Failure of a promising gadget for protecting surfers calls a theory into question

Back to the Drawing Board:  trevorjohnston.com
In 2002, an Australian company called Shark Shield released a brick-size transponder meant to keep away the worst fear of every diver and surfer: sharks. The thinking behind Shark Shield’s eponymous gadget is simple enough. Sharks have electroreceptors in their snouts, called ampullae of Lorenzini, that detect electric fields for navigation and predation. By emitting an irritating electric field, the idea goes, the Shark Shield would trigger a nasty sensation in the ampullae, forcing even the hungriest hammerhead to turn on its fin.

But this March, during an investigation of a 2005 shark attack in Australia, the shield’s effectiveness came into question after reports surfaced that a great white shark ate a chunk of bait hanging from a float carrying a prototype for surfboards. Could the electric field actually attract sharks? Rod Hartley, a co-founder of Shark Shield, says no and argues that the failed gadget was just a test unit with an undersize antenna. “Our final design works 100 times out of 100,” he insists.

Experts aren’t entirely convinced. Studies have shown that sharks will often turn away when they detect certain types of electric fields, says Christopher Lowe, a marine biologist at California State University at Long Beach. “But we also know that a highly motivated shark—one that’s rushing for prey, for example—can penetrate it.” And it’s important to note Shark Shield’s disclaimer: It works when the board is stationary but could be ineffective if the surfer is paddling or riding a wave.
It’s possible that the electric field only momentarily startles sharks, and scientists don’t think one device will repel (or attract) all species of sharks. “Animal behavior isn’t consistent in different conditions,” says Peter Klimley, an animal behaviorist at the University of California at Davis. “Anyone who says something works [with animals] 100 percent of the time is lying.”

Want to learn more about the environment, solar energy, sustainability, and more? Subscribe to Popular Science today, for less than $1 per issue!

1 Comment

This thing has been around since 2002?! And they haven't been able to test it and publish those results. You would think especially considering all the recent attacks and publicity that they'd want to get this thing out there and publicize it. If as the co-founder says, the final tests are 100 for 100, then he should be letting everyone know that.



June 2013: American Energy Independence

Five amazing, clean technologies that will set us free, in this month's energy-focused issue. Also: how to build a better bomb detector, the robotic toys that are raising your children, a human catapult, the world's smallest arcade, and much more.


Online Content Director: Suzanne LaBarre | Email
Senior Editor: Paul Adams | Email
Associate Editor: Dan Nosowitz | Email
Assistant Editor: Colin Lecher | Email
Assistant Editor: Rose Pastore | Email

Contributing Writers:
Rebecca Boyle | Email
Kelsey D. Atherton | Email
Francie Diep | Email
Shaunacy Ferro | Email

circ-top-header.gif
circ-cover.gif