Philip Bethge

Tag: marine science

  • SPIEGEL-Gespräch an der Uni: Wie schlimm steht es um die Ozeane?

    Der Mensch beutet die Meere aus, warnen Umweltschützer. Doch wie sehr – und wie lange noch? SPIEGEL-Redakteur Philip Bethge diskutiert darüber an der Uni Kiel mit einem Greenpeace- und einem Fischerei-Experten.

    Die Ozeane stehen unter enormem Druck. Rund 4,6 Millionen Fischerboote machen weltweit Jagd auf Meeresbewohner aller Art. Über 80 Millionen Tonnen Meeresgetier ziehen Fischer jährlich aus dem Wasser. Dieser Gesamtfang hat sich seit den Neunzigerjahren trotz immer besserer Fangmethoden nicht mehr steigern lassen. Selbst Europa importiert mittlerweile mehr als die Hälfte seines Fischbedarfs, weil es nicht gelingt, ausreichend Meeresfrüchte in den eigenen Gewässern zu fangen.

    Die Folge: Die Weltmeere verändern sich rapide. 90 Prozent der großen Fische sind verschwunden. Die Hälfte der Korallenriffe ist verloren oder stark beschädigt. Nur 3,4 Prozent der Meere sind als Schutzgebiete ausgewiesen. Gleichzeitig ist Fisch für über drei Milliarden Menschen die wichtigste  Quelle tierischen Proteins. Gelingt es nicht, die Meere nachhaltig zu bewirtschaften, könnte sich die Ozeankrise schnell zu einer Ernährungskrise ausweiten.

    Wie lassen sich die Ozeane nutzen ohne sie zu zerstören? Was ist die Menschheit bereit, für den Erhalt der Meere und seiner Bewohner zu opfern? Und: Sind die Meere überhaupt in einer historischen Krise, wie Umweltschützer warnen – oder nutzt der Mensch den Ozean heute schon nachhaltiger als seinen eigenen Lebensraum, das Land?

    Darüber diskutiert SPIEGEL-Wissenschaftsredakteur Philip Bethge mit Thilo Maack, Greenpeace-Experte für Meere und Biologe, und Christopher Zimmermann, Leiter des Thünen-Instituts für Ostseefischerei in Rostock.

    Zeit: am Montag, 14. November 2016, 18 Uhr

    Ort: Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Christian-Albrechts-Platz 2, 24118 Kiel; Audimax (Frederik-Paulsen-Hörsaal)

    Der Eintritt ist frei.

    Informationen zu dieser und weiteren SPIEGEL-Veranstaltungen an Hochschulen finden Sie auf unserer Website DER SPIEGEL live.

    Seit dem Sommersemester 2007 diskutieren SPIEGEL-Redakteure regelmäßig an zahlreichen Hochschulen mit prominenten Gästen. Die SPIEGEL-Gespräche live an Universitäten begannen mit Harald Schmidt und einer Debatte über TV-Satire und dem Bestsellerautor Daniel Kehlmann über “Filme, Bücher, schöne Frauen”.

    Etliche weitere Gespräche folgten, darunter Diskussionen mit Joschka Fischer, Götz Aly, Hans-Christian Ströbele, Hartmut Mehdorn, Joe Kaeser, Claudia Roth, Cem Özdemir, Charlotte Roche, Gesine Schwan, Sascha Lobo und Nasa-Manager Jesco Freiherr von Puttkamer.

  • Die Wal-Kämpfer

    Paul Watson, Gründer der Meeresschutzorganisation Sea Shepherd, hat die Selbstjustiz auf den Ozeanen salonfähig gemacht. Mit rabiaten Methoden versuchen seine Ökopiraten, das Leben von Walen, Robben und Haien zu retten.

    Von Philip Bethge

    Wie geht das, einen Wal zu töten, tonnenschwer und sechs Meter lang, der im seichten Wasser liegt? Eine Handbreit hinter dem Blasloch muss die Lanze angesetzt werden. Ein kräftiger Druck, und wie durch Butter gleitet die blattförmige Schneide durch den Walspeck, dringt in die Wirbelsäule ein und durchtrennt das Rückenmark.

    Nur Sekunden dauert es, dann ist der Grindwal tot. So soll es eigentlich sein beim “Grindadráp”, der traditionellen Waljagd auf den Färöern. Doch dem Hamburger Studenten Nico Flathmann, 21, bot sich ein anderer Anblick.

    “Hier lagen die Wale und haben um ihr Leben gekämpft”, erzählt Flathmann und deutet auf den Steinstrand hinter sich, “das Wasser war blutrot.” Minutenlang hätten die Tiere gelitten, weil die Männer die Lanze falsch angesetzt oder “im Blutrausch” gleich zum Messer gegriffen hätten.

    Flathmann hat ein Video von der Waljagd am Hvannasund gemacht, einer Bucht im Norden des Färöer-Archipels. Männer rennen in dem Film ins Wasser und schlagen große Stahlhaken in die Blaslöcher der zuvor von Booten zusammengetriebenen Grindwale. Aus zuckenden Leibern spritzt Blut in die Höhe. Vom Ufer aus verfolgen Schaulustige das Spektakel. “Sie lachten, und es waren sogar Kinder dabei”, sagt Flathmann, “es ist erschreckend, wie viel Spaß die Leute an dem Gemetzel haben.”

    –> Originaltext auf Spiegel.de

    Flathmann ist für die Organisation Sea Shepherd im Einsatz, um den Walfängern der Färöer das Handwerk zu legen. Am vorigen Montag wurden zwei der Aktivisten von der örtlichen Polizei festgenommen, weil sie eine Waljagd behindert haben sollen. Mit zwei Schiffen und einem Team an Land sind die Meeresschützer derzeit vor Ort. Es ist die aktuelle Kampagne einer einzigartigen Umweltguerilla.

    Sea-Shepherd-Aktivisten kappen die Netze illegaler Fischer im Südpolarmeer und stellen sich Robbenschlächtern in Schottland und Finnland in den Weg. Vor Australien, Südafrika und Brasilien zerstören sie Köderleinen für Haie oder bewachen Meeresschildkröten. Mit ihren Booten fahren sie Walfängern vor den Bug, bis Stahl auf Stahl kracht . Im Hafen sprengten die Aktivisten sogar Löcher in die Rümpfe der verhassten Jagdschiffe.

    Kritiker werfen den Tierschützern “Ökoterrorismus” vor. Für ihre Anhänger jedoch sind sie die letzten großen Helden einer Umweltbewegung, die in den Siebzigerjahren mit der Gründung von Greenpeace begann und heute fast untergegangen erscheint – gäbe es da nicht “Neptuns Navy”, wie sich die Ozeanhirten nennen .

    “Wir sind eine globale Bewegung”, sagt Paul Watson, der Gründer der Organisation. Er will die Ozeane schützen, falls nötig mit Gewalt. Als Logo hat er einen Totenkopf gewählt. Dreizack und Hirtenstab kreuzen sich darunter, “Symbole für Aggressivität und Schutz”, wie Watson sagt. “Wir protestieren nicht, wir intervenieren; nur protestieren ist was für Feiglinge.”

    Für solche Sprüche lieben ihn seine Fans. Und Watson ist erfolgreicher als je zuvor. Aus einer kleinen Ökokämpfertruppe hat er eine weltweit operierende Organisation geformt. In 40 Ländern ist Sea Shepherd inzwischen aktiv. Der US-Fernsehsender Discovery Channel produziert die Serie “Whale Wars”, die Sea Shepherds Kampf gegen die japanische Walfangflotte begleitet. Das Spendenaufkommen der Organisation hat sich seit 2008 auf jährlich etwa zwölf Millionen Dollar vervierfacht.

    Acht Schiffe gehören zur Flotte der Ökopiraten. Im Januar erhielt die Organisation 8,3 Millionen Euro von einer niederländischen Wohltätigkeitslotterie. Erstmals will Watson nun ein Schiff nach eigenen Plänen bauen lassen. Seinen Crews aus Freiwilligen bietet er kaum Geld, dafür jedoch Ruhm und Abenteuer und das gute Gefühl, auf der richtigen Seite zu stehen.

    Auch für Prominente hat Watson ein Händchen. “Uns unterstützen Captain Kirk, Batman, McGyver und zwei James Bonds”, schmunzelt er: Die Schauspieler William Shatner, Christian Bale, Richard Anderson, Sean Connery und Pierce Brosnan konnte er gewinnen. Letzter Neuzugang im Sea-Shepherd-Beirat ist die “Baywatch”-Blondine Pamela Anderson.

    “Mich überrascht der Erfolg von Sea Shepherd nicht”, sagt Rex Weyler, ein ehemaliger Greenpeace-Vordenker und Wegbegleiter Watsons. “Viele Menschen sind verzweifelt, wenn sie sehen, was mit der Welt geschieht; sie bekommen Angst und wollen schnelle Lösungen und jemanden, der handelt.”

    Das Treffen mit Watson findet in einem Hotel in der Rue Boulard im Pariser Stadtteil Montparnasse statt. Watsons Brustkorb ist trotz seiner 64 Jahre immer noch breit wie ein Fass, sein Gesicht zerknautscht wie ein ungemachtes Bett. Begleitet wird er von seiner vierten Frau, der 30 Jahre jüngeren, russischen Tierrechtsaktivistin Yana Rusinovich. In Watsons Redeschwall reiht sich bald eine Räuberpistole an die nächste. Mit weißem Bart und zerzaustem Haupthaar wirkt er wie ein Seebär, der sich in die Großstadt verirrt hat.

    Watson wuchs in St. Andrews auf, einem Küstenort im Osten Kanadas. Schon in jungen Jahren arbeitete er für die kanadische Küstenwache und heuerte als Seemann auf Handelsschiffen an. Seine Aktivistenkarriere begann mit 19, als er gegen Atomwaffentests in Alaska demonstrierte. Aus der damaligen Protestbewegung ging Greenpeace hervor.

    Doch in der jungen Regenbogenkriegertruppe konnte sich der streitbare Kanadier nicht lange halten. “Er war zu machtbesessen, zu unerbittlich darin, sich selbst in den Mittelpunkt zu stellen und alle anderen beiseitezudrängen”, erinnerte sich Robert Hunter, einer der Greenpeace-Gründer. Vor allem mit dem späteren Chef von Greenpeace Kanada, Patrick Moore, geriet Watson aneinander. Laut Watson eskalierte der Streit im Eis von Labrador.

    “Ich leitete die Kampagne gegen das Abschlachten der Robben, und wir hatten Brigitte Bardot als Unterstützerin gewonnen”, so erzählt es Watson. Ein Hubschrauber habe bereitgestanden, um die Bardot zu den Eisfeldern zu fliegen. “Patrick verlangte mitzufliegen, ich lehnte ab: ,Patrick, du bist kein Fotograf, kein Kameramann, ich brauche dich dort nicht.’” Seine angebliche Antwort: “Lass es mich so sagen: Ich fliege in diesem Hubschrauber; und wenn ich Präsident werde, setze ich dich vor die Tür.”

    Kurz darauf wurde Moore tatsächlich Chef – und Watson musste gehen. Aber nicht nur, weil er den Hahnenkampf zweier Alphamänner verloren hatte. “Paul definierte Gewaltlosigkeit neu”, sagt Weyler. “Gandhi war ihm nicht genug; er fand es in Ordnung, Eigentum zu zerstören, auch wenn er damit gegen Gesetze verstieß.” Das aber widersprach dem gewaltfreien Greenpeace-Ethos – eine Zerreißprobe für die junge Organisation.

    Für Watson war der Rauswurf am Ende ein Glücksfall. Erst auf sich allein gestellt, konnte er seinen Aufstieg zum Fidel Castro des Meeresschutzes starten.

    Seinen ersten Walfänger rammte Watson 1978. Kurz darauf gründete er Sea Shepherd und machte fortan mit Aktionen gegen sowjetische Walfänger und kanadische Robbenschlächter von sich reden. Die Selbstjustiz auf See begründete Watson bald nicht mehr nur moralisch, sondern auch juristisch. Er beruft sich auf die World Charter for Nature der Vereinten Nationen. Dort heißt es, dass nicht nur Staaten, sondern auch “internationale Organisationen, Individuen” und “Gruppen” Umweltrecht “implementieren” und die Natur “jenseits nationaler Jurisdiktion”, also beispielsweise auf hoher See, schützen sollen .

    “Wir müssten nicht tun, was wir tun, wenn die Regierungen der Welt die Gesetze durchsetzen würden, die sie unterzeichnet haben”, sagt er. “Aggressive Gewaltlosigkeit” nennt er seine Strategie. “Wir zerstören Eigentum, das zum Töten benutzt wird; aber wir haben nie Menschen verletzt und würden dies auch nie tun.”

    Sea-Shepherd-Aktivisten werfen mit Beuteln voller stinkender Buttersäure nach den verhassten Walfängern. Sie versuchen, die Schiffsschrauben ihrer Gegner mit Stahlkabeln zu blockieren. Sie kappen Schleppnetze und zerstören Harpunen.

    Dass dabei noch niemand ernsthaft zu Schaden gekommen ist, grenzt an ein Wunder. Greenpeace zumindest hält Watsons Weg nach wie vor für falsch, moralisch wie taktisch. Wenn es einen Weg gebe, die Japaner im Walfang zu bestärken, dann sei es, “Gewalt gegen ihre Flotte” anzuwenden, so Greenpeace: “Es ist falsch, weil es Menschenleben in Gefahr bringt und die Walfänger nur stärker macht .”

    Watson ficht das nicht an. Und der Erfolg scheint ihm recht zu geben. “Unsere Mandanten sind Wale, Haie, Robben und Fische”, sagt er. Ob er das Richtige tut, misst sich für ihn einzig an der Zahl geretteter Meerestiere. 6000 Wale will Watson allein im Südpolarmeer seit 2002 vor der Harpune bewahrt haben, weil seine Schiffe die Japaner Jahr für Jahr daran hinderten, ihre für angebliche wissenschaftliche Zwecke notwendige Fangquote auszuschöpfen. Inzwischen hat der Internationale Gerichtshof in Den Haag den Wissenschaftswalfang der Japaner verboten.

    Spektakulär endete eine Sea-Shepherd-Operation im Mai, als vor Westafrika der Fischtrawler “Thunder” gurgelnd im Atlantik versank. 110 Tage lang hatten Sea-Shepherd-Boote den Trawler verfolgt. Die Aktivisten sagen, der Kapitän habe die “Thunder” am Ende absichtlich versenkt, um Beweise zu beseitigen. Der Trawler soll auf illegalem Fischzug nach wertvollem Antarktisdorsch gewesen sein.

    Die Jagd auf den Raubfischer begann bereits im Dezember vor der Küste der Antarktis. 72 Kilometer illegal ausgelegte Netze bargen die Aktivisten in den Folgewochen. Ein Fang im Wert von rund drei Millionen Dollar soll der “Thunder” entgangen sein. Schließlich soll der Kapitän entnervt aufgegeben und die Seeventile geöffnet haben. Die Sea-Shepherd-Aktivisten nahmen die Schiffbrüchigen an Bord und übergaben sie den Behörden .

    Einen ähnlichen Erfolg erhoffen sich die Sea-Shepherd-Leute nun auch auf den Färöern. Dort allerdings haben sie ein ganzes Volk gegen sich. Gut gegen Böse – Sea Shepherd bietet einfache Lösungen in einer komplizierten Welt. Schwierig wird es, wenn die Rollen nicht so klar verteilt sind.

    Der “Grindadráp” ist eine uralte Tradition . Schon die Wikinger sollen auf den Färöern Wale gefangen haben. Offizielle Aufzeichnungen der Jagd gibt es seit 1584. Rund tausend Grindwale töten die Einheimischen jedes Jahr – bei einer geschätzten Gesamtpopulation von über 700 000 Tieren. Einsehen mag auf den Inseln daher kaum jemand, warum die Jagd plötzlich aufhören sollte.

    “Der Grind ist Teil unserer Lebensart, wie das Fischen und die Schafzucht”, sagt Hendrik Akurstein, 31. Der angehende Umweltingenieur war dabei, als Anfang Mai die Grindwale in den Hvannasund getrieben wurden. Sein Holzhaus steht kaum 200 Meter von jenem Strand entfernt, an dem die Tiere verendeten. Mit seinem kleinen Motorboot half er dabei, die Meeressäuger in die Falle zu treiben. Damit war ihm ein Anteil an der Beute sicher.

    Akurstein geht hinüber in seine Garage und öffnet die Tiefkühltruhe. Neben Hühnchen und Steaks lagern dort Plastiktüten mit tiefrotem Walfleisch. “Daraus schneide ich Steaks für meine Familie”, sagt er. Auch getrocknet sei das Fleisch eine Delikatesse. Oder der Walspeck: In einer grünen Tonne sind die mehrere Zentimeter dicken, weiß glänzenden Fettstücke in Salz eingelegt.

    Einmal im Monat gibt es bei Akurstein, seiner Frau Hallgerð und ihrem drei Monate alten Baby Walfleisch zu essen. Mehr bitte nicht, empfehlen Gesundheitsexperten. Das Fleisch ist mit PCB, Dioxinen und Schwermetallen belastet .

    Ist der seltene, vergiftete Genuss wirklich das Gemetzel wert? Die Färinger sind davon überzeugt. So wichtig ist ihnen der “Grind”, dass das Parlament in der Hauptstadt Torshavn im Mai sogar ein neues Gesetz zum Schutz der Waljagd verabschiedete . Den am vorigen Montag festgenommenen Sea-Shepherd-Aktivisten drohen bis zu zwei Jahre Gefängnis.

    “Dieses Gesetz wurde extra für uns geschrieben”, schimpft Lockhart MacLean, 35, Kapitän des Sea-Shepherd-Schiffs “Sam Simon”. Strafbar ist nun bereits, wer in Verdacht gerät, gegen die Waljagd vorgehen zu wollen. “Damit sind wir gemeint”, sagt MacLean und lächelt gequält.

    Anfang Juli ist der Kapitän mit der 56 Meter langen “Sam Simon” auf den Färöern angekommen. Ein weiteres Sea-Shepherd-Schiff, die “Brigitte Bardot”, kreuzt ebenfalls in den Gewässern. MacLean hat etwa 30 Crewmitglieder an Bord. Ein bunter Haufen Freiwilliger aus aller Welt: Ashkr Audet, 20, aus Melbourne, gerade erst mit der Schule fertig, hilft auf der Brücke aus. Sven Höreth, 32, ein deutscher Kfz-Mechaniker, arbeitet an der 1800-PS-Maschine des Schiffs; Giacomo Giorgi, 34, ehemaliger Sänger einer Heavy-Metal-Band, ist Bootsmann und steuert eines der zwei schnellen Schlauchboote, die auf dem Achterdeck bereitstehen.

    Auf einem Sea-Shepherd-Schiff geht es zu wie in einer Jugendherberge für Weltverbesserer. Das Essen ist vegan, die Stimmung gut. Hier auf den Färöern allerdings suchen die Aktivisten noch nach der richtigen Strategie. “Im Moment ist es uns erst mal wichtig, Präsenz zu zeigen, um die Färinger nervös zu machen”, sagt MacLean. Auf einer Seekarte hat er die “Killing Beaches” der Einheimischen mit rosa Klebepunkten markiert, 18 an der Zahl. Dort ist die Grindwaljagd offiziell erlaubt.

    Mit dem Finger fährt der Frankokanadier auf der Karte den für diesen Tag geplanten Kurs ab. Dann blickt er hinaus auf das bleierne Meer und die Inseln, die jetzt im Sommer wie mit grünem Samt überzogen wirken. Die See ist heute ruhig, die dunklen Wolken liegen tief, “ein gefährlicher Tag für Wale”, sagt MacLean. Genau an solchen Tagen lassen sich die Tiere gut sichten und an die Strände treiben.

    Wenig später lassen die Aktivisten ihre Schlauchboote zu Wasser, um in den Buchten zu patrouillieren. Kündigt sich eine Waljagd an, tauchen allerdings sofort Polizeiboote auf. Die Färinger haben eine Bannmeile eingerichtet. Sogar zwei Fregatten der dänischen Marine folgen den Sea-Shepherd-Schiffen rund um die Uhr.

    “Mit dänischer Hilfe wird hier ein Gesetz durchgesetzt, dass das Abschlachten von Walen schützt”, sagt MacLean. Die Grindwaljagd verstoße nicht nur gegen EU-Recht, sondern auch gegen das Übereinkommen zur Erhaltung wandernder Tierarten. Optimistisch ist MacLean trotzdem: “Früher oder später wird es auch hier keinen Walfang mehr geben, die Färinger haben es nur schwer, das zu schlucken.”

    “Man gewinnt diese Dinge nicht über Nacht”, sagt Paul Watson bei dem Treffen in Paris. Der Sea-Shepherd-Gründer hat gelernt, mit Rückschlägen fertig zu werden. Auf den Färöern etwa kann er nicht selbst dabei sein, weil er aktuell auf einer Fahndungsliste von Interpol steht. Costa Rica und Japan fordern seine Auslieferung.

    In Costa Rica soll er im April 2002 sechs Haifischflossenjäger in Lebensgefahr gebracht haben, als er deren Boot attackierte. Die Japaner machen ihn für das Entern eines ihrer Walfangschiffe vor fünf Jahren in der Antarktis verantwortlich. Deutsche Bundespolizisten nahmen die Interpol-Notiz im Mai 2012 ernst und verhafteten Watson am Frankfurter Flughafen. Doch der Tierschützer kam auf Kaution frei – und floh. Monatelang verschwand er von der

    Bildfläche, “im Südpazifik, auf verlassenen Inseln”. Inzwischen versucht er, die Sache juristisch zu klären. In Frankreich genießt er eine Art Asyl. Das Land hat ihm zugesichert, die Interpol-Fahndung vorläufig zu ignorieren. Auch in die USA darf Watson reisen.

    “Die Vorwürfe sind politisch motiviert”, wettert der Tierschützer. Um Sea Shepherd nicht zu schaden, hat er kürzlich trotzdem alle Ämter niedergelegt. Darin sieht er sogar einen Vorteil. Die zuvor zentral gelenkte Organisation sei nun in viele einzelne Ländergruppen aufgegangen. “Das macht uns flexibler.”

    Außerdem hat Watson Sea Shepherd Legal ins Leben gerufen. Künftig will er seine Gefechte nicht nur auf See, sondern auch im Gerichtssaal führen.

    “Sie haben geglaubt, dass sie uns ausschalten könnten”, sagt Watson, “stattdessen sind wir stärker als je zuvor.”

    Und welche Rolle ihm künftig zufalle bei Sea Shepherd? Watson zögert keine Sekunde: “Ich bin der Admiral.”

    Mail: philip_bethge@spiegel.de , Twitter: @philipbethge

    –> Originaltext auf Spiegel.de

  • Die Qual der Wale

    Von Philip Bethge, DER SPIEGEL 38/2014

    Vor einigen Wochen bereiste ich die Ostküste der USA. Auf der Insel Nantucket, einst Hochburg des Walfangs, erfuhr ich im örtlichen Museum, dass die Indianer die Tiere dort vor 400 Jahren mit kleinen Booten noch direkt vom Strand aus jagen konnten – so viele Wale gab es damals im Atlantik. Dann fuhren wir zum Whale-Watching hinaus aufs Meer, und ich erlebte, wie drei Buckelwale nebeneinander unter unserem Schiff hindurchtauchten – ein unvergesslicher, magischer Moment.

    Die Meeressäuger lassen uns nicht kalt. Diese Wesen sind intelligent, leidensfähig und hochgradig sozial. Das oftmals frustrierende Ringen um den Schutz dieser Tiere darf deshalb nicht aufhören – das Engagement der Artenschützer auf der Tagung der “International Whaling Commission” diese Woche in Slowenien ist sogar wichtiger denn je. Island jagt immer mehr bedrohte Finnwale und exportiert das Fleisch nach Japan. Norwegen vermeldet steigende Zahlen getöteter Zwergwale. Die Grönländer jagen weiter und locken “abenteuerlustige Gourmets” auf ihrer Tourismus-Website mit “Mattak”, Walspeck, ins Land. Und Japan will weiter unter dem Deckmantel der Forschung Walfang betreiben. All das untergräbt das kommerzielle Walfangmoratorium und macht wütend.

    Wer etwas dagegen tun will, kauft keinen Fisch mehr von Firmen wie der isländischen HB Grandi, die eng mit dem Walfang verbunden ist. Auch den Besuch von Delfinarien sollten wir uns sparen. Die Delfinschlächter in der Bucht von Taiji in Japan richten in diesem Jahr auch deshalb wieder ein Massaker an, weil sie einige wenige der Tiere für viel Geld an Zoos verkaufen können. Jedes Delfinarium, auch das in Duisburg oder Nürnberg, befördert eine Kultur, die Meeressäuger zu Clowns macht. Das Fangen und Töten von Walen und Delfinen passt nicht mehr in die Zeit. Sie endlich in Ruhe zu lassen würde uns Menschen ehren.

  • Reeling In the Trawlers: EU Takes On Overfishing

    Fish stocks have made surprising comebacks in the North and Baltic seas. But much remains to be done. Beginning in January, new EU laws will impose more sustainable practices with stricter quotas and by-catch rules.

    By Philip Bethge

    When the men open the net on the ship’s deck, fat codfish slap into plastic fish baskets. Slippery plaice and flounder, rough as sandpaper, gasp for air. Turbot the size of two strong fisherman’s hands slither between silvery herring and flat dabs.

    A particularly large cod with its mouth wide open lies on top of the pile. “It has to weigh more than six kilos (13 lbs.),” estimates Martina Bleil as she looks down at the fish. “It’s in great shape.” The female is about 8 years old, says Bleil, a fish biologist. “It would have been spawning again soon.”

    Bleil works for the Thünen Institute for Baltic Sea Fisheries (Thünen OF) in the northern German port city of Rostock, an agency that is part of Germany’s Federal Ministry of Agriculture. The scientist and her colleagues have made a big haul on this clear November day in the Bay of Mecklenburg. “We are headed in a very good direction with fish stocks in the Baltic Sea,” says Bleil. “Anyone who eats plaice or herring doesn’t have to feel guilty about it anymore.”

    Something amazing is happening in the seas off Germany’s coasts, where most species were long considered overfished. But now some stocks are recovering at an astonishing rate. Experts are seeing a significant upward trend in the North Sea, and even more so in the Baltic Sea.

    “We assume that the Baltic Sea will be the first European body of water that can be sustainably fished once again,” says Christopher Zimmermann, director of the Thünen OF. “That would be a huge success.”

    Ending ‘Horse-Trading” with Reform

    This year, the European Union has also launched a reform of its Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) that Zimmermann believes “will accelerate the positive trend even further.” In fact, the new rules could ring in a historic turning point.

    “In the past, the group of ministers was setting fishing quotas in cloak-and-dagger meetings,” says Ulrike Rodust, a member of Germany’s center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) and a lawmaker in the European Parliament from the northern state of Schleswig-Holstein. Rodust played a key role in pushing through the reforms in Brussels. But now, she says, the system of “horse-trading” among members that inadequately protects fish stocks has come to an end.

    Rodust expects that stricter maximum catch restrictions will lead to a trend reversal throughout Europe. The regulation, which comes into effect in January, stipulates that:

    In the future, fishing quotas will be established exclusively on the basis of scientific criteria. The goal is to ensure that all stocks are fished only to the “maximum sustainable yield” by 2020.

    Unwanted by-catch is to be brought to shore and included in the total subject to quotas. The more by-catch fisherman have in their nets, the less marketable fish they can catch. The rule creates an incentive to use more selective fishing methods.

    Subsidies for building new trawlers are being eliminated. Instead, more money will be available to monitor fishermen and conduct scientific studies of fish stocks.

    The new rules will also apply to EU fishermen operating outside Europe. This means that European trawlers will no longer have the option of simply shifting to fishing grounds off the coasts of Africa.

    The details of the fishing regulations are being negotiated regionally. Soon the same rules could apply in both the Irish Sea and off the Spanish coast.

    Stocks in ‘Excellent Shape’

    –> Read original story at SPIEGEL ONLINE International

    In the Baltic Sea, fishing reform has almost reached the goals that lawmakers hope to achieve in other European maritime regions in the future. This success story was made possible by the agreement among countries bordering the Baltic Sea to exclusively employ sustainable fishing practices, says Zimmermann.

    This hasn’t always been the case. Until 2007, for example, Polish fishermen were pulling about twice as much cod out of the water as EU rules permitted. It was only the new government under Prime Minister Donald Tusk that began “reining in the trawlers,” says Zimmermann. “But now the Poles are also abiding by the rules.”

    Baltic Sea fishing policy has been an immense success. Cod in the eastern Baltic, for example, which was still heavily overfished in 2005, is now doing “very well,” Zimmermann reports, while plaice stocks are in “excellent shape.” And herring in the eastern Baltic are now producing young at a healthy rate once again.

    Some fish species are also doing better in the North Sea. Researchers at the Thünen Institute for Sea Fisheries in Hamburg recently studied 43 fish stocks and concluded that 27 of them are in “good ecological condition.” According to the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, “more than half of the fish stocks in the North Sea and northeast Atlantic” are already “being managed sustainably” today.

    Herring and plaice, in particular, are developing well in the North Sea, says Zimmermann. Even North Sea cod, long a subject of concern for biologists, is finally showing initial signs of recovery, he adds.

    The Benefits of Stricter Quotas

    Zimmermann is one of the architects of this fishing miracle. He represents Germany on the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), which develops recommendations for EU catch quotas. The data used to analyze fish stocks in the Baltic Sea are obtained with research ships like the Clupea.

    Fish biologist Martina Bleil makes regular trips out to sea, where she and her assistants use a standardized TV3/520 research net. In the water, the net opens to a width of 20 meters (66 feet) and a height of two meters. With a mesh size of only 22 millimeters, hardly any swimming marine animal can escape the research net.

    On this November day, Clupea Captain Rolf Singer heads for two catch sites. Once the catch is on board, Bleil grabs one cod after another and hoists them onto a nearby table, where she measures them. “84 centimeters long,” she calls out to her assistants. With a practiced hand, she uses a pair of scissors to slice open the animals’ bellies. Bleil’s plastic gloves are stained red. Fish blood drips onto the green working deck. “Female,” she calls out. “Stomach: 65 grams; liver: 170 grams.”

    Data collection is the basis of the ICES recommendations. Experts have reduced the maximum allowable catches for many fish stocks in recent years. While stocks have often been radically overfished, the strict sustainability principle will apply as of January.

    The objective is to regulate fishing in such a way that fish stocks can stabilize or even grow in the long term, as well as to enable fishermen to continually harvest “the maximum yield with minimum effort,” as Zimmermann puts it.

    If stocks are doing well, there are more fish to catch, which enables fishermen to benefit from the reform. The overfished cod stock in the North Sea, for example, has provided an annual yield of no more than 40,000 metric tons for the last decade. If the stock were in good shape, Zimmermann explains, fishermen could easily catch more than three times as many fish.

    This explains why there are good reasons to reform EU fishing policy, especially as catches in many places have well exceeded scientific recommendations in the past. In addition, about a quarter of the fish caught by EU fleets are by-catch and directly returned to the water. But extremely few of these fish survive.

    “Overfishing must come to an end,” says Rodust, and she is confident that his goal can be achieved. All EU fish stocks are to be fished using the new, more sustainable methods by 2015, if possible, and by no later than 2020. The EU could serve as a role model worldwide, says Rodust, adding: “We have received a great deal of praise internationally for our reforms.”

    Fears of Fishing Lobby Manipulation

    But not all fishing experts see this in quite as positive a light. “The reform is supposed to be implemented by precisely the same people who were responsible for massive overfishing in the last few decades,” says Rainer Froese of the GEOMAR Helmholtz Center for Ocean Research in the northern German port city of Kiel.

    Since scientific recommendations are to become binding in the future, Froese fears that the fishing lobby could try to put pressure on scientists. This, in turn, could lead to the ICES quota recommendations being too high.

    According to Froese, sustainable management should only be considered once stocks have recovered. He points out that the situation is not improving for all fish stocks.

    “Eel and pollock are still being heavily overfished in the Baltic Sea,” says the biologist. While cod is in better shape in the eastern Baltic, the species remains under strong pressure west of the Danish island of Bornholm. In the North Sea, says Froese, stocks of cod and pollock are still a long way from recovering, while eel and spiny dogfish are even “acutely threatened.”

    Froese is also opposed to the subsidies. “Although they have been restructured, they haven’t been reduced,” he says. Subsidies for ship fuel, for example, continue to allow for the use of massive, heavy ground tackle that tears up the ocean floor, destroying important habitats for young fish.

    “We are currently still in hell and are marching toward the gates of paradise,” Froese concludes. “The question is whether we will halt at the threshold or walk through.”

    Zimmermann, on the other hand, prefers to convey a sense of optimism. “As a rule, the only thing grumbling achieves,” the Thünen OF director explains, “is that people say: ‘Oh God, the best thing is stop eating fish altogether,’ and to eat turkey from factory farms instead.” Many types of saltwater fish can be “enjoyed with a good conscience” once again, he adds.

    The biologist even believes that some stocks in the Baltic Sea are being “under-utilized.” Cod stocks in the eastern Baltic, for example, have grown to such an extent that the animals are “starting to eat each other and compete for food,” he says.

    According to Zimmermann, one in five cod in the Bornholm Basin is so thin that it can no longer be cut into fillets. Fishermen refer to these fish as “triangular rasps” because they are so bony. The animals can no longer be sold, says Zimmermann, “so they end up in fishmeal production.”

    Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

    –> Read original story at SPIEGEL ONLINE International

  • Flipper Fail: Dolphins May be Dumber Than We Think

    For decades, it’s been common knowledge that dolphins are among the world’s smartest species. Now some researchers — and a new book — argue the supposed underwater geniuses aren’t so special after all.

    By Philip Bethge

    Their social lives are complex, and they can congregate in large groups. Their heart rates increase when they notice a family member suffering. They sound the alarm when they discover food or a potential threat. And experiments have shown they even anticipate future events.

    Biologist Justin Gregg is talking about chickens.

    Chickens, says Gregg, “are not as dim-witted as popular opinion would have us believe.” He adds, “Some of these complex behaviors have also been observed in dolphins.”

    Really? Are chickens as smart as dolphins? Or, to put it differently: “Are dolphins really smart?” This is the question Gregg, a zoologist with the US-based Dolphin Communication Project, asks in his new book of the same name. And he isn’t the only one finding fault with Flipper’s brainpower.

    For more than 50 years, the dolphin has been viewed as an especially intelligent creature, grouped together with human beings and great apes. But now a dispute on the subject has erupted among scientists, and the smart aleck of the seas may end up being just an average mammal. “We put them on a pedestal for no reason and projected a lot of our desires and wishes on them,” says neuroethologist Paul Manger of the University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa. According to the professor, the claims that dolphins have a particularly complex brain, use a sophisticated language, are self-aware and can use tools are nonsense.

    In some cases, says Manger, dolphins — which are small whales — are even outdone by goldfish. When goldfish are placed in a bowl, he explains, they at least try to escape by boldly jumping out, whereas dolphins that have been captured in nets won’t even think of jumping to freedom. “The idea of the exceptionally intelligent dolphin is a myth,” Manger concludes.

    Origins of the Dolphin Myth

    In the 1950s, physician and neuroscientist John Lilly played the crucial role in the elevation of dolphins from the status of stupid, fish-like creatures with excellent swimming skills to that of underwater know-it-all. In eerie-sounding experiments, Lilly attached electrodes to the brains of living dolphins to stimulate neurons. One day, a dolphin hooked up to his equipment began making loud noises as it approached its horrible death. When Lilly slowed down and played back the audio recordings, he concluded the dolphin was trying to communicate with its tormenters.

    After further experiments, Lilly became convinced dolphins had a human-like faculty of speech and attempted to establish contact with the marine mammals. His desire to communicate was so great he administered LSD to himself and the dolphins in the hopes of stimulating conversation.

    He soon moved to the American West Coast, where he became a spiritual leader of the hippy generation and wrote books in which he combined New Age ideology with half-baked dolphin research. The animals, Lilly gushed, were “more intelligent than any man or woman.” He even attributed them philosophy, ethics and an “ancient vocal history.”

    Lilly’s muddled legacy shapes our image of dolphins to this day. Artists paint watercolors of the animals swimming through outer space. In popular lore, dolphins serve as ambassadors of peace and unconditional love, and, the more out-there believe they possess miraculous healing powers and can teleport space-age settlers to Mars. Behavioral scientists, along with most reasonable people, agree this is all nonsense. Still, the size of dolphins’ intellect remains a matter of dispute.

    What’s a Big Brain Worth?

    One measure scientists use to determine a creature’s intelligence is brain size — given the theory that the more a brain weighs relative to the body, the smarter the animal. A human brain, which weighs about 1,300 grams (46 oz.), makes up about 2 percent of body weight. A chimpanzee’s brain comprises 0.9 percent of its weight, while the corresponding number in elephants, with their brains weighing in at more than 4.5 kilograms (9.9 lbs.), is 0.2 percent. Dolphins do well by comparison. The brain of a bottle-nosed dolphin, for example, weighs more than 1,800 grams, or 0.9 percent of its average body weight.

    It seems logical that dolphins deserve to be included in the animal Mensa Society. But does a large brain mean the same in marine mammals as it does in terrestrial animals? In 2006, Paul Manger noted that whales developed a large brain in order to keep the organ from becoming hypothermic, and thereby useless, in cold water.

    Manger described an unusually high density of so-called glial cells in the animals’ brain matter. He explained that these cells act like tiny ovens to keep the brain warm. Besides, he added, dolphins have a relatively simple brain structure, and noted: “The essential features of complex neural processing of information, as observed in other mammals, are missing or poorly developed.”

    No Better Than Mealworms?

    Manger has now upped the ante with a new paper in which he claims behavioral studies involving dolphins are flawed and therefore not very informative. For instance, while zoologists have observed that dolphins can distinguish between the concepts “many” and “few,” Manger notes: “This has also been demonstrated in yellow mealworms.”

    On the other hand, some bottle-nosed dolphins on Australia’s west coast have learned to hold sponges over their snouts while they root around on the ocean floor. Is this a case of tool-use, indicating a high level of intelligence? Manger is skeptical. “Exactly what the dolphins do with the sponges remains unknown,” he says, noting that the evidence they use them as tools is “flimsy.”

    Another example is dolphins’ alleged talent for language. In one experiment, researchers were able to teach bottle-nosed dolphins 40 symbols. The animals were even capable of correctly interpreting combinations of the symbols, Manger admits, but African grey parrots and California sea lions can also learn this type of symbol-based language.

    The scientific community is similarly divided over what zoologist Gregg calls “Dolphinese.” It is known that every dolphin can identify itself with its own “signature whistle.” The marine mammals use many other acoustic signals, he adds. But is this truly special? The tail-wagging dance of bees is also very complex, says Gregg. “It’s probably not the case that dolphins have their own language, which is as complex as human language,” says the expert in animal communication.

    Dolphin Defenders

    So is the dolphin actually the dummy of the seas? Most dolphin researchers are offended by such remarks. “To put it bluntly, most of that is bullshit,” says Karsten Brensing, a marine biologist with the organization Whale and Dolphin Conservation (WDC). Manger and Gregg are losing sight of the “total package” when they compare the marine mammals’ individual abilities with those of mealworms or bees, he says. “You can use similar arguments to prove that people aren’t intelligent.”

    Lori Marino, a neuroscientist at Emory University in Atlanta, also has strong objections to Manger and Gregg’s conclusions. “We shouldn’t dismiss decades of peer-reviewed scientific work,” she says, noting there are overwhelming indications that dolphins possess a high degree of intelligence. For instance, scientists have observed how the animals work together to encircle schools of fish. To cultivate relationships, they spoil each other with their own form of “petting” behavior. And in a struggle for power, males will join together to form networks.

    Marino even believes that dolphins can recognize themselves. In a famous experiment, she and psychologist Diana Reiss drew markings on the bodies of two dolphins. Then they held up a mirror to the animals. They were fascinated to observe the animals turning around like divas in front of the mirror, presumably to examine their new body decorations.

    For Marino, this is evidence of self-recognition, similar to what has been observed among great apes. She and other scientists even want to see the animals given the legal status of persons and granted “some fundamental rights,” such as the right to bodily integrity.

    None of this convinces Manger, who has a low opinion of Marino’s mirror experiment. “The visual acuity of dolphins is actually not good enough to be able to readily perceive such marks,” he says, and is critical of what he calls “serious deficiencies” in the design of the experiment.

    Stop Calling Them ‘Special’

    Manger is accustomed to his theories being rebuffed. When he questioned the special features of the whale brain in 2006, dolphin fans called upon Manger’s university to suspend him. But he merely wants to prevent the marine mammals from being anthropomorphized. Interpretations of behavior based on “personal bias” are not helpful, says Manger. “Conservation strategies should not be based on unrealistic expectations.”

    Gregg’s primary objective is also to debunk the myth. “We have to stop describing them as ‘special’,” says Gregg.

    It is becoming increasingly apparent that the marine mammals’ intellectual abilities are by no means unique in the animal kingdom. “Many other species-from sharks to earwigs to rats-lead equally wondrous and worthy lives,” he writes.

    Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

  • Lear Jets of the Deep: Private Submarines Gain Popularity with Millionaires

    A new class of private submarines has become the latest plaything for the super rich. They allow would-be adventurers to navigate the wonders of the coral reefs, explore shipwrecks or even to cruise alongside dolphins. The cheapest models start at $1.7 million, but prices can go as high as $80 million – by Philip Bethge

    Just recently, Graham Hawkes tracked down a group of hammerhead sharks. Along for the ride on his Deepflight Super Falcon at the time was an investor named Tom Perkins, a potential client. “We were literally stalking them from below,” Hawkes says. “It felt like flying in liquid sky.”

    Hawkes is an engineer in Point Richmond, California, and his workshop is located at the town’s marina, directly on San Francisco Bay. Visitors don’t exactly wander in here often, but when they do come, they generally have full pockets. Hawkes builds submarines for millionaires.

    His company, Hawkes Ocean Technologies, is one of a number of businesses that specialize in taking the superrich diving. Hawkes’ asking price for the Deepflight Super Falcon, for example, is $1.7 million (€1.3 million). American manufacturer SEAmagine’s Ocean Pearl costs even more, at $2.5 million, but has the benefit of being able to dive to depths of around 900 meters (3,000 feet).

    Triton Submarines, based in Vero Beach, Florida, is another company that specializes in submersibles for the well to do. “Our customers are large yacht owners who want to offer their friends and their family something special,” says Bruce Jones, CEO of Triton. In the deep sea, “they can show them things they have never seen before.”

    Crisis Hasn’t Stopped Demand

    The financial crisis hasn’t stopped the demand for submarines, says Jones, 55. “There are 2,500 large yachts in the world today,” he adds, and most of them have enough room to carry a submarine.

    Today, Jones is in the Bahamas for a trial run. Around 20 prospective clients have come to Grand Bahama Island to try out Triton’s submarines. From the dock in McLeans Town, a speedboat zips them across the turquoise water to the Atlantis II, a retired research vessel Jones uses as the mother ship for his submarine fleet.

    The mustachioed CEO welcomes his guests on the deck, where two yellow submersibles sit waiting. Voluminous floats mounted on their sides also function as ballast tanks. Triton’s trademark features, however, are the acrylic spheres jutting from the top and bottom of the submarines, offering a 360-degree panoramic view.

    A shipboard crane lowers the three-seater Triton 3300/3, which weighs eight metric tons (nine US tons), into the water. The guests board through a hatch in the top. Pilot Troy Engen points to two black valves located behind the gray artificial leather seats and explains they can be used to quickly “bring it (the submarine) up in an emergency.”

    “Roger, payload is okay,” Engen then calls into the headset that keeps him in contact with the Atlantis II. The pilot lets water gush into the floats.

    A few waves crash over the submarine, then it’s calm again. The only sounds are the whirring of the electric motors and the hum of the air conditioning.

    Straight Out of a ‘Bond’ Movie

    Engen pushes the small black joystick on the control panel forward. “Heading 285 (degrees),” he reports to the ship above. “Life support (systems) OK.” The Triton continues on its whirring way, gliding just above a reef like something out of a James Bond movie.

    Colorful fish glow in the submarine’s LED headlights. A nurse shark whooshes past below the passengers’ feet — a surreal experience, since the acrylic wall of the cockpit, around 16 centimeters (6 inches) thick, becomes invisible under water. “Pretty amazing, right?” asks Engen, good-humored and tan.

    –> read original story at SPIEGEL ONLINE International

    The Triton 3300/3 can remain under water for around 10 hours and its purchasing price is about $3 million. Most of the company’s customers wish to remain anonymous; Jones recently sold two submarines to an Australian businessman with a private island in Belize.

    Jones’ next idea is to take tourists under the sea. He’s building an underwater resort with submerged suites (price per week: $15,000) off a private island in the Fiji archipelago. Five submarines will be on hand to ferry guests across artificial reefs during the day. “I am just an old kid living a dream,” the CEO says. As a boy, he wrote letters to legendary French oceanographer Jacques-Yves Cousteau, though Jones says regretfully, “Sadly, he never wrote back.”

    Triton’s submarines are large and heavy machines, hardly useable without a mother ship, but Graham Hawkes in California has developed a very different submarine concept. His vessels are sportier and slimmer — they look like small airplanes with truncated wings.

    A ‘Flight Over Ancient Shipwrecks’

    “We’re building the Learjets of the deep,” says the inventor, who likes to compare his work with that of aviation pioneers. He speaks in flowery terms, promising a “flight over ancient shipwrecks,” “barrel-rolling with the dolphins” and “skyhopping with whales.”

    A new design principle makes these lightweight vessels possible. Unlike other submarines, Deepflight models don’t sink using their own weight, instead applying a similar principle of physics to that used by airplanes: When water streams across the inverted wings, the underwater vessel is drawn downward.

    One of the Super Falcons stands propped up in Hawkes’ workshop in Point Richmond. Two hemispheres of Plexiglas curve up from the top of the cigar-shaped submarine, resembling fighter jet cockpits. Hawkes clambers into the front cockpit and explains the technology involved. A joystick steers the submarine. Instruments indicate cabin pressure and oxygen content in the air. A compass and artificial horizon provide orientation even in murky water.

    This latter-day Captain Nemo has completed around 200 dives with his submarines. A few months ago, Hawkes traveled to the Gulf of Aqaba at the invitation of Jordan’s King Abdullah II. With researchers onboard, Hawkes saw nearly all of Jordan’s coast. “We flew along the whole contour of a coral reef,” he recalls. “I felt like a bush pilot.”

    Graham Hawkes and his wife Karen have set up a “flight school” for submarines as a way of attracting new clients. Many of the customers are enormously wealthy CEOs. Virgin founder Richard Branson, for example, recently purchased one of Hawkes’ Merlin submarines, which the billionaire now rents out to visitors on his private Caribbean isle of Necker Island for $25,000 a week.

    Plans for More Affordable Subs

    But Hawkes has plans to make his submarines affordable for the less wealthy as well. He hopes to be able to bring the price for his “Ferraris of the ocean” down to around $250,000, as soon as there is high enough demand for the Deepflight vessels. “We’ve uncovered a new customer base with our submarines that nobody had thought of,” Hawkes says, expressing hope for his business’ future development.

    When that happens, the super rich will have to look for something more exclusive — perhaps the Phoenix 1000 model, made by manufacturer US Submarines, also part of Triton CEO Jones’ submarine empire.

    Passengers on this 65-meter (210-foot) submersible yacht can travel in comfort both above and below water. Its luxury berths easily hold 20 guests. The manufacturer promotes the Phoenix 1000 as a the unique “opportunity to explore the depths of the world’s oceans in perfect comfort and safety.”

    Such luxury comes at a price, of course. The Phoenix 1000 costs approximately $80 million.

    Translated from the German by Ella Ornstein

    –> read original story at SPIEGEL ONLINE International

  • Deep Trouble in the Gulf of Mexico: ‘A Disaster of Epic Proportions’

    The oil spill from the sunken Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico could turn into the biggest environmental catastrophe in US history. It could take months to stop the oil flow, and the damage to the local economy and wildlife could be huge. The accident is likely to hamper US President Barack Obama’s plans to extend offshore drilling.

    Orange booms made of resilient rubber, filling with floating foam, serve as the front line in the battle against the oil. Workers are loading meter after meter of the booms from the pier at Bud’s Boat Rental onto Miss Katherine, a supply ship that normally carries crews and materials to the oil rigs.

    Captain Leonard Murrel glances sullenly over at his men and wrinkles his nose. A brisk ocean breeze is laden with the heavy odor of crude oil. “It’s really a huge mess out there,” says the weather-beaten American, who has been working in the coastal town of Venice on the southeastern tip of the Mississippi Delta for the last 10 years. “I’ve never seen anything like it before.”… More

  • An Undersea Kama Sutra: The Disturbing Sex Lives of Deep Sea Squid

    A Dutch biologist has extensively studied the reproductive techniques of deep-ocean squid. During sex, they are brutal and ruthless — and sometimes clumsy.

    By Philip Bethge

    Sex in the deep sea is a difficult proposition. The problems already begin with the partner search: How do you find someone to mate with in the pitch-black depths of the ocean? And for any creature that does manage to have a rendezvous beneath the waves, failure is simply not an option.

    “Seize the moment,” is how Dutch researcher Hendrik Jan Ties Hoving describes the most basic rule of undersea reproduction. “Chances are low of finding a partner a second time.”

    Hoving, a biologist at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, is in a position to know what he’s talking about, too. He recently completed his doctoral thesis on the reproduction of deep-sea squid. He studied 10 different species, from mini-squid measuring just 25 millimeters (one inch) in length to 12-meter (40-foot) giant squid. Among Hoving’s striking findings: Squid bite during sex, males drive sperm packets directly into the skin of females and brutal wrestling is part of their mating ritual.

    The array of techniques is impressive, Hoving says, but also takes some getting used to. His conclusion: “Reproduction is no fun if you’re a squid.”

    Most of the squid behaviors that have come to light so far are striking and bizarre. For example, researchers in California photographed one species, Gonatus onyx, caring for its brood. This squid, which measures just under half a meter (one and a half feet) long and lives in water around 2,500 meters (8,000 feet) deep, stretched its arms into a kind of web, holding a gelatinous matrix containing 2,000 to 3,000 eggs. It regularly flushed fresh water through this egg mass, presumably to aerate the embryos.

    Meanwhile, American researchers Clyde Roper and Michael Vecchione caught another species, Brachioteuthis beanii, in the act off the coast of North Carolina. One squid grabbed another from behind, and the one being grabbed “bent its body and vigorously moved its arms around the head and mantle opening of the grasping squid” — one pulling the other, the second sinking toward the first. The experts’ opinion: “Probably mating.”

    Now Hoving has unveiled what seems like an entire Kama Sutra of the squid world. The subjects of his study were all already dead at the time he observed them, but what the biologist found in museums, obtained from fishermen and collected from the ocean on scientific expeditions off the coast of Namibia and the Falkland Islands is nonetheless sensational:

    • Using their sharp beaks or the hooks on their tentacles, males of the species Taningia danae make cuts more than five centimeters (two inches) deep into the females’ flesh. They then deposit sperm packets, called spermatophores, into the wounds.
    • Females of a mini-squid species, Heteroteuthis dispar, store sperm within their bodies in a special pouch. The precious cargo can account for up to 3 percent of the squid’s total body weight.
    • Some males of the species Ancistrocheirus lesueurii appear outwardly almost like females. “Possibly an adaptation for getting closer to the females,” Hoving suggests.
    • For another species, Moroteuthis ingens, the males simply release their sperm packets and don’t need to do anything more. The spermatophores penetrate the female’s skin independently, using a substance that dissolves tissue.

    Hoving has an explanation for this strange avoidance of bodily contact: “Mating is probably quite risky for the male,” he says. “In most species they’re smaller, and could get eaten.”

    He has a similar explanation for the males’ rough behavior: “More than anything, it’s about being fast.” It seems the males are quite literally under great pressure. A few years ago, Australian biologists discovered sperm packets under the skin of a freshly caught 15-meter (50-foot) female giant squid. Covered with a “gelatinous” substance, they had presumably been “injected” by a male, the researchers reported, “under hydraulic pressure,” with a penis “up to 92 centimeters (three feet) long.”

    Small wonder that things sometimes go wrong. Hoving discovered sperm packets, among other places, in the eyes of animals he studied. And one giant squid found off the coast of Norway seems to be a not atypical case: a male, it also had spermatophores under its skin. The science journal Nature offered the interpretation that the squid may have “literally shot itself in the foot.”

    In the end, however, it seems fertilization does manage to take place in most cases. Squid are certainly numerous enough — according to Hoving, there are around 200 species in the deep ocean. Not even overfishing does harm to them, he says. Quite the opposite, in fact: “The squid have more to eat, since they don’t have to share their food with the fish that are caught for consumption.”

    A female squid releases millions of tiny eggs into the water, but generally only once in her lifetime. When she does, the sperm stored under her skin are discharged simultaneously. The father for this legion of embryos is often the single male who got his beak or hooks on the female first.

    Thus the brutal attacks by some male squid have another purpose, Hoving believes. “The females have downright negative experiences with mating, meaning that afterwards they won’t let any other male near them.”

    It’s a forced fidelity for the squid, and Hoving even has a technical term ready for it: “traumatic insemination.”

    –> read original story at SPIEGEL Online International