Sonic Blast

Does the Navy’s new submarine-spotting technology endanger dolphins and whales?

Image: Associated Press

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


At 6 a.m. on March 15, 2000, Ken Balcomb went down to the beach in front of his house on the Bahamian island of Abaco and discovered something frightening: a whale stranded in the shallows. Over the next few hours, 15 more whales and a dolphin beached themselves on Abaco and nearby islands. “They were just coming in all over the place,” says Balcomb, a marine biologist at the Bahamas Marine Mammal Survey.

Balcomb and several volunteers managed to guide 10 of the animals back into the water. But six whales and the dolphin died. Last winter, a government investigation found that the whales had suffered severe ear trauma that damaged their navigational systems; the cause, the report said, was a test of a Navy sonar system in the waters off the Bahamas. The finding has added fuel to a long’standing dispute over the Navy’s next-generation sonar technology — a system that environmentalists say poses grave risks to marine mammals.

The new system — designed to detect new, super-quiet submarines — would transmit blasts of sound at the same low frequency whales use to communicate; even at 100 miles away, noise levels would reach 140 decibels, the equivalent of standing next to an F-15 jet at takeoff. In studies conducted by the Navy, sound at that level caused about a quarter of male humpback whales tested to stop their mating songs. “That essentially takes them out of the gene pool,” says Michael Jasny, a lawyer for the Natural Resources Defense Council. And whales may not be the only animals affected: “For so many creatures the acoustic environment is crucial to survival,” Jasny notes. “This will slowly eat away at their reproductive capabilities, their ability to feed, to avoid predators, to survive.”

The Navy, which has already spent $300 million on the system and expects it to be operational by the end of the year, argues that low-frequency sonar is critical to its ability to track modern submarines. Navy spokeswoman Paula Storum says that with careful precautions, including a warning system to detect nearby whales and dolphins, the technology will not hurt marine mammals. But critics accuse the Navy of underestimating the risk; they also say that the military, which funds much of the existing research on underwater sound, may be getting biased results.

In July, the National Marine Fisheries Service, a branch of the Department of Commerce, gave the Navy the green light to begin using low-frequency sonar. Environmentalists say they will take the matter to court. But they worry that even a ruling in their favor could ultimately become moot: The Bush administration has pushed legislation that would exempt the military from many environmental regulations, including those covering whales and other marine life.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate