As the testing drew to a close, the Hawai'i State Legislature took up a resolution introduced by Representative David Tarnas, who represents the district closest to the testing waters. The resolution was repeatedly strengthened as it moved through various committees. The resolution has now passed through three committees of the House unanimously and is now moving to the Senate. The resolution includes the following clauses:
WHEREAS, there has been a large outpouring of public concern from the citizens of Hawaii, the nation, and the world who have protested this research because it may harm the marine life, or severely impede the whales' acoustic activities, or both; and ...
WHEREAS, there have been numerous reports of whale sightings and behaviors in West Hawaii coastal waters that may contribute to a better understanding of the actual impacts on marine life of this LFA sonar testing; therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED by the House of Representatives of the Nineteenth Legislature of the State of Hawaii, Regular Session of 1998, the Senate concurring, that if the findings of this research conclude that low frequency active sonar results in harm or adverse effects to marine mammals, sea turtles, and other marine life, that the state Legislature will not support the installation, deployment, or use in Hawaiian waters of any devices such as SURTASS LFA that would generate or be used to produce this type of sonar; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the environmental impact statement should include a compilation and analysis of sightings and observations from whale-watch vessels, fishers, research organizations, and other sources ...;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Navy not conduct further testing or use of SURTASS LFA devices in Hawaiian waters until completion and approval of the final project EIS, but no earlier than the end of the 1999 whale breeding/calving season in Hawaiian waters.
Excerpts from HCR (House Concurrent Resolution) 134, Hawai'i State Legislature.
The entire history of the SURTASS LFA system and the specific history of testing in Hawai'i raise numerous policy issues.
First, as a classified program initiated during the Cold War, the Navy developed the SURTASS LFA system without complying with environmental laws. This development raises the following question: Are other classified programs being developed and/or used without adequate assessment of their environmental effects?
Second, the SURTASS LFA is meant to counter silent submarines sent against the United States. This purpose raises the following question: Are there programs begun during the Cold War, which are still being funded even after their initial purpose no longer justifies pursuit of the program?
Third, the failure of the National Marine Fisheries Service to aggressively enforce the mitigation requirements raises the following question: Is the sunk cost in SURTASS LFA and the deployment-ready status of this system preventing an objective assessment of the environmental impacts of the system?
Fourth, a reasonable conclusion from the Hawai'i data is that Humpback Whales are very sensitive to sound in their breeding, calving, and nursing cycle, such that even broadcasts 1,000 times less than deployment level can drive them out of their traditional reproducing grounds. A further reasonable conclusion is that exposure of human swimmers in the water to 125 dB, which is at least 1 million times less than deployment level, is physically harmful. These conclusions raise the question: Did the tests in Hawai'i produce sufficient evidence to conclude that deployment of SURTASS LFA would be environmentally unacceptable?
Fifth, while there are protocols protecting animals used for testing in laboratories, these same protocols are not applied to animals in the wild. This distinction raises the following question: Is there a need to adopt measures to ensure that scientific testing on animals in the wild is controlled to ensure protection of the animals to the greatest extent?
Sixth, this entire episode highlighted the issue of noise in the oceans. Numerous human activities result in emitting loud sounds into the ocean environment. Information is emerging that there are already other sound broadcasts from various installations going into the oceans and that other nations are developing systems similar to SURTASS LFA. The absence of any regulation of these sounds raises the question: Is there a need for national regulation and international agreement on the levels of noise which can permissibly be emitted into the ocean environment?
These question should be addressed by Congress. Furthermore, Congress should make a swift assessment of whether any further funding should be sunk into the SURTASS LFA system.
There is a bureaucratic momentum behind continuing to pursue deployment of SURTASS LFA. That momentum is further encouraged by fear of adverse career effects of admitting a mistake. Congress can step in and cure both those problems.
WHAT YOU CAN DO
1. Share this report with others and encourage them to act.
2. Go to the web site, http://www.dreamweaving.com/lfas.html, and send a message to Hawai'ian Senators urging them to pass HCR 134, the resolution calling for no further testing of the SURTASS LFA until the EIS is complete and approved.
3. Send a copy of this report to the members of your Congressional delegation and ask them to stop the deployment of the SURTASS LFA system. For a more condensed copy of the report without the "What you can do" section, go to the next page.
4. Help to build an international coalition to stop human environmental aggression and to develop a peace treaty between humans and the natural world.
5. Contribute to the costs of the litigation ($3,500 to date), international campaign, and other expenses associated with this effort by sending a contribution to the address below.
For further information, comments, suggestions, or other communications regarding this report, please contact:
Lanny and Mary Rose Sinkin
P. O. Box 944
Hilo, Hawai'i 96721
(808) 961-9100
FAX: (808) 934-9609
Return to first section of report
Return to LFAS Litigation Index