Tigers of Central India

[Pckts]

MG Nithyananda
Uma

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply

[Apex Titan]

(06-22-2021, 02:51 AM)Pckts Wrote: MG Nithyananda
Uma

*This image is copyright of its original author

The Umarpani male tiger is 12 years old, out of his prime, and still undefeated and reigns supreme. This beast has killed 2 large dominant male tigers and whooped several other large male tigers also and driven them off. Hands-down the most formidable and powerful tiger in Kanha.

Who would you favor in a fight between a prime Umarpani vs prime Waghdoh? Reply

[Pckts]

(06-22-2021, 03:19 AM)Apex Titan Wrote:

(06-22-2021, 02:51 AM)Pckts Wrote: MG Nithyananda
Uma

*This image is copyright of its original author

The Umarpani male tiger is 12 years old, out of his prime, and still undefeated and reigns supreme. This beast has killed 2 large dominant male tigers and whooped several other large male tigers also and driven them off. Hands-down the most formidable and powerful tiger in Kanha.

Who would you favor in a fight between a prime Umarpani vs prime Waghdoh?

Uma, he's much more battle tested and seems to be the more powerfully built male overall.
If you look at both, Waghdoh has achieved an incredible age but he's done so by being smart. He's moved out of territories controlled by younger males while Uma has never left his battle ground, every season he's fighting multiple males and never giving an inch. I think that mindset vs Waghdohs would have led to Waghdoh eventually giving way to Uma's persistence. Reply

[Apex Titan]

(06-22-2021, 03:39 AM)Pckts Wrote:

(06-22-2021, 03:19 AM)Apex Titan Wrote:

(06-22-2021, 02:51 AM)Pckts Wrote: MG Nithyananda
Uma

*This image is copyright of its original author

The Umarpani male tiger is 12 years old, out of his prime, and still undefeated and reigns supreme. This beast has killed 2 large dominant male tigers and whooped several other large male tigers also and driven them off. Hands-down the most formidable and powerful tiger in Kanha.

Who would you favor in a fight between a prime Umarpani vs prime Waghdoh?

Uma, he's much more battle tested and seems to be the more powerfully built male overall.
If you look at both, Waghdoh has achieved an incredible age but he's done so by being smart. He's moved out of territories controlled by younger males while Uma has never left his battle ground, every season he's fighting multiple males and never giving an inch. I think that mindset vs Waghdohs would have led to Waghdoh eventually giving way to Uma's persistence.

Watch this video from 15:25... just look how massive and powerful Umarpani looks!

Umarpani male vs Charger from Bandhavgarh would have been an epic battle. Reply

[Pckts]

(06-22-2021, 06:56 PM)Apex Titan Wrote:

(06-22-2021, 03:39 AM)Pckts Wrote:

(06-22-2021, 03:19 AM)Apex Titan Wrote:

(06-22-2021, 02:51 AM)Pckts Wrote: MG Nithyananda
Uma

*This image is copyright of its original author

The Umarpani male tiger is 12 years old, out of his prime, and still undefeated and reigns supreme. This beast has killed 2 large dominant male tigers and whooped several other large male tigers also and driven them off. Hands-down the most formidable and powerful tiger in Kanha.

Who would you favor in a fight between a prime Umarpani vs prime Waghdoh?

Uma, he's much more battle tested and seems to be the more powerfully built male overall.
If you look at both, Waghdoh has achieved an incredible age but he's done so by being smart. He's moved out of territories controlled by younger males while Uma has never left his battle ground, every season he's fighting multiple males and never giving an inch. I think that mindset vs Waghdohs would have led to Waghdoh eventually giving way to Uma's persistence.

Watch this video from 15:25... just look how massive and powerful Umarpani looks!

Umarpani male vs Charger from Bandhavgarh would have been an epic battle.

Generally any Tigers from a Sal Forest *Bandhavgarh, Kanha, Pench * are going to be larger than those from Teak forest. *Tadoba*
This is also noted by Both Brander and Sankhala.
With the genes flowing through Kanha on top of their large herbivore prey base and coolest temps of the 3 mentioned, I'd say they are likely to produce the biggest of the 3 but all produce some big cats, that's for sure. Reply

[Ashutosh]

@Pckts, actually by the metrics you provided, Satpura will have bigger cats than Kanha in Central India only basing it on those factors (personally, I don’t believe ONLY these factors determine size). 

Also, Pench has a much better prey base than Kanha, that’s why tigresses from Pench have been recorded giving birth to 5 or even 6 cubs in a litter. In fact, the area that Collarwali occupies has a prey biomass/square area higher than Kaziranga. Reply

[Pckts]

(06-23-2021, 03:38 AM)Ashutosh Wrote: @Pckts, actually by the metrics you provided, Satpura will have bigger cats than Kanha in Central India only basing it on those factors (personally, I don’t believe ONLY these factors determine size). 

Also, Pench has a much better prey base than Kanha, that’s why tigresses from Pench have been recorded giving birth to 5 or even 6 cubs in a litter. In fact, the area that Collarwali occupies has a prey biomass/square area higher than Kaziranga.

I’m not sure how you figure that about Satpura?


 
And Pench doesn’t have the prey base that Kanha does. I’m talking about large ungulates and on top of that,  it’s hotter and infact, they have to to put in man made water holes just to keep the tigers to stay local for tourists.

Put it this way, you go to Pench and you’ll have to get extremely lucky to see a Gaur, you go to Kanha and Gaurs are everywhere. Almost any of the main tiger prey source is more abundant when you go to kanha. In closing, Kanha is larger, cooler and generally has more large prey available which is why it produces larger cats. At least from my personal experience as well as others who saw both as well. Reply

[Ashutosh]

@Pckts The 2018 tiger census also did a census regarding prey bases of tigers in certain reserves. 

Here is Kanha’s:

   

And here is Pench’s:

   

It’s not news. Pench has always had a better prey base. Human degradation led to Pench losing it’s waterbodies and for a big period it had become a glorified tiger corridor. But, the herbivores just shifted to other neighbouring parts. Once conservation started on full-scale, Pench recovered and those herbivores came back. You can see Pench has more gaurs. Reply

[Pckts]

(06-23-2021, 04:16 AM)Ashutosh Wrote: @Pckts The 2018 tiger census also did a census regarding prey bases of tigers in certain reserves. 

Here is Kanha’s:



And here is Pench’s:



It’s not news. Pench has always had a better prey base. Human degradation led to Pench losing it’s waterbodies and for a big period it had become a glorified tiger corridor. But, the herbivores just shifted to other neighbouring parts. Once conservation started on full-scale, Pench recovered and those herbivores came back. You can see Pench has more gaurs.

This “census” you see more large ungulates in Kanha. The groups are more abundant for Sambar, Gaur, Barasingha and boar. Just because Kanha is larger than Pench and they extrapolate those numbers doesn’t mean by actual fact that it’s prey base is better. Since animals must congregate in tighter areas in Pench that could skew their density claims. The fact is they spotted groups of these large ungulates more often in Kanha but the area was almost double the size. Reply

[Ashutosh]

@Pckts, Firstly, camera trap images are also factored in while extrapolating prey density in these reserves.

Secondly, the chart that I posted is only of Pench, Madhya Pradesh and doesn’t include Pench, Maharashtra. So, in actuality, the number of all prey herds in Pench exceeded Kanha in absolute numbers even though Pench is much smaller in area. So, the density is higher.

Thirdly, you can’t expect any research to individually count all prey animals in a landscape, it would be next to impossible. So, extrapolation of data from a sample size is always going to be the norm (especially as there is no scope for camera trapping in grasslands). Not to mention, this is not the first study to suggest that Pench has a higher prey biomass per square km than Kanha or any other Central Indian Tiger Reserve. Reply

[Pckts]

(06-23-2021, 10:02 PM)Ashutosh Wrote: @Pckts, Firstly, camera trap images are also factored in while extrapolating prey density in these reserves.

Secondly, the chart that I posted is only of Pench, Madhya Pradesh and doesn’t include Pench, Maharashtra. So, in actuality, the number of all prey herds in Pench exceeded Kanha in absolute numbers even though Pench is much smaller in area. So, the density is higher.

Thirdly, you can’t expect any research to individually count all prey animals in a landscape, it would be next to impossible. So, extrapolation of data from a sample size is always going to be the norm (especially as there is no scope for camera trapping in grasslands). Not to mention, this is not the first study to suggest that Pench has a higher prey biomass per square km than Kanha or any other Central Indian Tiger Reserve.

Camera traps are one piece along with pug marks, carcasses and visual sightings. But like all the others mentioned, camera traps are a very small factor and many animals actively avoid them.

Second, it wouldn't matter if they include both sides, Kanha is larger and assuming that the same density of prey on one side to the other is wrong since like I've already stated, the FD have actively added watering holes to increase sightings of both Tigers and prey which skews the numbers and any area where that isn't a factor will so a lower density. 

Last, I never claimed to expect researchers to count individuals which is why these census are extremely faulty but they are the best we have. But it's pretty simple, I assume you've not been to Pench or Kanha, correct?
But if you had, you'd see fairly fast that Kanha is going to have the far more suitable habitat for larger prey and the animals that prey on them and I'm confident if you asked others who've also been to both, they'd say the same.

But lastly, the whole discussion started when I said that it's the Sal Forests that contribute to larger cats and both Brander and Sankhala said the same. This was something a novice like my self noticed right away once I went from Tadoba to Pench then Kanha. At this point I don't really think it's arguable, if you want to mention certain reserves over the others that's fine but if they aren't Sal Forest reserves I don't they they're going to compete unless we're talking about Kaziranga. But places like Kanha, Corbett, Dudhwa are all Sal Forests. Reply

[Ashutosh]

Except, as I said before, this isn’t the first research to come to the conclusion that Pench has a better prey density than Kanha. Your remark that there were more herds recorded in Kanha as per the study was off the mark as Pench being smaller has more herds when you count both the areas, clearly showing better density.

The forest department added watering hole in parts of Pench because of human degradation. If you look up the history of that area when Kanha-Pench was one big forest, you will see the insane deforestation that went on from 17th century by the Gonds to mid 1890s in Pench, whereas Kanha has stayed pristine much longer. With conservation giving the forest a chance to grow back, the animal numbers have also rebounded (this is also noticeable in tiger numbers). Plus, Brander and Sankhala are from the 60s-70s, contemporary sources should take precedence.

And, why would a prey base depend on what trees are commonly found in a reserve. Grassland would be way more pertinent in determining prey base. Trees don’t make up any part of any herbivores’ diet.

Also, I have been to Pench and Nagzira. Was supposed to go to Kanha-Bandhavgarh, but the pandemic has ruined that trip. Reply

[Pckts]

(06-25-2021, 01:46 AM)Ashutosh Wrote: Except, as I said before, this isn’t the first research to come to the conclusion that Pench has a better prey density than Kanha. Your remark that there were more herds recorded in Kanha as per the study was off the mark as Pench being smaller has more herds when you count both the areas, clearly showing better density.

The forest department added watering hole in parts of Pench because of human degradation. If you look up the history of that area when Kanha-Pench was one big forest, you will see the insane deforestation that went on from 17th century by the Gonds to mid 1890s in Pench, whereas Kanha has stayed pristine much longer. With conservation giving the forest a chance to grow back, the animal numbers have also rebounded (this is also noticeable in tiger numbers). Plus, Brander and Sankhala are from the 60s-70s, contemporary sources should take precedence.

And, why would a prey base depend on what trees are commonly found in a reserve. Grassland would be way more pertinent in determining prey base. Trees don’t make up any part of any herbivores’ diet.

Also, I have been to Pench and Nagzira. Was supposed to go to Kanha-Bandhavgarh, but the pandemic has ruined that trip.

I said more large ungulates, i.e. Sambar, Barasingha, Gaur 
And no, my remark on more herds isn't off the mark since we don't know the comparison of the other side. And since it's an extrapolation we don't know what that would entail. So making the claim that one side is the same as the other isn't correct not to mention the immense size of Kanha and dense foliage and  hilly terrain. Where as Pench has man made water holes and pools that animals will congregate in but that isn't the case in Kanha. 

The claim that they added watering holes in pench due to human degradation isn't backed by visual evidence. Where they are has nothing to do with man, they are in the middle of the forests with no human fingerprint around them, they are simply added to keep tourists in those areas during the summer months so they can generate revenue. If they weren't there, Turiya for instance would be barren of big cats. Also, both Kanha and Pench have suffered deforestation but regardless of that, the forest itself tells a story. And Kanha's forest is more lush, green, cooler and produces bigger animals, generally. Pench can also produce large cats, definitely larger than Tadoba but it's not quite as advantageous as Kanha.  And I certainly wouldn't discount Brander or Sankhala who both spent their lives in these forests, whether from a Hunters perspective or a Biologists perspective, both opinions carry weight.

Lastly, that's a bummer about your 2nd trip, I really hope you get a chance to go to Kanha-Bandhavgarh. I would be very interested to know your opinion when you came back. I've heard Bandhavgarh is a smaller Kanha.
And since Kanha sent some of their Gaur to Bandhavgarh, there should be some chances to see some of them as well.

Also, in regards to Pench. Did you see any Gaur there? We saw one the entire time and in comparison to Kanha, we saw many herds and bachelors every day.

Edit:
Sorry, didn't see this question

"And, why would a prey base depend on what trees are commonly found in a reserve. Grassland would be way more pertinent in determining prey base. Trees don’t make up any part of any herbivores’ diet."

Kanha again has more grassland as well, the sal trees offer cooler temps, more shade and the plants around them are greener. My guess is that Sal trees require cooler temps and more water since they are heavier and more dense as well. Reply

[Rage2277]

*This image is copyright of its original author

 wildlife_ley - Definitely one of my favorite tiger encounter during our India trip. This huge male looked extremely strong and healthy. Next to that the scenery was also breathtaking. We first spotted him far in the distance through the abundance of tree stems around. Eventually he approached our vehicle and crossed the dirt road to continue patrolling his territory. Photographed in Pench National Park, India. Reply

[parvez]

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply