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.)

Gehiago Pierre Urteren gramatikaren iturriez: Lilyren gramatika

[EN] Pierre Urte wrote Grammaire cantabrique circa 1714, when he was exiled in England. In this article we want to prove that the main source for Urte’s work was the socalled “Lily’s grammar”, which was the oficial grammar to learn Latin language in England from the 16th to the 19th century. The indentification of that source allows us to support the claim that Urte’s grammar must be included in the tradition of language teaching, as was already pointed out by Oyharçabal (1989). In this article, we first offer a brief history of Lily’s grammar. Then, we provide some clues in order to identify the exact edition used by Urte. Finally, in the main section of the article, we confront the two grammatical works; our aim is to ensure Urte’s debt to Lily’s grammar, and to show in detail the principal parts which Urte took from his source (mainly grammatical clasifications and examples).