Navy Cancels Live-Fire Exercises in the Chesapeake Bay

No stepped-up activity on bay island, Navy vows

Bombing, live-fire exercises called just 'hypotheticals'

By Tom Pelton

Sun Staff

Originally published March 17, 2005

Under fire from Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski and others, the Navy backed away yesterday from a proposal to resume bombing, strafing and live-fire military exercises on an island in the Chesapeake Bay.

During a Senate subcommittee hearing on the Navy's budget yesterday, Mikulski told Navy Secretary Gordon England that the residents of Maryland's Eastern Shore were agitated about the proposal, first reported March 4 in The Sun.

"Remember, they fought off the British," Mikulski said of the residents of Dorchester County, some of whom live within two miles, and earshot, of the target range on Bloodsworth Island.

"They don't want to get into it with you. ... The accounts in the newspaper, it really sounded over-the-top for an exercise in the bay."

The announcement means the Navy will continue to conduct aerial maneuvers and electronic testing over the island, as it has since it halted bombing practice on the island in 1996 after 54 years of exercises, Navy officials said.

The Navy secretary apologized to Mikulski, a Democrat, for any "misconceptions" that have been frightening people who live near the island.

"My apologies," said England. "We are not going to do any of those things on Bloodsworth island. ... We are not going to have any amphibious assaults or drop bombs and any of those things on Bloodsworth Island."

A Navy draft environmental assessment report sent to Dorchester County officials last month in advance of a series of public hearings said the military was proposing to resume target practice on the island with inert bombs and missiles.

The Navy was also proposing to conduct "live-fire" drills with submachine guns and rifles, build landing areas for amphibious assault craft, and create a helicopter pad and mobile targets on the island, according to the report.

Popular fishing site

The decision that the bombing and shooting exercises on the island won't restart after all means that watermen can continue to use a popular fishing area within a 26-mile Navy danger zone surrounding the island, said Capt. Kevin Wensing, public affairs officer for the Navy secretary.

The report had proposed to shut them out for up to 1,200 hours a year.

But both Wensing and his boss left some wiggle room, saying the Navy had no plans to expand testing on the range, leaving open the possibility that it might, if national security issues demand it.

'No current plans'

Wensing said the proposal for expanded military operations outlined in the environmental report were "hypotheticals" that didn't reflect the Navy's true intentions.

"There are no current plans or plans to increase operations at Bloodsworth," said Wensing. "I can't imagine any change for fishing or boating - no change in any way for the people who use the waters."

Environmentalists praised the Navy's decision yesterday, saying military exercises can harm wildlife, pollute the bay and disrupt the livelihoods of watermen.

Pleased with decision

"We are very pleased with this decision," said Kim Coble, Maryland executive director of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. "We think this is an excellent decision for the bay and the people who live off of it."

On Monday, Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes urged the Navy to conduct a more complete environmental study before it resumes bombing practice on the 5,361-acre island, which is about 12 miles north of the Virginia border.

In a letter to the Navy secretary, the Democratic senator said he worries about "the far-reaching implications that the bombing could potentially have on public safety, on commercial and recreational fisheries in the waters surrounding Bloodsworth Island, and on the continuing efforts to restore the Chesapeake Bay."

U.S. Rep. Wayne T. Gilchrest, a Republican from the Eastern Shore, said last week in an interview that his dream would be to have the testing range become part of the nearby Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge.

Mikulski vs. Navy

But it was Mikulski who got the Navy's top brass to say that they won't change operations at the island, which today involve flyovers for instrument testing but no gunfire or bombs.

During a hearing on the Navy's budget yesterday, Mikulski told England and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Vern Clark that Maryland has always supported the Navy. But she said the proposal by the Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River was too much.

The senator said the island's neighbors heard about the Navy's proposal "out of the blue" by reading The Sun, and were alarmed.

"The Navy at Pax River ... talked about flying, using bombs, using live ammunition, amphibious landings, and there was a sense it was going to be like a Guadalcanal operation," Mikulski said, referring to the battle in World War II.

Worried community

"The community is really concerned," she said. "The concern [is] about live ammunition, and disruption, and the safety to lives, and the threat to livelihoods in the famous and fabulous Chesapeake Bay."

Clark said the military options described in the environmental assessment report were part of a legal requirement to examine options and do not reflect the Navy's true intentions.

"There are no plans for any kind of increased operations on Bloodsworth," Clark told Mikulski.

"So you don't intend to bomb it?" Mikulski asked.

"That's correct," Clark said.

"You don't intend to land on it with live ammunition?" she asked.

"There are no plans, and there will be no changes in the operational status of Bloodsworth," Clark said.

Mikulski's spokeswoman, Amy Hagovsky, said later that the senator intends to hold the Navy secretary to his promise and allow no backpedaling.

"They have committed to not expanding operations- and that's what she'll hold them to," Hagovsky said.

We should just ban all live-fire exercises. That way we can pretend we are prepared for real combat which we won't ever be involved in because we'll just run computer simulations and have extensive 'peace talks' with potential enemies.

My dad and I go fishing in the bay all the time... I think I know where they are talking about.

Originally posted by Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin

We should just ban all live-fire exercises. That way we can pretend we are prepared for real combat which we won't ever be involved in because we'll just run computer simulations and have extensive 'peace talks' with potential enemies.

Do they do live-fire exercises in Puget Sound? Would you mind if they did while you were out boating nearby?

I think this is more of a NIMBY issue and concern over proximity to populated areas. I don't think anybody's suggesting that they ban live-fire exercises.

Originally posted by China

Do they do live-fire exercises in Puget Sound? Would you mind if they did while you were out boating nearby?

I think this is more of a NIMBY issue and concern over proximity to populated areas. I don't think anybody's suggesting that they ban live-fire exercises.

You act as if people would be permitted on /near a given island with that kind of activity.

Yes, it's more of a NIMBY issue, but I'm thinking of Vieques, as well.

Navy will continue to conduct aerial maneuvers and electronic testing over the island, as it has since it halted bombing practice on the island in 1996 after 54 years of exercises

So why did they halt exercises there in 1996?

Edit: I see that in Vieques they left under political pressure after a civilian was killed by errant fire in one of the drills. Perhaps the people around the site in the Chesapeake Bay have similar worries.

For more than 60 years, the Navy used a 900-acre firing range on the eastern tip of the tiny island for bombing exercises. For decades it insisted that the exercises could not take place elsewhere, because the area offered a unique opportunity to conduct ship-to-shore gunnery practice and aerial bombings.

The people of Vieques and the Puerto Rican commonwealth bitterly complained that the drills were dangerous. The practice generated international criticism in 1999, when two errant bombs killed a civilian Puerto Rican security guard.

I remember the Navy bombing the so-called "target ship" in the Bay for years.

I always thought it was pretty neat. Occasionally a jet or two would streak over our place near Point Lookout and rattle the whole neighborhood.

Fond memories...