its training operations in Puget Sound and off the coasts of Washington and Oregon. With everything from missile and sonar testing to dumping depleted uranium included in the proposal, some environmentalists are concerned that Ruffles and J-pod may have given up the last of their secrets.
Strategic defense
The Navy’s plan is to expand operations in its Northwest Training Range Complex, an area encompassing about 122,400 nautical miles of air, surface and subsurface space, which has been in operation since World War II.
The main purpose is to prepare for the wars of tomorrow, said Cmdr. Matt Miller, the executive officer at the Whidbey Island Naval Air Station, at a public hearing on the plan last week in Oak Harbor.
“Realistic training insures U.S. Navy personnel maintain the highest level of readiness in capability and is the single greatest asset the military has in preparing and protecting American service men and women to defend the nation,” he said.
The Navy has spent the past year preparing an environmental impact statement, or EIS, which is a requirement of the National Environment Policy Act. According to the document, which contains more than 1,000 pages, current training exercises in the complex include everything from anti-air, anti-surface, and anti-submarine warfare to explosive ordnance disposal.
Besides a no-action option, the EIS outlines two main alternatives. The first calls for an increase in current training activities as well as testing new equipment such as new aircraft, guided missile submarines and unmanned aerial systems.
Alternative 2, the Navy’s preferred option, includes all the changes outlined in alternative one but proposes increasing current training levels even more and enhancing the range by using new air and sea surface targets, and developing an underwater training minefield.
According to the EIS, Alternative 2 would allow the Navy to increase the number of missiles it fires by 470 percent, from 10 per year to 57 per year. The number of bombs dropped per year would increase 33 percent, from 108 to 144, and the number of shells fired would increase 106 percent, from 25,856 to 53,343.
That includes 20 mm cannon shells made from depleted uranium. Alternative 2 also would roughly double the number of sorties flown per year, from 2,499 to 4,998.
While most of these exercises would take place in coastal waters, some explosives testing is currently allowed within Puget Sound. Under Alternative 2, such activities would continue to be allowed.
Impact debated
Despite the Navy’s proposals, the EIS concludes there will be no significant effect on marine life from any of the offered alternatives.
The claim has drawn significant skepticism from a number of local residents. Of the 30 people who attended the public hearing in Oak Harbor, not a single person voiced support for the Navy’s plans. Instead, one attendee after another said the study’s conclusions are hard to swallow – literally.
“How much depleted uranium do you want to eat in your fish?” asked Zimmer Morris, a South Whidbey teacher.
While the study acknowledges that some species listed under the Endangered Species Act – certain salmonid species, leatherback turtles, migratory mammals and birds – could be affected, it would not be enough to have lasting effects.
The EIS is also proposing mitigation measures to help reduce potential impacts. With marine mammals, such as whales, the plan is to use passive sonar and keep at least three “well-trained” lookouts on duty 24 hours a day. When the animals are present, and they come within 200 yards, certain training exercises would be halted until the animals move out of the area.
But several people at the hearing expressed their doubt about the effectiveness of the mitigation measures. The Orca Network’s Garrett, for example, said he has been involved in observing and researching whales since 1981 and is aware of the difficulties of listening for “faint acoustic signals” that would indicate the presence of orcas.
“Recognition is highly problematic – even for experienced personnel,” Garrett said.
Another common concern among speakers was a feeling of being blindsided by the Navy’s plans. Although the EIS has been in the works for more than a year, Clinton resident Jerry Hurd said he didn’t learn about the proposal until January, shortly after the public comment period started Dec. 29. The comment period closes Feb. 11.
He also complained that he found it difficult to submit comments on the plan. The document was available at the Oak Harbor library, but not at any of the other Island libraries. And he said the Navy’s Web site, where the plan could be viewed online, wasn’t working for several days during the comment period.
“I think it would be appropriate there be an extension” of the public comment period, he said.
People from environmental organizations such as Whidbey Environmental Action Network, Whidbey Audubon Society and People for Puget Sound reported they also hadn’t learned about the plan until January.
“We just found out about this,” said Mike Sato, spokesman for People for Puget Sound.
Garrett said he also is hoping for an extension to the public comment period. Washington residents need more time to comment on the proposal, and a delay could improve the chance that the Navy’s plan will be noticed by Obama administration officials in Washington D.C., he said.
“The more time we can buy, the better,” he said.
Source: http://www.whidbeyexaminer.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=2186&TM=66263.9
Leave a Reply