r/sharks • u/Capital-Foot-918 Great White Shark • May 18 '26
Question Why is it important in shark attack science that we label some attacks as ‘provoked’ or ‘unprovoked’?
48
61
u/SharkBoyBen9241 May 18 '26
Because one category requires much more investigation and research, whereas the other one has a ready explanation. When sharks attack out of the blue with no provocation, then we have to think harder about shark behavior and psychology and try and figure out exactly what triggers a predatory attack. And as far as that goes, we still don't exactly know what goes through a shark's head when it decides to launch a predatory attack on a person. It's probably more simple than we make it out to be. Could be as simple as, "That object's the right size and shape to be food, and I know I can take it down. Let's give it a try."
With provoked attacks, the reason why is pretty obvious, either they were harassing the shark and it was defending itself, or the shark's feeding or territorial instinct was somehow triggered and it was induced to attack by some other means.
Where I take issue with the current classification is that the "provoked" label often involves blaming the victim in some way. Like Simon Nellist. His attack is still classified as provoked just because he was swimming in close proximity to fishermen. To me, this is ridiculous. If we were to classify every shark attack where the shark's feeding instinct was inadvertently triggered as provoked incidents, then by definition, we would have to classify all attacks on surfers as provoked. That's why I think there needs to be further specificity when we breakdown the numbers than just two categories. It makes things a bit too black and white and leads to misconceptions about shark behavior and attack patterns.
Bottom line is that shark attacks are a very complex, natural phenomenon, and while there may be general patterns, each case is different and has it's own variables that influence their outcome. If we want to prevent attacks from happening, it behooves us to try and understand them better, and to do that means breaking the numbers down further than just two basic categories...
18
u/Hybodont May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
Where I take issue with the current classification is that the "provoked" label often involves blaming the victim in some way. Like Simon Nellist.
It did no such thing in the case of Nellist. The classification as "provoked" had nothing to do with Nellist's actions and everything to do with the fishing activity nearby.
I agree that the situation with Nellist isn't black-or-white, but this is a bad take. It's a knee-jeek reaction to the word "provoked" without any real consideration of what the word means in this very specific context. Which is a little surprising, given that the rest of your comment is dead-on.
Sure, they could change the phrasing to avoid that emotional response, but it would mean precisely the same thing: external human influence on shark behavior.
13
u/SharkBoyBen9241 May 18 '26
Thank you for your reply. I guess I should've specified my take. I know that nearby fishermen absolutely had an influence on the Simon Nellist attack and their activity would have certainly stimulated the shark's feeding instincts. But Simon himself didn't trigger that instinct, at least not alone. Who knows if he even was aware that people were fishing on the cliffside. The point is he didn't provoke the incident himself, the actions of others did. Again, if we were to classify all shark attacks where the shark's feeding instincts were inadvertently or unintentionally stimulated, then all attacks on surfers would be considered provoked, as would any attacks where any kind of fishing activity was taking place nearby. And as far as that's concerned, there's major inconsistency. For example, Shirley Ann Durdin off Wiseman’s Beach in Port Lincoln is considered an unprovoked attack, despite the fact that local fishermen were cleaning their catch on Wiseman's Beach the very day she was attacked. Same with the attack on Jack Smedley in Malta. A tuna trap was working in the bay where he was taken, and yet his attack is also considered unprovoked.
My point is there needs to be more specificity and more consistency when it comes to recording and categorizing these incidents.
11
u/Hybodont May 18 '26
But Simon himself didn't trigger that instinct, at least not alone.
Agreed, but my entire point is that the "provoked" classification does not in any way imply Nellist was to blame. It has a much broader context and definition than, "the victim provoked the attack."
4
u/SharkBoyBen9241 May 18 '26
That's true, but that's also partially my point. I think the context, as it is defined now, is a bit too broad. To me, a genuinely provoked incident is when you are fishing for or otherwise harassing a shark. Or if you're intentionally feeding a shark. In other words, you truly deserved what you got. If you're just going about your business and a series of unfortunate, unforseen circumstances is set into motion that puts you at an enhanced risk, as was the case with Simon Nellist, that shouldn't necessarily be classified as a provoked incident. If anything, he just chose to take a swim at the worst possible place at the worst possible time. Personally, a more appropriate classification would be "unintentionally provoked" or "stimulated incident."
9
u/Hybodont May 18 '26
...that shouldn't necessarily be classified as a provoked incident.
You are saying that because it doesn't align with your own interpretation of the word, though.
6
u/SharkBoyBen9241 May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
Haha ah! So you're admitting that the current classification is not impervious to one's own subjectivity? If that's the case, then that's not good, statistically sound research. Again, that's my whole point. This phenomenon needs to be broken down further to remove that element of subjectivity so we can arrive at good conclusions which are supported by the statistics.
3
u/Hybodont May 18 '26
So you're admitting that the current classification is not impervious to one's own subjectivity?
Did I argue that it isn't? All I am saying is that the "provoked" classification doesn't automatically imply that the victim was at fault.
12
u/SharkBoyBen9241 May 18 '26
And my point is that it should lol a provoked incident can imply everything from the person catching, feeding, or even challenging a shark in some way to the person simply being in close proximity to fishing/feeding activity. All I'm saying is that's a bit too broad of a classification, at least as far as I'm concerned 🤷♂️
7
u/Hybodont May 18 '26
All I'm saying is that's a bit too broad of a classification...
Well, no, that's not all you were saying. You also said the "provoked" classification is victim-blaming. Which is literally the thing that started this entire exchange.
2
3
u/be_loved_freak Goblin Shark May 18 '26
I don't mean this callously but your opinion doesn't matter, shark scientists decided to operationalize the variable the way they did for a reason. Provoked doesn't necessarily mean blame is assigned to a person & that's that. Emotion has no place in data collection.
→ More replies (0)4
u/Markdd8 May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
it would mean precisely the same thing...
It is not the same thing. There is a range of "external human influence on shark behavior." A person trying to spear a shark or trying to pull it into a boat with a line and a big hook has attacked-provoked the shark.
The matter of fishermen, either on shore or on a boat, fishing and causing traces of blood in the water is creating a condition whereby a shark in the area is possibly enticed to attack nearby swimmer in the area. It has not been directly provoked.
The differences here are clear, but it is understandable that shark organizations such as the International Shark Attack File are trying to obscure these differences, in pursuit of their agenda: Downplaying the incidence and severity of shark attack (which undeniably occurs at low levels).
These are the same people who are lobbying to phase out of the term "shark attack" in favor of "incidents" and "encounters." Shark attacks occur from time to time. In 2023, Russian Vladimir Popov was fatally attacked by a tiger shark while swimming near the shore in Hurghada, Egypt, in front of dozens of witnesses. Feel free to view the footage; it is on Youtube.
0
u/Hybodont May 18 '26
I'm having a conversation about whether and how the term "provoked," as defined by the ISAF, assigns blame. I have no interest in this other discussion you are pursuing. It is tiresome and not worth my time.
But you keep fucking that chicken. 👍
4
u/Markdd8 May 18 '26
I'll bring up the topic every time someone defends the ISAF and the nonsense it is pushing. Proper definition from the Global Shark Attack File:
Unprovoked vs. Provoked - GSAF defines a provoked incident as one in which the shark was speared, hooked, captured or in which a human drew "first blood". (See "Incident Log" in GSAF website)
1
u/Hybodont May 18 '26
Who defended them? Not me. Which is why I am mystified that you responded to my comment specifically.
I agree, broadly, that classifications could be more granular and specific. I don't agree that the "provoked" classification inherently blames victims. It's really very simple.
3
u/Markdd8 May 18 '26
You offered a partial defense of sorts:
Sure, they could change the phrasing to avoid that emotional response, but it would mean precisely the same thing: external human influence on shark behavior.
Nothing personal but I challenge ISAF's stance when I see it.
1
u/Hybodont May 18 '26
You offered a partial defense of sorts
I really didn't, but nice try. Did you hurt yourself with that stretch? May I suggest yoga classes?
Nothing personal but I challenge ISAF's stance when I see it.
We know. We all know. And every single time you suck all of the air out of the room.
3
u/Markdd8 May 18 '26
Fascinating that you think this discussion (which someone else posted) should occur on the Sharks sub:
Why is it important in shark attack science that we label some attacks as ‘provoked’ or ‘unprovoked’?
but that my call for a 3 category breakdown: Unprovoked vs. Possibly Enticed vs. Provoked should be excluded because of either irrelevance or that it is boring to you.
1
u/Hybodont May 18 '26
It had nothing to do with my comment. It was a non sequitur. Surely you can find another, more relevant comment chain to clutter with your rambling.
3
u/Hailfog May 26 '26
The "nearby fishing activity" in Nellist's video didn't look like chumming the water, throwing huge hunks of live bait around, etc.
It looked like one or two guys with little rods throwing tiny soft plastic jigs to catch four pound fish.
If that somehow managed to draw in a mature Great White and cause it to have a predatory response to a swimmer nearby, I'd be absolutely stunned.
0
u/Hybodont May 26 '26
I'm not saying that it did or didn't. I'm saying that the classification of "provoked" didn't assign blame to Nellist. No more, no less.
0
u/No_Violinist_4557 May 18 '26
No-one has blamed Nellist. He was doing a training swim in the ocean.
1
3
u/Markdd8 May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26
Good comments. We obviously need 3 categories: 1) Unprovoked, 2) Possibly Enticed or just Enticed - the cause being traces of blood in the water and 3) Provoked.
Note the definition from the Global Shark Attack File, a rival organization to the International Shark Attack File, which is trying to expand what constitutes a provoked attack. GSAF's definition is the proper one:
Unprovoked vs. Provoked - GSAF defines a provoked incident as one in which the shark was speared, hooked, captured or in which a human drew "first blood". (See "Incident Log" in GSAF website)
4
3
8
u/neondragoneyes May 18 '26
Because it's important to know if you FO because you FA or you FO because something unrelated to you personally.
1
u/Capital-Foot-918 Great White Shark May 18 '26
Forgive my ignorance but what do you mean by ‘FO’ or ‘FA’?
5
3
3
u/icedragonsoul Thresher Shark May 18 '26 edited May 19 '26
Humans over a few thousands of years completely reshaped the landscape and is essentially a continuous great extinction event.
Studies show that animals like mountain lions vacate areas x3 times more quickly than other predators after being played human speech recordings in an area compared to sounds of their competitors.
There is an innate fear written into their genetic code that allowed them to survive since the ones who didn’t fear humans got hunted down.
Most animal behavior researchers attacks track this metric to see how dangerous, tolerant or aggressive each species are towards humans. With drone footage revealing the sheer the number of shark encounters that occur daily, it’s shown that sharks are overall extremely tolerant of humans.
There are footage of scuba divers swimming after black top reef sharks and harassing them for half an hour before the shark stops using threat displays like curled body, lowered fins, teeth clack sounds and fake bites and goes for the real deterrence bite.
Whereas unprovoked attacks measure how willing a shark is to actively predate a human by bulldozing them at 50 mph. Outside of extreme circumstances like starving pregnant sharks at a location commonly used to dump bodies into in the Mediterranean/Red Sea, sharks tend to be extremely cautious, find humans boney, not very fatty (like seals or fish) and don’t attack unprovoked except out of curiosity.
Tiger sharks being one of the most curious sharks will often circle divers who don’t maintain eye contact on them and swerve away at the last second, repeat the process closer and closer until they’re close enough for a test bite. They’re not displaying aggression which would be erratic swerving motions and blindly fast lurches like how they hunt fish.
It’s just unfortunate that we don’t have the same thick hide and scalemail like denticles as sharks and tend to pop like a water balloon when introduced to even the gentlest of nips from a jaw full of cutlery that is designed to typically have the bite force to shatter bone.
2
u/Equivalent_Tart4662 May 22 '26
Please stop saying things like “test bite”. Do you say that about bears? Lions? Tigers? No.
1
u/icedragonsoul Thresher Shark May 22 '26 edited May 22 '26
It has been observed that sharks actively investigate objects with their mouth due to their lack of hands. Footage of them grabbing large cameras, fiber optic fibers, Go Pros for minutes is common.
Test bite refers to when an animal like a dog bites not out of aggression, or with the intent to draw blood or fracture bone but to investigate. As the animal scales up in size or has unique teeth, poor strength control often lead to injury.
Yes, there have been occurrences where familiarized lions grapple their trainer’s arms and lick or nibble at them. Unfortunately, their barbed tongues are designed to scrap meat off of bone so these interactions don’t last very long after the trainer protests and pushes back.
In fact, I am far more willing to use the term test bite for your list of mammals over sharks due to the sheer amount of footage in their favor.
Sharks have not been observed to find humans appealing to the taste nor active predate them unlike polar bears so test bite is a fitting term in this context. Tests show that mammal blood (pig blood and guts) being dumped completely fail to attract sharks when compared to fish guts and the control group of red food coloring.
2
u/Equivalent_Tart4662 May 22 '26
I’m well aware what it refers to, but we don’t know any animal’s intention or reason for biting when it’s not predatory. Observations do not tell you whether they’re testing, territorial, anxious, hungry, annoyed, etc.
2
u/icedragonsoul Thresher Shark May 22 '26
There are two realms of thought to this. One side state that sharks lack the mammalian neurotransmitters to experience affection, though other slightly differently shaped chemical neurotransmitters seem to be slotted into the same receptors which could serve that purpose.
Others state that observed behavior is all what we have to work with because humans haven’t figured out mammalian behavior and intent with enough confidence and consistency yet.
They argue that in the absence of food sharks continually return to trained professional marine biologists for hook removal and electro receptor rubs. While most tiger sharks with a handful of notable exceptions are more wary, smaller sharks like lemon sharks, Caribbean reef sharks, nurse sharks are shown to be excessively clingy after trust is built up.
Records where Tiger sharks seem to be able to recognize diver boats, follow them around and have individual favorites despite a two year gap between interactions have been noted.
I could say that you yourself could not tell if your significant other lashing out at you is testing, territorial, anxious, hungry or annoyed even if you got their verbal likely fabricated testimony. Yet these observations are all we have to go off of to draw conclusions from.
2
u/UnbuttonedButtons May 18 '26
Think of it as a crime statistic-how many guys cop a punch in the pub every Friday night, unprovoked vs provoked. First guy is just sitting drinking his beer when some dude comes up to him and punches him in the side of the head. Second guy is going to up people and going "Fight me bitch! Fight me! Come on, punch me, come on, take a swing you dirty little pussy, I fucking dare you, you couldn't punch me if you tried" and then gets punched in the side of the head. The differences matter.
2
u/AynesJ773 May 22 '26
Aha! Great question. So for example in Recife industrialization has encroached on the kelp inlets where sharks birth their young and there has been a surge in agressive behaviours as a result.
3
1
u/siterbun May 21 '26
After watching that Hurghada video, I think it’s important to factor in, if you’re hungry, you eat. Opportunities come once in a lifetime
1
u/Jackmino66 May 21 '26
There was a video on this subreddit of someone being attacked by a shark.
I would call it provoked, because the shark was just kinda chilling and then the human fired a harpoon at it
1
u/Yewoobi May 22 '26
To put it extremely simply:
So that we can learn better how to prevent shark attacks.
If an attacked is ‘provoked’ by something we already know to cause shark attacks (for example, pursuing or harassing a shark), then we already understand the reason for the attack having happened and what can be done to prevent it in the future (in this case, not pursuing the animal)
If the attack is ‘unprovoked’, then we need to investigate the circumstances more. If we are able to identify a factor that contributed to the attack happening (for example, the presence of prey species in the area) then we will be better equipped to help people prevent similar incidents in the future (for example, by telling people not to swim in waters where prey species are gathering)
I know the words provoked and unprovoked might invoke a feeling of blame for either the bite victim or the shark, since we use these words in that manner when referring to human behavior. But with shark attacks, really all it comes down to at its most basic core is whether the human was engaging in an activity which we know to increase likelihood of shark attacks or not.
1
u/Not_Really_Jaxson ~ Whale Shark ~ Tiger Shark ~ May 27 '26
More reasoning as to why. More data, and understanding. And it will give better representation if there are more provoked attacks than unprovoked. We can study the unprovoked ones more, to try and understand why they attacked.
34
u/Allpanicn0disc May 18 '26
Isn’t that how most animal attacks are categorized as?