Several shark species utilize specific inshore
locations (coastal embayments, estuaries, river
mouths) as nursery areas, but only a few elasmo-
branchs are euryhaline, able to transition
between marine and freshwater environments for
prolonged periods (Thorson 1972; Pillans et al.
2009). Carcharhinus leucas (Valenciennes,
1839), the bull shark, is a circumglobal, euryha-
line apex predator widespread in the coastal
areas of the tropical, subtropical, and warm-tem-
perate regions of all ocean basins (Compagno
1984; Last and Stevens 2009; Ebert et al. 2021;
Gausmann 2021). This species relies on low
salinity habitats for reproduction and in the early
stages of its life cycle (Thorson 1976). Rivers
and river mouths can be considered as important
nursery grounds for neonate, young-of-the-year,
and juvenile bull sharks, as they provide low-
mortality habitats and large amounts of suitable
food items (Heupel and Simpfendorfer 2011;
Matich and Heithaus 2015; Pillans et al. 2020).
Carcharhinus leucas has been reported histori-
cally from major streams of the world thousands
of kilometers inland (Gausmann 2021). Thus, the
bull shark is currently known as one of the few
shark species that penetrates freshwater for
extended periods due to its osmoregulatory com-
petencies (Pillans et al. 2005). Grant et al. (2019)
reviewed the use of non-marine habitats by elas-
mobranchs and produced a classification of elas-
mobranchs using freshwater based on the impor-
tance of freshwater habitats on the life history of
each species. According to these authors, only 4
shark species, 3 Glyphis spp. and C. leucas, can
be considered truly euryhaline. In the Indo-Pacif-
ic region, bull sharks are born at 60 to 75 cm
total length (TL), both males and females reach-
ing maturity at ∼10-20 years and 180 to 230 cm
TL and reaching a maximum recorded size of
400 cm TL (Wintner et al. 2002; Last and
Stevens 2009; McCord and Lamberth 2009).
Carcharhinus leucas is assessed as Vulnerable
(VU) on a global scale in the IUCN Red List
(Rigby et al. 2021).
Carcharhinus leucas is currently recognized
from Sumatra in available distribution maps
(Ebert et al. 2021; Gausmann 2021; Rigby et al.
2021). Only few verified inland records of juve-
niles and subadults from Sumatran freshwater
environments had been previously reported
(Batang Hari River Basin: Tan and Lim 1998;
Musi River: Iqbal et al. 2019). Carcharhinus leu-
cas is know from both marine and freshwater
Indonesian habitats (Gausmann 2021), but there
are gaps in the distribution due to a lack of veri-
fied records for many parts of Indonesia. Some of
the freshwater records of C. leucas from Indone-
sia are quite old (Boeseman 1964) and require
verification. In summary, distributional informa-
tion on C. leucas in Indonesia and Southeast Asia
is scarce (Kottelat 2013; Hasan et al. 2021), and
better information is needed on specific localities
for better management and conservation planning
for this species. The present study aims to report
hints on new potential nursery areas of C. leucas
for conservation purposes, to fill in gaps in the
distribution of this species in Indonesia, and to
outline the benefits of both artisanal and recre-
ational fisheries data to scientific studies.
Herein, catch data on C. leucas from Sumatra
Island, Indonesia, a data-poor area of Southeast
Asia, are summarized (Table 1). Moreover, distri-
butional data of immature bull sharks from Suma-
tra are provided from alternative and inexpensive
existing sources (Figures 1 and 2). The second
author of the present work started a call targeting
Sumatran fishermen to report catches of C. leucas
from riverine habitats for scientific investigation
and to gain distributional data for this species
from a remote region of Indonesia. A systematic
survey of entire towns or regions was not con-
ducted. However, six juvenile to subadult speci-
mens of C. leucas were landed and photographed
by artisanal and recreational fishers in the period
between 2013 and 2019, from five river basins on
Sumatra Island. These sites were located between
∼4 and ∼195 km inland from the mouths of these
rivers. Distances of catch sites to the sea were
438 MARINE AND FISHERY SCIENCES 35 (3): 437-444 (2022)