Military Seeking to Screw Environment

Originally posted by /)eathKiller: The republican's new slogan: "Don't Give a Hoot! Just Palute!"

Don't get yer panties twisted too tight chummo, the democruds were in power for 40 years and they did it too....actually the Dems were in power when some orgs were releasing germs and radioactivity on unsuspecting civilians in the US....so might as well get off that horse since it ain't got no legs.

[Sir Taliesin]

I agree with some of this! Ft. Bragg, NC was on the verge of being shutdown, because Hurricane Hugo blew in a bunch of endangered woodpeckers! Once the Department of Interior found out about it, training all but stopped! They didn't want the woodpeckers new habitat disturbed. I thought that was a bunch of BS. The Army had to start flying the 82nd Airborne Division to different posts across the country just to do manuver exercises that could have been done there at Ft. Bragg. Totally riduclous if you ask me!

However I do have a problem with the new sonar system the navy wants to test or is the process of testing. It's my understanding that it can effect most ever creature of over hundreds of miles of ocean, especially whales!

[Timber Loftis]

Sir T, that base forgot the "TRIPLE S RULE" of "compliance" regarding the Endangered Species Act: shoot, shovel, and shut up.

MagiK, the facilities were processing nuke material for subs, and were naval bases that are now closed down. They dumped plutonium in the ground, which sat next to the water, and viola! you get the picture. If they had been subject to NEPA review, they would not have been able to do this. You seem to be all for policing casings. Read the article I posted -- avoiding policing casings is one of the intended benefits.

[Night Stalker]

Please considder that while the military should not actively look to destroy the environment, during the course of normal training some will occur. Magik, TL has some very good points about the Hudson issue. Both NYC and N Jersey are bickering heavily over it now. The only winners in the dispute seem to be lawyers and the Dock Workers/Teamsters Unions, who get the contracts. The sludge is an eco-nightmare.

Back to the training issue. Not every area can be sacrosanct. The military needs training areas to do it's job. Part of that job is dealing with hazzardous environments/materials. That does not absolve the military of minimizning the risk to the rest of the population, though.

SIDE RANT [img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img]
Who's bright idea was it to build civilian housing ARCROSS THE FREAKING ROAD from active firing ranges on semi-closed military bases?!?!?! Gives a new meaning to "Johnny, don't cross the road to play" ....

[ 05-12-2003, 02:43 PM: Message edited by: Night Stalker ]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Sir T, that base forgot the "TRIPLE S RULE" of "compliance" regarding the Endangered Species Act: shoot, shovel, and shut up. MagiK, the facilities were processing nuke material for subs, and were naval bases that are now closed down. They dumped plutonium in the ground, which sat next to the water, and viola! you get the picture. If they had been subject to NEPA review, they would not have been able to do this. You seem to be all for policing casings. Read the article I posted -- avoiding policing casings is one of the intended benefits.

I am for policing casing only because of the recycling value...I don't care if the ground becomes contaminated with brass.....that just makes a potential mining zone for when our civilization dies out and the next starts....they need brass...they know where to go

As for dumping plutonium in the ground....as far as I can recall (and my nuke exposure in the military is extreemely limited) it would have been against navy regs to just dump it in a llandfill too.....

Originally posted by Night Stalker: Please considder that while the military should not actively look to destroy the environment, during the course of normal training some will occur. Magik, TL has some very good points about the Hudson issue. Both NYC and N Jersey are bickering heavily over it now. The only winners in the dispute seem to be lawyers and the Dock Workers/Teamsters Unions, who get the contracts. The sludge is an eco-nightmare. Back to the training issue. Not every area can be sacrosanct. The military needs training areas to do it's job. Part of that job is dealing with hazzardous environments/materials. That does not absolve the military of minimizning the risk to the rest of the population, though. SIDE RANT [img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img] Who's bright idea was it to build civilian housing ARCROSS THE FREAKING ROAD from active firing ranges on semi-closed military bases?!?!?! Gives a new meaning to "Johnny, don't cross the road to play" ....

I agree Nnight Stalker, and I am not against some reasonable precautions to be taken by the military but you cannot expect them to not have special needs (note I said needs not desires or wants) and so to not fall under certain guidelines.

I am completely against the idea that this is a republican/democrud/libertarian issue and I resent the attempt to make it one.

[harleyquinn]

Originally posted by MagiK: I am completely against the idea that this is a republican/democrud/libertarian issue and I resent the attempt to make it one. [/QB]

Magik,
I'm so happy you said this. I was getting ready to post something similar. In my opinion, it doesn't matter if its the R's D's or L's doing something I don't agree with. I too hate how ppl tend to turn everything into an "us vs them" issue no matter who us or them is. Glad I'm not the only one that feels that way.
Now back to the topic before I get hit with the Willow Stick.

[Sir Kenyth]

I've had first hand experience with the military. The military installation is much better for wildlife than the surrounding urban area. Most of the base is simply woodlands fit for a wildlife preserve. There are lots of animals living there quite happily and unadulterated. The post waters are full of fish. Firing ranges and artillery ranges are what's being talked about here. Live fire ranges are a very small portion of the installation as a whole. They are also usually barren (to prevent fires) and always fenced in with barber wire to prevent anything from wandering in accidentally. On occasion some wildlife will be killed. It's unfortunate, but also rare. Great care is taken not to litter the occupied areas, and vehicles are only allowed to drive on designated roads to minimize the impact on the natural flora and fauna. Bottom line? It's not as bad as it sounds.

[sageridder]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: MagiK, the facilities were processing nuke material for subs, and were naval bases that are now closed down. They dumped plutonium in the ground, which sat next to the water, and viola! you get the picture. If they had been subject to NEPA review, they would not have been able to do this. You seem to be all for policing casings. Read the article I posted -- avoiding policing casings is one of the intended benefits.

Do you have any links about the plutonium dumping? I'm interested to know more about that, and the only info I've been able to find is strictly about PCBs.Even the EPA site only listed PCB contamination. http://www.epa.gov/hudson/background.htm#

Anything you could provide would be appreciated.

[Timber Loftis]

I'll check on it sagerider, but right now I gotta fly. I may be getting my cases confused. It could be another case in New York along the Hudson that happened 5 or 6 years back before the more recent dredging case. In fact, I think I did commingle cases, and the current Hudson case is about PCB's. I've also had MGP cases along the hudson, and used to work on cases for most every stone quarry on the Hudson, so I apologize if I put oranges in with the apples. I will check into it when I get time.