Navy shelves bomb
training plan
Environmentalists fought against Fort Hunter Liggett
proposal
Eric Brazil, Chronicle Staff Writer
Friday, November 16, 2001
©2001 San Francisco Chronicle
Facing stiff opposition from environmentalists
and Monterey County residents who cherish peace and
quiet, the U.S. Navy has shelved plans for stepping up
its aerial bombardment training program at Fort Hunter
Liggett.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy Duncan
Holliday made the announcement yesterday in Washington,
D.C., ending a debate that has raged since February.
Seldom-used Fort Hunter Liggett, 23 miles
southwest of King City and 45 miles northwest of Paso
Robles, is 162,000 acres of savannah and chaparral next
to the Santa Lucia Mountains and the Ventana Wilderness
Area.
The Navy had proposed an enormous expansion of
practice bombing runs at the sparingly used post, from a
handful of flights to a dozen sorties a day, five days a
week, by a dozen jets, each making 12 low-level passes to
drop dummy bombs on a 500-foot bulls-eye.
Current Navy bombing practice is carried on at
ranges in Nevada, Arizona and in the California desert.
The Navy eyed Hunter Liggett as a cost-saving move.
Navy spokeswoman Lt. Pauline Storurm said that a
re-examination of the proposal by Adm. Thomas B. Fargo,
commander of the Navy's Pacific Fleet, found that "there
is no present need to expand our current use of Hunter
Liggett. . . What we have in place meets our operational
needs."
Rep. Sam Farr, D-Carmel, whose district includes
Hunter Liggett, hailed the Navy's decision.
"This is making government work the way it should
work," Farr said. "The Navy made a proposal, the
community responded and generated statewide concern. . .
. The public decided that it preferred the silence to the
noise."
The Navy was bombarded by thousands of protest
letters and, following a public hearing, took a step back
from its proposal and decided to do an environmental
impact statement on it.
The report was never completed.
Opponents of the plan contended that it was an
inappropriate use for an area adjacent to wilderness and
the scenic Big Sur coast, which contained sacred Indian
sites.
E-mail Eric Brazil at ebrazil@sfchronicle.com.
©2001 San Francisco Chronicle