“Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under. Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, raise the black flag, and begin slitting throats”….H. L. Mencken
Much like Confucius, the 20th century philosopher, Lorenzo Pietro Berra, known to his followers as “Yogi”, dispensed his wisdom through insightful sayings. Who among us has not pondered the hidden meaning in the words “If you don’t know where you are going, you’ll end up someplace else”, or “You should always go to other peoples funerals, otherwise they won’t come to yours”. Perhaps his most profound offering was “When you come to a fork in the road, take it”. The announcement on November 30th that the National Marine Fisheries Service has granted oil exploration companies permission to begin seismic testing off the east coast of the Untied States presents us with a major fork in the road. The question is, will we take it?
Underwater seismic testing is an oil exploration process. A ship tows an array of high powered air guns. Every ten seconds or so, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, for weeks at a time, each gun fires a blast of compressed air down through the water column into and through the seabed. The sound produced by the blasts produces a seismic wave that travels through the ground beneath the seabed like a rolling earthquake. The properties of the wave are measured by sensors, and the resulting data is analyzed to detect pockets of oil and gas. The sound produced by an individual air gun blast is similar to the sound of a jet engine powering up for takeoff. An array of guns produces sound levels equivalent to the eruption of an underwater volcano.
The government says that the question of whether or not underwater seismic testing is actually harmful to marine life has not been conclusively answered. But numerous scientific studies have determined that these acoustic assaults can harm, and potentially kill, many forms of marine life, from dolphins and whales all the way down to zooplankton, the foundation of the marine food chain. According to Katherine Brogan, a NOAA spokeswoman, “NOAA Fisheries is clear in the documentation…..we do not expect mortality to occur as a result of these surveys.” What exactly does that mean…that the paperwork is in order? And what is the rationale for their “expectation” in light of the scientific studies?
The permits were approved on an “incidental basis”, which basically means that as long as the testing is not intended to kill marine life, “incidental casualties” are no problem. Well, that’s just great. You may permanently disrupt their habitat, you may destroy their migration patterns, you may critically impair their ability to use their own sonar systems to find food, but as long as you don’t kill’em on purpose, you’re good to go. In support of permit approval, the Bureau of Ocean Management claimed that “there is no confirmed evidence that animals are actually harmed by seismic mapping”, and it considers the threat “negligible”. But just last year that same Bureau opposed test applications saying that “the value of obtaining the geophysical and geological information from new air gun seismic surveys does not outweigh the potential risks of those surveys’ acoustic pulse impacts on marine life”. So, what miraculous event caused the Bureau to undergo a 180 degree shift in position from one year to the next? New research, updated science, or big oil politics?
Whether or not east coast drilling is a good idea is the subject of ongoing debate. The Trump administration stands squarely with the oil industry claiming that the national interest requires continuing efforts to produce more “home grown” oil. Virtually every elected coastal state official is opposed to the idea of drilling, which will of course expose millions of people and thousands of miles of developed coastline to the threat of another Deep Water Horizon catastrophe. Regardless of which side of that debate one chooses to be on, several additional factors with respect to the seismic testing cannot be disputed: 1) There is no immediate need to increase oil production. The United States is now an oil exporting nation, and domestic oil consumption is declining; 2) While there may not be conclusive proof that the acoustic testing kills marine life on the spot, there can be no doubt that the adverse risk factors concerning long term impacts are significant; 3) The surveys aren’t actually necessary. The area off the east coast was subjected to this testing years ago. The oil companies already know where the oil is. This round of testing is designed to enable the industry to fine tune drilling plans, which may never be implemented. Under these circumstances, the fact that the government has approved a process that will threaten the very existence of as many as 250,000 marine creatures is simply unconscionable. Thus the fork in the road.
We can choose to react to this massive display of arrogance by following the usual course of peaceful protest. Or we can, in Mencken’s words, spit on our hands, raise the black flag…and start slitting. Not throats perhaps, but certainly hydraulic hoses, coolant lines, towing cables, and anything else that can be done to prevent these tests from being conducted. This course will not be without serious risks. People will be arrested and imprisoned, property will be damaged, physical injury will almost certainly occur…but it is clear that extraordinary steps must be taken to stop this travesty.
Bill's Blog 