2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

According to the recent NRDC lawsuit against the Navy, Navy sonar ships are required to avoid key whale habitat and maintain a 12 mile coastal zone off California. As far as I've been able to discern, there is no mention of this in the EIS for the NW Training Range.

Also, "the Navy estimate the California sonar drills would disturb or injure 170,000 marine mammals and cause permanent injury to more than 450 whales, as well as temporary hearing impairment in at least 8000 others".  source: Jan/Feb 2009 NRDC "Nature's Voice"

 This concerns me as these marine mammals are as vulnerable is Oregon waters as California waters. I see no corresponding statistics for the coast of Oregon. Why does the Navy's EIS repeatedly say "No significant impact" for their assessment? This seems illogical.

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context