Whales and Sonar: Environmental Exemptions for the Navy’s Mid-Frequency Active Sonar Training

Mid-frequency active (MFA) sonar emits pulses of sound from an underwater transmitter to help determine the size, distance, and speed of objects. The sound waves bounce off objects and reflect back to underwater acoustic receivers as an echo. MFA sonar has been used since World War II, and the Navy indicates it is the only reliable way to track submarines, especially more recently designed submarines that operate more quietly, making them more difficult to detect. Scientists have asserted that sonar may harm certain marine mammals under certain conditions, especially beaked whales. Depending on the exposure, they believe that sonar may damage the ears of the mammals, causing hemorrhaging and/or disorientation. The Navy agrees that the sonar may harm some marine mammals, but says it has taken protective measures so that animals are not harmed. MFA training must comply with a variety of environmental laws, unless an exemption is granted by the appropriate authority. Marine mammals are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and some under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The training program must also comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and in some cases the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). Each of these laws provides some exemption for certain federal actions. The Navy has invoked all of the exemptions to continue its sonar training exercises. Litigation challenging the MFA training off the coast of Southern California ended with a November 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision. The Supreme Court said that the lower court had improperly favored the possibility of injuring marine animals over the importance of military readiness. The Supreme Court’s ruling allowed the training to continue without the limitations imposed on it by other courts. (pdf contains 20pp.)

Human Resources Development for Sustainable Aquaculture in Bangladesh

The ennoblement of human resources has become a prime issue in the philosophy of sustainable aquaculture development in the new millennium.Being the planners, designers, conductors and philosophers of sustainable aquaculture, human beings always demand their further improvement at level best from their current positions to bring supreme success in the sector. As sustainable aquaculture is socio-economic –cum-environmental in concept, its operation and management requires constant interplay of various human knowledge for ensuring its smooth direction and for achieving its goal. So, the arrangement of different types and levels of training and education are the great need for the development of personnel involved in sustainable aquaculture route and also for growing awareness of environmental issues. The modus operandi of training and education has to be changed systematically to answer the calls of the needs of the new millennium. In the developing and developed countries where aquaculture plays a vital role in promoting production of aquatic organisms, alleviating of poverty, ensuring environmental compatibility, replenishing and improving the natural stocks, increasing socio-economic upliftment through integrated development approach, developing and managing the aquatic resources, maintaining gene banks and preserving the diversity of fish stocks, it has been already proved that Human resources development (HRD) is inevitable to bring sustainable aquaculture and plays a great role in the flourishment of the system . Different types and levels of training of personnel required for sustainable aquaculture in the new millennium are brought forward in the study. The importance of human resources development (HRD) through specialized training to the personnel is also depicted.

Assessment of the performance of beach management units (BMUs) on Lakes Victoria, Albert, Kyoga and George

Until the late 1990s the fisheries of Ugandan lakes had been managed by government where stakeholders were excluded from the decision-making process. In order to involve other stakeholders, co-management was adopted. Operationalising Co-management on landing sites has led to the formation of BMUs at gazetted landing sites. A BMU is made up of a BMU assembly and the BMU committee that it elects. A BMU committee should be: 30% boat owners; 30% boat barias 30% including fish processors, boat makers, local gear makers and repairers, fishing input dealers and managers and 10% fish mongers/traders; and if possible, 30% women. To operate at a particular landing site, one must be registered with the BMU. The BMU assembly is the supreme organ of a BMU empowered to elect, approve and remove the BMU committee