mario_speedwagon
Guest
Maybe he was hungry.....
Shark attack in San Diego this morning
- Thread starter crispix
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
As I mentioned during the KNX interview, it is really difficult to speculate on this incident from across the Channel and with the often contradictory reports that were coming out on the boards and in the media.
When I heard the attack occurred over a shallow (20-30 ft) sandy bottom, I was a bit surprised. However, we've had observed GWS attacks on sea lions over sandy bottoms here off Catalina (primarily near the sea lion hauling area on the East End). Generally they've been much deeper though. The only encounter I've had underwater was the one that swam leisurely by me and the artist Wyland as we were filming giant sea bass near the East End Quarry. That was over a sandy bottom, but in deeper water (70-130 ft).
The descriptions I heard of the attack and the wounds on both legs suggested to me that it was a typical GWS attack... coming up from below and behind the victim. This is why the shallowness of the water surprised me, although these sharks are capable of rapid acceleration. The fact that both legs were involved with the result being very serious wounds almost causing the lower legs to be severed suggested a shark in the 12-16 ft range to have a maw large enough to effect this injury. Of course it could have been even larger as suggested by a much better expert than I am, Dr. Richard Rosenblatt of Scripps. I have been underwater with GWS up to 18 feet... they looked like they could swallow me whole (and that's quite a feat!).
I would assume that the water along that stretch of coast is fairly turbid due to its exposure and the shallow, sandy bottom. Diminished visibility due to resuspended sediments would make it much easier for the GWS to mistake the swimmer for something more palatable.
As for anything provoking the attack, hunger is the most likely explanation. The fact that the GWS apparently just bit once and may have backed off, suggests it may have been a test bite to see if the victim was anything good to eat. The GWS is able to swallow smaller prey like fish whole, but the attacks in sea lions I've seen or heard of second hand suggest they hit the sea lion, possibly taking a big chunk out of the abdomen (or wherever they hit it), then back off to wait for the animal to bleed to death. We have seen sea lions dead, or still alive in the shallows or on the beach with such wounds.
When I first came to Catalina in 1969 I was quite fearful of GWS (all previous diving was in freshwater). I gradually realized they weren't the problem most media made them out to be. However, I stopped diving for about three years after "Jaws" came out. The fact that after the film I was introduced to a guy who had a HUGE scar on his upper torso from an attack off Pt. Conception certainly accentuated the fear. I didn't return to diving until "Jaws II" came out.
When I heard the attack occurred over a shallow (20-30 ft) sandy bottom, I was a bit surprised. However, we've had observed GWS attacks on sea lions over sandy bottoms here off Catalina (primarily near the sea lion hauling area on the East End). Generally they've been much deeper though. The only encounter I've had underwater was the one that swam leisurely by me and the artist Wyland as we were filming giant sea bass near the East End Quarry. That was over a sandy bottom, but in deeper water (70-130 ft).
The descriptions I heard of the attack and the wounds on both legs suggested to me that it was a typical GWS attack... coming up from below and behind the victim. This is why the shallowness of the water surprised me, although these sharks are capable of rapid acceleration. The fact that both legs were involved with the result being very serious wounds almost causing the lower legs to be severed suggested a shark in the 12-16 ft range to have a maw large enough to effect this injury. Of course it could have been even larger as suggested by a much better expert than I am, Dr. Richard Rosenblatt of Scripps. I have been underwater with GWS up to 18 feet... they looked like they could swallow me whole (and that's quite a feat!).
I would assume that the water along that stretch of coast is fairly turbid due to its exposure and the shallow, sandy bottom. Diminished visibility due to resuspended sediments would make it much easier for the GWS to mistake the swimmer for something more palatable.
As for anything provoking the attack, hunger is the most likely explanation. The fact that the GWS apparently just bit once and may have backed off, suggests it may have been a test bite to see if the victim was anything good to eat. The GWS is able to swallow smaller prey like fish whole, but the attacks in sea lions I've seen or heard of second hand suggest they hit the sea lion, possibly taking a big chunk out of the abdomen (or wherever they hit it), then back off to wait for the animal to bleed to death. We have seen sea lions dead, or still alive in the shallows or on the beach with such wounds.
When I first came to Catalina in 1969 I was quite fearful of GWS (all previous diving was in freshwater). I gradually realized they weren't the problem most media made them out to be. However, I stopped diving for about three years after "Jaws" came out. The fact that after the film I was introduced to a guy who had a HUGE scar on his upper torso from an attack off Pt. Conception certainly accentuated the fear. I didn't return to diving until "Jaws II" came out.
dpbishop
Contributor
Dr. Bill,
There have been GWS sightings in local waters as long as I have lived here, but they are sporadic enough to suggest that the shark was just traveling through. Do they have a know migratory pattern? What is the probability of GWSs altering a behavior pattern due to environmental changes? (eg. increreased pinneped population)
There have been GWS sightings in local waters as long as I have lived here, but they are sporadic enough to suggest that the shark was just traveling through. Do they have a know migratory pattern? What is the probability of GWSs altering a behavior pattern due to environmental changes? (eg. increreased pinneped population)
Papa_Bear
Contributor
Just to give this a little perspective it is the first shark death since 1959 in southern Cal waters! The man had lived and swam in the same waters since the 70's along with his friends that have been training for six years in the same spot! The drive to the beach was still more dangerous! We as humans just hate being eaten it's just so primordial and all! As a diver I would rather be underwater with these guys than looking like bait! I have been with many big Sharks and have never felt fear only respect for these wild animals! She may have been down here in swallow water to pup this time of year? Just trying to feed here needs and doing what sharks do
Certainly not something I'd lose sleep over these days. As Papa_bear said, the drive to the beach was more dangerous than going swimming... especially if you're a passenger in my car!
Papa_Bear, I assume the 1959 death was the one off La Jolla. I've heard varying opinions on that one. I remember it was one of the pieces of information that scared me when I first moved here in 1969. However, I believe there has been at least one other death in SoCal in between these two... sometime in the 1990's.
Interesting. I just checked the ISAF web page after writing the above. One page lists the last fatal shark attack in San Diego county as 1959, but on another page they show a fatal attack in 1994 that is not reflected on the first page. Either that or my neurons aren't firing correctly this afternoon.
Interesting. I just checked the ISAF web page after writing the above. One page lists the last fatal shark attack in San Diego county as 1959, but on another page they show a fatal attack in 1994 that is not reflected on the first page. Either that or my neurons aren't firing correctly this afternoon.
Casarez
Contributor
Yes, Casarez, there was some dispute on that. I remember now. Interesting that the ISAF includes it on one page and not another.
Likewise with the 1959 attack. There were questions as to whether it was a disappearing act or a real attack. There were reports that the attacked diver, whose body was never recovered, had been seen alive in other countries. I think the most current thinking is that it was indeed a fatal shark attack rather than a fake. So Papa_bear is correct in stating no confirmed fatal attacks in San Diego County since 1959. That is reassuring news for me when I do those long surface swims down there (tee hee).
I haven't seen mention of the fatal attack on a surfer that just occurred in Mexican waters (yesterday I believe).
Likewise with the 1959 attack. There were questions as to whether it was a disappearing act or a real attack. There were reports that the attacked diver, whose body was never recovered, had been seen alive in other countries. I think the most current thinking is that it was indeed a fatal shark attack rather than a fake. So Papa_bear is correct in stating no confirmed fatal attacks in San Diego County since 1959. That is reassuring news for me when I do those long surface swims down there (tee hee).
I haven't seen mention of the fatal attack on a surfer that just occurred in Mexican waters (yesterday I believe).
dpbishop
Contributor
So, what's the best way to convey the message "I am not a seal" to a GWS? Yellow wetsuits?
Similar threads
