Drones are being deployed to monitor shark activity at US beaches, but are they truly making the public safer? While the technology is effective at spotting sharks on the surface, its usefulness as a public safety tool is questionable. The increased investment in drones, despite the lack of evidence suggesting a rise in shark threats, raises concerns about the potential for irrational reactions from both officials and beachgoers.
The perception of more shark sightings might be a result of the increased drone presence rather than an actual increase in shark activity. This could lead to a spiral of fear, with governments purchasing more drones, which then spot more sharks, creating a false sense of security. The odds of being bitten by a shark are incredibly low, with one in 4.3 million chances, according to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. The number of shark attacks worldwide has remained relatively stable, with 65 unprovoked shark bites in 2025, similar to the 10-year average.
New York state's spending on shark monitoring and drone purchases is a prime example of this spiral. Governor Kathy Hochul's announcement of increased lifeguard staffing and drone deployment in 2022 and 2023, followed by an additional $322,000 spent this year, suggests a growing fear factor. However, experts like Greg Skomal argue that the number of sharks may not have increased, but the fear has.
The use of drones in shark monitoring is effective in clear water conditions, but they have limitations. Chris Lowe, director of the Shark Lab, highlights the issue of poor visibility, where sharks can be just 5ft below the surface and undetectable. The lab's approach, which includes tagging sharks and installing acoustic receivers, is a more scientific method, providing valuable data to local authorities.
The deployment of drones and the subsequent beach closures can have unintended consequences. Suzanne Grout Thomas, Wellfleet's retired director of community services, notes that drones might not always spot all sharks, and their presence could provide a false sense of security. George Gorman, regional director at the state parks office, confirms that lifeguards clear the water if a shark is spotted, but the state doesn't use tags and receivers for detection.
The challenge lies in balancing public safety and the potential economic impact of shark reports. Lowe emphasizes the importance of judicious decision-making when determining beach closures to avoid creating fear among swimmers. The question remains: Are drones the most effective solution, or are they simply fueling a growing fear of sharks at US beaches?
