Don't forget that the 9th circuit is so far left it's either foul or halfway up the stands on any given decision and gets overruled at appeal very frequently. It's very possible that the next appeal will change things.
Right, because you really want to use your equipment for the first time when you're in a fight. Why would you want to see if it's in good repair, train your crews with it, find the limitations, or even see if the stuff works at all before the shooting starts?!
</s>
There definitely are justifications. Maybe not sufficient to justify the damage done, but it's not like the Navy is just screwing with whales for grins.
You can minimize the use of the equipment to tests that ensure its operational, made on dry land or with precautions preventing the sound to disturb marine life. Training can happen on simulators.
I didn't make any comment on the validity of the decision, just that the 9th tends to err much farther left than the other circuits and appeals of its decisions are much more frequently successful.
Okay, but you'll have to be willing to give up the following: agriculture, power generation (both fossil and renewable), housing, clothing, and shelter.
Almost all industrial scale processes, including building your house, endanger animal life in one way or another, whether it's particulate creation from fossil fuels, migrating birds in wind turbines, or simple destruction of habitat.
A better argument, to me, would be that dolphins and whales exhibit intelligence on par with the great apes. Dolphins have the largest number of neurons in the neocortex of any mammal, communicate with one another, transmit culture from generation to generation, and work in tandem with humans even in the wild.
There's at least a decent argument to be made that they may be sentient. Given that possibility, we would be not only cruel to damage these animals, but perhaps would also deprive ourselves of an invaluable resource in understanding the roots of consciousness.
Apples to oranges. The processes you mentioned actively produce an end product. Sonar, at best, produces intelligence during wartime and at worst, kills intelligent marine life during peacetime.
Kills endangered species, sentient or not, that are strictly protected by law. Like Eubalaena japonica, with a world population estimated between 23 and 40 animals.
Anybody caught just willfully harassing a whale would face a hefty fine or even jail time. To kill entire herds of several species of dolphins and whales is, understandably, a much worst offence. The question to be answered here is: Can the army be allowed to just ignore the current law in peace time, arguing that laws are annoying for them?
The problem was that they were breaking the law for no reason, not if this whales can use facebook or not.
The end products of a powerful navy are openness of the sea for commerce, protection of international peace, and national security.
Intelligence, when gathered in accordance with the law, is an invaluable resource in producing those end products.
Security may be something that many in the United States take for granted, but it is one of the basic requirements of human beings, perhaps even prior to food, water, and shelter on the hierarchy of needs.
What goals? The "openness of the sea for commerce, protection of international peace"?
It's about a nation's interests. We shouldn't pretend that, if those interests are better served by closing down the sea for commerce and waging war, the navy would do anything else. The navy is a tool of power and suppression of its enemies.
