WASHINGTON, Nov. 12, 2008
Supreme Court: No Limits On Navy Sonar Use
Enviro Groups Had Said Sonar Affects Whales; Arguments Begin In Religious Monuments Case
-
Photo
The Suprme Court Ruled Nov. 12 that lower courts exceeded their authority by limiting the Navy's use of sonar in training drills. Environmental groups say that the sonar adversely affects whales. (CBS/iStockphoto)
-
Interactive
The Supreme Court
History, traditions and key cases, plus what it takes to get on the bench.
The court, in its first decision of the term, voted 5-4 that the Navy needs to conduct realistic training exercises to respond to potential threats by enemy submarines.
Environmental groups had persuaded lower federal courts in California to impose restrictions on sonar use in submarine-hunting exercises to protect whales and other marine mammals.
The Bush administration argued that there is little evidence of harm to marine life in more than 40 years of exercises off the California coast.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, which was joined by Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
The court did not deal with the merits of the claims put forward by the environmental groups. It said, rather, that federal courts abused their discretion by ordering the Navy to limit sonar use in some cases and to turn it off altogether in others.
The overall public interest tips "strongly in favor of the Navy," Roberts wrote. He said the most serious possible injury would be harm to an unknown number of the marine mammals.
"In contrast, forcing the Navy to deploy an inadequately trained anti-submarine force jeopardizes the safety of the fleet," the chief justice wrote.
In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that the Navy's own assessment predicted substantial and irreparable harm to marine mammals from the exercises. She said that "this likely harm ... cannot be lightly dismissed, even in the face of an alleged risk to the effectiveness of the Navy's 14 training exercises." Justice David Souter joined in Ginsburg's dissent.
Roberts pointed out that the federal appeals court decision restricting the Navy's sonar training acknowledged that the record contained no evidence marine mammals had been harmed.
Read the Supreme Court ruling and dissenting opinions in the Navy sonar case.
The exercises have continued since the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled in February that the Navy must limit sonar use when ships get close to marine mammals.
A species of whales called beaked whales is particularly susceptible to harm from sonar, which can cause them to strand themselves onshore.
In other activity this week:
The Salt Lake City-based reigious group hopes to erect a monument in the city's Pioneer Park, which is already home to a Ten Commandments monument that donated by another private group.
The Summum argued, and a federal appeals court agreed, that Pleasant Grove can't allow some private donations in its public park and reject others.
Cities and states worry that a ruling for the Summum would allow almost anyone to erect a monument in a public park, including people with hateful points of view, or lead to the removal of war memorials and other longstanding displays.
The question arises from a Massachusetts drug case and turns on whether defendants' constitutional right to confront witnesses against them extends to lab reports. Prosecutors use such reports in thousands of cases each year. Typically, jurors are given the official reports with no accompanying testimony.
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Video and Galleries from Supreme Court
-
Video
Alito Discusses Abortion
-
Video
Questioning Of Alito Begins
-
Video
Challenging 1st Day For Alito
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 62 CommentsYepper, and we surely can believe everything that the Bush administration claims, can''t we?
Posted by cdfoxtrot5
Nuclear armed Russian SSBN''s still prowl off our coasts - just as we do on their coasts.
Posted by cdfoxtrot5
Maybe, China, Russia, and North Korea to name a few. What an idiot you must be. I bet your mother is proud.
These drills could just as easily take place in simulators or in a body of fresh water like Lake Tahoe.
How did we get from sonar and whales to monuments in parks? Active sonar makes whales deaf. A deaf whale might as well be blind, since they use echolocation to find their food, each other, and to find their way on their migration routes.
These drills could just as easily take place in simulators or in a body of fresh water like Lake Tahoe.
Unquote
Having personally served on the USNS Impeccable, which has an active sonar that is considered the loudest man-made noise second only to the space shuttle launch, I can tell you that it would NOT hurt the whales unless they were within feet of the transducer, which would never happen.
Once the sound radiates a few hundred yards from the transducer, it is lowers in Db to a tolerable level that is less than the noise the whales make themselves.
Some whales, the sperm wale and the blue whale specifically, make clicking bursts of sound LOUDER than the active ping and use it to stun prey.
This sonar has been extensively tested and does not hurt the whales. In fact, many whales actually come CLOSER out of curiosity to see what''s making the noise.
Gee... if something "hurts," wouldn''t they go the OTHER way????
To anyone who thinks SONAR does not hurt whales ears ?
Ok, YOU get in the water to test that idea.
Good Luck
To twohares
I not only served aboard a ship in Navy, I was one of the Sonar Techs - and sorry, you are full of it.
;-)
For one thing ... 140+ db of acoustic energy in water at 5-10 kHz does not become ''tolerable'' after a few hundred yards.
YOU go diving as a test to prove your claim of ''tolerable'' - then come see us after, with both your ear drums blown out.
Or, just go stand in front of the speakers at a rock concert. Put your face in there real close now ;-)
Active SONAR is a joke. Any smart sub will avoid it, easily. The use of active Sonar is just a money maker for the Military Industrial Complex perpetuating a myth upon America that it does some good in finding subs.
130 years ago the USA, with support from our Government, destroyed an entire species of animal when we wiped out the Buffalo - in the name of Military Necessity.
Hopefully we have now grown as a Nation and will not allow greed, ignorance, and false promises of security to influence our thinking and repeat the same mistakes of the past.
Plus, the Supremes did not rule on the question of ''harm'' to whales, just that the Lower Court did not have the authority to make their ruling.
Perhaps the New Administration will make necessary changes once in Office.
Unless they allow *ALL* religious symbols, then ANY on public property now should be REMOVED, you can''t put ten commandment stone in a public park foised by one group on us while excluding the hundreds of others. Time the Supreme court grow some balls and start ruling on this- religious symbols dont belong on PUBLIC property- PERIOD- put them in your CHURCH where that krap belongs.
This is a cover up for something more.
Any Greenpeace boat gets near a U.S. sub, torpedo the sucker!
We are committing national suicide by cow-towing to all these enviro-wackos.
Grow up America, quick behaving like some limp-wristed PC pansy and get some balls!
Posted by ritewingman at 12:34 PM : Nov 12, 2008
________________________________
I totally agree. There is no reason to care about anything but ourselves on this planet and we should immediately add a hyphenated "wacko" designation to the name of anyone who does. And, we should use ignorant phrases like "limp wristed" to demonstrate that there are sub-classes of humans who also don''t deserve consideration.
Why is the Supreme Court debating harm to whales? The only issue is was the lower court''s ruling constitutional.
Again, it just shows the Supreme Court is noting but lawless Republican political activists.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by TallyMan2008 at 01:11 PM : Nov 12, 2008
Our supreme court is out of balance to the right. The only hope for the next few generations is that president Obama fill any vacancies in the image of Breyer, Ginsberg, Souter and Stephens. Unless there is a death (and I''m not wishing for it), the court will remain a 5-4 conservative edge, even with all new liberal justices. Oh, for a balanced oourt!
We need to protect the sea from the Navy.
Yeah, it does become tolerable "to whales". You suggested that I get in and listen to it... big difference. Yes, it would pretty much liquefy my innards. Big difference between whales and humans.
Whales are "liquid saturated" which is part of the reason they can dive to great depths and not "crush" as liquid doesn''t compress.
Sound doesn''t affect them like it does humans which actually have a lot of cavities and gases in the various tissues.
And, the whales make noises themselves that are in excess of 230 Db which is more than the sound pressure of the LFA sonar suite after it dissipates over a few hundred yards.
I''d like to see YOU put 230 Db right next to your ears and not spew blood.
Yet whales create that noise inside their head with no ill effects.
No... the sonar does not hurt them.
Posted by cdfoxtrot5
Maybe, China, Russia, and North Korea to name a few. What an idiot you must be. I bet your mother is proud.
Posted by damn_fast
You forgot Israel, France, the Netherlands and the UK. Just because nations have submarines doesn''t mean they''re hostile to the US. Destroying wildlife and the environment for the sake of some more redundant "tests" is not in our interests.
And if Russia, etc. wanted to do the US damage, these "tests" won''t prevent them. Russia could end the US as a functioning society in, oh, about 15 minutes, if it so choose. Don''t be so foolish as to think that ploughing more and more into military efforts makes the US safer and immune from attack.
Oh yeah... active sonar is only a "Joke" to submarines.
Submarines don''t go active as it alerts everyone to their position.
Surface ships, however, use active sonar to find subs as it doesn''t matter that everyone can hear their sonar. Their on the surface... everyone knows where they are anyway!
Also, active sonar (and especially SOSUS LFA) is used to discourage and "de-louse" sub-prone areas because it keeps the subs AWAY.
A real sonar tech would''ve known that.
OTM/STG for twenty years, dude. You''re outclassed.
true: it affects them much more since they are more sensitive and sense of sound is more critical for their hunting and survival.
Posted by newster1 at 01:41 PM : Nov 12, 2008
But, but, but what about my Flying Spagetti Monster plaque?
Just kidding, loved the comment.
as for religous monuments. If you allow christian monuments then you need to accept every single religions monuments including atheist views. You can not force one religion on the people, that is not freedom of religion.
For those upset about that... too bad, we are either free or we are not, do you really want to travel down the "are not" road ?
Without the afore mentioned study then the best that can be said is that the link between sonar and harmful effect to marine life is simply a hypothesis.
Other hysteria based hypotheses:
- irradiated food is harmful
- nuclear power is dangerous (and/or puts out more dangerous waste) as compared with conventional energy sources.
- Cloning is evil
- Genetically engineered food is dangerous/bad for you.
- Silicone implants cause insert illness here
- vaccines cause an increase in insert illness here (including autism)
- fluoridated (sp?) water is harmful
None of the above hypotheses have studies to back them up and many of the above hypotheses have proper studies that show the exact opposite.
blah, blah, blah
Posted by ritewingman
What''s your point? DDT has been banned for decades due to the enormous damage it did, including destroying wildlife, and damaging human health.
Acid rain and damage to the ozone layer have caused damage that is well documented and accepted by scientists.
Even moron Bush appears to have finally accepted that there is irrefutable scientific evidence of global warming.
Are you so intensely stupid that you refute anything based on science???? I bet you voted for Bush. Twice.
Posted by shado269 at 02:51 PM : Nov 12, 2008
***********************8
My rule: Always, ALWAYS follow the money. Behind all that high dollar equipment the Navy uses is somebody turnin'' a nickel. It wouldn''t matter if every sub in the world was scrapped save ours - the Navy would still promote taxpayer paid for, expensive anti-sub equipment. ''Cause that''s where the money is...
What''''s your point? DDT has been banned for decades due to the enormous damage it did, including destroying wildlife, and damaging human health.
Acid rain and damage to the ozone layer have caused damage that is well documented and accepted by scientists.
Even moron Bush appears to have finally accepted that there is irrefutable scientific evidence of global warming.
Are you so intensely stupid that you refute anything based on science???? I bet you voted for Bush. Twice.
Posted by cdfoxtrot5
You know science once said the world was flat, the universe revolved around the sun and the world was cooling. Do you really feel that science is always correct. do you believe everything you read or do you do your own research. You are just as guilty as ritewingman. Given twenty the data will change and a new hypothesis will be made. There is not enough data and we do not understand climate to accurately predict a world wide change. Man and computers cannot do this. All the *** in the news is due to the issue of there being a possibility of global warming. You cannot refute that there are areas of cooling and areas of warming. the best you can say is that there is global change. But guess what, when in time was there a point where the climate was not in flux. there have been other periods of extinction, rapid temperature cooling and warming, ect...
The *** going on at this time is just another attempt for people to control what is going on. As for Gore he is full of ***. He just as many of the people promoting global warming are promoting it as they have interests in the cause. If you have a company selling carbon credits, DUH, you are going to promote it! If it gets you more funding, DUH!
Posted by au_fait
The constant climate change is due to the Earth''s carbon dioxide cycle. The earth outgasses carbon dioxide naturally creating a greenhouse effect. As the earth warms, precipitation increases and removes atmospheric carbon dioxide. The weakened greenhouse effect cools the earth. When the earth is too cool, precipitation slows dissolving less CO2. Eventually outgassing will increase the CO2 in the atmosphere warming the planet again. Supposedly this is a very long process.
What is being debated is whether human activity is adding to the current increase. If the increase is too dramatic, then the earth will react with a severe cooling. The earth will survive, but can our species? Supposedly the earth has been in a snowball stage before, which we would not survive.
Of course they would say this. This current administration has never shown any care for anything except their bank accounts. Environmentalists believe that a sound ecosystem is pertinent for human survival, including the "mere" lives of ocean whales. When are people going to understand this--that every specie in are connected in our universe & we need to coexist in harmony??!! Human lives will be non-existant in the future if we continue to only think of ourselves now!
Posted by Displeased
So please explain where newer studies show that the trend is reversed showing that the CO2 being released into the atmosphere or being dissolved/captured by precipitation actually follows temperature, not as you state.
At this time there is not right or wrong. There is evidence on both sides. It can be debated intelligently from both sides of the fence
After all, the 3 Stooges argued, national defense is more important than the welfare of the whale population!
Perhaps Roberts (Moe), Scalia (Larry), and Alito (Curly) would think a bit differently if they were thrown into a soundproof room and sat listening to the noise emitted from the Navy''s sonar for 3 weeks!!!
After all, they would be doing their part to promote national defense, even if it meant their ear drums would "POP" in their heads!!!!
SIG HEIL, MY BUDDIES ON THE SUPREME COURT DON''T CARE ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT, JUST LIKE I DON''T!!!, BUSH!!!
Yeah?? There''s little evidence of harm from enemy submarines for that matter..
What is this, 1957??
Who even has submarines anymore that we care about militarily?
I bet China has like 3 submarines..
So what.
Submarines: gimme a break
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 62 Comments