Bush recently signed the latest Defense Bill and one of the issues it included was:

I've been on both ends of that argument so, personally, I'll watch where this goes. I have experienced times when the laws restricted training, but I've also seen units that showed a horrendous disregard for the environment.

However, I'd rather see the pendelum stay a little to the environmentalist's side versus swinging the other way. I worry that relaxed regulations will allow the Navy to pollute fishing grounds or harm fish with their sonar, or the Army's tracked vehicles fording through redds or dumping hazardous materials that eventually end up in the river.

On a brighter note it also included a 4%+ payraise and concurrent retirement and disability pay.

the military is getting stronger every day, with the exception of its leadership, and they have whole countries that they control outside of the U.S. to do training in. i dont understand how this certain types of training will help them in their fight against people that are launching 20 year old rockets from mule carts.

the best way to get the best for our troops is to make sure that someone who went AWOL for a year and a half isint in charge of the troops anymore.

the environment on the other hand is getting weaker and weaker everyday thanks in part to the same leadership or lack there of. our economy is directly linked to how healthy our environment is. if our environment gets worse it will mean a less healthy economy and less taxes for the military as a whole. a classic example that is easy to understand after this latest round of floods is the fact that a wetland is 50 times more economically viable undeveloped... than developed. Bad environmental policy will take exponentially more dollars out of our economy than the "jobs vs the environ" theorists think they are saving thru short term destructive practices. conservative business practices can often be very healthy but conservative environmental practices are usually a total lie when you research it and are almost allways extreemely economically damaging as well as environmentally damaging.

just think of the trillions that we would have saved by using the technology that we had 50 years ago to power cars without oil .

in short if they can overide our environmental policies it will do absolutely nothing to make us more safe. the columbia is allready been turned into the most radioactive river in the entire world!!! how did that make us any safer

Oh, give it a rest... The environmentalists brought this on themselves.

Some of the best remaining wildlife areas are in the shape they are in because of the military, not in spite of it. Case in point...The Marines at Camp Pendleton California have been using their beaches to practice landings since the base was established in 1942. Because the Marines have taken care of this big piece of California real estate, it remains in great condition and wildlife abounds. But rather than leave a great situation alone, the environmentalists want some say in the matter and have tried legally to get the Marines to stop practicing beach landings. What a bunch of idiots... Might as well try to get fish to stop swimming and birds to stop flying.

The purpose of the military is to protect this country and they don't need environmentalist wackos telling them how and where they should train!

If you spent any time at Camp Pendleton, you would realize that the best thing that anyone can do is leave the Marines to take care of their own backyard.

Semper Fi!

ET- While it may be true that the Marines at Ft. Pendelton have treated their environmental area kindly this is not the case for all millitary bases and units. I worked over the summer for the fish and wildlife deparment on Ft. Lewis and saw first hand places where the millitary showed complete disregard for the environment when conducting training. I feel that it is neccasary for environmentalists and the millitary to work together so that we can have a strong millitary and a healthy environment. By not holding the millitary acountable for their destruction of the environment we make this difficult to acheive.

I want a strong military and I want a clean environment. Until all possibilities for solution are exhausted, I refuse to believe that they are mutually exclusive ideas. Obviously the Administration feels that they might be mutually exclusive. The more I view the current administration, the more I believe they must be voted out of office. If I were an umpire, I'd be calling Strike 83 about now!!

Oh, and another thing, I also believe that most people (that includes military personnel as well) will do the right thing by the environment if they know what to do. Maybe there is some room for education?

Moving tanks and dropping bombs is not an environmentally friendly process and there is no doubt that areas are devastated. And there is no doubt that 18-year-olds with a steering wheel are going to tear it up when given the chance.... The mistake is that the environmentalists pushed this issue to the point where something had to give.

Holding the military accountable??? For what? Doing their mission? And exactly how is one government agency going to hold another accountable? Fines? From who? The taxpayers again?

And again this issue is important, why? Because overall the military bases have lots of undisturbed land that holds tons of wildlife off limits to most. If they had been out destroying their land for the last 40 years, we wouldn't be discussing this, would we? And they are being asked to follow the lead of who? The same people who have already destroyed their own land, now want control.

Probably the best thing we can do is leave them alone for another 40 years.

That's very true, especially the "if they know what to do" part. It's amazing what has changed enviromentally speaking in the military during the last 21 years.

In the mid-80's I remember seeing hundreds of gallons of diesel drained, purposely, on the ground at the National Training Center (NTC) which is right next to Death Valley. Now you receive an extensive briefing about what you can and cannot do while there. Boy, you better not even THINK about touching one of those Desert Tortoise. Over in Yakima there are quite a few areas that are off-limits to vehicles because of flora and fauna.

ET - your points are exactly why this is an important issue. I agree that the military has done an excellent job as environmental stewards for the lands they command. I believe it's because of the regulations that has kept them in check, however. I'd hate to see the regulations rolled back and some of those detrimental practices resumed.

As far as the fines are concerned - individuals, commanders, and units pay those fines. And they can be quite significant.

ET: This is another of those issues where a little compromise and common sense can result in a bit more protection for the environment with no harm to the military.

I am not anti military. I am, in fact a disabled U.S. Navy veteran. I was raised in Bremerton and saw first hand the wanton disregard for the environment shown by the U.S. Navy. For most of the history of the shipyard all sewage was dumped, untreated, directly into a shallow bay that has little natural flushing. It took environmental groups years to get the navy to stop dumping raw sewage into the bay. Now the sewage goes into a pipe to a sewage treatment facility. Did this change hurt the Navy? Not a bit.

Can one government agency enforce rules on another? Most certainly! We have done so for many years. Many times the EPA has fines cities, counties and states. I see no reason why they can’t enforce rules on the military. In fact I know they routinely do.

I think the military is no better or worse than any other large organization. Some leaders are excellent stewards of OUR land, others are not. I see no harm in asking the military protect our land and water while they are protecting our freedom. The two are not mutually exclusive.

"...most people (that includes military personnel as well) will do the right thing by the environment if they know what to do. Maybe there is some room for education? "

The history of this country and others proves just the opposite. When a dollar is on the table most people will choose the dollar.

Buying Chinese goods is a classic example. Most enviromentally minded people have homes full of Chinese products and have such based on price. Manufactures are doing business in China based on costs being driven up by labor and the EPA regulations in the US. If so many environmentally correct people existed the manufacturing would remain here regardless of the cost of the end product.
China is becomong a toxic waste dump as is much of the 3rd world.

You can look to pesticide and herbicide consumption by US farmers and homeowners if you do not like the Chinese example.

The example list is long and the quote should read ""...most people (that includes military personnel as well) will do the right thing by the environment if if it is the easiest thing to do and effects them directly and visably"