ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)

[Matias]

This debate focused on the ability of tigers to prey on bears in the Russian Far East has produced enough elements to “encourage” there to be a purported big cat determinism about bears of both species. The justifications that move this conflict were dimensioned on Rochelle's appeal for help, in the notorious Ochkarik case on Chlamid, denoting that there is an emotional and justifying appeal, when feeling threatened; not directly witnessed. Could Chlamid have been killed by both tigers? Or not? Conjecturing possibilities is all @peter doesn't want, so the best points have been given and each, from their perspective of understanding, makes their conclusion. I've read @Apex Titan  latest posts and also see all of it framing it from factual perspectives, whether or not acceptable to some, but they are factual.

Tigers slaughter their competitors and, in some cases, eat them. Whether for symbolism of power, driving away competitors or just to satisfy hunger. The ecological conditions in the Russian Far East is a predictor of conflicts over dominance, food, territory, by different species that have very close ecological functions. Bears are notorious opportunists and carcass sniffers, as well as predator followers in search of the remains of prey. Many pathogens afflict their hosts and affect their health conditions. Some to the point of withering to death, others have their physical abilities impaired, as a result, they start collecting carcasses. Barring a desperate situation, predators are not likely to get involved in conflicts that could result in their death, so there are many unmeasurable factors about what motivated tiger A or B to engage in a clash with unpredictable consequences with any grizzly bear great. Therefore, we should not generalize that all adult male Amur tigers play a predominant role over Ussuri grizzly bears. Each case is different and the devil is in the details, as the details from the behavioral and situational point of view (ecological situation and survival challenges) of both predators under unknown stress factors, produce a predation story that, however experience and logical deduction that Mr. Batalov has, possibly it will be very difficult to know how to measure the correct dosimetry of the natural forces that for thousands of years made these two species cohabitate to survive sharing this vast region, regardless of the bear having greater possibilities as an omnivore and being more predisposed to get food.

Let's let the balance prevail in this debate, there are no winners or losers.

I hardly get involved in these debates, I always prefer to focus on the knowledge that these interactions produce, as knowing the likely winner in a fight between different species will not produce far-reaching practical knowledge, a high dose of sensationalism. I don't think there are many scientists involved in tiger and bear conservation who care about the power of the tiger over the bear or vice versa. “There is nothing more important than the conservation of habitat and wildlife, so, as conscientious citizens, we have an important role in spreading the values of preserving and conserving our natural world, a commitment to everything that involves maintaining our natural wealth”.

With over 2500 posts the Tiger's thread has very good material and unfortunately this long material goes unnoticed by those who haven't followed it over time. The tiger is the number one animal in fundraising for its conservation, hence more than a million views here. As charismatic as it is enigmatic. "The predation of adult Indian rhinos is a reminder of the animal's power and possibilities to overcome obstacles."

Can a forum titled "Domain of the Bears" produce information that takes them off the top?

Sorry Peter, I couldn't resist giving an opinion. Reply