Shark repellent: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>SchlurcherBot
m Bot: http → https
 
imported>Ilenart626
See also: added link to “ Shark attack prevention” page
 
Line 2: Line 2:
{{For|the business strategy|Poison pill (disambiguation){{!}}Poison pill}}
{{For|the business strategy|Poison pill (disambiguation){{!}}Poison pill}}


A '''shark repellent''' is any method of driving [[shark]]s away from an area. Shark repellents are a category of [[animal repellent]]s. Shark repellent technologies include [[magnetic shark repellent]], [[electropositive shark repellent]]s, [[Protective Oceanic Device|electrical repellents]], and [[semiochemical]]s. Shark repellents can be used to protect people from sharks by driving the sharks away from areas where they are likely to harm human beings. In other applications, they can be used to keep sharks away from areas they may be a danger to themselves due to human activity. In this case, the shark repellent serves as a shark conservation method. There are some naturally occurring shark repellents; modern artificial shark repellents date to at least the 1940s, with the [[United States Navy]] using them in the [[Pacific Ocean theater of World War II]].
A '''shark repellent''' is any method of driving [[shark]]s away from an area. Shark repellents are a category of [[animal repellent]]s. Shark repellent technologies include [[magnetic shark repellent]], [[electropositive shark repellent]]s, [[Protective Oceanic Device|electric repellents]], and [[semiochemical]]s. Shark repellents can be used to protect people from sharks by driving the sharks away from areas where they are likely to harm human beings. In other applications, they can be used to keep sharks away from areas they may be a danger to themselves due to human activity. In this case, the shark repellent serves as a shark conservation method. There are some naturally occurring shark repellents; modern artificial shark repellents date to at least the 1940s, with the [[United States Navy]] using them in the [[Pacific Ocean theater of World War II]]. However results from modern studies have been mixed with electric shark repellents being independently assessed as the most effective shark deterrent.<ref name="Sos250625">{{cite web |last1=Flounders |first1=Lois |title=Do shark repellents work? |url=https://saveourseas.com/worldofsharks/do-shark-repellents-work |website=Save our Seas Foundation |access-date=25 June 2025}}</ref><ref name="ABC230623" /><ref name="Huveneers2" /><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gautheir |first1=A R G |title=Variable response to electric shark deterrents in bull sharks, Carcharhinus leucas |journal=Nature |date=21 October 2020 |issue=Sci Rep 10, 17869 (2020) |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-74799-y |access-date=25 June 2025}}</ref>


==Natural repellents==
==Natural repellents==
It has traditionally been believed that sharks are repelled by the smell of a dead shark;<ref name=AP2004>[https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna5560773 Researchers tout shark repellent], 2004 Associated Press, "Fisherman and scientists have long noted sharks stay away if they smell a dead shark."</ref> however, modern research has had mixed results.
It has traditionally been believed that sharks are repelled by the smell of a dead shark.<ref name=AP2004>[https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna5560773 Researchers tout shark repellent], 2004 Associated Press, "Fisherman and scientists have long noted sharks stay away if they smell a dead shark"</ref> however, modern research has had mixed results.<ref name="ABC230623">{{cite news |last1=Kilvert |first1=Nick |title=Shark deterrents are flooding the market. Here's what you should know about the science |url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-06-24/when-it-comes-to-shark-deterrents-here-s-what-the-science-says/102399294 |access-date=25 June 2025 |agency=Australian Broadcasting Commission |date=24 June 2023}}</ref>


The ''[[Pardachirus marmoratus]]'' fish (finless sole, Red Sea Moses sole) repels sharks through its secretions.<ref name=Clark1979/> The best-understood factor is [[pardaxin]], acting as an irritant to the sharks' gills, but other chemicals have been identified as contributing to the repellent effect.<ref>{{cite journal
The ''[[Pardachirus marmoratus]]'' fish (finless sole, Red Sea Moses sole) repels sharks through its secretions.<ref name=Clark1979/> The best-understood factor is [[pardaxin]], acting as an irritant to the sharks' gills, but other chemicals have been identified as contributing to the repellent effect.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Pavoninins: Shark-Repelling Ichthyotoxins from the Defense Secretion of the Pacific Sole
|title=Pavoninins: Shark-Repelling Ichthyotoxins from the Defense Secretion of the Pacific Sole
|last1=Tachibana |first1=Kazuo|last2=Sakaitanai |first2=Masahiro|last3=Nakanishi |first3=Koji|journal=Science|volume=226|number=4675|pages=703–705|year=1984|doi=10.1126/science.226.4675.703|pmid=17774948 |bibcode=1984Sci...226..703T |s2cid=19656976 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=Shark repellent lipophilic constituents in the defense secretion of the Moses sole (Pardachirus marmoratus).|last1=Tachibana |first1=Kazuo|last2=Gruber |first2=Samuel H. |author-link2=Samuel H. Gruber|journal=Toxicon|year=1988|volume=26|number=9|pages=839–853|pmid=3201487 |doi=10.1016/0041-0101(88)90325-x|bibcode=1988Txcn...26..839T }}</ref>
|last1=Tachibana |first1=Kazuo
|last2=Sakaitanai |first2=Masahiro
|last3=Nakanishi |first3=Koji
|journal=Science
|volume=226
|number=4675
|pages=703–705
|year=1984
|doi=10.1126/science.226.4675.703
|pmid=17774948 |bibcode=1984Sci...226..703T |s2cid=19656976 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal
|title=Shark repellent lipophilic constituents in the defense secretion of the Moses sole (Pardachirus marmoratus).
|last1=Tachibana |first1=Kazuo
|last2=Gruber |first2=Samuel H. |author-link2=Samuel H. Gruber
|journal=Toxicon
|year=1988
|volume=26
|number=9
|pages=839–853
|pmid=3201487
|doi=10.1016/0041-0101(88)90325-x
|bibcode=1988Txcn...26..839T }}</ref>


In 2017, the US Navy announced that it was developing a synthetic analog of [[hagfish]] slime with potential application as a shark repellent.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://interestingengineering.com/us-navy-sythesizing-hagfish-slime-defend-against-torpedoes-and-sharks|title=The US Navy Is Synthesizing Hagfish Slime to Defend Against Torpedoes and Sharks|date=2017-07-10|access-date=2018-09-23|language=en-US}}</ref>
==Electric repellents==
 
Electric repellents create an [[Electro magnetic field|electromagnetic field]] to deter [[shark attack]]s and are used by [[Surfing|surfers]], [[scuba diver]]s, [[Snorkeling|snorkelers]], [[spearfishing|spearfishers]], ocean [[kayak fishing|kayak fishers]], swimming areas off boats and for ocean fishing. The [[Ocean Guardian (Shark Shield)|Ocean Guardian devices]], marketed with the Shark Shield brand name, are considered one of the few electrical devices on the market that has performed independent trials to determine the effectiveness<ref name="Kempster">{{cite journal|display-authors=etal|vauthors=Kempster RM, Egeberg CA, Hart NS, Ryan L, Chapuis L, Kerr CC|date=1 June 2016|title=How Close is too Close? The Effect of a Non-Lethal Electric Shark Deterrent on White Shark Behaviour|journal=PLOS ONE|volume=11|issue=7|page=e0157717|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0157717|pmc=4930202|pmid=27368059|bibcode=2016PLoSO..1157717K|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="Huveneers">{{citation|last=Huveneers|first=C.|title=Effects of the Shark Shield electric deterrent on the behaviour of white sharks Carcharodon carcharias|date=June 2012|url=http://www.sardi.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/173876/Risk_Assessment_of_the_Shark_Shield_Report_-_FINAL_19_06_2012.pdf|location=Australia|publisher=SARDI|access-date=3 February 2014}}</ref> at deterring shark attacks.<ref name="Choice">{{cite web |title=Do shark repellents work? |url=https://www.choice.com.au/health-and-body/diet-and-fitness/surfing-and-snowboarding/articles/shark-repellents-review |website=Choice |access-date=5 December 2019|date=2016-10-03 }}</ref> Whilst it is noted the Shark Shield technology does not work in all situations<ref name="Kempster" /><ref name="ABC_sa">{{cite news|url=http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2012/06/20/3529306.htm|title=SA researchers trial effectiveness of electronic shark deterrent devices on Great Whites|last1=Williamson|first1=Brett|date=20 June 2012|access-date=1 June 2017|publisher=ABC News}}</ref><ref name="Huveneers" /> and divers have been attacked whilst wearing Shark Shield,<ref name="Choice" /><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.portlincolntimes.com.au/story/1608925/clarkson-was-wearing-shark-shield/|title=Clarkson was wearing shark shield|date=3 July 2013|access-date=2 June 2017|publisher=Port Lincoln Times}}</ref> modelling research from Flinders University in 2021 indicated that the proper use of personal electronic deterrents is an effective way to prevent future deaths and injuries.<ref>{{cite web |title=Technology can save Australians from shark bites |url=https://news.flinders.edu.au/blog/2021/04/01/technology-can-save-australians-from-shark-bites/ |website=Flinders University |date=31 March 2021 |access-date=18 June 2021}}</ref> It was estimated that these devices could save up to 1063 Australian lives along the coastline over 50 years.<ref>{{cite web |title=Technology might save us from shark bites |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/melissacristinamarquez/2021/04/12/technology-might-save-us-from-shark-bites/?sh=5a11bac96ca3// |website=Forbes |access-date=June 16, 2021|date=2021-06-16 }}</ref>


==History==
==History==
Some of the earliest research on shark repellents took place during the [[Second World War]], when military services sought to minimize the risk to stranded [[aviator]]s and [[sailor]]s in the water. Research has continued to the present, with notable researchers including Americans [[Eugenie Clark]], and later [[Samuel H. Gruber]], who has conducted tests at the Bimini Sharklab<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://www.biminisharklab.com | title=Bimini Sharklab - Shark Research & Marine Biology Internships - Understand, Educate, Conserve}}</ref> on the Caribbean island of [[Bimini]], and the Japanese scientist Kazuo Tachibana. The future celebrity chef [[Julia Child]] developed shark repellent while working for the [[Office of Strategic Services]].<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://www.intelligence.gov/index.php/people/barrier-breakers-in-history/451-julia-child | title=1944: JULIA CHILD}}</ref>
Some of the earliest research on shark repellents took place during the [[Second World War]], when military services sought to minimize the risk to stranded [[aviator]]s and [[sailor]]s in the water. Research has continued to the present, with notable researchers including Americans [[Eugenie Clark]], and later [[Samuel H. Gruber]], who has conducted tests at the Bimini Sharklab<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://www.biminisharklab.com | title=Bimini Sharklab - Shark Research & Marine Biology Internships - Understand, Educate, Conserve}}</ref> on the Caribbean island of [[Bimini]], and the Japanese scientist Kazuo Tachibana. The future celebrity chef [[Julia Child]] developed shark repellent while working for the [[Office of Strategic Services]].<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://www.intelligence.gov/index.php/people/barrier-breakers-in-history/451-julia-child | title=1944: JULIA CHILD}}</ref>


Initial work, which was based on historical research and studies at the time, focused on using the odor of another dead shark. Efforts were made to isolate the active components in dead shark bodies that repelled other sharks. Eventually, it was determined that certain copper compounds like [[copper acetate]],<ref name='shadows'>[https://www.amazon.com/Shadows-Sea-Sharks-Skates-Rays/dp/1558215182 Thomas B. Allen. Shadows in the Sea: The Sharks, Skates and Rays]</ref> in combination with other ingredients, could mimic a dead shark and drive live sharks away from human beings in the water. Building on this work, [[Stewart Springer]] and others patented a "shark repellent" consisting of a combination of copper acetate and a dark-colored dye to obscure the user.<ref>
Initial work, which was based on historical research and studies at the time, focused on using the odor of another dead shark. Efforts were made to isolate the active components in dead shark bodies that repelled other sharks. Eventually, it was determined that certain copper compounds like [[copper acetate]],<ref name='shadows'>Thomas B. Allen. ''Shadows in the Sea: The Sharks, Skates and Rays''</ref> in combination with other ingredients, could mimic a dead shark and drive live sharks away from human beings in the water. Building on this work, [[Stewart Springer]] and others patented a "shark repellent" consisting of a combination of copper acetate and a dark-colored dye to obscure the user.<ref>{{cite patent | inventor1-last = Brinnick | inventor1-first = Frederic E. | inventor2-last = Fogelberg | inventor2-first = John M. | inventor3-last = Springer | inventor3-first = Horace Stewart | inventor4-last = Tuve | inventor4-first = Richard L. | title = Shark repellent| issue-date = 1949| patent-number = 2458540| country-code = US }}</ref> This shark repellent, known as "Shark Chaser", was long supplied to sailors and aviators of the [[United States Navy]], initially packaged in cake form using a water-soluble wax binder and rigged to life vests. The Navy employed Shark Chaser extensively between 1943 and 1973. It is believed that the composition does repel sharks in some situations, but not in all, with about a 70% effectiveness rating.<ref name='shadows'/>
{{cite patent
| inventor1-last = Brinnick
| inventor1-first = Frederic E.
| inventor2-last = Fogelberg
| inventor2-first = John M.
| inventor3-last = Springer
| inventor3-first = Horace Stewart
| inventor4-last = Tuve
| inventor4-first = Richard L.
| title = Shark repellent
| issue-date = 1949
| patent-number = 2458540
| country-code = US }}</ref>
This shark repellent, known as "Shark Chaser", was long supplied to sailors and aviators of the [[United States Navy]], initially packaged in cake form using a water-soluble wax binder and rigged to life vests. The Navy employed Shark Chaser extensively between 1943 and 1973. It is believed<ref name='shadows'/> that the composition does repel sharks in some situations, but not in all, with about a 70% effectiveness rating.{{cn|date=January 2024}}


On the other hand, Albert Tester questioned the idea that dead shark bodies or chemicals based on them could work as shark repellent. In 1959, he prepared and tested extracts of decaying shark flesh on [[tiger shark]]s in [[Hawaii]] and [[blacktip shark]]s at [[Enewetak Atoll]]. Tester found that not only did the dead shark extracts fail to repel any sharks, but several sharks had a "weak or strong attraction" to them. Tester reported a similar failure to repel sharks by a 1959 test at Enewetak of "an alleged shark repellent, supplied by a fisherman, which contained extract of decayed shark flesh as the principal component."<ref>
On the other hand, Albert Tester questioned the idea that dead shark bodies or chemicals based on them could work as shark repellent. In 1959, he prepared and tested extracts of decaying shark flesh on [[tiger shark]]s in [[Hawaii]] and [[blacktip shark]]s at [[Enewetak Atoll]]. Tester found that not only did the dead shark extracts fail to repel any sharks, but several sharks had a "weak or strong attraction" to them. Tester reported a similar failure to repel sharks by a 1959 test at Enewetak of "an alleged shark repellent, supplied by a fisherman, which contained extract of decayed shark flesh as the principal component."<ref>{{cite journal|last = Tester| first = Albert L.| title = The role of olfaction in shark predation| date = April 1963| journal = Pacific Science| issn = 0030-8870| volume = 17| issue = 2| pages = 145–170| hdl = 10125/4935
{{cite journal
}}</ref> Research continued into the 2000s on using extracts from dead sharks or synthesizing such chemicals.<ref name=AP2004/>
| last = Tester
| first = Albert L.
| title = The role of olfaction in shark predation
| date = April 1963
| journal = Pacific Science
| issn = 0030-8870
| volume = 17
| issue = 2
| pages = 145–170
| hdl = 10125/4935
}}
</ref> Research has continued into the 2000s on using extracts from dead sharks or synthesizing such chemicals.<ref name=AP2004/>


==Research==
Since the 1970s, there have been studies of how the Moses sole repels sharks, with Clark<ref name=Clark1979>{{cite journal|last1=Clark|first1=Eugenie|author-link1=Eugenie Clark|last2=Gorge|first2=Anita|title=Toxic soles, Pardachirus marmoratus from the Red Sea and P. pavoninus from Japan, with notes on other species|journal=Environmental Biology of Fishes|date=June 1979|volume=4|issue=2|pages=103–123|doi=10.1007/bf00005447|bibcode=1979EnvBF...4..103C |s2cid=11156811}}</ref> and Gruber both studying it. {{as of|2004}} it has not found practical use, however, as the chemicals are perishable,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1981/01/20/science/natural-shark-repellent-is-alluring-to-scientists.html|title=Natural Shark Repellent is Alluring to Scientists|author=Walter Sullivan|work=[[The New York Times]]
Since the 1970s, there have been studies of how the Moses sole repels sharks, with Clark<ref name=Clark1979>{{cite journal|last1=Clark|first1=Eugenie|author-link1=Eugenie Clark|last2=Gorge|first2=Anita|title=Toxic soles, Pardachirus marmoratus from the Red Sea and P. pavoninus from Japan, with notes on other species|journal=Environmental Biology of Fishes|date=June 1979|volume=4|issue=2|pages=103–123|doi=10.1007/bf00005447|bibcode=1979EnvBF...4..103C |s2cid=11156811}}</ref> and Gruber both studying it. {{as of|2004}} it has not found practical use, however, as the chemicals are perishable,<ref>{{cite news
|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1981/01/20/science/natural-shark-repellent-is-alluring-to-scientists.html
|title=Natural Shark Repellent is Alluring to Scientists
|author=Walter Sullivan
|work=[[The New York Times]]
|date=January 20, 1981}}</ref> and the repellent had to be injected into the shark's mouth to be effective;<ref name=AP2004/> in nature the substance is secreted on the skin and is thus ingested by sharks when they bite the sole.
|date=January 20, 1981}}</ref> and the repellent had to be injected into the shark's mouth to be effective;<ref name=AP2004/> in nature the substance is secreted on the skin and is thus ingested by sharks when they bite the sole.


Since the 1980s,<ref>
Since the 1980s,<ref>{{cite journal|journal=Archives of Toxicology|year=1984|volume=56|issue=1|pages=55–58|title=Synthetic surfactants: A new approach to the development of shark repellents|first1=Eliahu |last1=Zlotkin|first2=Samuel H.|last2=Gruber|author-link2=Samuel H. Gruber
{{cite journal
|doi=10.1007/BF00316354|pmid=6517714|bibcode=1984ArTox..56...55Z|s2cid=10478482}}</ref> there is evidence that [[surfactant]]s such as [[sodium lauryl sulfate]] can act as a shark repellent at concentrations of the order of 100 parts per million. However, this does not meet the desired "cloud" deterrence level of 0.1 parts per million.<ref>{{cite journal | last1=Smith | first1=Larry J. | year=1991 | title=The effectiveness of sodium lauryl sulphate as a shark repellent in a laboratory test situation | journal=Journal of Fish Biology | volume=38 | issue=1 | pages=105–113 | doi=10.1111/j.1095-8649.1991.tb03096.x| bibcode=1991JFBio..38..105S }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sisneros |first1=Joseph A. |last2=Nelson |first2=Donald R. |year=2001 |title=Surfactants as Chemical Shark Repellents: Past, Present, and Future  |journal=Environmental Biology of Fishes |volume=60 |issue=1–3 |pages=117–130 |doi=10.1023/A:1007612002903|bibcode=2001EnvBF..60..117S |s2cid=19575107 }}</ref>
|journal=Archives of Toxicology
|year=1984
|volume=56
|issue=1
|pages=55–58
|title=Synthetic surfactants: A new approach to the development of shark repellents
|first1=Eliahu |last1=Zlotkin
|first2=Samuel H.|last2=Gruber
|author-link2=Samuel H. Gruber
|doi=10.1007/BF00316354
|pmid=6517714
|bibcode=1984ArTox..56...55Z
|s2cid=10478482
}}</ref> there is evidence that [[surfactant]]s such as [[sodium lauryl sulfate]] can act as a shark repellent at concentrations of the order of 100 parts per million. However, this does not meet the desired "cloud" deterrence level of 0.1 parts per million.<ref>
{{cite journal
| last1=Smith | first1=Larry J.
| year=1991
| title=The effectiveness of sodium lauryl sulphate as a shark repellent in a laboratory test situation
| journal=Journal of Fish Biology
| volume=38 | issue=1
| pages=105–113
| doi=10.1111/j.1095-8649.1991.tb03096.x
| bibcode=1991JFBio..38..105S
}}</ref><ref>
{{cite journal
|last1=Sisneros |first1=Joseph A.
|last2=Nelson |first2=Donald R.
|year=2001
|title=Surfactants as Chemical Shark Repellents: Past, Present, and Future  
  |journal=Environmental Biology of Fishes
|volume=60 |issue=1–3
|pages=117–130
|doi=10.1023/A:1007612002903
|bibcode=2001EnvBF..60..117S
|s2cid=19575107
}}</ref>


There have been validated field tests and studies to confirm the effectiveness of [[semiochemical]]s as a shark repellent. From 2005-2010, an extensive study on the effectiveness of semiochemicals as a shark repellent was conducted by scientists from [[Sharkdefense|SharkDefense Technologies]] and [[Seton Hall University]]. The study's results were published in the scientific journal ''Ocean & Coastal Management'' in 2013. The study concluded that the existence of a putative chemical shark repellent has been confirmed.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://bmis.wcpfc.int/docs/references/Stroud_etal_2013_Chemical_shark_repellent_Myth_fact_necromones_effect_OpenA.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=2016-02-11 |archive-date=2016-04-03 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160403052520/http://bmis.wcpfc.int/docs/references/Stroud_etal_2013_Chemical_shark_repellent_Myth_fact_necromones_effect_OpenA.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>
There have been validated field tests and studies to confirm the effectiveness of [[semiochemical]]s as a shark repellent. From 2005-2010, an extensive study on the effectiveness of semiochemicals as a shark repellent was conducted by scientists from [[Sharkdefense|SharkDefense Technologies]] and [[Seton Hall University]]. The study's results were published in the scientific journal ''Ocean & Coastal Management'' in 2013. The study concluded that the existence of a putative chemical shark repellent has been confirmed.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://bmis.wcpfc.int/docs/references/Stroud_etal_2013_Chemical_shark_repellent_Myth_fact_necromones_effect_OpenA.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=2016-02-11 |archive-date=2016-04-03 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160403052520/http://bmis.wcpfc.int/docs/references/Stroud_etal_2013_Chemical_shark_repellent_Myth_fact_necromones_effect_OpenA.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>
Line 118: Line 32:
As of 2014, SharkDefense partnered with SharkTec LLC to manufacture the semiochemical in a canister as a shark repellent for consumers called Anti-Shark 100.<ref name="Shark_tec">{{cite web|title=Anti-Shark 100 Product Overview|url=https://www.sharktecdefense.com|website=SharkTec|access-date=5 June 2017}}</ref>
As of 2014, SharkDefense partnered with SharkTec LLC to manufacture the semiochemical in a canister as a shark repellent for consumers called Anti-Shark 100.<ref name="Shark_tec">{{cite web|title=Anti-Shark 100 Product Overview|url=https://www.sharktecdefense.com|website=SharkTec|access-date=5 June 2017}}</ref>


Recently{{When|date=July 2019}}, SharkDefense used the same semiochemicals found in SharkTec's product to reduce shark by-catch by 71% in a government grant initiative. The government agency [[NOAA]] released these findings in a report to Congress.<ref>{{Cite journal|url = http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/by_catch/docs/brep_2014_rice.pdf|title = Performance of a long-lasting shark repellent bait for elasmobranch bycatch reduction during commercial pelagic longline fishing|last = Stroud|first = Eric|date = October 2014|journal = National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration}}</ref>
According to a 2014 report by the [[National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration]], SharkDefense used the same semiochemicals found in SharkTec's product to reduce shark by-catch by 71% in a government grant initiative. The government agency [[NOAA]] released these findings in a report to Congress.<ref>{{Cite journal|url = http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/by_catch/docs/brep_2014_rice.pdf|title = Performance of a long-lasting shark repellent bait for elasmobranch bycatch reduction during commercial pelagic longline fishing|author=Rice, Patrick Rice; DeSanti, Brian; Stroud, Eric|date = October 2014|publisher=[[National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration]]|language=en-US|url-status=dead|archive-date=September 27, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160927122653/http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/by_catch/docs/brep_2014_rice.pdf}}</ref>
 
In 2017, the US Navy announced that it was developing a synthetic analog of [[hagfish]] slime with potential application as a shark repellent.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://interestingengineering.com/us-navy-sythesizing-hagfish-slime-defend-against-torpedoes-and-sharks|title=The US Navy Is Synthesizing Hagfish Slime to Defend Against Torpedoes and Sharks|date=2017-07-10|access-date=2018-09-23|language=en-US}}</ref>


In 2018 independent tests were carried out on five Shark Repellent technologies using [[Great white shark]]s. Only [[Shark Shield]]’s ''Ocean Guardian Freedom+ Surf'' showed measurable results, with encounters reduced from 96% to 40%. Rpela (electrical repellent technology), SharkBanz bracelet & SharkBanz surf leash ([[magnetic shark repellent]] technology) and Chillax Wax (essential oils) showed no measurable effect on reducing shark attacks.<ref name="Huveneers2">{{cite journal |last1=Huveneers |first1=Charlie |title=Effectiveness of five personal shark-bite deterrents for surfers |journal=PeerJ |date=2018 |volume=6 |pages=e5554 |doi=10.7717/peerj.5554 |pmid=30186701 |pmc=6120439 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
In 2018 independent tests were carried out on five Shark Repellent technologies using [[Great white shark]]s. Only [[Shark Shield]]’s ''Ocean Guardian Freedom+ Surf'' showed measurable results, with encounters reduced from 96% to 40%. Rpela (electrical repellent technology), SharkBanz bracelet & SharkBanz surf leash ([[magnetic shark repellent]] technology) and Chillax Wax (essential oils) showed no measurable effect on reducing shark attacks.<ref name="Huveneers2">{{cite journal |last1=Huveneers |first1=Charlie |title=Effectiveness of five personal shark-bite deterrents for surfers |journal=PeerJ |date=2018 |volume=6 |pages=e5554 |doi=10.7717/peerj.5554 |pmid=30186701 |pmc=6120439 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
Line 125: Line 41:
The 1947 Robb White book ''Secret Sea'' mentions a copper acetate shark repellent developed by the U.S. Navy.<ref>White, Robb, ''Secret Sea'' (New York: Scholastic Book Services, 1968 reprint edition), p. 182.</ref>
The 1947 Robb White book ''Secret Sea'' mentions a copper acetate shark repellent developed by the U.S. Navy.<ref>White, Robb, ''Secret Sea'' (New York: Scholastic Book Services, 1968 reprint edition), p. 182.</ref>


In [[Batman (1966 film)|Batman: The Movie (1966)]] there is a scene where an exploding shark jumps from the water and grabs Batman's leg while he is hanging on the Batcopter's ladder, piloted by Robin. Batman tries to punch the shark back to the ocean, but it does not affect the shark. He's handed a canister of Oceanic Bat-Spray, making the shark open its jaw and explode.
In a scene in the 1966 film ''[[Batman (1966 film)|Batman]]'', an exploding shark jumps from the water and grabs Batman's leg while he is hanging onto the ladder of a helicopter. Batman tries to punch the shark back to the ocean, but it does not affect the shark. He is handed a canister of Oceanic Bat-Spray, making the shark open its jaw and explode.
 
In a 2015 [[MythBusters (2015 season)#Episode 235 .E2.80.93 .22MythBusters vs. Jaws.22|a ''MythBusters'' episode]], the hosts [[Adam Savage]] and [[Jamie Hyneman]] used an extract of dead sharks, and were able to drive away 10-20 [[Caribbean reef shark]]s and [[nurse shark]]s in only a few seconds on two occasions. The repellent used consisted of extracts from other species of shark bodies, and sharks did not return for over 5 minutes on both occasions.<ref>


{{cite web
In a 2015 [[MythBusters (2015 season)#Episode 235 .E2.80.93 .22MythBusters vs. Jaws.22|a ''MythBusters'' episode]], the hosts [[Adam Savage]] and [[Jamie Hyneman]] used an extract of dead sharks, and were able to drive away 10-20 [[Caribbean reef shark]]s and [[nurse shark]]s in only a few seconds on two occasions. The repellent used consisted of extracts from other species of shark bodies, and sharks did not return for over five minutes on both occasions.<ref>{{cite web| last1 = Hyneman| first1 = James F.| author1-link = Jamie Hyneman| last2 = Savage | first2 = Adam W.|author2-link = Adam Savage| title = Dead Shark Repellent MiniMyth| website = Discovery.com| publisher = [[Discovery Communications]]
| last1 = Hyneman
|date = August 29, 2015| url = http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/shark-repellent-minimyth/| access-date = September 25, 2016}}</ref>
| first1 = James F.
| author1-link = Jamie Hyneman
| last2 = Savage
| first2 = Adam W.
| author2-link = Adam Savage
| title = Dead Shark Repellent MiniMyth
| website = Discovery.com
| publisher = [[Discovery Communications]]
| date = August 29, 2015
| url = http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/shark-repellent-minimyth/
| access-date = September 25, 2016
}}
</ref>


==See also==
==See also==
*[[Chain mail]]
*[[Chain mail]]
*[[Bear spray]]
*[[Bear spray]]
*[[Shark attack prevention]]


==References==
==References==

Latest revision as of 01:24, 30 June 2025

Template:Short description Script error: No such module "For".

A shark repellent is any method of driving sharks away from an area. Shark repellents are a category of animal repellents. Shark repellent technologies include magnetic shark repellent, electropositive shark repellents, electric repellents, and semiochemicals. Shark repellents can be used to protect people from sharks by driving the sharks away from areas where they are likely to harm human beings. In other applications, they can be used to keep sharks away from areas they may be a danger to themselves due to human activity. In this case, the shark repellent serves as a shark conservation method. There are some naturally occurring shark repellents; modern artificial shark repellents date to at least the 1940s, with the United States Navy using them in the Pacific Ocean theater of World War II. However results from modern studies have been mixed with electric shark repellents being independently assessed as the most effective shark deterrent.[1][2][3][4]

Natural repellents

It has traditionally been believed that sharks are repelled by the smell of a dead shark.[5] however, modern research has had mixed results.[2]

The Pardachirus marmoratus fish (finless sole, Red Sea Moses sole) repels sharks through its secretions.[6] The best-understood factor is pardaxin, acting as an irritant to the sharks' gills, but other chemicals have been identified as contributing to the repellent effect.[7][8]

Electric repellents

Electric repellents create an electromagnetic field to deter shark attacks and are used by surfers, scuba divers, snorkelers, spearfishers, ocean kayak fishers, swimming areas off boats and for ocean fishing. The Ocean Guardian devices, marketed with the Shark Shield brand name, are considered one of the few electrical devices on the market that has performed independent trials to determine the effectiveness[9][10] at deterring shark attacks.[11] Whilst it is noted the Shark Shield technology does not work in all situations[9][12][10] and divers have been attacked whilst wearing Shark Shield,[11][13] modelling research from Flinders University in 2021 indicated that the proper use of personal electronic deterrents is an effective way to prevent future deaths and injuries.[14] It was estimated that these devices could save up to 1063 Australian lives along the coastline over 50 years.[15]

History

Some of the earliest research on shark repellents took place during the Second World War, when military services sought to minimize the risk to stranded aviators and sailors in the water. Research has continued to the present, with notable researchers including Americans Eugenie Clark, and later Samuel H. Gruber, who has conducted tests at the Bimini Sharklab[16] on the Caribbean island of Bimini, and the Japanese scientist Kazuo Tachibana. The future celebrity chef Julia Child developed shark repellent while working for the Office of Strategic Services.[17]

Initial work, which was based on historical research and studies at the time, focused on using the odor of another dead shark. Efforts were made to isolate the active components in dead shark bodies that repelled other sharks. Eventually, it was determined that certain copper compounds like copper acetate,[18] in combination with other ingredients, could mimic a dead shark and drive live sharks away from human beings in the water. Building on this work, Stewart Springer and others patented a "shark repellent" consisting of a combination of copper acetate and a dark-colored dye to obscure the user.[19] This shark repellent, known as "Shark Chaser", was long supplied to sailors and aviators of the United States Navy, initially packaged in cake form using a water-soluble wax binder and rigged to life vests. The Navy employed Shark Chaser extensively between 1943 and 1973. It is believed that the composition does repel sharks in some situations, but not in all, with about a 70% effectiveness rating.[18]

On the other hand, Albert Tester questioned the idea that dead shark bodies or chemicals based on them could work as shark repellent. In 1959, he prepared and tested extracts of decaying shark flesh on tiger sharks in Hawaii and blacktip sharks at Enewetak Atoll. Tester found that not only did the dead shark extracts fail to repel any sharks, but several sharks had a "weak or strong attraction" to them. Tester reported a similar failure to repel sharks by a 1959 test at Enewetak of "an alleged shark repellent, supplied by a fisherman, which contained extract of decayed shark flesh as the principal component."[20] Research continued into the 2000s on using extracts from dead sharks or synthesizing such chemicals.[5]

Since the 1970s, there have been studies of how the Moses sole repels sharks, with Clark[6] and Gruber both studying it. Template:As of it has not found practical use, however, as the chemicals are perishable,[21] and the repellent had to be injected into the shark's mouth to be effective;[5] in nature the substance is secreted on the skin and is thus ingested by sharks when they bite the sole.

Since the 1980s,[22] there is evidence that surfactants such as sodium lauryl sulfate can act as a shark repellent at concentrations of the order of 100 parts per million. However, this does not meet the desired "cloud" deterrence level of 0.1 parts per million.[23][24]

There have been validated field tests and studies to confirm the effectiveness of semiochemicals as a shark repellent. From 2005-2010, an extensive study on the effectiveness of semiochemicals as a shark repellent was conducted by scientists from SharkDefense Technologies and Seton Hall University. The study's results were published in the scientific journal Ocean & Coastal Management in 2013. The study concluded that the existence of a putative chemical shark repellent has been confirmed.[25]

As of 2014, SharkDefense partnered with SharkTec LLC to manufacture the semiochemical in a canister as a shark repellent for consumers called Anti-Shark 100.[26]

According to a 2014 report by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, SharkDefense used the same semiochemicals found in SharkTec's product to reduce shark by-catch by 71% in a government grant initiative. The government agency NOAA released these findings in a report to Congress.[27]

In 2017, the US Navy announced that it was developing a synthetic analog of hagfish slime with potential application as a shark repellent.[28]

In 2018 independent tests were carried out on five Shark Repellent technologies using Great white sharks. Only Shark Shield’s Ocean Guardian Freedom+ Surf showed measurable results, with encounters reduced from 96% to 40%. Rpela (electrical repellent technology), SharkBanz bracelet & SharkBanz surf leash (magnetic shark repellent technology) and Chillax Wax (essential oils) showed no measurable effect on reducing shark attacks.[3]

In popular culture

The 1947 Robb White book Secret Sea mentions a copper acetate shark repellent developed by the U.S. Navy.[29]

In a scene in the 1966 film Batman, an exploding shark jumps from the water and grabs Batman's leg while he is hanging onto the ladder of a helicopter. Batman tries to punch the shark back to the ocean, but it does not affect the shark. He is handed a canister of Oceanic Bat-Spray, making the shark open its jaw and explode.

In a 2015 a MythBusters episode, the hosts Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman used an extract of dead sharks, and were able to drive away 10-20 Caribbean reef sharks and nurse sharks in only a few seconds on two occasions. The repellent used consisted of extracts from other species of shark bodies, and sharks did not return for over five minutes on both occasions.[30]

See also

References

Template:Reflist

  1. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  2. a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  3. a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  4. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  5. a b c Researchers tout shark repellent, 2004 Associated Press, "Fisherman and scientists have long noted sharks stay away if they smell a dead shark"
  6. a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  7. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  8. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  9. a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  10. a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  11. a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  12. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  13. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  14. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  15. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  16. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  17. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  18. a b Thomas B. Allen. Shadows in the Sea: The Sharks, Skates and Rays
  19. Template:Cite patent
  20. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  21. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  22. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  23. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  24. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  25. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  26. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  27. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  28. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  29. White, Robb, Secret Sea (New York: Scholastic Book Services, 1968 reprint edition), p. 182.
  30. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".