Shark Shield Eaten by a GW?!?!

[seguyette]

I saw an article on an Australian website a few days ago regarding the Shark Shield. I've never used one (only heard good things about it), but was curious what people thought of this article: Great white 'ate anti-shark device' | The Australian


Great white 'ate anti-shark device'

Pia Akerman | March 01, 2008
AN electronic device designed to ward sharks away from surfers failed so spectacularly during a trial off South Africa that it was eaten by a great white.
An inquest heard yesterday the Shark Shield surf model was activated on a float carrying bait when the 3.6m female shark approached. Rather than being deterred by the device, the shark, under the gaze of the Natal Sharks Board, bit into it.
South Australian Deputy State Coroner Tony Schapel yesterday heard of the test failure during the inquest into the death of Jarrod Stehbens, who was taken by a great white shark while diving off Glenelg in South Australia in 2005.
The inquest has turned into a trial of Shark Shield devices, hearing concerns that the electronic fields generated to repel sharks may attract them.
Studying cuttlefish for the University of Adelaide at the time of his death, Stehbens had been provided with two Shark Shields on his dive boat by university staff - but he either didn't know they were there or chose not to use them.
University staff have told Mr Schapel they questioned the Shark Shields' efficacy and believed there might be long-term health risks from using them. As a result, the devices were not compulsory.
Rod Hartley, director of Sea Change Technology, which manufactures the Shark Shields, yesterday took the stand to defend his product.
"There is no doubt whatsoever that it does not attract sharks," he said.
He told Mr Schapel he believed a disgruntled surfer had started the rumour.
"Nobody wearing a Shark Shield has ever been attacked by a shark," he added.
Mr Hartley said the failed South African test on the surf unit - which has been held back from release into the marketplace - was due to a problem with the electrode's configuration. The device was now packaged with a large disclaimer warning it would only repel sharks when the surfer was still in the water waiting for a wave.
"The surf product only can be guaranteed to work when it's stationary, not when it's surfing in the wave or paddling," Mr Hartley said.
CSIRO shark expert Barry Bruce has told the inquest the shark that killed Stehbens was in "full predatory strike" mode and would have been nearly impossible to deter. His body was never recovered.
Mr Schapel will publish his findings at a later date."

[Marwan]

just what i needed to hear , thanks mate

[BennyB]

Maybe it thought it was a stingray?

[alexrom1207]

Well... on the bright side the device may have some beneficial use for sportfisherman who are going shark fishing.

[Lockedin]

Interesting article.

Originally Posted by seguyette

An inquest heard yesterday the Shark Shield surf model was activated on a float carrying bait when the 3.6m female shark approached. Rather than being deterred by the device, the shark, under the gaze of the Natal Sharks Board, bit into it.

The above seems to have loaded the deck a bit.
Usually when people are surfing, they avoid carrying bait, chum, raw meat, etc. Maybe a kayak with fishing gear would have been more appropriate for that particular test, or have an unbaited shark shield nearby, for comparison.

Originally Posted by seguyette

South Australian Deputy State Coroner Tony Schapel yesterday heard of the test failure during the inquest into the death of Jarrod Stehbens, who was taken by a great white shark while diving off Glenelg in South Australia in 2005.
The inquest has turned into a trial of Shark Shield devices, hearing concerns that the electronic fields generated to repel sharks may attract them.
Studying cuttlefish for the University of Adelaide at the time of his death, Stehbens had been provided with two Shark Shields on his dive boat by university staff - but he either didn't know they were there or chose not to use them.

Stehbens' death, while unfortunate, only shows that sharks will show interest in (and explore with all 300 teeth) divers and surfers who are not using the shark shield, just as they always have. Other than being a literary scare tactic, this anecdote doesn't strike me as belonging in this article, since the shark shield was not worn in this case. Nor should Stehban's reluctance to wear the shield be considered regarding the efficacy of the device. Stehbens was studying Cuttlefish. Wearing a device that potentially repels fish might have made his job difficult. The concern of this article is that sharks bite baited floats (potentially surfers), even when the shield is attached and activated.

Originally Posted by seguyette

University staff have told Mr Schapel they questioned the Shark Shields' efficacy and believed there might be long-term health risks from using them. As a result, the devices were not compulsory.
Rod Hartley, director of Sea Change Technology, which manufactures the Shark Shields, yesterday took the stand to defend his product.
"There is no doubt whatsoever that it does not attract sharks," he said.
He told Mr Schapel he believed a disgruntled surfer had started the rumour.
"Nobody wearing a Shark Shield has ever been attacked by a shark," he added.
Mr Hartley said the failed South African test on the surf unit - which has been held back from release into the marketplace - was due to a problem with the electrode's configuration. The device was now packaged with a large disclaimer warning it would only repel sharks when the surfer was still in the water waiting for a wave.
"The surf product only can be guaranteed to work when it's stationary, not when it's surfing in the wave or paddling," Mr Hartley said.

If I remember correctly (please correct me if I am wrong), one of the complaints from divers has to do with the electric field "zapping" buddies who get too close. That could cause some to be "disgruntled", especially in a crowded surf spot, or the swim step of a crowded dive boat.

Originally Posted by seguyette

CSIRO shark expert Barry Bruce has told the inquest the shark that killed Stehbens was in "full predatory strike" mode and would have been nearly impossible to deter. His body was never recovered.
Mr Schapel will publish his findings at a later date."

Again with the scare tactics. I like the "full predatory strike mode", sounds like the Terminator shark! And the "his body was never recovered" line reinforces that death is the inevitable end of those who tempt fate.

Sorry if I sound a bit cynical; it just struck me as unfair to include Stehben's death, since a Shark Shield was not even involved in the actual incident.

[island_sands]

Guys
here's the other side to the story - read attached.

[Lockedin]

Well done as always, Ms. Sands!

I'm still curious though, will the Shark Shield "zap" fellow divers / surfers?

BTW: That's my friend "Doc", getting burned (not by me) in the second picture!

[Marwan]

Originally Posted by Lockedin

I'm still curious though, will the Shark Shield "zap" fellow divers / surfers?

yes it will...but its not a very serious zap underwater with a wetsuit on, only if they touch it,,,i remember my buddy, was complaining about an electric feeling in his leg when we came out of my first dive with the shield,,,he was apparently touching the antenna and felt some light zapping through his wetsuit...of course if you forget it on as you exit the water and touch it, or if you touch it with your bare hands ooooouuuuucccchhhh!!!

[island_sands]

Originally Posted by Lockedin

Well done as always, Ms. Sands!

I'm still curious though, will the Shark Shield "zap" fellow divers / surfers?

BTW: That's my friend "Doc", getting burned (not by me) in the second picture!

hey that's cool!!! Great pictures. Reminds of this scene

YouTube - Surfer Attacked by Two Sharks

or this one

YouTube - Shark or Dolphin

YouTube - Shark Takes Bite Out Of Surfer's...

[Haydn]

To get a zap you really have to touch the cable. If you move your bare hand slowly to within 6 inches of the cable, you will begin to feel the water tingle and it gets dificult to decide how much closer you will go to actually grabbing the cable. Most people I know, never get to touch the cable before they pull their hand away. It is easy to grab the cable quickly and you will simply let it go straight away and laugh. Taking your time increases the tension, its a good game. Sharks of course, are far too sensitive and cant get within a 6 feet of it. Unless of course they are in full predatory attack mode which might simulate a hand just being brave enough to grab the cable. Most sharks are too inquisitive and will circle around you until they get too close for their comfort. Or do as I did and wait for one to come in range and then turn the unit on. This shark (full sized oceanic white tip) shoved off really quickly from about 30 feet.

[Boomstick]

Originally Posted by Haydn

To get a zap you really have to touch the cable. If you move your bare hand slowly to within 6 inches of the cable, you will begin to feel the water tingle and it gets dificult to decide how much closer you will go to actually grabbing the cable. Most people I know, never get to touch the cable before they pull their hand away. It is easy to grab the cable quickly and you will simply let it go straight away and laugh. Taking your time increases the tension, its a good game. Sharks of course, are far too sensitive and cant get within a 6 feet of it. Unless of course they are in full predatory attack mode which might simulate a hand just being brave enough to grab the cable. Most sharks are too inquisitive and will circle around you until they get too close for their comfort. Or do as I did and wait for one to come in range and then turn the unit on. This shark (full sized oceanic white tip) shoved off really quickly from about 30 feet.

You and your flippin shark shield

[Haydn]

Hey, at least it worked. Dont suppose you've got any pics. Ive lost all mine. Just like the ad on the telly.