Incidents
and Accidents
T
he actual probability of getting bitten by a shark is more than
overrated. Yearly, billions of swimming, bathing, surfing, and diving
events occur but barely more than 100 incidents with sharks happen
during the same period, sometimes even less. Considering that sharks are
the most abundant top predator weighing over 50 kg on this planet, the
number is nearly non-existent. This low number
Based
on
animal
of incidents can further be reduced by 20 to 30%
density and incidents
of encounters that did not end in an actual injury
with humans, sharks
to the person involved. Another rather large
cause the least number
percentage of the remaining incidents ends in
of incidents among
superficial cuts. Only between 30 and 40 bites
all the top and super
per year end in more serious wounds of which no
predators on this planet.
more than 10 incidents are fatal. Despite the fact
that these numbers are so low compared to the millions of people entering
the water on any given day, the probability that even such a rare incident
could take place still remains so prominent in people’s minds that the majority
would never even consider interacting with sharks to get to know them better.
Attack, accident, or incident
Despite the common use of the term ‘shark attack’, the word ‘attack’ is not
really accurate when describing an incident in which harm is done to a person,
and it should rather be called an accident or incident. An attack in a predator’s
world always aims to incapacitate the object of attention; however, a shark never
tries to hurt a person. That a person is wounded or on rare occasions even killed,
has a different basis than to cause harm willfully. As will be described later in this
– 103 –
ERICH RITTER
chapter, sharks do not bite people because they are hungry
or angry. The infliction of a wound is not purposely done
to remove flesh or impair. Whenever sharks defend
themselves against other sharks, or compete with each
other, they might bite not with the purpose of hurting,
but to force a reaction from the other animal, terminate
a situation, or anything like this. A shark does not have
the knowledge that a human’s skin is less robust nor does
it adapt a force commonly used for a certain situation
to serve another purpose when the target group is not
a shark but a human being. For these reasons, the term
‘accident’ is more suitable just because it is never a shark’s
purpose to cause harm. Similarly suitable would be the
term ‘incident’ even more since it leaves the entire debate
between accident and attack aside.
Most incidents could be avoided
Around a public beach, swimmers or bathers will
rarely end in a situation in which a bite might happen.
Nevertheless, people should never blindly rely on
lifeguards, since they, for example, are unable to see
into the glare and detect a shark below the surface
or know that up-current – beyond the beach patrolled
area – fishing or any other activity might be in progress,
attracting sharks.
Likewise,
that
other people are
in the water at
the same spot
does not indicate
that no shark is
present.
Many
areas show telltale
– 104 –
INCIDENTS & ACCIDENTS
signs that sharks could be present,
and the possibility of an appearance
is increased should certain activities
occur or a constellation of factors
be
prolonged.
Understanding
signs, circumstances, and such
constellations can largely reduce
encounters or avoid them all together. Constantly updated lists of “Dos &
Don’ts” (e.g., www.sharkvictimnetwork.org) do not just provide information
on how to act correctly in the vicinity of sharks, but also on how to avoid an
encounter altogether. A complete list is also given at the end of this book.
Incident related research
Until the early 90s, shark accident research was limited mainly to the
collection of data and filing of incidents, and the recommendations released
lacked proper field testing since they merely reflected the opinion of the file
keepers and people who were studying sharks in general but not specifically
regarding human interaction. It does not, therefore, come as a surprise that
many of the assumptions that caused these occasional bites were erroneous.
Governmental sponsored research
on shark incidents began in 1958
when the ‘Shark Attack Panel’ was
launched. This panel of scientists
was founded by the US NAVY and
given the task to quantify and qualify
shark bites, to look for reasons why
they occur and how to prevent them.
Overall, the panel was rather helpless in this endeavor and failed to offer any
relevant recommendations on how to avoid incidents or what caused them in
the first place. One of the shortcomings regarding recommendations was the
lack of the already mentioned field testing, mainly due to the fact that they
were not shark behaviorists, had not studied shark-human interaction to begin
with and were not working among sharks – a prerequisite to understanding
– 105 –
ERICH RITTER
the behavior of sharks. That the US NAVY withdrew their funding 10 years later
did not come as a surprise.
Research on shark incidents revolves around four main aspects: 1) wound
pattern analysis, 2) accident reconstruction and field testing of probable
incident related factors, 3) evaluation of incident sites with special emphasis
on environmental factors, and 4) interviews with victims and eye witnesses.
The reconstruction of a shark bite focuses on determining causing factors,
shark species, shark size, and likely motivation. Probably the most important
task is the actual reconstruction of an incident in a similar setting with sharks
of the involved species. This creates the basis for recommendations of
how humans should act and react in comparable situations, how to avoid
predictable reactions with sharks, and/or how to defuse dangerous situations.
Incident statistics
Only a small number of incidents per year are analyzed in greater detail,
indicating that the majority of involved shark species is not (!) truly known
but assumed. Although the general media always tries to name the species
involved, the assumption is largely based on the species living in that
particular area or on often questionable eye witness accounts. Based on
such deduction or speculation, the presumably involved species should
be accepted with caution. Nevertheless,
members of some species are known to be
involved on a more regular basis (e.g., white
sharks, tiger sharks, bull sharks, or blacktip
sharks) but other species that are able to
create comparable wounds can also be
involved. Overall, popular shark bite and
incident statistics are not just inaccurate regarding species and their frequency
of involvement, but in the true number of incidents as well. The latter is a fact
not just because more and more shark diving and feeding occurs worldwide
and operators are not too keen to reveal that a client has been injured (even
slightly), but some incidents, mainly in remote areas, just never make it into the
mainstream media.
– 106 –
INCIDENTS & ACCIDENTS
Every accident is provoked
Incidents do not “just happen.” Every accident is provoked by humans,
whereas the person does not have to be aware of the triggering factors.
It may happen that the later victim swims into a region in which there is
up-current fishing taking place. The hooked fish releases bodily fluids and
stress hormones and the swimmer ends up in the created odor corridor.
Although a shark will not mistake the
encountered person as the struggling
fish when swimming towards the
odor source, if the person creates
sound patterns resembling struggling
fish, the shark might further examine
the person. Such a scenario may end
in an exploratory bite since smell and
sound might suggest a known prey – independent of the fact that the visual
clue is not a match. In such a scenario, the incident would have been provoked
by the fisherman (the third party). Contrary to third party triggers, a known
provocation revolves, for example, around a person who swims close to/in/
around accident prone areas (sandbars, jetties, channels, river mouths, etc.),
knowing that these areas are a prime hangout for sharks. An unknowingly
triggered accident, is a scenario in which the person is not aware that his or
her activities at or around certain areas may attract sharks, encouraging them
to further investigate.
A more than outdated classification: pump, hit &
run, and sneak
This outdated and wrongful
classification still finds its way into
books and articles disseminated
by the media. Although there
are common denominators when
comparing accidents, making a
certain classification possible (e.g.,
– 107 –
ERICH RITTER
bite motivation), this simple 3-group classification
has no real value. No other accident statistics with
animals exist in which brushing against a person is
considered an ‘attack.’ Such absurdity underlines the
fear of sharks where even the mere touch of an animal
is considered worth mentioning and collecting.
Bumping is mostly a form of exploration, a means
of establishing hierarchy, or a way to chase off an
intruder, but it is not an ‘attack.’ Similarly incorrect is
the ‘hit & run’pattern. No shark will swim away after it
bit a person. It will stay in the vicinity of the person.
This description implies a rather cowardly animal
that vanishes after having done “something bad” (in
a shark’s world a bite is a common behavior and not
interpreted as a wrongful deed that needs an escape
to avoid punishment). Sharks are curious animals
and do not swim off after a bite, even less so since
the majority of these bites occur out of curiosity,
and further observation might follow. On the same
note, likewise erroneous is the description of the so
called ‘sneak’ attack. Here as well, the term implies
that an animal is up to no good, hence sneaks up
on the person. Although it is true that victims are
mostly unaware of a shark’s presence, such can have
different reasons (e.g., blind spot approach, staying
beyond the outer circle). Whatever the reason, each
incident is unique in itself. That analyses show
similarities is likely, but considering the different
species of varying sizes, all the situations with
different human activities, dissimilar environmental
factors, etc. makes a 3-group classification incorrect.
– 108 –
INCIDENTS & ACCIDENTS
The main bite motivations
Curiosity, competition, stress, and provocation represent the most frequent
bite motivations. Although each motivation reflects a different wound
pattern, the latter two look rather similar, since both stem from defensive
motivations. Starving or just being hungry is not a motivating force for a shark
to bite humans. That human body parts have been found in sharks’ stomachs
have different explanations. Swallowing a hand or a foot can even happen
out of curiosity should a rather large shark hold on too tight or too long and
the person reacts in a forceful manner. Similarly, a shark might investigate a
corpse whose limbs were already rather deteriorated and came apart easily.
Curiosity
One of the more important motivations of a predator is to explore an unfamiliar
object, which is also true for sharks. Cameras, dome ports, flashes, etc. are
frequent targets for inspection. Not only
physical objects create curiosity (although
at this point it is still speculation about
what might entice a shark to bite into a
camera or bump a flash) or activities as
such, but likely ‘mental states’ of humans
(fear, stress, panic, etc.) as well. It seems
the these states create less harmonic
motions,
emitting
non-rhythmical
sound patterns that appear quite intriguing for a shark. Depending on the
trigger’s intensity, a shark may approach rather quickly and may immediately
pass very closely (often at the inner threshold). Such approaches are often
connected to pectoral bursts at the closest point, a telltale sign that more
approaches will follow. Despite the rather direct swim patterns, most of the
time a controlled withdrawing is possible (slow, deliberate motion), before an
exploratory bite, a brushing of the person or a bumping into it might happen.
Exploratory bites are used to satisfy curiosity. They are a form of grabbing/
holding an object rather than an actual bite. The shark mostly tries to obtain a
better understanding of the object’s hardness or its surface by getting it into
– 109 –
ERICH RITTER
contact with its taste buds (gums).
Due to the small amount of pressure
applied by the shark’s jaws, a person
is easily able to pull the limb away,
causing cuts that are entirely brought
on by the victim himself/herself. The
cuts or wound structures prompted
by the person’s reaction are called
secondary wounds.
Stress
Sharks like any other animal can be easily stressed by humans. However, aside
from some hardly visible stress coloration and very tight swim patterns in
narrow spaces, stress is not easy recognized. As a consequence, people are
barely aware of having created a stressful situation or being in the process of
creating one. A subsequent bite may seem unprovoked, but has indeed been
triggered by the person’s actions. Defensive bites are always the last option for
a shark to free itself from a situation (it will always try first to escape). Compared
to exploratory bites, this type of bite is more severe, making it less likely that a
person can pull the targeted body part free. A defensive shark won’t pursue as
long as the person is withdrawing (but an uncontrolled withdrawing can further
reduce escape routes, increasing the risk of getting bitten a second time). A
sensible diver is an observant diver who monitors his/her surroundings and
never creates a situation in which a stress bite may follow.
Competition
If a diver, swimmer, or bather is seen as a competitor, food is the likely trigger. A
shark will always first try to scare off an intruder by faking an attempt to bite. Fake
charges consist of speed bursts towards a person with a rather abrupt turn right
at the inner threshold; however, these fake attempts to bite a person occur much
less often than commonly thought, since they are mostly just a misinterpretation
from the diver’s side – as long as the person is not spearfishing. Whenever a shark
performs, for example, a frontal approach (which is indeed very goal oriented as the
– 110 –
INCIDENTS & ACCIDENTS
shark likely tries to create a reaction in
the person), it can be rather intimidating.
During such approaches, sharks
generally lower their pectoral fins when
getting close to their inner threshold
but – as already mentioned – lowering
these fins is a mere enhancement
for maneuverability in tight spaces.
One should never forget that during a
competitive interaction, a shark will not treat a person like something to explore
but will likely follow the same patterns as if the person were another shark under
the same circumstances. Should the person be spearfishing and carrying fish, a
shark might try to steal the catch (also known as kleptoparasitism), and multiple
bites might happen to reach this goal. Multiple snappings at conspecifics is a
common way of forcing the other shark to drop its prey.
Recommendations when feeling threatened:
© Withdraw in a controlled fashion (slow deliberate movements)
© Never ascend over a shark but move to the side (if a shark is defending
some prey, not only the area around the prey could be seen as its
territory but the water column as well)
© Always keep visual contact with a shark (even if one has to swim
“backwards” for a while)
© If a shark approaches “too close” when diving, point a snorkel/camera (if on eye level) or fin (if on lower body level) at the animal but never (!) hit the shark
Recommendations when spearfishing and carrying fish:
© Always (!) drop your catch. Never try to get it to the surface
© If a speared fish can’t be brought to the surface on the first breath, always
wait a few minutes before diving down again. A struggling fish (even for a
very short period of time) may have alerted some sharks, and they
could appear within a few minutes
© Always leave the area up-current (!) after having caught some fish
– 111 –
ERICH RITTER
Provocation
All bites represent some form of provocation, but harassment is the most
called for cause of bites. An initially well balanced situation can get so stressful
for an animal that a bite will be the only possible result. A diver hitting a shark
with a camera, pulling its tail (resting nurse shark), or teasing a shark with food
without then giving it to the animal are typical provocations. Since more and
more people dive, these types of bites are on the rise.
Zones around an incident
When identifying the factors that influenced an incident, natural and human
triggered factors have different weights and typically create three zones. The
most inner zone is defined by the human created factors that revolve around
the actual interaction between the later victim and the shark that ultimately
lead to the incident. The second zone encompasses the area where a shark
picks up the human triggered factors that eventually create curiosity to swim
towards the source. The most outer zone revolves around the natural factors
that bring an animal into the area in the first place (e.g., nursery grounds,
common bait areas, and others). Except for the outer zone, the two others are
always knowingly or unknowingly influenced by humans.
Comparison to terrestrial predators
Sharks behave, act and react similarly to land predators, but some very obvious
differences occur. Interactions with sharks mostly happen in a 3-dimensional
surrounding, except within very shallow shore areas, and encountered sharks
are most often in motion as compared to terrestrial predators who may perch
or lie rather (seemingly) relaxed somewhere.
Shark accident theorems
Shark accident research is still in its infancy, but it is evident that bites do not
just “happen.” They are the result of a variety of factors that must come together
(constellation of factors) but other truths underlie these incidents as well. Some
of them have already been described in some detail while others are rather selfevident.
– 112 –
INCIDENTS & ACCIDENTS
1. There are no dangerous sharks – but
dangerous situations.
2. Each shark is influenced by a human’s presence.
3. Sharks should always be seen as individuals and
not as stereotypes of a species.
4. Sharks do not have a search image for humans.
5. There are no unprovoked shark accidents. They
are all triggered knowingly, unknowingly, or by
third parties.
6. No bite is caused by a single trigger.
7. No bite on humans is a mistake. A shark is aware
when it bites an unfamiliar object.
8. If a shark feels threatened by or is in competition
with a human being, it bites with the same intensity
as if the person were another shark.
9. No shark bites without reason.
10. No shark bites to intentionally cause harm to
a person.
– 113 –