Big Bigger Biggest

[Fiskadoro]

So the rumor is Jason Johnston's 1,323 pound Mako is going to qualify as the new world record.



That is one Big Mako!!!!

[kareem korn]

Stupid.

[driftwood]

That thing should of been released Look how pissed off it looks.

[crazyfishnfool]

Looks like the one I caught and released off my yak 2 months ago. I should of known it was a world record

[jorluivil]

Its amazing and scary that those things can get that big.

[wiredantz]

Hope my day doesn't come anytime soon.

[Fiskadoro]

So I looked around for info on Makos and boat attacks.

Here's a vid I found where a Mako went after a skiff.



That shark attacked their outboard while they were under power. The vid starts after they turn around to see what they hit. You can see where the prop left cuts on the makos mouth and head but it's still more interested in attacking the outboard then the tuna chunks they throw in the water. Another male mako, not a really huge one but you can see it's clearly pissed off, and it's kind of wild that even after it was injured by the prop it still not afraid of the boat, and still being aggressive.

[PapaDave]

I wonder how old that shark was...

[Fiskadoro]

Originally Posted by PapaDave

I wonder how old that shark was...

Should be pretty maxed out. They live for thirty years give or take a year so it was probably close to if not over thirty. Sharks grow their entire lifetime in fact they age them by checking the growth rings like tree rings in their spine. Since it was the largest ever taken it's probably one of the oldest and wasn't going to around much longer.

The enviros were pissed off that the shark was taken because they said it was valuable for reproduction. The truth is they only pup every three years with a 18 month gestation then a 18 month break between pregnancies. So if it was close to thirty, which it probably was, unless it was carrying pups it was probably not going to reproduce again.

[LawDog]

Tell me more about the last kayak fisher you heard of actualy attacked by a shark. There is more of a possibility of a sea lion biting your leg while trying to take your catch.

Not that im against catching a shark, for food, but lets not get this crazy Jaws shark hunt going again and destroying species just out of fear.

If your that scared, Ill take your gear, keep what i want, and sell the rest.

Botom line is dont take what you dont plan to eat. And dont kill out of ignorance.

[dos ballenas]

Originally Posted by Fiskadoro

Should be pretty maxed out. They live for thirty years give or take a year so it was probably close to if not over thirty. Sharks grow their entire lifetime in fact they age them by checking the growth rings like tree rings in their spine. Since it was the largest ever taken it's probably one of the oldest and wasn't going to around much longer.

The enviros were pissed off that the shark was taken because they said it was valuable for reproduction. The truth is they only pup every three years with a 18 month gestation then a 18 month break between pregnancies. So if it was close to thirty, which it probably was, unless it was carrying pups it was probably not going to reproduce again.

Are you kidding Jim?

I am the biologist who initially contacted Mako Matt and arranged for the fish to be sampled for research purposes. Both Keith Poe and Mako Matt were extremely helpful and made sure that the appropriate labs recieved sections of vertebrae, tissue, and stomach contents for future analysis. The fish is currently being aged and compared to other tagged and recaptured sharks in order to validate the results.

Where did you find the information you posted in the quote above? 30 years old? 18 month gestation period? Please direct me to the scientific journal which states data supporting or validating you claims.

The two statements you made above are actually the two most important questions that researchers are STILL trying to answer. Shark biologists are the first people to admit that they know nothing about the reproductive cycle, gestation period, litter size, migration patterns, and population size of large female mako sharks.

And the age and growth rates of mako sharks are yet to be validated. Old studies have previously estimated that mako sharks could live for upwards of 20 years. But new, current research, is revealing that those estimates are likely way OFF.

Yes sharks are aged using cross sections cut out of their vertebrae. And yes they can be read similar to the methods for aging trees with tree trunk rings. But unlike most bony fish and trees aging sharks in not as straightforward as you would think.

For example it is unknown if mako sharks create one, two, or three growth rings per year. This fact alone is why the jury is still out on aging sharks.



I admit I'm not expert myself and the statements you made above could be true. I just spend a lot of time working with the researchers who are currently trying to decide on the appropriate methods to age mako sharks.

NOAA's Southwest Fisheries Science Center has been injecting Mako and blue sharks for years with a antibiotic which stains the vertebrae of sharks that they then tag and release. Ask Keith Poe about this if you like.

The only way to validate age and growth for sharks is to recapture those same tagged sharks and then determine the amount of growth that occurred during their time at liberty based off when the shark was tagged and then counting number of growth rings laid down after the sharks vertebrae was stained with the antibiotic.

[Fiskadoro]

Originally Posted by dos ballenas

Are you kidding Jim? .... age and growth rates of mako sharks are yet to be validated..... For example it is unknown if mako sharks create one, two, or three growth rings per year. This fact alone is why the jury is still out on aging sharks.

Hell I'm no expert just opinionated

Actually your preaching to the choir..... No doubt the jury is still out, and nothing is definitive.

Like Kieth I've been interested in these sharks for decades, read a lot about them, and put a lot of time in on the water, but I've not heard anything all that concrete. I think the first estimates were based on two rings a year, then they went to one. Used to be people were estimating something like twenty years, then last I heard they kicked it up to thirty, but I'm not a biologist just someone who's interested in fish, and I'm just throwing out my opinion based on what I've read in the past.

If I had to personally guess I'd go with 30 to 40 years but the highest estimates I've read were only thirty.

Reproduction wise. I used to think they pupped every year, then some studies on Whites showed that they probably carried their young longer and took time off between pregnancies. That was a while back and they based it on migration patterns and sat tags. I.E. the Great White females varied their migrations in cycles and went to specific areas when carrying pups and after they dropped them. Since they changed their migration pattern the next year, the theory was that they skipped years in their reproductive cycles. Later I read somewhere that Makos might have a similar cycle even though their migrations are not the same. Makos and Salmon sharks are biologically closer to whites then most sharks so it kinda makes sense. I'm not sure where I read it, but it stuck with me since it challenged my preconceptions.

Speaking of preconceptions where do you think they pup? I've heard they probably have a reduced feeding response around the time they give birth to keep them from eating their young. Since Big females can be caught local, I always thought they probably pupped elsewhere in Mexican waters then swam up here afterwards.

Then I caught this.




That's a 22 inch female mako that I caught trolling off the West end of Catalina. It probably only weighed three pounds max and still had part of it's umbilical attached from it's egg sac. That shark attacked a skirted Bonita trolled on the downrigger. The bait was as big as it was but it still manged to rip off it's back end and put a 9/0 hook right through it's gills.

The guy I was fishing with and I have a running joke about that shark. We may of not caught biggest local Mako but we probably got the smallest, at least for one that hit a bait and was outside it's mother. I figure it had to be fresh pupped so the question in my mind is if the females loose their desire to feed when they are in they are in there pupping grounds, then why do we still catch full sized adults here like the 1300 pound fish that I started the thread with.

I'd say a on again off again breeding cycle like the whites have might explain that, but of course that's just a guess, and can't back it up with hard data.

Fortunately I'm just an amateur so I don't have to

You know how it is, fishing always involves a lot of guess work especially for us non-scientists.

Good to hear Matt got you some of the spinal cartilage, I was hoping you guys got it. I'd be really interested to know how many rings they find. It's my understanding is they do not stop growing as they age, so no matter how old that shark is in years just it's size suggests it's one of the oldest makos ever caught, and likely maxed out in life expectancy.

Jim

[Dim Jay]

Originally Posted by Fiskadoro

So the rumor is Jason Johnston's 1,323 pound Mako is going to qualify as the new world record.



That is one Big Mako!!!!

That fish is obviously not a Mako. It is clearly a Great White. The internet told me so.

I also heard he used a gun to dispatch the fish, so it probably wont be accepted by the IFGA, or the sporting community. I also know for a fact that the fish only ate 12" pacific mac's, and that it was well over 100 years old.

Just my take.

Jay

[Bubble Boy]

Originally Posted by Dim Jay

...

Just my take.

Jay

Jay, no need to be so modest. You clearly have read more of the internet than most fishermen.

[wiredantz]

Originally Posted by Dim Jay

That fish is obviously not a Mako. It is clearly a Great White. The internet told me so.

I also heard he used a gun to dispatch the fish, so it probably wont be accepted by the IFGA, or the sporting community. I also know for a fact that the fish only ate 12" pacific mac's, and that it was well over 100 years old.

Just my take.

Jay

whatever the case maybe, if im on a kayak and i see a huge DORSAL FIN.... Im out!