Exemption of military from environmental conservation - Research Paper Example

? Running head: Exemption of military from environmental conservation (insert Should the military be exempted from environmental conservation? Date (insert date) Outline Introduction Background information Method Literature review Result Conclusions and recommendations References Should the military be exempted from environmental conservation? Introduction Environmental degradation would lead to occurrence of diseases like cancer and widespread environmental hazards for example droughts, floods etc. Due to the various benefits of environment, the federal government tries to ensure that the environment is properly conserved for the future generations. This is done by proper legislation through acts of parliament, formation of organizations that ensure protection of endangered species and supporting world organizations whose mandate is to protect the environment. In the process of environmental conservation, an important question about the military involvement is environmental conservation normally surface. Scholars like Benedict Cohen and Jamie Clark have been able to argue out ideas on the military involvement in environmental conservation. Indeed, the issue of environmental conservation should be taken with the seriousness it deserves hence no person or personality should be exempted in the efforts of environmental conservation. Background information Environment is the conditions or the surroundings through which a human being, plant or animal operates. It involves the air, the waters, the soil, forests, etc. The environment is beneficial because it is a habitat to living things, source of food for animals, source of medicine and provides beautiful scenery during man’s relaxation. Over the past century, the military activities have been strongly linked to being insensitive to the conservation of the environment. Research through books, journals, newspaper articles and other forms of media has shown that the environmental pollution and degradation is due to the some of the military activities. The military may affect the environment unwillingly such as during combat or even during the training and testing sessions. In the training sessions and even live combat, the military use weapons, which release harmful chemicals to the environment (Bowden, 2004). These chemicals pollute the environment hence leads to death of biodiversity. In addition, the contaminated air may lead to increase in temperatures hence tropical diseases like malaria become widespread. Moreover, it has been proven that the radiation caused due to nuclear weaponry causes faster multiplication of body cells hence development of cancer. Thus the effect caused by military activities are more severe that leave the question should the military be exempt from environmental conservation. Method To address the issue, I will conduct a review of related research from the books, journals, newspaper articles and other forms of media. The review will give information on various scholarly materials that have researched on the issue. The findings will be summarized to give the results that on whether military should be exempt from environmental regulations. Literature review Land degradation is the deterioration of top soil in which the value of the biophysical environment is affected by one or more combinations of human-induced methods. The explosives used during testing or live combats affect the nature of the land by creating large dents in the ground (Schwartz, 2006). These dents accumulate water hence the land becomes unsuitable for agriculture. In addition, the heat generated by the explosives kills the microorganisms, which are responsible for the fertility and aeration of the soil. These lands are left bear hence no agricultural activities can take place. According to Schwarts (2006), military activities during either war or practice may result into leaving some dangerous substances in the environment. These substances may include radiations, unexploded ammunitions, burning oil wells etc. These environments are risky for agricultural practices and human settlement because people encounter these fatal remnants The chemicals released during war find their way into rivers and lakes causing the acid level of the waters to rise (Bowden, 2004). The living organisms in the water would die because such acidic waters cannot host living organisms. In the Persian gulf war of 1991, environmental war was introduced. In this case, the military personnel of the US enemies could release many barrels of oil to the water to limit the activities of the opponents. This led to death of many sea animals because they were unable to breath inside the water. Such damage could have been avoided if the military could have a sense of responsibility. Land is a very important asset to man. According to Carry (2006), military activities leave the land bear and barren because the chemical agents do not support the growth of vegetation. Most of the lands used as battlefields are left with dead bodies (see the picture below), burnt property, and are always isolated because people had to run away. The once beautiful landscape becomes bare and unpleasing to the eye hence the land loses its aesthetic value due to military activities (Cary 2006). Thus according to this scholar, the military activities should be limited to ensure that the amount of damage caused on the environment is minimized. Picture (for public domain) of Kuwait 1991 by Sebastian Salgado According to Dix (1981), pollution is the act of introducing into the environment substances or things that has harmful or poisonous effects. The military, in many ways, is involved in the rampant pollution of the environment. They contribute to noise pollution, water pollution, land pollution and air pollution. Noise pollution is one of the effects of military activities on the environment. The army uses heavy artillery that produces a lot of noise. In addition, during training and combat, the explosions causes by the ammunitions produce large sounds hence polluting the environment (Dix, 1981). People leaving close to such areas may develop earring complications because of exposure to the large sounds. This leaves the question on whether the military activities or the people should be given more priority. According to Gordon (2007), the military normally advocate for their exemption in the role of environmental conservation. They justify their proposals by claiming that the security of the nation of more importance hence need for carrying out more tests on their modern weapons. However, it has been proved that the military can carry their day-to-day activities and practices and in the end strive to conserve the environment. Removal of the environmental restrictions on the military would result into careless activities by the army hence it would be a large set back to the environmental conservation efforts (Gordon 2007). Hence, the military should continue their activities within the set guidelines. Results Military operations have been observed to cause noise pollution, water pollution, land pollution and air pollution. Among the many effects of military operations, land degradation tops the list. Explosives used during testing or live combats affect the soil hence making it unproductive. The explosives affect the atmosphere through releasing chemicals to the environment, which at times find their way into water bodies hence affecting aquatic life. Human health is affected as well as animal health. Therefore, the amount of damage cause as explained by various scholars cannot go unnoticed. The effects as analyzed are so severe that there is need for somebody to be held accountable for environmental degradation. The military should therefore be limited to how much they release into the useful environment. However, the department of defense argues that the soldiers need to be aware of the war situation and how to use various forms of weapons. This seems not to be the case on the ground. Since the training cannot be totally theoretical, the use of live ammunition is always used by the soldiers during the practical sessions. Though these weapons destroy the American environment, the department of defense encourages such because they have no choice but to train efficient soldier for the defense of the nation; hence their wish for exemption from environmental conservation. The modern war is somewhat dynamic because the country with the latest technology would be able to out-compete the enemy. The U.S should therefore not be left behind in the efforts of development of the latest technological weapons so that it can be able to defend against its enemies. For the military to achieve their targets, they need to use the environment in testing their war equipment. This war equipment has to undergo various tests to ensure that they are more efficient and not risky to their own soldiers. Considering the experimentation and testing of these equipments, the department of defense had to propose exemption of the military in environmental conservation. Conclusions and recommendations In conclusion, the environment is an important resource not only to the current generation but also to the future generations. Hence, there is need to ensure that it is protected by all ways possible. Despite the environmental conservation laws, the military activities are one of the ways in which the environment is destroyed because it causes pollution, land degradation and also loss of land’s aesthetic value. Therefore, exempting the military from the environmental conservation policy would worsen the current situation. Therefore, there is need for some things to be improved if military have to remain effective and up to date with the demands of war as well as contribute to environmental conservation. The military should ensure that the new weapons developed by the military should have a small impact on the environmental condition. This will ensure that in the situation of war, the weapons hit their specific targets hence the impact on the environment is negligible. This can be done by avoiding nuclear weapons and use of ammunitions with fewer chemicals. In addition, the weapons used by the military should not have long-term effects such as radiations. Currently, the land allocated by the United States government to the military is 1.1% of the total land. This land is too small compared to the extensive military activities that the US military are involved in. With the encroachment of human settlement to these military zones, the government should allocate more land to the military. Allocation of more land would prevent human interference during training and would lower the intensity of pollution because the pollutants are distributed over a large area. Even though the US military is involved in the conservation exercise of endangered spaces in its reserved lands, it has to do more in these conservation activities. More funds should be allocated for the conservation activities so that the military can be able to prevent the worsening of the current situation. More funds would ensure that the bare lands left after explosions are reclaimed and trees planted hence conservation of the environment for the future generations. References Bowden, R. (2004). Transportation: our impact on the planet: water pollution. Chicago, Ill. Britannica Education Publishing. Cary, C. (2006). Soil sorption of organic pollutants and pesticides. Denver: U.S department of interior. Dix, H. (1981). Environmental pollution: atmosphere, land, water and noise. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons publishers. Gordon, B. (2007). Land atmosphere interaction. National center for atmospheric research. Retrieved from www.google.com/national_centre_for_research. On April 11, 2013. Schwartz, J. (2006). The health effects of air pollution: Separating science and propaganda. North Carolina, NC: John Locke foundation. Read More