An Open Letter to the Washington State Parks Commission:
As a resident of Port Townsend, I am extremely concerned with what I heard as an attendee in your meeting of 11/19/2020 regarding Navy Seal Training in our State Parks.
I have been following the Navy’s proposed and past activities in this area for some time, and although Rear Admiral Barnett claimed to be offering “the actual truth” as opposed to the “misinformation being passed around by the public”, the information you were given by the Admiral was highly flawed and inaccurate.
Most importantly, I heard you say, Commissioner Milner, that you want to be able to look the public in the eye and assure us that the Navy SEAL activities do not involve any surveillance whatsoever. The Admiral claimed that they do not. However, when the Navy first proposed renewing their application for training in the parks, a Navy SEAL trainer stated that the training is specifically for surveillance exercises – to observe the public without being detected, as practice for wartime covert operations.
Therefore, either the Admiral or the trainer is poorly informed or was purposely prevaricating. Either way, the lack of truth is shameful.
When Rear Admiral Barnett was queried at your meeting, he said the Alaskan shoreline “is limited in scope”, but gave no details. “Scope”, however, was previously defined by the trainer (mentioned above) as meaning there are no people there to observe. Considering that the water and shoreline in southwest Alaska are nearly identical to that of the Puget Sound, it seems obvious that this lack of people to observe is what the real reasoning is.
Furthermore, the Rear Admiral stated that the training would only be done at night “when the parks are closed”, which is contrary to what the trainer stated: up to 72 hours per exercise. This makes the Navy’s communications with you ambiguous and puts into question every assurance they have made or will make.
When asked why they need our State Park beaches, the Rear Admiral said there are certain features of the water and shoreline that are conducive to their needs. He was not specific what those features are. He said that the 46 miles of shoreline the Navy owns in the Puget Sound area is not sufficient. However, it does not take even a few miles of shoreline to conduct these exercises. Obviously the only real reason is because the public is in the parks whereas there is no public to observe on the Navy properties. If diversity of shoreline features is what they seek, they can easily purchase what they need. But again, the public is in the parks.
He also stated that the training supervisors would be dressed in plain clothes so the public they encounter would not suspect anything. However, their Environmental Assessment states that they would be dressed so as to be easily identified, and would inform anyone wandering into the training area that there are exercises going on. So, which is it?
How will parks personnel track the Navy’s activities? How will you know if they stay within the areas and times of agreement? In the past, they have made statements and assurances about what they will do – not just verbally but in legal documents – yet they have over-reached substantially. Witness, for instance, the number of Growler jets: an additional 36 were cited in their Environmental Impact Statement, but in actuality they brought in 54 additional jets. They claim those jets are quieter than the Prowler jets used previously, but in fact the Growlers are louder when performing Field Carrier Landing Practice, according to the Navy’s own documents. The Navy cannot be trusted to tell the truth about any of their plans or their current activities. At your meeting they stated that they have been training “in water” since the 1980s. If they have been successfully training for that long, why the sudden need for our public lands?
The Admiral stated a few times, as have his predecessors, that the Navy personnel are “part of the local community”. They are not. They shop on base, they work on base, and they live here for only about an average of two years. He said, “We are all in this together”, but if that were true he would be truthful to you and to the public.
You were assured that the SEALS will never be seen. But these are TRAINEES. By definition, they can make mistakes. It’s only a matter of time before they are seen. But in actuality, it doesn’t matter whether we see them or not. They will be observing us, and that is unacceptable.
The Admiral said the weapons that the SEALS will be carrying have no firing capability. If a member of the public happens to see one, they have no way to know that. Imagine an unsuspecting person who is legally armed suddenly meets one of these SEALS and doesn’t know who he is. There was a tragic occurrence of exactly this kind in North Carolina in 2002. A soldier was killed.
The public is rapidly becoming aware of the Navy’s proposed and past training activities in the Parks, and as was so aptly pointed out in your meeting, there is a “creep factor” that tourists and locals are feeling which will preclude their willingness to visit the parks. That alone should alarm you. You cannot adequately assure the public that having covert exercises going on around them in the parks is okay.
You seemed to be trying to find ways to make compromises so you can approve the Navy’s application, instead of approaching this with skepticism. You’ve come up with highly complex plans that will be nearly impossible to implement. How will it be possible to ensure that these plans are followed? Do you even have the personnel to do this? Why allow this at all? The Navy does not lack for anything; they are not our poor neighbors. They are taking advantage of you and the public.
Please do not grant their application.
MORE LETTERS AND ARTICLES:
A feature story in Bitterroot Magazine discusses noise over Whidbey and the Olympic Peninsula and – in case you missed it – SDA Executive Director Larry Morrell sat down with KPTZ to discuss this issue.
Oceans Initiative, a non-profit marine research organization, is conducting underwater sound measurements to assess how much of the noise generated in the air transfers to the water – impacting marine life that depends on hearing to navigate, communicate and forage. The study has shown that even at 100 feet underwater, the sound of a growler is significantly disruptive to orcas and other marine life. An op-ed on the results appeared recently in the Seattle Times. If you have a subscription to the Seattle Times, you can see it here: https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/serene-olympic-national-park-is-no-place-for-noisy-navy-growlers/
Sen. Lovelett Letter to Patty Murray
Dave Paul Letter to Patty Murray
Stand Up for Our Olympics – Flyer
Langley Mayor Support Letter to Coupeville Town Council & Mayor
Quiet Skies San Juan County Report – Jet Noise Jan 2015 thru October 2018
Link to Map – San Juan County Jet Aircraft Noise Reporting
Environmental Impact Study for Whidbey Island by economist Michael Shuman (see hisbiography at: http://michaelhshuman.com/?page_id=6) Study can be seen at:
Sustainable Economy Collaborative Report – In 2016 a diverse group of residents of Island County, Washington, with both civilian and military backgrounds, came together to investigate the opportunities and obstacles to building a thriving, just, and sustainable local economy. The SEC proudly presents Michael Shuman’s answers to the questions for which there are available data and analysis tools. We hope this study opens an important conversation in Island County and the State about the costs and benefits of brittle dependency on the military for our prosperity and stimulates debate and further research so we can steadily and rationally make our local economies more diverse, healthy, prosperous, and resilient.
Rep. Larsen Letter to SecNav re ACHP and shutdown
12.20.18 Allyson Brooks Letter to ACHP
11/29/18 State Historic Preservation Society Letter To Navy re: Refusal to Sign MOA
11/21/18 – Representative Rick Larsen to Secretary of the Navy on EIS Response
11/5/18 Secretary of the Navy Letter to Rep. Larsen re: Navy Ops at NAS Whidbey Island
10/26/18 – Governor Jay Inslee Letter to Secretary of the Navy re:Final EIS
10/12/18 Representative Rick Larsen Letter to Secretary of Navy, re:NASWI-EA-18G-EIS
May 1989 – Brock Adams Letter
Olympic Sound Warriors, Here’s an opportunity for some letters to the editor and comments supporting less noise from Navy Growlers overhead. PT’s experience demonstrates that noise on Whidbey and the Olympics covers the entire region. Rob
| Rob SmithNorthwest Regional Director | National Parks Conservation Association1200 5th Street, suite 1118 | Seattle, WA 98101P: 206-903-1125 | C: 206-817-0007 | rsmith@npca.org | npca.orgYour parks. Your turn. |
Navy sued for allegedly withholding Growler info Posted Wednesday, May 8, 2019 3:00 am Kirk Boxleitner
kboxleitner@ptleader.com Shortly after the start of May, the U.S. Navy was hit with a lawsuit claiming it’s been insufficiently responsive in the face of Freedom of Information Act requests regarding its EA-18G “Growler” jets’ training exercises over Olympic National Park.The suit was filed May 2 by the National Parks Conservation Association, represented by the Earthrise Law Center at the Lewis & Clark Law School, along with Smith & Lowney PLLC, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle. Matt Abele, West Coast communications manager for the National Parks Conservation Association, noted that the Navy had released a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement last month, opening a public comment period for the extension of training operations over the Olympic Peninsula to 2025.He added that his group’s lawsuit is requesting materials that it charges the Navy with “withholding” from the public, especially given the potential for the Navy to increase the frequency of its flights.Abele believes this information would afford the public “a better understanding of noise impacts, and provide thorough responses” during the public comment period.Abele recounted how the National Parks Conservation Association submitted its first Freedom of Information Act request in 2016, to determine the impacts of the Navy’s training exercises over what he described as “one of the quietest places in the lower 48 states.”Rob Smith, Northwest Regional Director for the National Parks Conservation Association, acknowledged the Navy’s training needs, but he does not believe they supersede the importance of preserving the pristine wildlife and environment of the Hoh Rain Forest.“Unfortunately, the Navy has forced us to go to court, due to their failure to provide the documentation necessary for NPCA and the public to make informed comments on the impacts of their latest proposal,” Smith said.Smith and Abele cited the appeal of the Olympic National Park, which they deemed “the most popular national park in the Northwest,” attracting more than 3.1 million visitors in 2018, in no small part because its lack of “noise-pollution,” one of the factors that earned it a World Heritage Site designation for its internationally significant landscape.“The park is full of natural sounds, such as the whistles of the Olympic Marmot and bugling call of the Roosevelt Elk,” Smith said. “However, the tranquility of the park has already been disrupted by the periodic roar of Navy Growler jets, one of the loudest aircraft in the skies.”Smith warned that the Navy could increase the number of flights over the Olympics to 5,000 per year. NPCA has long fought to protect the soundscape for the wildlife and park visitors who come here to enjoy the peace and solitude.Julianne Stanford serves as the environmental public affairs specialist for Navy Region Northwest, and while she told The Leader that the Navy could not comment on pending litigation, she did note the eight open house public meetings the Navy has conducted in Washington, Oregon, California and Alaska, from April 24 through May 8, as well as the fact that the Navy had already extended the public review and comment period for the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement an additional 15 days, to June 12.The Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is available for the public to view at the Jefferson County Library at Port Hadlock and the Port Townsend Public Library, as well as online at NWTTEIS.com.
| Rob Smith, Northwest Regional Director, National Parks Conservation Association, 1200 5th Street, suite 1118 | Seattle, WA 98101P: 206-903-1125 | C: 206-817-0007 | rsmith@npca.org | npca.orgYour parks. Your turn. |
From the Washington Environmental Protection Coalition: https://washingtonenvironmentalprotectioncoalition.org/2-how-growler-jets-harm-owls-and-other-wildlife/2-2-how-the-navy-mislead-usfw-on-jet-noise-levels
Noise Zone map and article: https://disclosuredeception.wordpress.com/noise-zone-map/
A letter to Bob Ferguson, Attoreny General, Washington State, from Bruce Amundson, MD Vice President Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility Seattle WA : Dear Mr. Ferguson: As an organization of health professionals concerned with the documented damages to hearing from noise levels produced by the Whidbey Island Growler fleet, we deeply appreciate your legal challenge to the Navy’s proposed plan to even further expand the fleet. In addition to physical threats to the health of residents, the adverse impact on overall quality of life for WA residents throughout the broader region from the relentless, hourly noise din is remarkable. Who among us, including Navy leaders, would find living day in and day out in a crucible of 24-hour disruptive noise tolerable? The area impacted, of course, is much larger than Whidbey Island and its surrounds. Documented noise pollution in Olympic National Park, already a disturbing reality, can only increase from expansion of the Growler fleet. The National Park Service’s Natural Sounds and Night Skies Division has helped park managers across the country reduce noise, for instance, by restricting snowmobiles. But airplane overflights, the NPS reports, are the biggest noise threats in backcountry areas such as the ONP – an area where WA residents flock for the quiet of wilderness experiences. The military has been unmoved. It is for this, the larger perspective on the presence and intrusion of the military and “militarization” in our state, that we express our appreciation for your taking this action. Typically when any branch of the U.S. military is challenged regarding its impacts, the flag of “national security” appears. The extent to which the military can continue to roll over complaints about its presence or impacts under the cover of national security is a reflection of the extent to which we have become a militarized society. The Growler issue is simply a perfect local example. Considering the very large presence the U.S. military has in this state, it is rare in our experience for any elected official in Washington to publicly challenge any Pentagon position or decision affecting Washington residents. Your lawsuit is a refreshing and commendable exception, challenging their demonstrably inadequate health and environmental reviews before further expansion of this grossly offensive and damaging presence on Whidbey Island and the Olympic National Park. We appreciate your assertive action on behalf of Washington residents, and especially the health and overall quality of life for residents in the northwest corner of our state. Sincerely,
– Bruce Amundson, MD Vice President Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility Seattle WA
MANAGE THE DAMAGE 