And I always thought, that the USNavy baleen research was to find the political correct answer to the problem of Los Angeles class subs being raped by undiscriminating whales. I mean whales are endagered species and even rape of a LA is without issue.

More information in an article quoted on GLOBALSECURITY.ORG

More information in an article quoted on GLOBALSECURITY.ORG

The idea of using animals to provide some basic functions in combat related operations is not new. Dogs have been used for various purposes as far back as WWI. Animal rights groups may object. As long as the animals are treated humanely I have no big problem with using seal lions, dolphins, dogs or whatever. My objection is to the Navy's refusal to disclose how much money is being spent on the program. In an open society that type of unnecessary secrecy undermines both civilian morale and confidence in the government.

Greytraveller The very significant point is: If you don't treat animals well, they will be worthless for military work. You can torture dogs to attack anything as guard dogs; but to get a good military dog you need to treat it well or it will never track well, it will never stop escapees well. To be quite honest: When a man-dog team fails it's because the dog hasn't trained the handler well enough. I suppose it's the same with other animals: How would you force a dolphin to do something it doesn't want to do? About the non-disclosure of the Navy budget, I have a sneaking suspition, that what has been publicised is just the tip of the iceberg. A wild guess (and it is a wild guess (but I have been right before)): The navy uses dolphins to ferret out hostile submarines, especially in littoral water, where sonar is bunk. Your hydrophones would pick up Flippers denounciation of a nasty aft in the wake and below - just have to understand what he says - theres the real work.

Sweden made some experiments with seals for submarine detection during ww2, I think that the seals were good at finding subs, but they also wanted them to blow them up and the seals were to weak to carry larger explosives.

I'm just waiting for Thomas to comment on jofredes comment about swedes and seals now... ;)

I won't disappoint you: 1. I think the plan didn't work because they fed the seals "Surströmming", but seals like their fish fresh. 2. Says more of the quality of Swedish sailors, that they recruit seals. These could actually swim. 3. The seals services were discontinued as they violated se no evil - hear no evil policy towards infringement from the Soviet Union. Instead the russian got a parking ticket when they placed a nuclear sub just outside their main naval base (do not underestimate the power of the "Lap Lisa"). And Swedes will think I'm joking.

IIRC, when the Russians tried it with the Norwegians they sent in the "depth charge" parking inspectors... ;)

Well the Norwegeans have allways been the most robust of the scandinavians - very nice people, very good sailors. I believe I heard once, that a russian sub got a bravery medal for the ordel - plus a dented sub.