Fishes of the Western North Atlantic 69 



interest to seamen, to fishermen and to seaside visitors who frequent shark-infested regions. 



Most species of sharks are either too small, too sluggish, too weakly armed or nor- 

 mally live at too great a depth to be of any potential danger. This applies also to some of 

 the larger and better-armed species which feed on small rather than on large prey. On 

 the other hand, there are unquestionably a considerable number of species, proverbially 

 voracious, which are large, active and armed with very effective teeth, and which habit- 

 ually feed on large prey such as other sharks, large fishes and sea turtles; it is equally 

 true that many persons in various parts of the world have been attacked by sharks. Notable 

 among dangerous species are the White Shark {Carcharodon), the Tiger Shark (Galeo- 

 cerdo), certain members of the genus Carcharhinus, the Lemon Shark (Negaprion brev- 

 irostris) and the larger Hammerheads. All these bear evil reputations as potential man- 

 eaters and the charge seems to be sufficiently proved against them in one part of the world 

 or another (see discussions below under the respective species). Perhaps the Makos {I sums 

 oxyrinchus and /. glaucus), which feed chiefly on small fish, may deserve a similar repu- 

 tation, but we do not believe that the Blue Shark {Prionace glaucd) does, unless attracted 

 by blood to a wounded man in the water; under these conditions any shark more than five 

 or six feet long would be a menace. Among the foregoing list the White Shark {Carcharo- 

 don carcharias) is beyond question the most dangerous. Fortunately, however, even the 

 smaller sizes of this species appear not to be common anywhere, while large adults are very 

 seldom seen, especially close inshore. 



In estimating the risk, even from the more dangerous species, we should keep in 

 mind that man is not the habitual prey of any shark; hence the scent of man in the water 

 is not likely to prove especially attractive, since it is presumably by scent chiefly that sharks 

 discover and track down their food. On the other hand, sharks soon learn to gather where 

 dead animals or garbage are to be expected, as where refuse from a slaughter house drifts 

 out to sea. When in a feeding mood, some of the more voracious kinds, especially the 

 "Tiger," will gulp down wholly indigestible objects, such as boots, old clothes, a sack of 

 coal, tin cans, etc., as readily as a chunk of salt pork or a dead dog. Nor is there any reason 

 to suppose that the scent of man is repulsive to any shark. 



In view of the foregoing it is not astonishing that many shark fatalities are on record, 

 well attested by hospital reports or otherwise.^' Shark attacks are much more frequent in 

 warm waters than in cold, as might be expected. For example, from 1919 to 1933, 37 

 cases were reported for various parts of Australia on seemingly conclusive evidence, with 

 many more for earlier years." In fact, the shark menace is so real in New South Wales 



II. The many reports of fatalities by sharks which are not so attested may be left out of the account; some have 

 been based on rumor alone (even the individuals concerned may have been imaginary) ; others, involving the 

 overturning of small boats, etc., or the disappearance of swimmers without trace, may have resulted from quite 

 other causes; and in still others, an observed attack may have been by a Barracuda {Sphyraena) and not by a 

 shark. 



13. See Coppleson (Med. J. Aust., April 15, 1933 : 449) for a list of these and other such happenings for Australia, 

 with references for shark attacks in other parts of the world; see also, Whitley (Fish. Aust., /, 1940: 13, 259) 

 for further details, discussion and list of attacks in Australian waters, with photographs of wounds suffered 

 by victims. 



