|
The Effects of Humans on animal behaviour
|
Perhaps no other non-domesticated animal in history has ever been so strongly affected by human impact as the grizzly ( Ursus arctos ). First of all his diet and lifestyle. Before humans became so overwhelmingly over-populated and armed with weapons far advanced above those of earlier stone-age peoples, grizzlies were, for the most part, primarily carnivorous omnivores. It has been estimated that their diet was roughly 85% meat and 15% vegetation, insects, honey, etc. Grizzlies were more predatory than those living today though they were scavengers as well. Today, most grizzly populations are normally about 75% vegetarian. Today's grizzly is a more shy and elusive bear than his more highly aggressive predecessors. Bears are intelligent animals and they have learned of the killing power of the modern rifle. Their change in diet and behavior has also led to smaller size. Prey animals are certainly less abundant even for when a grizzly does decide to hunt. Their size, diet, habits, and temperament changes can clearly be seen within the populations of grizzlies in North America and Europe, after learning of their historic ancestors. I feel sure the same holds true for their Asian relatives.
 *This image is copyright of its original author
WILD CARNIVORES USING HUMANS?
Sam Ellis is a cameraman. Some years ago, he wanted to capture a hunt of a wild Canadian lynx. His attempts to get close to a wild lynx all but failed. One day, his luck changed. One lynx known as 'Mad Max' was different from the others in that he, in the end, decided to show himself to Sam. Over time, a unique bond developed. My guess is 'Mad Max' realized that Sam wasn't dangerous. I also think he used him. I remember a documentary about pumas in South America. Could have been Argentina. Over time, the cameraman developed a kind of bond with a wild puma. That female, 'Penny', gradually lost her fear. The bond resulted in a very interesting document. In Argentina, pumas are hunted. For this reason, they fear humans. Same for 'Penny'. When she realized that the cameraman wasn't dangerous but, instead, contributed to her safety, she gradually lost her fear. Why is it that some wild carnivores lose their fear of humans, whereas others do not? Species related? Individuality? And who is using who? Anyhow. Here's the link to the video: 
12-10-2018, 03:57 AM
( This post was last modified: 12-10-2018, 03:59 AM by Matias
Edit Reason: Formatting
)
Effects of Humans on Behaviour of Wildlife Exceed Those of Natural Predators in a Landscape of Fear
Simone Ciuti , Joseph M. Northrup, Tyler B. Muhly, Silvia Simi, Marco Musiani, Justin A. Pitt, Mark S. Boyce,
Published: November 28, 2012
Abstract
Background
Human disturbance can influence wildlife behaviour, which can have implications for wildlife populations. For example, wildlife may be more vigilant near human disturbance, resulting in decreased forage intake and reduced reproductive success. We measured the effects of human activities compared to predator and other environmental factors on the behaviour of elk (Cervus elaphus Linnaeus 1758) in a human-dominated landscape in Alberta, Canada.
Why is cheetah docile and why it not caused any human fatalities in history?
*This image is copyright of its original author Cheetahs made a sudden appearance in the fossil records around the globe at almost the same time, about 3.5 to 4 million years ago in the Pliocene, so it is difficult to determine exactly where they first arose. It appears that the cheetah split from other large cats several million years ago in a lineage that includes the puma and jaguarundi, a small South American cat. Cheetahs, pumas and jaguarundis are closely related with anatomical similarities, corroborated by recent molecular analysis. In prehistoric times, the cheetah's distribution was more extensive; several species of cheetah-like cats were widely distributed throughout Africa, Asia, Europe and North America up to only 10,000 years ago. The opening up of habitat during the Pliocene favoured a cursorial (running) lifestyle, which cheetahs have exploited to the maximum. The oldest known fossil records of the modern cheetah, Acinonyx jubatus are from East Africa about 3.5 million years ago, with slightly later records in southern Africa and Asia. A very large cheetah, Acinonyx pardinesis, lived in Europe during the Pliocene and Pleistocene, from about 3.2 million to 500,000 years ago. Fossils that have been uncovered suggest that cheetahs originated from North America and migrated to the Old World at around 5.5 million years ago. These fossils are largely similar to the modern cheetah’s skeleton, which means that prehistoric cheetahs probably possessed the very same anatomy required to survive in their environments, albeit with some differences. *This image is copyright of its original author A. pardinensis was the size of a small modern-day lion and weighed up to 105 kg, but had the same limb proportions as a modern-day cheetah. Because of its larger mass, A. pardinesis wasn't as fast as today's cheetah, but was still able to swiftly pursue its prey across the grassy steppes of Eurasia. At the same time as the European cheetah, a genus of sprinting cheetah-like cats called Miracinonyx arose in North America. The earliest species Miracinonyx inexpectatus, weighing up to 95 kg, was only slightly smaller than the European A. pardinensis, while the later form Miracinonyx trumani was smaller and resembled the modern cheetah, A. jubatus. M. Trumani survived up to 10,000 to 20,000 years ago. Both American cheetah-like species exhibited the same small, domed skull and slim, elongated bones of the existing species today, but differed in a number of skeletal features, including retention of fully retractile claws. M. expectatus had intermediate body proportions between a puma and a cheetah, but was more versatile, running faster than a puma and better equipped for climbing than a cheetah. A fossilized skull of a new species of primitive cheetah, Acinonyx kurteni, was recently found in China. The skull, between 2.16 and 2.55 million years old, is about the same size as living cheetahs but has a very wide braincase, enlarged frontal sinuses and primitive teeth. The discovery of this skull may cast doubt on the theory that cheetahs evolved in North America and spread into Eurasia and Africa. On the other hand, it is possible that the modern cheetah, A. jubatus, first evolved in Africa from an earlier species on the cheetah-puma lineage that had arisen elsewhere and colonised Africa, spreading into Eurasia. For example: during the early and middle Pleistocene, roaming the wide open plains of Europe and China was a species called the giant cheetah (see above), so named because it had the size of a lion (around 2 meters long). But just like its modern-day counterpart, this feline was built for speed despite its size, capable of outrunning its prey (ibex and elks, these two being larger than today’s gazelles) at around 112 km/h or more, due to its longer legs and back. *This image is copyright of its original author Why did cheetahs migrate from North America towards Africa and Asia, you might ask? Genome studies suggest that the spotted cats’ populations may have experienced a sharp decline around 100,000 years ago, either due to widespread diseases or a heavy depletion of prey species at around the end of the Ice Age, an event that lowered genetic variability. Other cheetah species could have been evolving elsewhere in the world (North America and Eurasia) at the same time, possibly from the same distant ancestor of the African (modern) cheetah. There are still large gaps of knowledge of cheetah evolution because few fossils have been found. The cheetah appears to have suffered a series of severe population reductions or "bottlenecks" in its history, with the most significant probably occurring during the late Pleistocene, about 10,000 to 12,000 years ago. Drastic changes in the earth's climate resulted in a major extinction of vertebrates worldwide (75% of all mammals in North America and Europe died). Over a few thousand years, all the cheetahs in North America and Europe, and most of those in Asia and Africa died. Cheetahs may have migrated to more suitable environments as ice covered a large part of the northern hemisphere and sea levels fell. The cheetah survived the mass extinction of the Pleistocene Epoch, but its numbers were greatly reduced. Brothers were left to reproduce with sisters and parents with siblings, which led to inbreeding. Today's population are direct descendants of the survivors, the only cheetah species that survived. The cheetah was first described scientifically by J.C.D. von Schreber in 1775 as Felis jubata from a specimen collected at the Cape of Good Hope. *This image is copyright of its original author This is proof that the cheetah has perfectly evolved to become the world’s fastest land animal, and to overcome all obstacles with its tremendous speed. Unfortunately, nowadays, its future is uncertain: indeed, even its incredible speed is not enough to escape all the man-made catastrophes (trophy hunting, habitat loss, poaching, conflicts with farmers, global warming…). Therefore, it’s only up to us humans to help cheetah populations replenish again. Eventually, cheetahs left the Americas towards their current ranges in Africa and Asia, where they thrived, roamed by the millions, and evolved many adaptations that enhanced their sprinting abilities (the elongated spine, the non-retractile claws, the long tail used for balance…). So, it doesn't belong to Pantherinae/roaring cats. It belong to medium sized cat group but informally called as big cat in which total of 9 exists. The modern cheetah evolved for speed hunting medium sized swift game and open habitats with a sleek aerodynamic body. It is not much robust like its pumoid (puma-like) ancestors like Giant cheetah. It doesn't involve in fighting with either predators and despite its success rate of 30-50% it sometimes loses its kills to lion, hyenas and even black backed vultures group. It ridiculously avoids, inter-specific conflicts even other opponent is smaller and inferior in strength. This makes it very docile. This is cheetah man, he daily goes to hunt with wild and free ranging african cheetahs (not raised by him). The coalition is of 5 male cheetahs with different hierarchies and not from same parents ie.., they are not brothers. They hunt on their own. This guy daily goes to them and earn their trust that he is not a threat to them by staying with them for some time even though they all try to attack him. After, earning their trust, they accept him in their coalition and make him as their pack member similar like wolves. This a daily scenario and circle of going to them>accepting their trust>becoming a member>hunting with them. A similar situation happened with this camera man and wildlife film maker. This docile, less aggressive behavior and fear of fighting with other species which lead to serious injuries to its light built body and impair its hunting skills is like a death sentence to them. This behavior combined with its ridiculous cuteness making perople around the world to go chaos, crazy to get a cheetah ass a pet and leading to illegal international cheetah or wildlife trade to get them as pets. A severe blow to cheetah conservation. In wild: This Masai tribe men steals kills from cheetahs and lions for livelihood. You can see how cheetah avoids to fight.  .
At lobpuri in Thailand, afrer the tourists have gone because of the coronavirus pandemy, the gangs of macaques don't have easy food any more at all. Thus, it's the "war" between them. The video is in french but you can easily understand the problem...
Human disturbance causes widespread disruption of animal movement
Abstract: Disturbance and habitat modification by humans can alter animal movement, leading to negative impacts on fitness, survival and population viability. However, the ubiquity and nature of these impacts across diverse taxa has not been quantified. We compiled 208 studies on 167 species from terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems across the globe to assess how human disturbance influences animal movement. We show that disturbance by humans has widespread impacts on the movements of birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish and arthropods. More than two-thirds of 719 cases represented a change in movement of 20% or more, with increases in movement averaging 70% and decreases −37%. Disturbance from human activities, such as recreation and hunting, had stronger impacts on animal movement than habitat modification, such as logging and agriculture. Our results point to a global restructuring of animal movement and emphasize the need to reduce the negative impacts of humans on animal movement.  *This image is copyright of its original author Fig. 1 | The global extent and magnitude of the impacts of disturbance on animal movement. a, Study locations, with each point representing an individual case (N = 208 studies and 719 effect sizes). b, Histograms of effect sizes (percentage change in movement in response to disturbance). Bin size is 25%. Five movement distance and six home range effect sizes >500% are not shown. c, Photos of representative taxa included in our database, left to right: sleepy orange butterfly (Eurema nicippe), southern leopard frog (Rana sphenocephala), tawny owl (Strix aluco), red-eared slider turtle (Trachemys scripta), diademed sifaka (Propithecus diadema) and great white shark (Carcharodon carcharias). Photos adapted from Flickr under Creative Commons license CC BY 2.0.  *This image is copyright of its original author Fig. 2 | Effects of disturbance on animal movement distances and home range size according to taxonomic groups. Positive effects represent increased movement in response to disturbance, and the opposite for negative effects. Symbols represent posterior means and coloured bands represent 95%, 80% and 50% CIs. Silhouettes adapted from PhyloPic under Creative Commons licenses CC0 1.0 and CC BY 3.0.  *This image is copyright of its original author Fig. 4 | Effects of different disturbance types on animal movement distances and home range size according to taxonomic groups. Positive effects represent increased movement in response to disturbance, and the opposite for negative effects. Symbols represent posterior means and coloured bands represent 95%, 80% and 50% CIs. The black box encloses the results for mammals. Silhouettes adapted from PhyloPic under Creative Commons licenses CC0 1.0 and CC BY 3.0
Just discovered on Youtube:
[color=var(--yt-spec-text-primary)]This lioness lost her life to a buffalo at Lake Nakuru national park mainly because of the gps collar,is there any other alternative of tracking wild animals?[/color]  *This image is copyright of its original author What do you think about ?  (09-23-2024, 07:02 PM)Spalea Wrote: Just discovered on Youtube: Makes me angry, her death is the direct result of the actions of the people who placed that collar on her. I have never liked that they collar these creatures, I don't even collar our dog when she's in the house, for this very reason, and I am here with her at all times. Things like this are predictable, and I wish they would stop.
@BA0701 :
" Makes me angry, her death is the direct result of the actions of the people who placed that collar on her. I have never liked that they collar these creatures, I don't even collar our dog when she's in the house, for this very reason, and I am here with her at all times. Things like this are predictable, and I wish they would stop. " I'm sadly quite agree with you. One of the so much numerous inconsistency of the human action... And carelessness too. To think having a such wild beast under control, despicable. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |