Almost 9 miles long, 2.5 miles wide, and up to 260 ft
deep in one particular section, Lake Labynkyr in far-eastern Russia's Yakutia (Sakha) Republic is not only a large but
also a very remote body of icy-cold freshwater. It is not frequently visited by
outsiders, but those hardy local hunters that have braved its location's
inhospitable climate have sometimes returned home with stories of formidable
aquatic monsters inhabiting its chilly depths - stories that date back as far
as the 19th Century but which have received increasing public and
scientific attention since the 1950s.
Some tell of a dark-grey beast with an enormous
mouth that has allegedly devoured their dogs when they have leapt into the lake
to retrieve shot ducks. Others speak of a black, long-necked, snorting creature
with a snake-like head that preys upon geese and reindeer. In my book In Search of Prehistoric Survivors (1995), I
noted that according to Anatoly Pankov, a chronicler of mysterious happenings
in this part of the world, sometime during the 1950s one such creature
supposedly raised its neck above the lake's surface in full view of a team of
geologists and lunged upwards to snare a flying bird between its jaws while also
being watched by a number of astonished reindeer hunters.
In 1962, Dr Sergei Klumov suggested that an unknown
species of amphibian may exist here - a possibility also contemplated by Soviet
geologist Dr Viktor Tverdokhlebov, who visited Lake Labynkyr during Russia's Stalinist era. A relict reptile was an
alternative candidate proffered by Tverdokhlebov, but he
was unable to put either option to the test, as he did not report any sightings
of monsters there. Nor did any team members from a Russian expedition that
visited in 1963, or an Estonian team in 1964. Yet the legend of mystery beasts
lurking beneath its water surface continues.
Modern reconstruction of Mastodonsaurus - a very big and notably large-mouthed amphibian from the Middle Triassic Period
(public domain)
Thanks to the intriguing findings of a team that
visited this mysterious lake last month, however, the true nature of its
supposed monsters may be very different from the accounts and theories noted
above, but no less interesting either.
The team in question was composed of divers from the
Russian Geographic Society and the Diving Sport Federation of Russia. Their
mission had three separate goals – to collect samples for formal scrutiny and
analysis by scientists investigating the long-suspected
possibility that an underwater link exists between Lake Labynkyr
and the equally mysterious Lake Vorota, almost 20 miles away; to break the world record for the deepest under-ice
dive; and to look out for Labynkyr's fabled monsters. By the end of their
visit, the team had accomplished both of their first two goals, and had also
obtained some thought-provoking findings of great relevance to their third.
As documented by the Siberian Times on 21 April 2014, team member Lyudmila Emeliyanova, an Associate Professor of Biogeography, revealed that during a previous visit here (in 2009):
"It
was our fourth or fifth day at the lake when our echo sounding device
registered a huge object in the water under our boat.
"The
object was very dense, of homogeneous structure, surely not a fish nor a shoal
of fish, and it was above the bottom. I was very surprised but not scared and
not shocked, after all we did not see this animal, we only registered a strange
object in the water. But I can clearly say - at the moment, as a scientist, I
cannot offer you any explanation of what this object might be."
And that was not all -
further sonar readings of this same kind were subsequently recorded by her
equipment:
"I
can't say we literally found and touched something unusual there but we did
register with our echo sounding device several seriously big underwater
objects, bigger than a fish, bigger than even a group of fish."
In contrast, the largest life
forms detected in the lake during this latest visit, and which were
photographed by team member Alexander Gubin, were fishes up to 4 ft long that
the team referred to as dogfishes – which is something of a mystery in itself.
Two
photographs of 'dogfishes' encountered during the Russian team's visit to Lake Labynkyr
in March 2014 (© Alexander Gubin/Siberian Times)
For whereas the
term 'dogfish' is normally applied to various relatives of sharks, I was
readily able to identify the fishes in Gubin's photographs as being something
totally different.
Namely, a
cod-related freshwater species known as the burbot Lota lota. So, could
'dogfish' be a colloquial name used in Russia for the burbot?
(Top) A burbot (© Achim R
Schloeffel/Wikipedia); (Bottom) One of the Russian team's 'dogfishes' (©
Alexander Gubin/Siberian Times)
Carnivorous by
nature, this very distinctive species – the world's only freshwater gadiform -
is known to attain a total length of up to 4 ft. However, larger specimens may
conceivably exist in this large but little-disturbed lake.
Untroubled by
any large-scale threat of predation by other animals or persecution by humans, and
encouraged to attain an exceptionally large size by the lake's chilling
temperature in the same way that fishes and invertebrates famously do in the
freezing waters off Antarctica, perhaps undiscovered mega-burbots are the real
monsters of Labynkyr.
For more information on Russian lake monsters,
check out my book Karl Shuker's Alien Zoo
(CFZ Press: Bideford, 2010).
The Lake Labynskyr's monster was described to display something like a toothy beak and this fish was seen moving itself forward in leaps, which is relevant to some kind of giant sturgeon, very closely related the Kaluga sturgeon IMO.
ReplyDeleteSomething with a long neck and a big mouth almost sounds like Ogopogo, Nessie, or Champ to me. Do you think any of them or other lake monsters could be related to the Labynskyr montser, Karl?
ReplyDeletePersonally I'd like to know, how big is "huge" for Lyudmila Emeliyanova? I.e. was the object in question a meter long? Two? Ten? Thirty?
ReplyDeleteIt is intersting to hear that there was an estonian expedition to the place. I'd never heard of it - though that is likely because, as you said, they didn't find anything interesting.