yeah im a terrible person but i would have loved there to be hd up close footage of these attacks especially if it was a great white in a river. or better yet to have witnessed it in person.
Racing is an oddball pursuit, with discarded priorities. The other keel components should have kept the boat upright and afloat. ........ Oops, there are no other components. Bolt on keels are a godsend, but they come with responsibilities, just like you maintain a plane or bus. I would have not been afraid to own a high strung boat like this, except I would have demoted it's design after the keel got beaten up. Clip the mast down. Attach a lighter keel. Build a better mounting base. These all would have worked. Money makes people blind and insulated. I see a bolt on keel as an advantage, but not in it's most extreme forms.
One thing always bothered me...the shark in the Matawan Creek never really ate it's victims. They were found with a limb missing but the shark stopped the attack it seems, once the person died. They found dead folks mostly intact, so why did it keep attacking people if it wasn't hungry enough to eat what it'd already killed?
It wasn't JUST a citizen who saw the shark swim up the river under the bridge...it was a captain that was at sea often and knew what sharks looked like. Still, the townsfolk acted like he was crazy. The Matawan and the Manasquan rivers have varying levels of salinity for a large part of the time, but it is not nearly as salty as the open ocean, obviously. At high tide the Matawan river could support a great white for a limited time. It is also known now, that often bull sharks will swim up a river and pup there, then exit to the ocean. This gives the baby sharks some safety from large predators until they have some size to them and can swim to the ocean and protect themselves better. Sort of a bull shark maternity ward. That is now common knowledge in the shark world. Bull sharks are the only known shark that can live extended periods in brackish and even freshwater areas.
A good point was made that whites (and tigers) do not like brackish water. These two species have excellent vision & use it when hunting. Bulls like brackish water to hide their attacks. That's why they favor the surf. An 8 ft white is a juvenile. Juveniles are notorious for exploratory bites (they don't have hands to check you out). Once the shark bit, it realized you weren't prey & went away. Adult whites do this too but have been known to come back for more bites. Eight foot long bulls are adults. They are known for their "bullish" behavior & usually make mulitple attacks on the same victim. The 8 ft white that was caught was the right size from witness testimony & had 14 pounds of human remains in it's stomach including what they believed to be a child's arm. Experts strongly agree that it was not a tiger. So, white or bull?
I wanted to commend you for a very well researched documentary, but, you really gotta record your audio outside of the closet. I definitely want to see more of your vids. Very well done.
13:40 Wrong. Yes, great whites tend to be the most infamous, due mostly to their size and frequent run-ins with humans after surfing became popular. But numerically, it has been bull sharks which are mosr responsible for human fatalities, not least _because_ of their ability to survive in freshwater environments. Indeed, most attacks from bull sharks actually tend to occur in murky rivers, often with high human traffic (the Zambezi, the Amazon, the Ganges, etc.).
Bull Shark? Bullshit. They found a young Great White with human remains in its stomach, in the Raritan Bay. Zero Bull Sharks were found. It's not hard to figure out. The Great White entered the creek on a rising tide, when the salinity was high enough, found some prey, then left as the tide receded, and the water became unsuitable. It's certainly possible some of the attacks that summer in the general region were related to more than one shark, but the attacks in Matawan Creek came from one young Great White, which was later caught. If Bull Sharks were involved, there would have been more attacks there. And a Bull Shark wouldn't have turned back after finding food, since the lowering salinity wouldn't be an issue. Not that you can go very far up Matawan Creek, which is not a freshwater stream, but an 'arm of the sea.' Yes, we'll alway speculate, but the mystery was solved long ago. It was a freak incident, caused by a young Great White Shark, at a point in the species' life cycle when they explore possible food sources. Witnesses in the creek said the shark was pale underneath, as a Bull Shark wouldn't be. Why talk about Tiger Sharks when they are also averse to brackish water, and far less common in that area? They found the killer. Great White. Case closed, as far as Matawan Creek is concerned. As to the attacks along the Jersey Shore, that case remains open, and always will be, since we have no physical evidence. We do for Matawan Creek.
Dr Frederick Lucas, an expert in bones and who examined the human remains found inside the juvenile great white said they were not from any of the victims, didn't tally up to the wounds on the victims, and were likely scavenged from a dead sink shipping casualty. WW1 was at its mid point and ship sinkings were frequent.
I'm sorry, people back then saw sharks as stupid murdermachines, today we know better! Nothing like that has ever happend again, anywhere in the world! Not in over a hundred years! And the last twenty years, everybody has cameras on them! Hey, maybe it was the shark equivalent of Jason Vorhees - I bet, it had two legs as well! "Yeah, it was a shark which killed those kids! Like that one which attacked that one guy on that beach a week ago! Vicious bugger, a great white! It swam right up that river and ate them, yeah!" Sounds very possible, right? You know humans, aren't you?!
I don't believe that there was only one culprit shark during the event of 12 days of terror.On the creek, it was probably a bull shark. In my opinion, killing those sharks will not stop shark attacks. It can also affect the eco system of our ocean. Some species of orcas will be affected too. I think, beach goers should be more careful if they really love to swim into the sea.
So a few things that are a matter of getting the record straight. The creek is not 11 miles long from the bay. The Wycoff Dock where the attacks took place was less than 3 miles. Stanley (Watson) Fisher knew Lester and responded believing Lester may been having a seizure. Stanley and also Al Smith jumped into the water after they probed the water for 40 minutes before jumping in to recover Lester’s body. When Stanley was attacked he had Lester’s body in his arms and was pulled back under the water. He was then polled by the rest of the men into the boat, where they placed a poorly made tourniquet to stop the bleeding from his femoral artery, which had been severed. When Dr. Reynolds’s responded from his home on Main and Church Street, he determined Stanley needed to be sent in the train (5:06pm) to the hospital. He never made it there alive. The story goes on from there and I would welcome you to come on a Matawan Historical Society tour to learn the rest of the true story.
I find this video very interesting. I have a huge fear of water, but I find myself fascinated by things in or on the Ocean. The 1916 attacks are no exception. Especially the debate on who, what, when, where, why, etc. I think the strongest candidate for the Creek attacks is a Bull Shark for sure. The juvenile Great White is difficult to prove or disprove. Especially since we are still learning about sharks species 100yrs later. Great video by the way.
Is it true that some people believe a conspiracy that one or two of the attacks were actually mob related taking advantage of the situation? I read that and I want to know if this is true. Also, I've noticed looking at statistics of fatal shark attacks in the U.S., they usually happen back to back around the same time, usually months apart. Does anyone know why this is?
I have followed the shark attacks of this time period for decades in papers,books,interviews online. Your theory of the shark captured not being the one who killed the first few victims an lived to kill a decade later is fascinating to me. It's always been assumed it was caught,but you make some valid points. And yes,there may have been more than one that attacked people in 1916-17...Thank's for this great piece of work 👍
He added an attack a decade later. It's highly UNlikely that any shark involved in killing humans was coming back for more a decade later as if they're somehow connected. If he wanted more than sensationalized material driving clicks, that should have been clearer. Besides, just taking the head and limbs sounds way more tiger shark like, although it does happen with other species. The only evidence needed to settle the science of which species for sure exists in the only place they haven't looked--graves! They know where Stillwell is buried, but getting exhumation approval is highly unlikely.
judging by all the attacks from the 1916 till 1926, the killer could be either a juvenile great white shark or an adult bull shark. This can be analyzed from the victims. most of the victims suffered heavy loss of flesh and tissue within few minutes. Only Great white sharks and adult bull sharks have straight large sharp teeth which can tear flesh like that within few mins.
However, their teeth are not the exact same and are used differently, which are the ways we identified shark bites as being from this or that type long before DNA. I fear bulls more than whites and could not be paid to touch a toe in the water off Volusia or Brevard counties in Florida. Why?!? That's where juvenile bulls coming out of the Indian River pupping ground go swimming by as they start putting into practice their hunting skills!!! Yet I think the tissue damage described in the Matawan Creek attacks don't sound bullish. It sounds like a juvenile white.
I was happy to have stumbled upon this video as I'm very aware of the 1916/17 attacks but hadn't heard of the 1926 one. An addendum here is that there was a fourth and final separate instance that occurred 34 years after the 1926 incident on August 21st 1960 in the waters off of Sea Girt with the victim being John Brodeur, who survived the attack. The experts of the era believed the culprit in this attack to have been a Tiger Shark.
I never bought into the single shark theory. But, five attacks in twelve days? Coincidence? I’m of the opinion there was some significant factor that influenced this rash of attacks that has remained undetected. Some kind of prey species was congratulating along the Jersey shore because of environmental conditions? The heat wave caused prey species to leave the area and sharks had to settle for swimmers? Were there any stockyards that were flushing blood or viscera into the waters near the attacks? Anyway, great info and I had no idea of the ‘17 and ‘26 incidents.
We have Key Deer in Florida, and they are a smaller version of the Whitetail Deer, and these are extremely “friendly” and approachable as well! Sometimes a Key Deer Buck is the size of a larger dog. I have some recent vids on my channel, please check it out.
The idea that *all* the attacks off the New Jersey Coast, Matawan Creek, and Seaside Heights were committed by one shark is absurd. It is based on the theory of the rogue shark--a theory that has been *definitively* disproved.
3tons great white sharks, where do you get your intel from?! The maximum an adult great white will reach is 1 to 1.5 tons and that's either a pregnant female full of pups or a large male/female that gorged itself on a whale carcass. The white pointer known as Deep Blue would be about this size. Such large specimen however are a rare sighting, they are not the norm. 3tons is orca territory, not great white.
3 tons = 6,600 pounds. If a 18ft great white can be 4,000 pounds then a great white over 20ft can be over 6,000 pounds. Seeing as great whites probably on rare occasions can be over 20ft then it's possible. The Seven Star Lake great white looks over 20ft and was said to be at 7 metres (22ft) and 2500 kg (5,500 pounds). Bite marks on whales and humans (Jack Rochette for example) indicate great white sharks even larger.
@@lyndoncmp5751 IF (which is an hypothesis not a fact) a 6 meters great white weighs 1.5 tons , then your 3 tons great white would be 12 meters. There is nothing in Jack Rochette's story that suggest some "giant shark" was involved, in fact his injuries were not indicative of anything remotely "giant". Simon Nellist was attacked off Sydney by a great white estimated between 3 and 5 meters; judging by the footage I would say it was closer to 5. In one breaching bite Mr Nellist was cut in half. Had a "giant shark" attacked Mr Rochette there would be no remains left to identify. Jack Rochette was a typical case of journalist sensationalism. 7 meters Great Whites that are reported to weigh 2.5 tons are all UNCONFIRMED for a reason. Even Deep Blue' size is disputed at 6 meters for 2.2 tons. In Auckland New Zealand, this monster shark (link below) was caught circa 2003 off Waiheke Island, the female was reported to be about 5.5meters long weighing about 1.5 tons with 5 pups in her belly. So again, 3 tons makes no sense to me, the largest female orcas weighs 3 tons. Male orcas average 3.5 to 5.5 tons and they are much larger than great whites. The point is no 3 tons Great White has ever been confirmed. It is all hear say. jairointheworld.tripod.com/shark.htm
Before the video even starts I hope this isn’t JUST about the 1916 NJ Matawan creek attacks that inspired the Jaws movies Edit: okay good, Good. Great video!
It was not fresh water but brackish. i have seen blue point crabs and young striped bass above Philadelphia many times during high tide in 'fresh water' tidal creeks feeding into the Delaware River. Side note we have a large tagged great white that pings off Anglesea almost every summer.
@@silasbeebe I hear you, I didn't mean to come off like a dick. I was at the gym watching it and arguing with someone at the same time. Everything else was legit. I didn't know about 1917 or 1926.
