Security, Sound, and Cetaceans: Legal Challenges to Low Frequency Active Sonar under U.S. and International Environmental Law

By Inkelas, Daniel | The George Washington International Law Review, January 1, 2005 | Go to article overview

Security, Sound, and Cetaceans: Legal Challenges to Low Frequency Active Sonar under U.S. and International Environmental Law


Inkelas, Daniel, The George Washington International Law Review


I. INTRODUCTION

Since 1996 at least fifty marine mammals of various species have suffered excruciating injury or death as the likely result of active sonar or similar human-made, extremely high decibel noise broadcast into the world's oceans.1 During the same period, the volume and intensity of the debate over low frequency active sonar (LFAS), which the naval forces of the United States and other countries seek to deploy now or in the near future, has resonated in court-rooms and legislative chambers, raising important questions concerning the extraterritorial reach of U.S. environmental laws, the capacity of international agreements and principles of international law to deal with the growing problem of acoustic pollution in the oceans, and the balance that these laws strike between governmental interests in military readiness and scientific research on the one hand and marine mammal protection on the other. The horror of widely reported, fatal cetacean "strandings"2 has prompted worldwide calls from legal scholars, marine biologists, and concerned citizens for a strengthening of international rules governing ocean noise,3 while within the United States, the involvement of the Navy and federally-funded science projects in whale beachings associated with sonar has led to significant litigation and legislative developments.4 The legal constraints upon the use by the U.S. Navy and federal researchers of active sonar and its equivalents in U.S. and international waters are the focus of this Note.

Several scholars have responded to an initial series of lawsuits in U.S. courts challenging the Navy's and federal research vessels' use of active sonar by applauding the vigorous, extraterritorial enforcement of U.S. environmental law to restrain such use,5 and some have suggested that provisions or norms of international law may be even more restrictive of LFAS than U.S. law, and enforceable in U.S. courts.6 Some scholars have, however, criticized what they consider the obstructionist tactics of plaintiffs whose litigation significantly and dangerously hampers both military readiness and scientific research necessary to protect cetaceans.7 This criticism led Congress to relax certain provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)8 in November 2003.9

This Note addresses each of these scholarly perspectives in light of legislative and judicial developments in 2003 and 2004 and argues that the salient requirements of both U.S. and international environmental law, to the extent that both apply to the federal government's use of LFAS, are as follows: (1) those seeking to use LFAS must thoroughly, in good faith, and with public participation, assess its environmental impact; and (2) following such environmental assessment, those parties using LFAS must monitor and mitigate the harmful effects of LFAS to the greatest extent possible. Neither U.S. environmental law nor international law, including the precautionary principle, prohibits per se the deployment of LFAS or the incidental killing of marine mammals, and balancing the interests in sonar use versus environmental harm is appropriate under U.S. and international legal regimes. U.S courts, in balancing the need for sonar versus the harm it seems likely to cause, have charted a course that satisfies these twin demands of U.S. and international environmental law. As the results of recent and pending cases thus far demonstrate, neither an outright bar to using LFAS nor a blanket exception for military or research activities would be appropriate, and the balance that courts have struck between the competing interests of military readiness and research versus environmental protection is reasonable. The 2003 MMPA amendments, while potentially opening a loophole for unregulated destruction of marine mammals by the Navy or federal researchers, are intended to maintain this balance.

Part II of this Note describes the problem of sonar and ocean noise and surveys provisions of U. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Security, Sound, and Cetaceans: Legal Challenges to Low Frequency Active Sonar under U.S. and International Environmental Law
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.