Am 22. März 2016 stellte der WWF einen Report zur räumlichen und zeitlichen Verteilung der Krabbenfischerei im Wattenmeer vor. Bisher war nur den Fischern bekannt, wo genau im Wattenmeer gefischt wurde, obwohl ein großer Teil des Fanggebietes unter strengem Naturschutz steht. Der WWF-Report erfasst erstmals die Krabbenfischerei in den Schutzgebieten des Wattenmeeres und der Nordsee mittels Satellitendaten im Detail und macht sie sichtbar. Laut WWF-Report findet mehr als zwei Drittel (69 %) der Fischerei auf Nordseegarnelen innerhalb des Nationalparks statt. Davon entfällt der weitaus größte Anteil auf das offene Meer, seewärts der Inseln. In den empfindlichsten Gebieten des Nationalparks, dem eigentlichen Wattenmeer zwischen Inseln und Festland, findet ein gutes Viertel (26 %) der Fischerei statt. Hier ist die Befischung am stärksten in den Mündungsgebieten von Elbe und Eider, in den Tidebecken vor Büsum und der Meldorfer Bucht sowie in der Osterems und der Accumer Ee. Die Karten des Reports zeigen, dass sich die Fischerei innerhalb des Wattenmeeres auf jene Bereiche konzentriert, die auch bei Niedrigwasser nicht trockenfallen. Dort werden dann aber auch die Meerestiere gefangen, die sich bei Hochwasser über die Wattflächen verteilen. Es müsse daher, so die WWF-Forderung, in Zukunft in den Schutzgebieten Bereiche geben, in denen nicht mehr gefischt werde. Ziel sei es, dass sich dort wieder eine natürliche Unterwasserwelt entwickeln könne. Zu dieser gehören im Wattenmeer auch Riffe aus Sandkorallen, kleine Arten von Haien und Rochen oder auch Seepferdchen. Sie alle sind nach jahrzehntelangem Fischereidruck extrem selten oder kommen gar nicht mehr vor. Der WWF-Report wurde vom Bundesamt für Naturschutz gefördert.
Inhaltsverzeichnis Abbildungsverzeichnis ........................................................................................................6 Tabellenverzeichnis ...........................................................................................................10 Zusammenfassung.............................................................................................................12 Summary.............................................................................................................................15 1 Zielsetzung ................................................................................................................17 2 Datenerhebung und -auswertung ............................................................................18 2.1 Betrachtungszeitraum und -gebiet...............................................................................18 2.2 Datenbasis ..................................................................................................................19 2.2.1 Internationale Surveys und Fischereianlandungsstatistik .................................19 2.2.2 Nationale Surveys und Forschungsfahrten ......................................................20 2.2.3 Museale Sammlungen und Literatur ................................................................22 2.3 Datenbearbeitung........................................................................................................27 2.3.1 Datenaufbereitung zur GIS-basierten Darstellung der Literatur-, Museums-und Surveydaten.....................................................................................................27 2.3.2 Ermittlung von Verbreitungsgebieten und zeitlichen Mustern ...........................28 2.3.3 Datenaufbereitung für Habitatmodellierung und altersbezogene Verbreitungsanalysen ......................................................................................29 2.3.4 Entwicklung von Habitateignungsmodellen ......................................................32 2.3.5 Modellbasierte Prognosen ...............................................................................34 2.3.6 Einschätzung von Etablierungs-und Gefährdungsstatus sowie Anfertigung von Steckbriefen.....................................................................................................35 3 Ergebnisse.................................................................................................................37 3.1 Gesamtübersicht der erfassten Nachweise .................................................................37 3.1.1 Literaturquellen ................................................................................................37 3.1.2 Museumssammlungen und mündliche Mitteilungen.........................................37 3.1.3 Internationale und nationale Surveys ...............................................................38 3.2 Artenspektrum der Knorpelfischarten in den deutschen Gewässern von Nord-und Ostsee.........................................................................................................................39 3.3 Etablierungsstatus und Vorkommen der relevanten Knorpelfisch-Taxa im Betrachtungsgebiet .....................................................................................................41 3.3.1 Cetorhinus maximus (Gunnerus, 1765) - Riesenhai ........................................41 3.3.2 Galeorhinus galeus (Linnaeus, 1758) - Hundshai............................................45 3.3.3 Hexanchus griseus (Bonnaterre, 1788) - Großer Grauhai ...............................49 3.3.4 Lamna nasus (Bonnaterre, 1788) - Heringshai................................................51 3.3.5 Mustelus spp. - Weißgefleckter Glatthai/Grauer Glatthai.................................56 3.3.6 Scyliorhinus canicula (Linnaeus, 1758) - Kleingefleckter Katzenhai ................59 3.3.7 Scyliorhinus stellaris (Linnaeus, 1758) - Großgefleckter Katzenhai .................63 3.3.8 Squalus acanthias Linnaeus, 1758 - Dornh i ..................................................65 3.3.9 Squatina squatina (Linnaeus, 1758) - Meerengel ............................................71 3.3.10 Amblyraja radiata (Donovan, 1808) - Sternrochen...........................................74 3.3.11 Dasyatis pastinaca (Linnaeus, 1758) - Gewöhnlicher Stechrochen.................79 3 3.3.12 Dipturus batis (Linnaeus, 1758)-Komplex - Glattrochen..................................83 3.3.13 Leucoraja fullonica (Linnaeus, 1758) - Chagrinrochen ....................................87 3.3.14 Leucoraja naevus (Müller & Henle, 1841) - Kuckucksrochen ..........................89 3.3.15 Myliobatis aquila (Linnaeus, 1758) - Gewöhnlicher Adlerrochen.....................92 3.3.16 Raja clavata Linnaeus, 1758 - Nagelrochen....................................................95 3.3.17 Raja montagui Fowler, 1910 - Fleckrochen...................................................100 3.3.18 Torpedo marmorata Risso, 1810 - Marmorierter Zitterrochen .......................103 3.3.19 Chimaera monstrosa Linnaeus 1758 - Seekatze ..........................................105 3.4 Zeitliche Muster von CPUE und Präsenz...................................................................108 3.5 Präsenzanteile und Verbreitung verschiedener Lebensstadien .................................110 3.5.1 Mustelus spp. - Weißgefleckter Glatthai / Grauer Glatthai...............................110 3.5.2 Scyliorhinus canicula (Linnaeus, 1758) - Kleingefleckter Katzenhai ..............113 3.5.3 Squalus acanthias Linnaeus, 1758 - Dornhai ................................................116 3.5.4 Amblyraja radiata (Donovan, 1808) - Sternrochen.........................................119 3.5.5 Leucoraja naevus (Müller & Henle, 1841) - Kuckucksrochen ........................122 3.5.6 Raja clavata Linnaeus, 1758 - Nagelrochen..................................................125 3.6 Habitateignungsmodelle und prognostizierte Vorkommen des Sternrochens ............128 3.7 Gefährdungssituation der etablierten Hai-und Rochenarten .....................................132 3.7.1 Einstufung in Rote-Liste-Kategorien...............................................................132 3.7.2 Bestandstrends und Vorkommen in deutschen Meeres-und Natura 2000-Gebieten ........................................................................................................132 3.7.3 Gefährdungsursachen ...................................................................................134 3.8 Schutz-und Hilfsmaßnahmen sowie Forschungsbedarf............................................136 3.8.1 Überlegungen zu möglichen Schutz-und Hilfsmaßnahmen...........................136 3.8.2 Zukünftiger Forschungsbedarf .......................................................................138 3.9 Beratungsarbeit.........................................................................................................139 4 Quellenverzeichnis..................................................................................................141 4.1 Zitierte Literatur .........................................................................................................141 4.2 Recherchierte Online-Daten ......................................................................................152 5 Anhang.....................................................................................................................154 5.1 Steckbriefe für die in deutschen Meeresgebieten nachgewiesenen Knorpelfisch- Taxa..........................................................................................................................154 5.1.1 Riesenhai Cetorhinus maximus (Gunnerus, 1765)- Familie Cetorhinidae.....154 5.1.2 Hundshai Galeorhinus galeus (Linnaeus, 1758)- Familie Triakidae..............158 5.1.3 Großer Grauhai Hexanchus griseus (Bonnaterre, 1788) - Familie Hexanchidae..................................................................................................161 5.1.4 Heringshai Lamna nasus (Bonna erre, 1788) - Familie Lamnidae .................164 5.1.5 Weißgefleckter Glatthai Mustelus asterias - Familie Triakidae.......................167 5.1.6 Kleingefleckter Katzenhai Scyliorhinus canicula (Linnaeus, 1758) - Familie Scyliorhinidae ................................................................................................170 5.1.7 Großgefleckter Katzenhai Scyliorhinus stellaris (Linnaeus, 1758) - Familie Scyliorhinidae ................................................................................................173 5.1.8 Dornhai Squalus acanthias Linnaeus, 1758 - Familie Squalidae ...................176 5.1.9 Meerengel Squatina squatina (Linnaeus, 1758) - Familie Squatinidae ..........179 5.1.10 Sternrochen Amblyraja radiata (Donovan, 1808) - Familie Rajidae ...............182 5.1.11 Gewöhnlicher Stechrochen Dasyatis pastinaca (Linnaeus, 1758) - Familie Dasyatidae .....185 5.1.12 Glattrochen Dipturus batis-Komplex (Linnaeus, 1758) - Familie Rajidae.......188 5.1.13 Chagrinrochen Leucoraja fullonica (Linnaeus, 1758) - Familie Rajidae.........192 5.1.14 Kuckucksrochen Leucoraja naevus (Müller & Henle, 1841) - Familie Rajidae 195 5.1.15 Gewöhnlicher Adlerrochen Myliobatis aquila (Linnaeus, 1758) - Familie Myliobatidae...................................................................................................198 5.1.16 Nagelrochen Raja clavata Linnaeus, 1758 - Familie Rajidae.........................201 5.1.17 Fleckrochen Raja montagui Fowler, 1910 - Familie Rajidae..........................204 5.1.18 Marmorierter Zitterrochen Torpedo marmorata Risso, 1810 - Familie Torpedinidae..................................................................................................207 5.1.19 Seekatze Chimaera monstrosa Linnaeus 1758 - Familie Chimaeridae..........210 5.2 Bestimmungsschlüssel für die in deutschen Meeresgebieten nachgewiesenen Knorpelfische............................................................................................................213 5.3 Altersbestimmung an Dornen des Sternrochens.......................................................214 5.4 Anhangstabellen.......................................................................................................217 Danksagung.....................................................................................................................224
Bebauungspläne und Umringe der Kreisstadt Neunkirchen (Saarland):Bebauungsplan "Solarpark oestlich der ehemaligen Tagesanlage Dechen" der Kreisstadt Neunkirchen, Stadtteil Heinitz
SWACI is a research project of DLR supported by the State Government of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Radio signals, transmitted by modern communication and navigation systems may be heavily disturbed by space weather hazards. Thus, severe temporal and spatial changes of the electron density in the ionosphere may significantly degrade the signal quality of various radio systems which even may lead to a complete loss of the signal. By providing specific space weather information, in particular now- and forecast of the ionospheric state, the accuracy and reliability of impacted communication and navigation systems shall be improved. The total electron content (TEC) is defined as the integral of the electron density along the ray path between satellite and receiver. Thus, TEC provides the number of electrons per square meter. The most frequently used unit is 1TECU = 1x1016 electrons / m2. TEC is derived from dual frequency code and carrier phase measurements provided by Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS). SWACI uses GPS measurements from various European GNSS networks such as the International GNSS Service (IGS), European Reference Frame (EUREF), Norwegian Mapping Authority (NMA), and ascos distributed by the Federal Agency of Cartography and Geodesy (BKG) Frankfurt. The global TEC maps are mainly created by using data provided by the International GNSS Service Real-Time Pilot Project (IGS-RTPP). To generate TEC maps of vertical TEC, the slant measurements have to be transformed to the vertical. In a first approximation the ionospheric range error in GNSS is proportional to TEC. These TEC maps are used to derive latitudinal and zonal gradients, rate of change of TEC (5 min increments), 27 days medians, hourly forecasts of TEC, and corresponding error estimates. Spatial resolution (latitude x longitude): 2 °x 2° (Europe), 2.5° x 5° (globally)
SWACI is a research project of DLR supported by the State Government of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Radio signals, transmitted by modern communication and navigation systems may be heavily disturbed by space weather hazards. Thus, severe temporal and spatial changes of the electron density in the ionosphere may significantly degrade the signal quality of various radio systems which even may lead to a complete loss of the signal. By providing specific space weather information, in particular now- and forecast of the ionospheric state, the accuracy and reliability of impacted communication and navigation systems shall be improved. The total electron content (TEC) is defined as the integral of the electron density along the ray path between satellite and receiver. Thus, TEC provides the number of electrons per square meter. The most frequently used unit is 1TECU = 1x1016 electrons / m2. TEC is derived from dual frequency code and carrier phase measurements provided by Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS). SWACI uses GPS measurements from various European GNSS networks such as the International GNSS Service (IGS), European Reference Frame (EUREF), Norwegian Mapping Authority (NMA), and ascos distributed by the Federal Agency of Cartography and Geodesy (BKG) Frankfurt. The global TEC maps are mainly created by using data provided by the International GNSS Service Real-Time Pilot Project (IGS-RTPP). To generate TEC maps of vertical TEC, the slant measurements have to be transformed to the vertical. In a first approximation the ionospheric range error in GNSS is proportional to TEC. These TEC maps are used to derive latitudinal and zonal gradients, rate of change of TEC (5 min increments), 27 days medians, hourly forecasts of TEC, and corresponding error estimates. Spatial resolution (latitude x longitude): 2 °x 2° (Europe), 2.5° x 5° (globally)
At the 3rd Forum on the Search for a Final Repository (Forum Endlagersuche) on 22 and 23 November 2024, 247 participants came together in Würzburg to discuss the status of the repository search and the question of participation. A further 260 participants took part in the consultations online. A breakdown of the participants into their various groups reveals a mixed picture. While 65 people signed up as citizens, 124 participants saw themselves as belonging to local authorities, 31 people classified themselves as representatives of social organisations, 46 people came from academia, a further 48 registered as observers or press, 30 could not be assigned, and 172 people had a professional connection to the subject matter. They either belonged to federal or state ministries or worked directly for or with the parties involved in the procedure, the Bundesgesellschaft für Endlagerung (BGE), the Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Disposal (BASE) or the National Citizens’ Oversight Committee (NBG) – which is also a sign of how seriously the authorities and those responsible take the public debate regarding the repository search. On the first day of the forum, the focus was on the current work status of the BGE. The second day focussed on BASE’s supervisory strategy and its recently presented concepts for participation and for the preparation of the regional conferences. These concepts will see BASE prepare the central formats for participation as soon as the BGE has proposed siting regions for surface exploration. At the opening of the forum, BASE President Christian Kühn gave a keynote speech on the search for a repository site in uncertain times. “As a central format for participation until the proposal of siting regions, the Forum Endlagersuche shows that we, as a democratic society, are able to solve complex problems in a collective and responsible manner – including with a view to future generations,” said Kühn. “In addition to reliable institutions, we need a committed civil society that accompanies the search process critically and constructively if the search for a repository is to be successful.” At the beginning of the event, Chair of the BGE Managing Board Iris Graffunder gave an insight into her strategic considerations regarding site selection. She emphasised that the BGE will determine the siting regions for surface exploration by the end of 2027 and submit them to BASE for review. In Würzburg, she said: “We have very good geology in Germany, so I’m sure we will find a site where the high-level radioactive waste can be disposed of with the best possible safety. A broad political consensus is important, but it won’t be enough if we don’t reach people and succeed in reducing fears around radioactive waste. I’m convinced that the handling and disposal of high-level radioactive waste can be done safely. There’s no need for anyone to be afraid of a repository.” She expressly thanked the civil society members of the Forum Endlagersuche planning team (PFE), who spent a year preparing the conference. “The level of commitment I see here, including in many citizens’ initiatives, is exceptionally high. I’m always impressed by the extent to which private individuals familiarise themselves with the topic in their spare time.” Debate about timing dominates many discussions One key topic at the 3rd Forum Endlagersuche was the question of whether and how the search for a site can be accelerated. At a panel discussion, Jakob Blankenburg, a member of the Bundestag for the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD), called for political consensus regarding the long period of time needed to bring the science-based site selection procedure to a successful conclusion. It is precisely the question of this consensus that worries Ursula Heinen-Esser, the former co-chair of the Bundestag’s Repository Commission. She fears that this cross-party agreement, which made the relaunch of the repository site selection possible in the first place, may be lost over the decades that the procedure may still take. Karola Voß, Mayor of Ahaus, sees new risks in terms of the safety of the interim storage facilities – in which the high-level radioactive waste will have to be stored for decades until the repository site has been identified and the repository constructed. For the towns that host interim storage facilities, such as Ahaus, she said it has long felt as if they were actually hosting the repositories themselves. Voß called for financial compensation for these burdens on the community as a whole and argued that such a payment from the federal government to the municipalities would also encourage politicians not to skate around the issue. Tim Vietor from the Executive Board of the Swiss radioactive waste management company Nagra argued for accelerating the process by reducing complexity and concentrating solely on the best areas. Vietor also pointed out that the joint development of a realistic timetable, which is then followed up by a central actor in the procedure, brings stability and reliability to the process. In Switzerland, this leading role is played by the Federal Office of Energy, said Vietor. Gerrit Niehaus, head of the Directorate-General for Nuclear Safety at the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety and Consumer Protection (BMUV), believes that the search for a site for the repository is on the right track. He stated that the BGE’s current work status already demonstrates that the requirements for concentrating on suitable areas are being established through the current narrowing-down strategy. The corresponding reduction in the number of areas that are clearly unsuitable is a key part of the acceleration strategy called for by Federal Environment Minister Steffi Lemke. On the second day, a central working group also focussed on time needed for the seach. The group discussed the current position paper on acceleration potential by the Federal government’s Nuclear Waste Management Commission ESK (external link) . Participation as a key part of the site selection On the morning of the second day, Sebastian Stransky, head of BASE’s Supervision Department, presented the supervisory concept for monitoring the repository site selection, thereby fulfilling a request from the PFE and the NBG for information on this central function of BASE in the site selection procedure. “BASE’s task is to supervise the procedure, continuously monitoring the work of the BGE. Our job is to ensure compliance with the law and adherence to defined standards,” said Stransky. BASE also has a special obligation towards the BMUV and the NBG. The modalities for the inspection of records were agreed between BASE and the NBG on the fringes of the forum. The presentation of BASE’s supervisory activities was well received and was followed by a lively discussion. Central topics on the second day of the Forum Endlagersuche included the organisation of public participation in the coming years and strategies for the preparation of the regional conferences by BASE. In a working group, representatives of the Participation department presented the new Participation Strategy, published by BASE in May 2024, for discussion with the general public. This strategy identifies four key areas of action for participation in relation to the current status of the site selection procedure: monitoring progress in the procedure, picking up on regional concerns, promoting engagement, and supporting the development and exchange of knowledge. Civil society plays a key role in participation At the beginning of the Forum Endlagersuche, the PFE presented an accountability report showing that many of the resolutions passed by the previous forum had been implemented by the actors involved in the procedure. Public consultations by the PFE addressed current issues relating to time forecasts, repository planning or processes at the BGE. On Saturday, the following people were elected to the PFE for a period of one year: Elected for the group of citizens: Bettina Gaebel and Heiko Schaak. Elected for the group of scientists: Janine Hauer and Daniel Lübbert. Elected for the group of municipal representatives: Asta von Oppen and Eva Bayreuther. Elected for the group of associations and initiatives (social organisations): Andreas Fox and Jörg Hacker. Elected for the group of under 35-year-olds: Elisa Akansu, Maximilian Hipp, Anton Köller, Farras Fahti, Johannes Hunger, Lukas Fachtan. Compared with the previous PFE, the only changes were in the group of under 35-year-olds. Asta Haberbosch has left the group, and Lukas Fachtan was newly elected. How the participants see the Forum Endlagersuche BASE-President Christian Kühn expressed his gratitude for the civic engagement of the PFE in preparing and organising the event. In particular, he emphasised the importance of the broad political and societal consensus regarding waste disposal over the past decade and the need to continue renewing this widespread consensus. As a take-away from the forum, the Chair of the BGE Managing Board, Iris Graffunder, points above all to recognition and new impetus for the further work of the BGE, combined with an aspiration to push ahead with narrowing down the sub-areas quickly but without negative consequences for the safety and transparency of the process. “The BGE’s presentations on the current state of work here in Würzburg went into great depth,” she said. “What also became clear is that the issue of time required for the site selection is highly controversial and needs further discussion. It’s important to remember that the site selection is merely the opening act for the subsequent nuclear licensing procedure and the construction and operation of the repository. Our task is not complete until all waste has been disposed of.” “The procedure must remain science-based and transparent. Restricting public participation would take its toll in the end if mistakes then led to setbacks in the prodecure,” says Dr Daniel Lübbert from the PFE. Bettina Gaebel, also a member of the PFE, highlights the communicative atmosphere at the event: “A lot of interested people got talking to one another both at the face-to-face event in Würzburg and online. Local authorities, state and federal offices, federal companies, the National Citizens’ Oversight Committee, scientists and many other people from civil society exchanged views on nuclear waste issues and engaged in controversial debates. The forum also involved motions addressing specific expectations of BASE and the BGE,” Gaebel continued. “Preparations for the regional conferences should definitely include participation in public workshops. Decisions on changing how sites are selected cannot be made without the involvement of civil society.” At the end of the forum on Saturday, Gerrit Niehaus from the BMUV announced that he sees a role for the Federal Environment Ministry as “guardian of the timetable”. Compared with the 2nd Forum Endlagersuche a year ago, Niehaus sees “significant changes, particularly in the mood”. He emphasised the value of the Forum Endlagersuche as a place to discuss the site selection procedure. “The Federal Environment Ministry is already tasked with working with stakeholders to develop a reliable timetable for the period after the siting region proposal in 2027. This timetable is to be adapted and therefore modified in line with changing developments in the site selection. Nevertheless, I believe it’s necessary to set an end date for determining the site – which will need to be regularly adjusted due to the many uncertainties.” It’s important for Niehaus that the “old fronts are not rebuilt, and that we instead remain in dialogue.” Furthermore, he says: “The repository remains a necessity, regardless of our position on the use of nuclear energy.” The 4th Forum Endlagersuche will take place in 2025.
Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz Bekanntmachung gemäß § 11 der Röntgenverordnung (RöV) Zulassung BfS 20/09 V RöV Vom 6. Januar 2010 Gemäß den §§ 8 bis 12 und der Anlage 2 Nummer 3 der Röntgenverordnung (RöV) in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 30. April 2003 (BGBl. I S. 604) wird die Bauart der folgenden Vorrichtung zugelassen: Bauartzeichen:BfS 20/09 V RöV Bezeichnung der Vorrichtung:Röntgenfluoreszenzspektrometer Vollschutzgerät (gemäß § 2 Nr. 25 RöV) Typ/Firmenbezeichnung:Röntgensystem EDX (EDX700HS, EDX720, EDX800HS und EDX900HS) Inhaber der Zulassung:Fa. SHIMADZU Europa GmbH Albert-Hahn-Straße 6-10 47269 Duisburg Hersteller der Vorrichtung:SHIMADZU Corporation 1, Nishinokyo-Kuwabara-cho, Nakagyo-ku, Kyoto 604-8511 Japan Zugelassene Verwendung:Die Vollschutz-Röntgeneinrichtung EDX ist zur Material- analyse zugelassen. Befristung der Zulassung:6. Januar 2020 Technische Angaben zur Vorrichtung: Max. Betriebswerte: Röntgenröhre: Typ: Anodenmaterial: Hersteller: Röhrenspannung Röhrenstrom Röhrenleistung 50 KV 1 mA 50 W XTF5011A Rhodium (oder mit Ordnungszahl Z<45) Oxford Instruments, X Ray Technologies, Inc. 275 Technology Circle Scotts, CA 95066, USA Salzgitter, den 6. Januar 2010 57502/2-236 Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz Im Auftrag Motzkus
Das Bundesamt für Naturschutz (BfN) stellte am 19. April 2017 eine neue Studie vor, die erstmals umfassend Aufschluss über Vorkommen und Gefährdung von Haien, Rochen und Chimären in der deutschen Nord- und Ostsee gibt. Erstmalig wurden in Deutschland für einen Zeitraum von 390 Jahren (1625 bis 2015) mehr als 27.500 Nachweise von 19 Knorpelfischarten für die deutschen Meeresgebiete von Nord- und Ostsee zusammengetragen und analysiert. Zehn Arten stufte das Forscherteam als etabliert in den deutschen Meeren ein: Hundshai, Weißgefleckter Glatthai, Kleingefleckter Katzenhai, Dornhai, Sternrochen, Kuckucksrochen, Nagelrochen, Fleckrochen, Gewöhnlicher Stechrochen sowie der Glattrochen-Artkomplex. Eine Chimärenart, drei Rochen- und fünf Haiarten kommen darüber hinaus derzeit unregelmäßig in deutschen Gewässern vor. Die Studie kommt zum Ergebnis, dass die Gefährdungssituation der meisten Knorpelfischarten in den deutschen Meeresgebieten alarmierend ist. Der Gewöhnliche Stechrochen und der Glattrochen sind in deutschen Gewässern ausgestorben bzw. verschollen. Nagelrochen und Dornhai sind vom Aussterben bedroht, Hundshai und Sternrochen sind stark gefährdet bzw. gefährdet, Kuckucks- und Fleckrochen gelten als extrem selten. Aufgrund unzureichender Datenlage konnte für den Weißgefleckten Glatthai keine Gefährdungsanalyse durchgeführt werden. Nur eine einzige Art, der Kleingefleckte Katzenhai, gilt derzeit als ungefährdet. Als Haupt-Gefährdungsursachen der Knorpelfische werden die Fischerei, durch den Menschen verursachte Lebensraumveränderungen, Schadstoffe und der Einfluss des Klimawandels herausgestellt. In der Studie wird die Einrichtung von wirksam gemanagten Meeresschutzgebieten als eine wesentliche Schutzmaßnahme vorgeschlagen.
Vom 4. bis 9. November 2014 fand in Quito/ Ecuador die 11. Konferenz der Vertragsstaaten der Bonner Konvention statt. Experten aus über 120 Staaten berieten über den besseren Schutz der Zugvögel und über höhere Schutzstandards für andere bedrohte Arten. Ein wichtiges Thema war der Kampf gegen die Vergiftung von Zugvögeln. Die Staaten nahmen eine Resolution an, die sich für ein Verbot von bleihaltiger Munition innerhalb von drei Jahren ausspricht.Verabschiedet wurde auch ein Aktionsplan zum Schutz terrestrischer Vogelarten für die Region Afrika/Eurasien. Ferner beschloss die Konferenz, eine internationale Taskforce zur Bekämpfung der illegalen Zugvogelverfolgung einzusetzen, etwa im Mittelmeerraum. Zu den Gewinnern der Konferenz zählt der Eisbär, der in Zukunft mit größeren Schutzanstrengungen der Staatengemeinschaft rechnen kann – ebenso wie unter den Vögeln die Blauracke, die Großtrappe, der Sandstrandläufer und der Knutt. Auch Haie und Rochen, die durch Überfischung und Beifang zunehmend in ihren Beständen gefährdet sind, werden unter den Schutz der Bonner Konvention gestellt: Verschiedene Arten wie der Sägerochen, der Seiden- und der Hammerhai sowie die Mantas werden nun gelistet. Die "Central Asian Mammals Initiative" soll die in Zentralasien vorkommenden Lebensräume wie Steppen, Gebirge und Wüsten schützen. Gemeinsam mit dieser Resolution wurde ein Arbeitsprogramm zum Schutz der Zugwege von Großsäugern in Zentralasien verabschiedet. Damit soll der Schutz wandernder Tierarten auch beim Bau von großen Trassen berücksichtigt werden.
Um Sägerochen vor dem Aussterben zu retten, hat die Hai-Spezialisten-Gruppe (Shark specialist group SSG) des IUCN am 5. Juni 2014 eine globale Strategie zur Rettung und Wiederherstellung der Sägerochenbestände eingeleitet. Die Strategie wurde auf der Internationalen Hai-Konferenz in Durban ins Leben gerufen.
| Origin | Count |
|---|---|
| Bund | 120 |
| Land | 10 |
| Type | Count |
|---|---|
| Ereignis | 6 |
| Förderprogramm | 95 |
| Taxon | 2 |
| Text | 8 |
| unbekannt | 12 |
| License | Count |
|---|---|
| geschlossen | 15 |
| offen | 102 |
| unbekannt | 6 |
| Language | Count |
|---|---|
| Deutsch | 115 |
| Englisch | 50 |
| Resource type | Count |
|---|---|
| Datei | 6 |
| Dokument | 6 |
| Keine | 78 |
| Webdienst | 1 |
| Webseite | 40 |
| Topic | Count |
|---|---|
| Boden | 91 |
| Lebewesen & Lebensräume | 113 |
| Luft | 66 |
| Mensch & Umwelt | 122 |
| Wasser | 78 |
| Weitere | 117 |