Shark Bites In French Polynesia Reveal A Hidden Side Of Shark Behavior
Sharks have long been cast as ruthless, mindless predators, a fear so deeply ingrained that it has fueled an entire genre of Hollywood horror films. Yet a long-term study from French Polynesia shows that sometimes, when sharks bite humans, it is not out of predatory instinct… but rather self-defense.
A team of researchers, led by Dr. Eric Emile Germain Clua of the Paris Science et Lettres (PSL) Research University, have reviewed over 60 years of shark bite data and found that activities like spearfishing and handling fish traps often trigger a defensive response. In such cases, the sharks react immediately to human aggression, typically inflicting superficial wounds that are rarely fatal unless unfortunate circumstances, like arterial damage, occur. These defensive bites lack the typical signs seen when a shark attacks out of fear or predation, such as pectoral fin lowering or hunched swimming, and usually involve little tearing of flesh or removal of tissue. Unlike predatory attacks, where significant injury and loss of flesh are common, self-defense bites are swift, sometimes repeated, but comparatively mild.
The waters of French Polynesia, home to over 30 shark species within a 2.1 million square mile (5.5 million km²) exclusive economic zone, provide a unique environment to study shark-human interactions. Since the area was declared a shark sanctuary in 2006, the shark populations have remained relatively healthy, offering a rare opportunity to observe these interactions over decades. The team found that bites classified as self-defense were exclusively initiated after a human acted aggressively toward a shark. Harpooning, speargun strikes, and even rough handling were common triggers. In most cases, the resulting injuries were minor to moderate, reinforcing the idea that the shark's intent was not to hunt or consume but to respond to a perceived threat.
The idea that wild animals defend themselves when threatened is not new. Birds, bears, and even snakes and spiders regularly react defensively to human provocation. However, detailed documentation of this behavior in sharks has been lacking until now. Earlier mentions of defensive shark bites were anecdotal or speculative, without comprehensive data, the scientists argue. But this new analysis confirms that sharks, like many terrestrial animals, may bite defensively when cornered or attacked. Out of all the cases reviewed, a small but consistent percentage — about 5% over a 15-year span — involved self-defense motivations. These incidents were concentrated in areas like the Tuamotu archipelago, where traditional fishing practices remain common.
Sharks biting in self-defense reminds us that they are not villains of the ocean but animals trying ... More to survive in a world increasingly dominated by humans.
The new study also highlights an important caution I personally hope everyone heeds: distressed sharks should not be handled by untrained people. Even a wounded or trapped shark can lash out reflexively, and in these moments, the bite is not calculated or proportionate. Rather, it is an instinctive act of survival, much like a bear swatting at a perceived threat or a bird pecking at an intruder near its nest. By shifting the narrative to acknowledge human responsibility, public attitudes toward sharks could not only become more balanced, but can help prevent unnecessary injuries to both humans and sharks. Sharks are already facing numerous threats from overfishing, habitat loss, and climate change. Misrepresenting their behavior only adds to the challenges they face by justifying unnecessary fear and sometimes lethal retaliation.
Understanding the motivations behind shark bites is crucial for developing non-lethal management strategies. As human presence in marine environments grows, so too does the likelihood of human-wildlife conflict (in French Polynesia alone, an estimated 200,000 spearfishing sessions happen annually). Just as we have learned to modify our everyday behaviors around bears, snakes, and other wildlife to reduce conflicts, we can do the same for animals at sea. Avoiding unnecessary provocation of sharks, educating ocean users about shark behavior, and promoting respectful coexistence can lower risks for both sides. Ultimately, by respecting their space and understanding their responses, we can work toward safer waters and a better future for sharks and people alike.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
A record catch of krill near Antarctica could trigger an unprecedented end to fishing season
Ocean-Fisheries-Antarctic-Krill MIAMI (AP) — Trawling near Antarctica for krill — a crustacean central to the diet of whales and a critical buffer to global warming — has surged to a record and is fast approaching a never before reached seasonal catch limit that would trigger the unprecedented early closure of the remote fishery, The Associated Press has learned. The fishing boom follows the failure last year of the U.S., Russia, China and two dozen other governments to approve a new management plan that would have mandated spreading out the area in which krill can be caught and creating a California-sized reserve along the environmentally sensitive Antarctic Peninsula. In the first seven months of the 2024-25 season, krill fishing in Antarctica reached 518,568 tons, about 84% of the 620,000-ton limit that, once reached, will force the fishery to automatically close. In one hot spot, the catch through June 30 was nearly 60% higher than all of last year's haul, according to a report from the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, or CCAMLR, the international organization that manages the world's southernmost fishery. The report, which has not been publicly released and CCAMLR said contains confidential data, was shared with The AP by someone concerned about overfishing in Antarctica on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release the information. 'The vast majority of the krill take is from an increasingly smaller area,' said Capt. Peter Hammarstedt, campaign director for conservation group Sea Shepherd Global, which this year made its third voyage to Antarctica to document the fishery. 'It's the equivalent of a hunter saying that they're only killing 1% of the U.S.' deer population but leaving out that all of the deer were shot in Rhode Island.' Threat from climate change, advances in fishing Krill is one of the most abundant marine species in the world, with an estimated biomass of 63 million metric tons. But advances in fishing, climate change and growing demand for krill's Omega-3 rich oil – for fishmeal, pet food and human dietary supplements — have increased pressure on the krill stocks. In the 2023-24 season, a fleet of 12 industrial trawlers from mostly Norway and China caught 498,350 tons of krill — until now the largest harvest since CCAMLR began collecting catch data in 1973. AP journalists traveled to the icy waters around Antarctica in 2023 and observed how factory ships trawl in close proximity to whales whose numbers are still recovering from a century of industrial culling that nearly drove them to extinction. Underscoring the competition between humans and whales, three humpback whales were found dead or seriously injured last year in the long, cylindrical nets deployed by the vessels to vacuum up the paper-clip sized crustacean. Officials have been negotiating for years a new management plan that would balance the growing market for krill with calls for greater protection of the Antarctic Peninsula, the continent's northernmost point and an area teeming with whales and, increasingly, tourists. Currently, less than 5% of the Southern Ocean is protected — well behind CCAMLR's target and a United Nations goal to preserve 30% of the world's oceans by 2030. But a tentative deal fell apart at last year's CCAMLR meeting over a last minute proposal by the United Kingdom and Australia for an even lower catch limit than the one agreed to during talks, AP reported last year. China, objecting to the persistent Western demands, then withdrew its support for the marine reserve and refused to renew the existing management system. 'The truth was it was the UK,' Matts Johansen, chief executive of Norway's Aker BioMarine, the world's largest supplier of krill-based products, said at the United Nations Oceans conference in June. 'Just a couple days before the vote, the UK threw another suggestion and that's when the Chinese backed off.' A spokesperson for the UK Foreign Office rejected that characterization and said the British government continues to push for a krill management strategy that better safeguards Antarctic marine species and vulnerable ecosystems. Catch limit restrictions expire In the absence of a deal, restrictions adopted 15 years ago to spread out the catch limit expired, allowing the krill fleet to essentially fish anywhere at any time, including in smaller habitats preferred by whales and other animals such as penguins and seals. Krill aren't just vital to marine ecosystems. Increasingly, researchers are focusing on their role as a bulwark against climate change. One peer-reviewed study last year found that krill remove from the atmosphere and store in the ocean 20 million tons of carbon annually. That's the equivalent of taking off the road 5 million cars every year. CCAMLR declined to comment on the report obtained by the AP. Ship tracking data analyzed by Global Fishing Watch at the request of the AP also showed a higher concentration of trawling. Activity in one popular fishing ground, denoted Sub-Area 48.1, appears to have more than doubled so far this season compared to the entire 2023-2024 season, according to the the U.S.-based group, which supports sustainable fishing. Javier Arata, the executive director the Association of Responsible Krill harvesting companies, whose members are responsible for 95% of the krill taken from Antarctica, said the catch limit that lapsed was always intended as an interim measure. His group supports the creation of marine protected areas in Antarctica. But it rejects waiting for a conservation deal to adopt 'ready-to-go measures' raising the quota, which he said can be much higher. 'The failure to advance management was political, not scientific,' he said. The current fishing levels, although higher than previous limits, remain sustainable and reflect the consensus recommendation of scientists before last year's deal fell apart, Arata added. — This story was supported by funding from the Walton Family Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. __ Contact AP's global investigative team at Investigative@ or Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
Record-breaking deep-sea snail species discovered 6km underwater
Scientists have discovered a giant snail species living at a depth of around 6km in the northwestern Pacific Ocean, marking the deepest-known habitat for any limpet. The species, found on hard volcanic rock some 500km southeast of Tokyo, grows to about 4cm long, remarkably large for a snail at such a depth. It has about 80 clearly defined white radial streaks on the shell. Researchers have named the species Bathylepeta wadatsumi after the god of sea in Japanese mythology and the One Piece manga series character 'Large Monk' Wadatsumi. 'Here, we report a giant Bathylepeta up to a shell length of 40.5mm from 5,922m deep in the northwestern Pacific and name it Bathylepeta wadatsumi,' they wrote in a study detailing the discovery published in Zoosystematics and Evolution. 'We also take this opportunity to salute Eiichiro Oda for continuing to chart the epic voyage of One Piece, which reminds us that the greatest voyages are driven by freedom, camaraderie and an insatiable thirst for discovery.' The snail grazes on sediment layers over rock, indicating it may be playing a specialised role in processing organic matter in deep-sea ecosystems. 'Members of this genus are notable not only for their very deep habitats but also for their large size considering the depth, with B laevis reaching 30 mm in shell length,' the study said. 'The body size of Bathylepeta is remarkable for the depth and this genus could play an important role in utilising sedimentary carbon deposited on abyssal hard substrata.' The discovery underlines the usefulness of submersible vehicles in accessing deep habitats, allowing for direct observation and collection of previously overlooked organisms. Researchers used crewed submersible DSV Shinkai 6500 to make the discovery, marking the first time a member of this genus had been observed and photographed live in its natural habitat rather than after being dredged up using a net. 'Even in an age of sophisticated remotely operated vehicles, there's often an edge to the human eye on the seafloor,' said Chong Chen, lead author of the study. 'Crewed submersibles like Shinkai 6500 let us explore with intention and nuance – spotting lifeforms like Bathylepeta wadatsumi that might otherwise be missed entirely.' Scientists hope future studies using submersibles will reveal the true diversity and distribution of such snails and other animals living in deep-sea ecosystems. 'Our finding underscores the need for more comprehensive explorations of rocky abyssal habitats using submersibles to reveal the true diversity and distribution of Bathylepeta and other animals relying on such habitats,' they wrote.
Washington Post
6 days ago
- Washington Post
We've made sharks into monsters
Lindsay L. Graff is a shark researcher and PhD candidate in marine biology at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. There are few summer traditions more predictable than turning sharks into profit. Fifty years ago, on June 20, 1975, 'Jaws' established the template for the modern-day blockbuster, combining mass marketing and high-concept thrills that all but guarantee mega box-office returns. But the film's lasting power lies in how it transformed a relatively obscure marine predator into a cultural icon and villain that could be used for financial gain. Before 1975, sharks managed to lead inconspicuous existences that belied their ecological importance. Fear of sharks wasn't born with 'Jaws': Isolated incidents, such as the infamous 1916 attacks along the East Coast, had already stirred public alarm in coastal communities. It was easy to scale local anxiety into global panic. Transforming sharks into predatory monsters leverages the primal unease humans experience when we're reminded of our natural place within the food web. In a single summer, 'Jaws' distilled a subclass of hundreds of species, small and large, down to the singular, misleading moniker of 'man-eater.' After the summer of 1975, sharks became unforgettable — and extremely profitable. But half a century after 'Jaws,' the truth is clear: Humans are far deadlier to these animals than they are to us. Each year, we kill an estimated 100 million sharks, largely due to overfishing, where they are caught intentionally for finning or incidentally as bycatch. Sharks were the perfect monsters for an economy built on entertainment and fear — not facts. Their capability of causing traumatic harm to humans (47 people were bitten by sharks last year in unprovoked attacks) lent enough validity for the 'man-eating' label to stick, irrespective of the fact that the vast majority of shark species feed primarily on fish, squid, invertebrates and planktonic organisms. It was far easier to sell society on sharks' evil tendencies than it was to face the reality that you're statistically more likely to be killed by a grass-eating hippopotamus — or that there are more people bitten by squirrels in New York City each year than Americans injured by sharks. 'Squirrelnado' wouldn't have quite the same ring to it. The lack of research on and public understanding about sharks in the 1970s allowed them to become whatever Hollywood imagined. This fact can be heard in the remorse of 'Jaws' author Peter Benchley, who, after an encounter with a great white shark while diving in the Bahamas, penned an essay with his famous line: 'I couldn't write 'Jaws' today. The extensive new knowledge of sharks would make it impossible for me to create, in good conscience, a villain of the magnitude and malignity of the original.' Before science could dispel the myths, sharks had been cemented in the public's eye. The immense success of 'Jaws' sparked a wave of films, including sequels: 'Jaws 2' (1978), 'Jaws 3-D' (1983) and 'Jaws: The Revenge' (1987). Hollywood's interest exploded. Television networks followed suit. Discovery Channel aired the first Shark Week in July 1988, and it has since become a summer rite of passage. Shark Week leaned heavily into sensationalized storytelling of shark attacks and shark bite reenactments. It provided a space for viewers to face their growing galeophobia, however misguided, without leaving the comfort and safety of their living rooms. Today, Shark Week is the longest-running cable television programming event in history. As the scientific and public perception of sharks matured, driven by advances in marine science and public education, media channels adapted their content; sensationalized fearmongering was replaced with conservation-focused storytelling, and shark behavior was allowed to extend beyond the overused verbiage of 'lurking' and 'stalking.' Even as Hollywood maintained its fascination with the man-eater — not least of all in the series of six (six!) 'Sharknado' movies — National Geographic launched its own week of shark-focused TV in 2012, SharkFest, developing it into the multi-week TV event that it is today. SharkFest is marketed as a science-based, educational alternative to Discovery Channel's Shark Week, but the platform remained grounded in the same logic: that sharks are media assets designed to generate viewership. There remains an uneven balance between episodes of science and spectacle — each meant to appease an audience viewing these animals through a different lens. (Even the popular TV show 'Shark Tank,' which has nothing to do with these cartilaginous fishes, is meant to evoke in viewers the sense of business-focused, man-eating investors.) Recently, the commodification of sharks has reached digital platforms, such as Instagram and TikTok, where sharks fuel personal branding and ego. Platforms are flooded with influencers who disguise sharks as subjects of scientific curiosity and conservation, when in reality they are used as props to gain followers, views and personal clout. We are spammed with content from people recording themselves unsafely interacting with wild animals and sensationalizing shark encounters to feed a performative image of bravery or connection with nature. They are exploiting these animals like those before them did on our movie and TV screens, reducing 450 million years of evolution to a tool for engagement and sponsorships. Humans intentionally kill sharks for profit, selling their fins for shark fin soup or mounting them as trophies. Consequently, over one-third of shark and ray species are now threatened with global extinction. By contrast, between 2019 and 2023, there were just 64 unprovoked shark attacks, including six fatalities, per year on average. Most attacks occur when swimmers or surfers are mistaken for prey, such as seals. Sharks are important and worthy of conservation and research, and not because they generate profit. Without sharks, marine ecosystems can unravel, leading to population booms of prey species, degradation of habitats and a loss of biodiversity. Sharks matter — not for what they give us, but for what they are.
