DOCSLIB.ORG

Navy RPA Comments- Through 12/18/2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Navy RPA Comments- Through 12/18/2020 Navy RPA Comments- through 12/18/2020 I object to the Navy’s proposal to use our State Parks for training. There are serious problems with the proposal. Allowing the Navy to use our State Parks for training would further militarize our society, taking over a large number of parks (29) for military training. We use our parks for peace, solitude, getting back to nature, getting in tune with our family and ourselves. There is no need to use these spaces. Stop, just stop. This is a terrible idea. I firmly object. This is wrong. Stop.1 The Navy has and continues to destroy our state and national parks, our homes, environment, wildlife and communities with toxic jet noise and war games. Our State Parks are for us the Citizens, not military war games. Just say no to the Bullish Toxic Navy.2 I OBJECT to the Navy’s proposal to use our State Parks for training! There are serious problems with the proposal. Allowing the Navy to use our State Parks for training would further militarize our society, taking over a large number of parks (29) for military training. One of the key responsibilities for civil authorities is to tell the military when enough is enough. Just say NO to using public parks for military training!3 In these days of great division in our civil society, we don't need stealthy men in camo uniforms toting toy guns around our State and County Parks. People frequent parks to escape tension, not to encounter more. Keep the Navy commando training out of our parks!4 Please don’t let the military train in our parks.5 I am vehemently opposed to allowing military training in our 29 public parks. This practice is absolutely in opposition with the mission and regulations of our State Park system and puts public safety at risk. The Navy has sufficient land to practice spying with realistic looking weapons without putting actual civilians who are uninformed in harms way. This is ludicrous when weapons are not allowed in our parks! Military training in our public parks does not meet the stated goals for parks to care for state resources and provide recreational access to the public. Please do not allow this proposal to go forward.6 I am the daughter of a navy commander from WWII. I am opposed to using our park system for wargames. In addition to the risks posed to frequent walkers, dogs, forest wildlife, and fragile eco- systems, outdoor recreation has become essential for safe activities in the covid19 pandemic. The navy owns property on Indian Island etc with similar land and sea approaches for necessary training.7 The Navy has plenty of other places to train, many of them right next to the parks they want to use. This is inconsistent with mission, vision and core values not to mention the regulations of the State Park system and has a real potential for harm. I AM SAYING NO TO USING PUBLIC PARKS FOR MILITARY TRAINING. The people have already said this.8 As lifelong residents of Washington state we are against the Navy being allowed to use our state parks for military training purposes. The mission of our state parks is caring for state resources for the recreation of citizens not providing a training ground for military exercises. It is a bad precedent to set. We don’t want to be part of an exercise where we are being “spied on” by people carrying “fake” weapons for whatever purpose they conjure up. Please deny this request.9 Do not allow Navy training involving unknowing citizens in Washington State Parks!10 Hello, I strongly object to the Navy’s proposal to use our State Parks for training. The state parks are for the benefit and enjoyment of the people and for the care of the natural beauty and wildlife. The Navy's proposal does not meet the standard and needs to be rejected, furthermore: • Allowing the Navy to use any State Park for training would further militarize our society. • The Navy has plenty of other places to train. Navy RPA Comments- through 12/18/2020 • There is very real potential for harm to result from the activities the Navy is proposing. • Trainees will be carrying realistic looking fake weapons. This would clearly be problematic in our parks, where weapons are not allowed. • Having military training activities in our parks is inconsistent with the mission, vision, and core values of the State Park system. • Having military training activities in our parks is inconsistent with State Park regulations.11 I don't want this to spoil my time in our state parks. To quote from the assistant director of State Parks, the mission is “to care for state resources and provide recreational access to the public.” This proposal does not meet that standard and needs to be rejected. To quote from a letter to the editor: "One of the key responsibilities for civil authorities is to tell the military when enough is enough. It the citizens don’t put limits on military activities, expansion will never cease. It is up to us, the citizenry, to take that stand and draw the appropriate line. It is not unpatriotic or disrespectful to set limits on the military – it is our responsibility. Just say NO to using public parks for military training."12 I'm writing to let you know of my objection to the Navy’s proposal to use our State Parks for training as described by the 2/11/20 article in the South Whidbey Record newspaper. While I would object at any time to the use of our state parks for military practice exercises where the Navy carries apparent weapons and spies on park users, during these times of increased awareness of abuses of power and spread of conspiracy theories, it is reckless and irresponsible. My family was been involved with CERT disaster preparedness practices, and it is possible to carry out practice exercises AND be transparent to the public.13 I have just learned that the Navy wants to use our parks for training. I am opposed to this for the following reasons: The Navy has plenty of other places to train, many of them right next to the parks they want to use. When challenged, they admitted that it was the presence of civilians on whom they could spy that made the parks desirable. Many park users have real and reasonable objections to being spied on. There is very real potential for harm to result from the activities the Navy is proposing. Although the Navy claims to alert park staff and local law enforcement before an activity, in the five years they have used five parks they have never actually done that. Trainees will be carrying realistic looking fake weapons. This would clearly be problematic in our parks, where weapons are not allowed. Having military training activities in our parks is inconsistent with the mission, vision, and core values of the State Park system.14 I object to the use of state parks for navy training. It is the antithesis of the purpose of state parks to allow them to be used for military practice exercises on unaware Washingtonians. Please do not permit this militarization of our great state resource.15 I am writing to oppose opening state parks to war games of any nature. Parks are where we take our families to enjoy peace and quiet and interact with nature. The very thought of armed military, even if the “arms” are not actual firearms, leaping out of bushes is the very antithesis of a park. Please, do not agree to the pressure from the military to war games in our parks!16 The state parks are places for recreation, relaxation and tranquility and should be safe and secure. Seeing Military Service Members in battle dress with rubber replicas of assault rifles and other military equipment hiding in the bushes, stalking and observing park visitors IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AND IS DEEPLY DISTURBING. Particularly so for those park visitors with young children. It beggers belief that anyone in a position to allow this situation to occur is even considering it and that we the people have to stand up and object to this in any formal way. The very idea that this could occur in parks that the citizens of Washington State own and are taxed to maintain is unconscionable. THIS MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO OCCUR.17 Navy RPA Comments- through 12/18/2020 I object to the Navy’s proposal to use our State Parks for training. There are serious problems with the proposal. Allowing the Navy to use our State Parks for training would further militarize our society, taking over a large number of parks (29) for military training. One of the key responsibilities for civil authorities is to tell the military when enough is enough. Just say NO to using public parks for military training.18 I am writing to voice my opposition to the proposal by the US Navy that they use our State Parks for training purposes. The Navy has no shortage of places to train, while the civilian population relies on our parks to provide safe and peaceful recreation, especially in this time of a raging pandemic. I am horrified that it is even under consideration. I understand that the privacy of park users could be compromised by these exercises and strongly object to that possibility. To quote from the assistant director of State Parks, the mission is “to care for state resources and provide recreational access to the public.” This proposal does not meet that standard and needs to be rejected.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Whidbey & Whidbey &
    5-2018 F m o o oe is oe l and info and W elds and woods. and elds f both through trails hiking C hidbey I amano slands.com ere are dog-friendly dog-friendly are ere T restaurant. a and shops, specialty galleries, Greenbank Farm Greenbank is publicly-owned farm is home to art art to home is farm publicly-owned is T – 9 9 from invading ships. invading from Sound Puget protect to forts three Fire”; of “Triangle region’s the e fort, featuring cannons, was part of of part was cannons, featuring fort, e T 1890’s. the in built fort a and rst lighthouse, Admiralty Head Lighthouse, Lighthouse, Head Admiralty lighthouse, rst f region’s the both to home ere is a Visitor Center located at Make Whidbey. Make at located Center Visitor a is ere T Fort Casey State Park State Casey Fort overlooking Puget Sound is is Sound Puget overlooking f blu is T - 8 8 Small shops and restaurants greet visitors along the main highway. highway. main the along visitors greet restaurants and shops Small is, for many, where they drive on the mainland, or where they depart. depart. they where or mainland, the on drive they where many, for is, stunning views. views. stunning Clinton and South Whidbey South and Clinton – Whidbey Island’s ferry gateway gateway ferry Island’s Whidbey – 18 18 and provides opportunities to explore parks, beaches, trails and and trails beaches, parks, explore to opportunities provides and Reserve is home to historic farms, the seaport town of Coupeville, Coupeville, of town seaport the farms, historic to home is Reserve towering forests, and camping options, including cabins.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Public Beach List
    2021 Public Beach List - Special Rules The following is a list of popular public beaches with special rules because of resource needs and/or restrictions on harvest due to health concerns. If a beach is not listed below or on page 2, it is open for recreational harvest year-round unless closed by emergency rule, pollution or shellfish safety closures. Click for WDFW Public Beach webpages and seasons 2021 Beach Seasons adopted February 26, 2021 Open for Clams, Mussels & Oysters = Open for Oysters Only = For more information, click on beach name below to view Jan1- Jan15- Feb1- Feb15- Mar1- Mar15- Apr1- Apr15- May1- May15- Jun1- Jun15- Jul1- Jul15- Aug1- Aug15- Sep1- Sep15- Oct1- Oct15- Nov1- Nov15- Dec1- Dec15- beach-specific webpage. Jan15 Jan31 Feb15 Feb28 Mar15 Mar31 Apr15 Apr30 May15 May31 Jun15 Jun30 Jul15 Jul31 Aug15 Aug31 Sep15 Sep30 Oct15 Oct31 Nov15 Nov30 Dec15 Dec31 Ala Spit No natural production of oysters Belfair State Park Birch Bay State Park Dash Point State Park Dosewallips State Park Drayton West Duckabush Dungeness Spit/NWR Tidelands No natural production of oysters Eagle Creek Fort Flagler State Park Freeland County Park No natural production of oysters. Frye Cove County Park Hope Island State Park Illahee State Park Limited natural production of clams Indian Island County Park No natural production of oysters Kitsap Memorial State Park CLAMS AND OYSTERS CLOSED Kopachuck State Park Mystery Bay State Park Nahcotta Tidelands (Willapa Bay) North Bay Oak Bay County Park CLAMS AND OYSTERS CLOSED Penrose Point State Park Point
    [Show full text]
  • RV Sites in the United States Location Map 110-Mile Park Map 35 Mile
    RV sites in the United States This GPS POI file is available here: https://poidirectory.com/poifiles/united_states/accommodation/RV_MH-US.html Location Map 110-Mile Park Map 35 Mile Camp Map 370 Lakeside Park Map 5 Star RV Map 566 Piney Creek Horse Camp Map 7 Oaks RV Park Map 8th and Bridge RV Map A AAA RV Map A and A Mesa Verde RV Map A H Hogue Map A H Stephens Historic Park Map A J Jolly County Park Map A Mountain Top RV Map A-Bar-A RV/CG Map A. W. Jack Morgan County Par Map A.W. Marion State Park Map Abbeville RV Park Map Abbott Map Abbott Creek (Abbott Butte) Map Abilene State Park Map Abita Springs RV Resort (Oce Map Abram Rutt City Park Map Acadia National Parks Map Acadiana Park Map Ace RV Park Map Ackerman Map Ackley Creek Co Park Map Ackley Lake State Park Map Acorn East Map Acorn Valley Map Acorn West Map Ada Lake Map Adam County Fairgrounds Map Adams City CG Map Adams County Regional Park Map Adams Fork Map Page 1 Location Map Adams Grove Map Adelaide Map Adirondack Gateway Campgroun Map Admiralty RV and Resort Map Adolph Thomae Jr. County Par Map Adrian City CG Map Aerie Crag Map Aeroplane Mesa Map Afton Canyon Map Afton Landing Map Agate Beach Map Agnew Meadows Map Agricenter RV Park Map Agua Caliente County Park Map Agua Piedra Map Aguirre Spring Map Ahart Map Ahtanum State Forest Map Aiken State Park Map Aikens Creek West Map Ainsworth State Park Map Airplane Flat Map Airport Flat Map Airport Lake Park Map Airport Park Map Aitkin Co Campground Map Ajax Country Livin' I-49 RV Map Ajo Arena Map Ajo Community Golf Course Map
    [Show full text]
  • USFWS Outreach/Education FY2005 Protected Salmonid Survey/Angler Outreach Project Progress Report
    USFWS Outreach/Education FY2005 Protected Salmonid Survey/Angler Outreach Project Progress Report Cooperative Agreement # 134104 Report Date: March 24, 2008 Reporting Period: November 1, 2005–December 5, 2007 Project Rationale and Objectives In recent years, Wild Fish Conservancy has received reports from recreational anglers of observed violations of no-harvest rules for trout, salmon and char in the marine waters of Washington State. Such illegal take may be significantly compromising conservation efforts, and may stem in part from confusion about the geographic range of the fishery regulations or from misidentification of protected species as harvestable salmonids. To assist in the protection of the anadromous life-history forms of these fishes, this cooperative project has developed educational signage that alerts the public about state and federal harvest restrictions on at-risk salmonids and illustrates diagnostic features to facilitate species identification in the field. The signs, installed throughout coastal Washington State, target Washington’s recreational nearshore anglers. To assess recreational fishing pressure on selected species, the project has implemented a 12-month harvest survey. The objective of the survey is to collect quantitative and qualitative information volunteered by anglers, which Wild Fish Conservancy will analyze and provide to USFWS and WDFW as feedback to assist with refinement of biologically based fishing regulations that are accessible and understandable by the public. Methods The regulatory signage utilized in this project focuses on anadromous bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) and sea-run coastal cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki clarki) and were developed by the USFWS’s Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office (Fig. 1). At all posting sites, the regulatory sign was accompanied by an advertisement (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017-2018 Fishing in Washington Sport Fishing Rules Pamphlet
    Sport Fishing Rules Pamphlet Corrections and Updates July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018 Last updated June 28, 2017. Marine Area Rules Page 98, LANDING A FISH - A club or dipnet (landing net) may be used to assist landing a legal fish taken by legal gear. A gaff may only be used to land a legally hooked LINGCOD (in Marine Areas 1-3 and 4 West of Bonilla-Tatoosh line), HALIBUT, TUNA, or DOGFISH SHARK that will be retained. HALIBUT may be shot or harpooned while landing. Photo By Scott Mayfield General Information Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) Dr. Jim Unsworth, Director Ron Warren, Assistant Director, Fish Program Contents General Information General Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission GENERAL RULES & INFORMATION Dr. Bradley Smith, Chair, Bellingham Jay Kehne, Omak Contact Information ..................................2 Larry Carpenter, Vice Chair, Mount Vernon Miranda Wecker, Naselle Update From WDFW ................................3 Barbara Baker, Olympia Kim Thorburn, Spokane Statewide General Rules .........................4 Jay Holzmiller, Anatone David Graybill, Leavenworth Salmon and Trout Handling Rules ............5 Rules Robert “Bob” Kehoe, Seattle License Information ...............................6-7 Catch Record Cards .................................8 Freshwater Catch Record Card Codes .......................9 How to Use This Pamphlet Definitions ..........................................10-11 FRESHWATER GENERAL RULES This pamphlet is effective July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018 Statewide Freshwater Rules..............13-15 and contains information you need to legally fish throughout RIVERS .............................................17-73 Washington State (see WAC summary information below). Special Rules Introduction ..................17 Puget Sound Puget Puget Sound and Coast Rivers - Rivers & Coast 1 Read the General Information Pages. Special Rules ...................................18-46 Read the Licensing and Catch Record Card information.
    [Show full text]
  • Bull Kelp Monitoring in Island County, 2015 - 2016 Island County Marine Resources Committee
    Bull Kelp Monitoring in Island County, 2015 - 2016 Island County Marine Resources Committee Clockwise, from upper left: Shiner perch (lower center) and forage fish school (right side) in bull kelp bed (L. Rhodes). Fried egg jellyfish, Phacellophora sp. (L. Rhodes). Kelp crab, Pugettia sp. (L. Rhodes). ICMRC volunteer surveyors on Polnell Point kelp bed, infrared imaging (V. Brisley) Report submitted in partial fulfillment of WA Department of Ecology grant SEANWS-2015- IsCoPH-00004, Task 2 (kelp). Project period: May 2015 – September 2016 Report date: September 30, 2016 Project lead: Linda Rhodes Project participants: Barbara Bennett, Vernon Brisley, Barbara Brock, Paulette Brunner, Lenny Corin, Leal Dickson, Linda Kast, Don Meehan, Debra Paros, Gregg Ridder. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. Bull Kelp Monitoring 2015-16 2 Bull Kelp Monitoring 2015-16 I. Introduction Kelp forests represent significant habitat for a wide variety of invertebrate and vertebrate animals, and may also influence other submerged aquatic vegetation (Mann 2000; Graham et al 2007). In addition to providing structural habitat, primary productivities of kelp forests match or exceed those of tropical rain forests, marine reefs and estuaries, and warm temperate forests (Mann 1972a; Mann 1972b). In Washington State, two species of kelp are dominant: giant kelp (Macrocystis integrifolia) and bull kelp (Nereocystis leutkeana). While both species occur along Washington's outer coast and coastal Strait of Juan de Fuca, bull kelp is the species found along shorelines of the inner Salish Sea (Mumford 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility Assessment for Salt Marsh Restoration at Camano Island State
    FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT FOR SALT MARSH RESTORATION AT CAMANO ISLAND STATE PARK, WHIDBEY BASIN Aundrea McBride and Eric Beamer Skagit River System Cooperative August 2010 Photo from Washington State Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction and Objectives............................................................................................................ 1 Potential Fish Use of a Restored Site.............................................................................................. 2 Fish Assemblage ......................................................................................................................... 3 Juvenile Chinook Salmon Habitat Use and Origin..................................................................... 5 Restoration Potential....................................................................................................................... 7 Site Geomorphology and Hydrology.......................................................................................... 7 Possible Restorable Footprint ..................................................................................................... 8 Restoration Feasibility .................................................................................................................. 16 Tidal Inundation (Will the site get wet?) .................................................................................. 16 Inlet Sustainability (Will the channel stay open?) ...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Beaches 2008
    National List of Beaches September 2008 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20460 EPA-823-R-08-004 Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 States Alabama........................................................................................................................................... 3 Alaska .............................................................................................................................................. 5 California.......................................................................................................................................... 6 Connecticut .................................................................................................................................... 15 Delaware........................................................................................................................................ 17 Florida ............................................................................................................................................ 18 Georgia .......................................................................................................................................... 31 Hawaii ............................................................................................................................................ 33 Illinois ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Beaches 2004 (PDF)
    National List of Beaches March 2004 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20460 EPA-823-R-04-004 i Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 States Alabama ............................................................................................................... 3 Alaska................................................................................................................... 6 California .............................................................................................................. 9 Connecticut .......................................................................................................... 17 Delaware .............................................................................................................. 21 Florida .................................................................................................................. 22 Georgia................................................................................................................. 36 Hawaii................................................................................................................... 38 Illinois ................................................................................................................... 45 Indiana.................................................................................................................. 47 Louisiana
    [Show full text]
  • The Totem Line 53 Years of Yachting - 54 Years of Friendship
    Volume 55 Issue 3 Our 55th Year March 2010 The Totem Line 53 years of yachting - 54 years of friendship In this issue…Annual awards announced; Membership drive emphasis; Consider WA marine parks Upcoming Events Commodore.………………...….…. Ray Sharpe [email protected] Mar 2…………..…………...…General Meeting Mar 6………... Des Moines Commodore’s Ball Vice Commodore…………… Gene Mossberger Mar 16…………...…………..… Board Meeting [email protected] Mar 17…………….NBC Meeting at Totem YC Mar 18 – 21..….…………Anacortes Boat Show Rear Commodore…….…………….Bill Sheehy Mar 19 – 21.….……………Coming Out Cruise [email protected] Mar 27………....…….………….....Spring Fling C ommodore’s Report The Membership Yearbook is Area Fuel Prices going to print shortly and should http://fineedge.com/fuelsurvey.html be ready for the March general Updated 1/27/10 meeting. Thanks to Gene, Dan and Mary for their efforts. C ommodore (Cont’d) by itself. If there isn’t some one willing to take on I want to thank Gene and Patti the organizing of this event and make it a great end of Mossberger, Bill and Val summer happening, then we need to decide now so Sheehy, and Rocci and Sharon Blair for attending the club can let Fair Harbor know that we’re not The TOA Commodores Ball with Char and myself going to do it. Then they can have it available to other and supporting Totem Yacht Club. boaters that may want it. Last year was a last minute scramble by some dedicated members. It is a lot Val Sheehy has stepped forward to take on the easier if it is done with proper planning.
    [Show full text]
  • Shellfish/Seaweed Rules
    Washington Sport Fishing Rules: Effective July 1, 2017 - June 30, 2018 Shellfish/Seaweed Rules Note: For current clam, oyster, and mussel beach seasons check wdfw.wa.gov/shellfish/beaches, the Shellfish Emergency Rule Change Hotline (866) 880-5431, or contact the WDFW customer service desk (360) 902-2700 to verify seasons. RAzOR clAm seasons occur only after clam samples have been tested by Washington Department of Health (DOH) and are found to be safe for human consumption. See page 128. 3 Steps to Safe and Legal Shellfish Harvest - It's your responsibility! 1 � � Know the Rules (You could get a ticket) Is the harvesting season open? Read the rules for seasons, size, and bag limits. For beach seasons, check the website wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/shellfish/beaches, the toll-free WDFW Emergency Rule Change hotline (866) 880-5431 or contact the WDFW customer service desk (360) 902-2700 to verify seasons. A chart of current seasons can be downloaded here: wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/shellfish/beaches/WDFWBeachSeasonsBarChart.pdf 2 � � �Pollution Closures (You could get sick) Does the beach meet standards for healthy eating? Some closures and advisories are shown on page 127. For more detailed information and current updates visit the Washington Department of Health website at doh.wa.gov/shellfishsafety.htm, call (360) 236-3330 or the local health department. County health department phone numbers are published in the government pages of local telephone directories. 3 � � �Marine Biotoxin Closures andVibrio Warnings (You could get sick or die) Is there an emergency closure due to Shellfish Poisoning (PSP/ASP/DSP) or Vibrio bacteria? Water quality conditions can change quickly.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Protected Areas in Washington
    Marine Protected Areas in Washington Recommendations of the Marine Protected Areas Work Group to the Washington State Legislature December 2009 Marine Protected Areas in Washington: Recommendations of the Marine Protected Areas Work Group to the Washington State Legislature December 2009 F. Brie Van Cleve Greg Bargmann Michele Culver The MPA Work Group Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, Washington 98501 Cover photo: Smith and Minor Islands. Photo courtesy of Kurt Beardslee, Wild Fish Conservancy. Back cover photo: Capt Disappointment State Park. Photo by Brie Van Cleve. Suggested citation: Van Cleve, FB, G Bargmann, M Culver, and the MPA Work Group. Marine Protected Areas in Washington: Recommendations of the Marine Protected Areas Work Group to the Washington State Legislature. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. This document does not declare, expand or diminish any rights, authorities, or legal obligations of the state and tribes. Nothing in this document shall be construed as a concession or waiver by any entity as to the claims, rights, or legal positions of others. Table of Contents Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]