Between 1991-1997 a study of school and gummy shark nursery areas in Tasmania, lead by John Stevens, resulted in 404 school shark and 1254 gummy shark being tagged. Up to 1997, 50 school shark and 160 gummy shark had been recaptured. Small numbers of other shark species were also tagged.

Between 1947 and 1956 a study lead by Mick Olsen resulted in 6502 school and 587 gummy sharks being tagged in south-east Australia. Most of the school shark were tagged in inshore bays and estuaries, notably Port Phillip Bay, Port Sorell, Georges Bay and Pittwater. Most of the gummy shark were tagged in inshore areas around Flinders Island and the north coast of Tasmania. A total of 594 school shark and 60 gummy shark were recaptured. This data set includes field sheets and the tags returned to CSIRO. These records are cataloged in the TRIM Records database, as follows: AB2008/1038: CMAR - School and Gummy Shark Tagging by CSIRO in Southern Australia 1947-1956 - Mick Olsen and Grant West - MarLIN record 8218 This Archive Box number incorporates 2 containers: "C2008/6921-01: CMAR - School and Gummy Shark Tagging by CSIRO in Southern Australia 1947-1956 - Mick Olsen and Grant West - MarLIN record 8218 - Part 1 - Tag Data Field Sheets" [associated files lodged within as separate objects]; and "C2008/6921-02: CMAR - School and Gummy Shark Tagging by CSIRO in Southern Australia 1947-1956 - Mick Olsen and Grant West - MarLIN record 8218 - Part 2 - Tags and Olsen Card Index [in metal filing cabinet]"

46 school shark were tagged with archival tags during 1997-98, in South Australian and Tasmanian waters. 19 tags were recovered. The tags yielded 15.3 years of data on light level, depth and temperature collected at 4 minute intervals. The basic release-recapture data has been entered into the CSIRO pelagic tag data base but not the actual electronic data. The electronic data for the Lotek tags is in a different format to that of the Wildlife Computer tags, and may require dedicated geolocation software to process. Wildlife Computers provides geolocation software for their tags free of charge. While longitudinal movements have been described, there was no analysis of corresponding latitudes, as light-based latitude estimation was unreliable. There is scope for additional research into latitudinal movements based on the depth data. The depth pattern shown by the sharks can be used to examine if the fish was close to the bottom, and combined with a longitude estimate for a particular day, latitude can be estimated as across much of southern Australia where depth increases with latitude. However, there is a software development challenge associated with this, as there may be more than one depth fit for a particular longitude, especially towards eastern Australia. In this eastern region the restricted depth of Bass Strait can provide additional information on the latitude, as fish data at >86m indicates that it was too deep for Bass Strait. An additional factor that was not examined was the temperature data from the tags. In pelagic species surface water temperature is used to estimate latitude and at times school shark do come close to the surface. Some of the tags were set up to record internal as well as external temperatures but this data was not examined. There have been 2 recaptures of Wildlife Computers tags since West & Stevens (1996) published the results. There have also been two Lotek tags returned since this publication but the data for these tags was corrupted.

Southern blue fin tuna have been released since 1959 using conventional tags. This is where the tag database has its origins and therefore a large amount of the data held in the database consists of conventional (dart) tags releases of this species in Australian waters. In recent times the data base has evolved to include many more species of pelagic and benthic fish, sharks and turtles. The advent of electronic tags, some with satellite and/or acoustic tracking ability has added to the complexity of the database. Not only do these electronic tags require additional fields for setup options before release, but also require tables to support the complex range of data retrieved from these tags. The data has been grouped into a number of projects. The purposes behind each such project are many and range from the collection of data required for population analyses (the estimation of mortality rates and growth rates), to the investigation of large and fine scale movements, feeding patterns as revealed by the use of ‘smart tags’. Also for many tagging programs there have been changes in tagging ability between skilled and novice taggers. Individual projects thus reflect these criteria so that each Marlin entry contains as nearly as possible a homogenous data set in terms of: 1. Species 2. Tag type 3. Taggers used, in particular the use of CSIRO or non CSIRO personnel 4. Period of coverage to ensure that particular variants of tag type were used 5. Specific project aims 6. Specific geographical area 7. Lead agency ( to ensure that appropriate permission is obtained before access to the data base is permitted) Thus all the species specific data contained in the CSIRO data base has been grouped into discrete Marlin metadata units. Tag data for a particular species may also be covered by multiple Marlin units. The CSIRO database manager has a full listing of the species numbers contained in all Marlin units. Species where more than 200 individuals have been tagged in individual or multiple projects are listed in the descriptive keyword section. Keywords: Tag, Conventional, Archival, Acoustic, Pop-Up, Satellite, Tuna, Swordfish, Shark, Pelagic Fish, Demersal Fish, Turtles.