Reply to Statzner

First of all, I want to thank B. Statzer for carefully and critically scrutinizing our paper and for his reanalysis of our data. In constrast to him, we restricted our statistical analysis to models which can be expected to fit the data because of autecological knowledge about the animals. We think that only then is a correspondence between the data and the model of some practical relevance. Doing so we found that'...using the FST hemispheres, nothing can be measured which cannot be measured as well by means of a small propeller-type anemometer. The FST results are hardly more biologically relevant than are those of a "classical" current measurement. We know about the shortcomings of our data and agree with most of Statzner's criticism. However, as we mentioned in our discussion, we assessed tham as being of minor relevance for our interpretations and think that our principle statements hold true nevertheless.