I’m inclined to ask how much more understanding do we need? What does a tracker on a bird adds when we can easily tell that 90% of the deaths are caused by eith

I’m inclined to ask how much more understanding do we need? What does a tracker on a bird adds when we can easily tell that 90% of the deaths are caused by either indirect or direct human actions? Why do we bother tacking on a tracker if we can also tack the same trackers on fishing nets and boats that do the actual damage? I am phrasing this as an Or statement as I do view the allocated resources for this kind of research as some kind of dichotomy. Sure the allure of animal tracking is more interesting but I can only imagine they it’d be vastly more effective for the overall well being by applying said invasive tracking to the commercial organisations that are more directly responsible.