There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
(08-18-2015, 11:25 PM)GuateGojira Wrote: @jeets, that is not true. Animals like tigers need large landscapes to live, even if there is supposedly large "wild" areas, in fact this normally lack the necessary prey densities or are heavily disturbed by human intervention. You can't "pack" large groups of tigers in a single area, because they are territorial and even protected areas have a finite space for a population.
Numbers alone can be tricky, the areas need to be secure and protected. According with the numbers that you posted, we can put wild animals in any part of those "thousands" of kilometers, but the REAL issue is that there is not space for them, as those areas are no longer "wild".
Check this map:
Only the red areas have "known" tiger populations, which are ridiculous small, and besides, you most take in count the densities of each area. For example, there are more tigers in one small red dot in India than in the large red patch in Sumatra. The yellow areas are proposed for tiger conservation and represent possible areas for reintroduction, but it need a real work in order to be prepared to have wild animal populations. Still, this yellow areas are even less than 20% of the Indian territory.
IF India want to save them tigers, they need to make a real compromise to save them AND its habitat. In this side, Russia and Nepal are making a better work.
Thanks for your replay.That Map is total fake I mean Burma/Thailand/Viet hardly had 60 tigers showing huge Red areas where as 2226 Indians tigers showing small Red dots here and there.
The tiger numbers have recovered in parts of India where economic growth, wages are higher and transition to more urbanized life is well underway. Most of India’s larger tiger populations are here because of relatively effective protection against illegal hunting of tigers and prey. In contrast,even in more extensive forests ofthe tribal belts in Odisha, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and northeastern hill states, tiger populations have dwindled, largely because of uncontrolled hunting of prey species.
India still has 200,000 sq. km of potential tiger habitat left, and less than 25% of this area is currently reasonably well-protected. India can potentially hold 10,000 tigers
This is actual India's forest Map
*This image is copyright of its original author
Do you know almost 20% India's land is not in India's (govt) control.Indians don't know what is happening there.It is controlled by Maoists/Communists/Naxals.You can see entire Dense forest in center-eastern side of India which is Ullas karanth mentioned is in Naxal's control.Naxals&Tribals hunted entire prey there so tiger population is nill.Once govt control the land then they will re introduces prey species from rest of country then TIGERS will follow,then India can hold not 2,000 but20,000 tigers without any problem. Naxals attacks/causalities/recruitment is gradually decreasing every year, those yellow areas in your map once again occupied by wild tigers by another 3 or 4 years.
Even in 2015 these fu**** Communists exists in democratic India,thanks to China.Anyway another 3/4 years everything will be alright.
PS Sorry for Bold&Capitals,they are necessary.We all know tigers are heavy breeders and their mortality rate is high.In controlled habituates mortality is low tigers population will grow rapidly.
Absolutely agree with you. It's amazing that a country that supports 70% of the world's tigers despite having a 1.2 billion strong population gets so much flak. And countries with barely 200 tigers are supposed to be role models.
People are largely ignorant regarding the wildlife situation in India. They look at Ranthambhore and Bandhavgarh and assume that's the case for the whole of India. Central and eastern India have some huge swathes of forest. When I travelled by road from Nagpur to Jabalpur (on the way to Kanha), I was amazed to see miles after miles of dense forest with not a person in sight. India's forest network extends much beyond protected areas. If Dr. Karanth says India can support 10,000 tigers, I have no reason to doubt him.
Regarding prey base, ever wondered how Kaziranga with only 1000 km2 supports 100 tigers and 2000 rhinos? And Corbett with more than 200 tigers and 1000 elephants in 2000 km2? The amount of space a tiger needs is completely dependent on the prey density. And India has it more than any other tiger range country. In fact, even outside protected areas, India has huge number of nilgai, wild boar and the biggest population of feral cattle in the world. Thats why dispersing tigers don't have problem finding food to support themselves. Some Indian states are even considering issuing hunting permits for Nilgai and wild boar since their population is so large that it threatens farmlands. The problem is that very little research is being done on tigers outside reserves, where and how they travel. More areas are being added to the protected network as the tiger population disperses out of reserves. Of course, in some areas, more could be done but the situation is definitely not as bad as it is made out to be.
Indian wildlife sanctuary, information data and its condition
