Tagging sounds like it'd be useful for conservation but when I think about it I cannot figure out what's useful about it.
Tagging is probably the best way we have right now to study sharks, especially species like great whites. We really do not know very much about them still, such as where they breed, where they birth, how and where they spend the rest of the year. Where do juveniles grow? What happens when they get to certain age/size? Is there an intermediate ground? With this information we can make educated decisions about regulating fisheries. Is is not just about limiting shark finning, but also drift nets and other types of fishing where sharks are a by-catch.
If they find juvenile sharks, males ready to breed, and pregnant females, it's a mating ground. I don't see why they need more than one episode and more than 3 sharks to figure that out (one of each mentioned type.)
Actually you need a lot more than just a one or even a few tagged sharks to tell you anything. Science is about accumulating massive amounts of data and then seeing what the entire amount tells you. Think of it like flipping a coin, you have a 50/50 chance of landing on heads. But let's say we alter the coin to give us a 75% chance of heads. How to test this?
If we flip the coin 4 times and get 3 heads, that tells us what? Statistically speaking nothing, pure chance can give us these results. How about 40 flips? That is better of course but we could still expect chance to show similar results. 400 flips with 300 heads is starting to show some real results, 1000 or 4000 flips, now we have something. Now we can make accurate predictions about how specific modifications alters chance.
Same goes with sharks. So we catch a gravid (pregnant) female. Is this an oddity in this area? She could be just passing through OR she could be hanging out here. What about that make with sperm in his claspers? Do mature males always have sperm present?
The more individuals we sample and tag the more information we have to base theories on, the more we know for a near certainty about this species.
How about those juveniles? Where do they grow up? What are they feeding on? Is there a certain time of year when juveniles start to follow migrations? Perhaps yearling or 2 year old sharks follow tuna schools. Maybe that is how populations get new bloodlines? So perhaps certain times of the year in certain locations we need to restrict tuna fishing.
These are but a few questions and possible answers that tagging will help with, but we need lots of tags and several years to fully assimilate the data.
Scientists already have some ideas about those questions, but more data is needed. Perhaps the overall accumulated data shows that the hypothesis are correct, but maybe the data will contradict. If the first few sharks tagged were anomalies then everything based on that data is incorrect for a given population.
I also remember in one episode they were talking about how they were holding out for a twenty foot female. For a fisherman who wants to have a spectacular fishing trip, I can understand why a twenty footer is ideal, but for science I don't understand why they need a female of any particular size, as long as she's of sexual maturity.
If they can get blood samples that would help. After enough studies we will know for example if 20 feet is prime breeding age, or perhaps she is over the hill. We could learn this by comparing hormone levels for example. We really need data from as many of every category as possible.
to mention they handled that extremely unprofessionally by getting overexcited at the first shark they saw (13 foot male) and threw their gear in the water before they got it properly set up. They almost got seriously injured, and they couldn't get the damn hook out of the shark's mouth. They claim that the hook will decompose in just a few days, but I googled to see if any hooks did that and I couldn't find such a hook (I admit this doesn't disprove the hook's existence.)
While the data they gather may prove to be extremely valuable, things like this cast doubt. The unprofessionalism of the crew makes me cringe as well.
Btw, have you guys heard of a hook strong enough to catch a great white that decomposes in just a few days?
Not in a few days no, but I can't say that such a hook doesn't exist. Just a thought though, barbless circle hooks should work better. Circle hooks mean the shark will hook itself, and as long as they maintain tension on the line the shark will not be able to spit the hook. Whats more without the barb it will be easily removed or if the line snaps the shark will be free of the hook in an hour or less.
But maybe they thought of that and it didn't work in testing, IDK...
