WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Terrestrial Wild Animals
›
Wild Cats
›
Tiger
White, Black & Golden Tigers
White, Black & Golden Tigers
|
White, Black & Golden Tigers
|
Gaute, that book is not easy to find. You cant just go to a library and check it out, very few libraries carry any of these books, i have to go and find them and buy them.
Now about Ranthambhore, it absolutely had a baby boom this year. More new mother and cubs where filmed and pictured than in the past years. This is coming from eye witnesses who go out and tour every day during the season. Kaziranga is another booming population, kahna, tadoba etc... They are now opening new parks for tourists, etc... You say we need to "conserve" these animals, but conservation is not captively breeding animals to release them later just to suffer the same problems down the road. The only "conservation" we should assist with, is the conservation of earth. Like I have said many times, these animals are only in danger because of us and the only way they can become healthy again is for us to stop destroying everything they need to survive. You don't "conserve" the president, you "protect" him. If you say these cats need our protection from us, than I absolutely agree. Now onto the first link “The white tiger in captivity in Rewa was caught in December 1915 in the jungles of the State near Sohagpur. He was about two years of age at the time. There were two more white tigers at the time in Southern Rewa related to this tiger but it was believed that the mother of this animal was not white. A big cage was kept for months in the jungle in which live pigs were placed to attract the tiger." Like I have said before, white tigers can absolutely occur in the wild, I have yet to see a adult white tiger survive. This speaks of a two year old who was forced to hunt captive pigs. His adult mother was orange as well. More proof that there is no way you could ever tell if the white gene is extinct, unless you tested every single tiger that walks the earth. Also paintings are quite hard to take as fact. Since so many exist of men killing lions and tigers with their bare hands, or babies suckling from them etc, Not saying that that aren't or are white tigers, but paintings are very hard to confirm one way or another. Now the 2nd link "In December 1915, one of these (a two-year-old male) was captured near Sohagpur, by the Maharajah Gulab Singh of Rewa. He exhibited it at his summer palace for the next five years, until its death" So that tiger that was caught lived to the age of 7, in captivity. Obviously a unhealthy speciman IMO. Next is this "On 27 May 1951, a male white tiger was captured alive in Rewa, and was housed within the now-disused summer palace of the Maharajah. This specimen was the famous Mohan, sire of the pure strain of white Bengal tigers subsequently exhibited in zoos ands circuses all over the world. Mohan was mated with many different tigers, all normal-coloured at first, from which only normal-coloured offspring were produced. However, when one of these was itself mated with Mohan, white tiger cubs were at last obtained, and the strain has thrived ever since, with new tigers introduced intermittently in order to strengthen and perpetuate the line. (Moreover, white tigers have also appeared spontaneously in other captive tiger lineages elsewhere, showing that the genetic basis for white tigers is more widely distributed through the world tiger population than once assumed.) This captive-breeding programme was studied in depth by Hong Kong University zoologists Drs Ian W.B. Thornton and K.K. Yeung, together with Dr K.S. Sankhala from Delhi Zoological Park, and in 1967 the trio published a [i]Journal of Zoology paper. In it, they proposed that the white tiger form was caused by a recessive mutant allele when present homozygously (i.e. represented by two copies, as opposed to just one, or none at all). Further studies by Thornton (by then residing at La Trobe University in Victoria, Australia) into the inheritance of the white phenotype (coat appearance) in tigers confirmed this (Journal of Zoology, 1978)." This shows that all over the world, white tigers came from mohan. Not just N. America Also shows the its a mutant gene that can occur naturally and is recessive which makes it almost impossible to tell which tigers do or don't have it unless every single one is tested. I did enjoy that 2nd article, very good info on it. TFS So my stance absolutely remains the same, I have yet to see any evidence of a white tiger being able to successfully reach adulthood in the wild, let a lone breed. I absolutely believe that white tigers occur in nature. And the chances of any surviving to adulthood are extremely slim.
This article takes your guys stance
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/201...143342.htm I will say that there are many accounts of adult white tigers, but no real images that I can find. The genetic deformities are most likely due to the massive inbreeding that has occured in white tigers. A wild white tiger could definitely be different to the captive specimens if it does exist in the wild till adulthood. My opinion definitely remains the same in regards to conservation, protect these animals and let a "white tiger" occur naturally, just like it did in the past. It will do so again. I am more open to the idea of white tigers surviving to adulthood in the wild. I still believe that any captive white tiger is genetically deform due to the massive inbreeding that has occured. While the gene has been seen in other captive tigers that they had no idea the tigers where carrying it, the tiger specimens are so few and far between that inbreeding still occurred. This is my conclusion after everything I have read. 
Here is the book in pdf format http://irtsa.net/pdfdocs/maneaters_of_kumaon.pdf . Download it and read it, page 204 and 246 . It mention about white tigers
Its the same pictures as Gaute posted, so i guess no clear image exists from that expedition. I am curious about the video if it exists, as well as if Sundquist saw any white tigers.
I really don't like these old hunting accounts though, they really make me angry. Killing animals that have no idea what is going on, mothers of cubs, fathers who protect them, just sad and useless times. Very disgusting IMO. I can only read pages up till 207, is that the same for you? TFS Sanjay
Also Gaute, here is info on Ranthambhore baby boom
 *This image is copyright of its original author Ranthambhore National ParkApril 8Female tigers of the tourism zone - All the mature females of the tourism zone of Ranthambhore have cubs right now : T 8 with one cub, T 19 with four cubs, T 39 has cubs (though no one has seen them as yet) and T 41 with one cub. Besides these there are three or four young females that have either just come of age or are still to young to have cubs. Besides these females there are about 14 males that can be seen in the tourism zones.Ranthambhore's biggest demographic problem is that there are far too many males and not enough breeding females in the park. 68108 SharesLikeLike · · =164990260221338&p[1]=655538851166474&profile_id=164990260221338&share_source_type=unknown&__av=100001388236295]Share
and anotherHey All, The 2013-2014 season has come to a glorious end at Ranthambhore and the park re-opens in October after the monsoons. Ranthambhore has been blessed with a baby boom and all its denizens seem to have pulled through the year without any fuss. Our next few posts shall highlight the current status of each Tiger family of Ranthambhore & what is expected next season. Here is an update # 2 on another family of Ranthambhore. T-24 (Ustad) : Happy & content as ever in his own domain. He is a prolific hunter and apparently, it seems he doesn't mind sharing food with either his mate Noor or son Sultan. Ustad has been a doting Dad to Sultan and looks all set to spend quality time with the new arrivals. How long both parents tolerate Sultan's presence remains to be seen. T-72 (Sultan) : Still a young brat, although he does manage to hunt on his own, he has often been sighted in close proximity to his mother Noor & her 2 new-born cubs. This grown up boy loves hanging around his parent’s area rather than seek out a territory for himself. As long as he doesn't venture out of the park, he looks all set to remain in his parent’s territory a bit longer than expected and keep putting on a show to his ardent admirers. T-39 (Noor) : A proud mother of 2 young cubs, she remains one of the star attractions of the park and we bet she will raise the new litter to adulthood without any hiccups and also impart lessons to remain oblivious to the presence of tourists. Her cubs shall be at least 7 months old by the time the park re-opens in October and she looks all set to be a show-stopper next season. It remains to be seen as to how long would Sultan, her offspring from the first litter, lurk around her territory. We wish to thank our good friend Vipin Sharma for letting us share this image of Noor feeding her cubs.— with Minh Ha and 38 others. https://www.facebook.com/tigertrackersindia more on Ranthambhore and a unknown male who took over bameras territory Ranthambhore was echoing with the purrs of a large number of cubs from the various adults and their carefree activities made the sighting season rich and delightful. Both the park favourites T39 and T19 decided to raise their new litter in the tourist zone giving the visitors an exciting sneak peak into the tiger life. Sub adult cubs from previous litters along with the orphan cubs of T17 kept the number of sightings rolling in. The legendary Machli also contributed her fair share by catching up with the visitors a number of times. Needless to say, the shutterbugs had a delightful time and indulged in some awe-inspiring photo shoots of the striped beauty. Bandhavgarh, yet another important tiger park of the country made an anxious start to the season with the news of a new male entering Tala zone and defeating Bamera. Loss of two Kankati cubs (each of the either sex) was an equal dampener as was the complete loss of Banbehi’s fresh litter. Most of the veterans had predicted the end of Bamera reign and his clan. Kankatis continued absence from Chakradhara was giving it a deserted look. However, the park surprised everyone with the cubs of Rajbehara and Mirchaini and increased the sightings count. The end of the season brought in the good news of Kankati raising yet another litter of three cubs soaring all hopes. Re-appearance of a male cub from her previous litter was also a great up lifter. http://us7.campaign-archive2.com/?u=8ec3...4b671544c2 Do you still consider Ranthambhore to be making up the baby boom, Gaute?
Well, I am not that expert, but i have found reliable source which state white tigers were present in wild. It's one of my favorite website , sciencedaily.com
White tigers today are only seen in zoos, but they belong in nature, say researchers reporting new evidence about what makes those tigers white. Their spectacular white coats are produced by a single change in a known pigment gene, according to the study, appearing on May 23, 2013 in Current Biology, a Cell Press publication. "The white tiger represents part of the natural genetic diversity of the tiger that is worth conserving, but is now seen only in captivity" says Shu-Jin Luo of China's Peking University. Historical records of white tigers on the Indian subcontinent date back to the 1500s, Luo notes, but the last known free-ranging white tiger was shot in 1958. That many white tigers were hunted as mature adults suggests that they were fit to live in the wild. It's worth considering that tigers' chief prey species, such as deer, are likely colorblind. Captive white tigers sometimes do show abnormalities, such as crossed eyes, but Luo says any frailties are likely the responsibility of humans, who have inbred the rare tigers in captivity. With the causal gene identified, the researchers ultimately hope to explore the evolutionary forces that have maintained tigers in both orange and white varieties. and here is link http://goo.gl/VvIyIT Well, there may not be Images and Video Proofs. But Images and Video are not common at that days. Not good camera even. Pckts, It is not necessary to believe things on basis of images or videos only, They are not everything to believe. Try to believe on others saying, belief and wisdom and specially the people whom you enjoy talking. Also, There are little evidence of white tigers in wild from past. BUT there is no article anywhere which deny possibility of adult white tigers in wild from past. (07-15-2014, 10:03 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: This article takes your guys stance Sanjay, read above.
Okay. I thought you disagree with all the proofs of white tigers in wild from past.
Here are some more article i found from internet, may be you have read them already, but just in case. They talk about white tigers. http://a-z-animals.com/animals/white-tiger/ http://www.lions.org/types-of-tigers.html http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/myths.html and this is report of research, we read on sciencedaily http://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/...0495-8.pdf 
Pckts, you're doing it again. You're putting words in our mouth as Guate pointed out. You're reading your preconceptions, not what is actually there, making it very difficult to discuss with you, as why should I defend something I am not saying? You said adding heterozygous tigers to a dwindling population would cause poaching and increased in-fighting. I rebutted each possible problem you presented with reintroduction of captive specimen if the population ever came so low. No where was it said to add white tigers to the population if ever needed. Heterozygous means specimens who carry the white recessive gene.
Captive populations are essential in this day and age. It isn't as simple as an animal being labeled as endangered and now the government will do a great job stopping all killing and deforestation. Not even India, a model for conservation has done that. Take a look at Africa, plenty of laws in place, but rhino, elephant, etc. populations are being poached at an alarming rate. Criminals don't live by the law that you rightfully want for these animals. Animals won't be left alone, accept that. It's better to have bleak outlook and do something about rather than false hope when the situation is just all about untouched nature. Finally, this is enough. Pckts, stop using words "you" in aggressive manners and phrases such as "haha" or "lol" toward someone's argument. That is rude, and causes the debate to become personal. Look at how Guate and I post, we stay from away from personality accusations such as saying "you don't love cats." Learn to debate professionally. Don't question the poster's integrity. Do not laugh at the poster's points. Do not mock a logic they present that you don't seem to understand. All this makes debating disgusting, and thus most of my time I've stayed away. (07-16-2014, 12:26 AM)'tigerluver' Wrote: Pckts, you're doing it again. You're putting words in our mouth as Guate pointed out. You're reading your preconceptions, not what is actually there, making it very difficult to discuss with you, as why should I defend something I am not saying? You said adding heterozygous tigers to a dwindling population would cause poaching and increased in-fighting. I rebutted each possible problem you presented with reintroduction of captive specimen if the population ever came so low. No where was it said to add white tigers to the population if ever needed. Heterozygous means specimens who carry the white recessive gene.What are you talking about? You're the one acusing me, yet you have personally attacked me numerous times. I have provided numerous data and info and have agreed or disagreed with evidence to back every thing I have claimed. Honestly, you chimed in with your own opinions when I have been having a discussion with Gaute the whole time. Look at this, Tigerluver "The proof of the adult white tigress is right there in front of you, and you're denying it. Here, the fault is your's, not Guate's or mine's." I never denyed anything, and my "fault" then the next one "You dodge the question, we both don't have concrete evidence. You presented a faulty argument" I never dodged any question nore have i presented a faulty argument. Lastly, you dont even know what you're arguing about anymore, you tried to say that nature can't come back on its own, posted numerous success stories of it occurring, your trying to say that introducing white tigers that have been selectively bred into the wild, is good for tigers? Yet you once again dismiss actual evidence of tiger over population leading to higher tiger mortality, cattle killing, villager interaction, etc... Honestly Tigerluver, i really don't care what you have to say, this never was between you and I, you simply joined in and have not presented evidence that would ever prove your argument right and mine "faulty" Endangered species coming back once protected from hunting, proves without a shadow of a doubt that animals just need to be left a lone and nature will provide. I have denied no facts, admitted to the idea of wild white tigers possibly making it to adulthood, shown that white tigers in captivity are all inbred aside from the freak occurances of white tigers in captivity that people didnt even know had the white gene, I have also shown that the white gene is in wild cats and has not gone extinct because there is absolutely no way to tell that without genetically testing every tiger. I have shown that Ranthambhore is in the middle of a baby boom. Etc. Proof of both Ranthabhore's growing population and proof of its higher mortality rate that has come from it... "The forest department of Rajasthan is facing an uphill task to manage the growing population of tigers in the Ranthambore Tiger reserve due to intra-specific fights resulting in grievous injuries and even death of the stripped cats. There has been reports of five tiger deaths due to intra-specific fight in Ranthambore. To avoid this situation taking a serious turn, the state forest department is contemplating to shift a few tigers from their original home to other suitable tiger habitat areas of the state.In recent past there has been reports of five tiger deaths due to intra-specific fight in Ranthambore Tiger Reserve. Wildlife experts are of the firm view that to manage a situation where the population of the feline increases beyond the carrying capacity of the area, the only solution is to shift the extra tigers to other suitable areas enabling them to lead a normal healthy life.As per census carried out in Ranthambore Tiger Reserve, there are around 60 tigers which also includes cubs. Going by the core area of the tiger reserve which is spread over 1,113 square km and the buffer zone comprising 298 square km, the space is certainly not adequate for the current population, feel experts who are of the view that the current population can only be sustain the existing tiger population in the same space if the prey base density becomes high." “Since such a situation does not exists, the solution is to shift the additional tiger, else apart intra-specific fights, the tigers may also stray out of the park in search of new homing ranges where a direct conflict with humans cannot be ruled out,” pointed out an expert who added that under those circumstances there could also be possibilities of tigers being poached. As per the management plans being drawn by the state forest department, the surplus tigers would be shifted to Sariska tiger Reserve and also to Alwar and Kota reserve forest areas, said an official of the state forest department. http://www.indileak.com/surplus-ranthamb...-habitats/ So, I think you and I are done with this debate.
For the last time, I never said release white tigers into the wild. Point that out to me please. I continuously repeat myself but nothing comes of it. Secondly, I was supporting Guate's argument. Furthermore, this is an open forum, anyone can chime in if they please.
Your faulty argument was that releasing white tigers into the wild would cause increased poaching, I explained why that is faulty. Notice here I defend I point I never made, one that you thought I made up. I said release captive animals could be released if worst comes to worst and we are low on or out of a wild population. The problem is that you're not reading what I am saying, not that I am lost in the fray of discussion. What success story of nature surviving on its own did I post? The horses that saved a species were captive. Where have I attacked you? I showed the problems I have with your argument. The faults in your argument in my perspective. Disagreeing with an argument is not a personal attack. I never questioned your integrity once. Did I question you're love of cats? Nope. That's a personal attack. Not saying this argument I find iffy. Debates can get professionally heated. That's half the fun. But it shouldn't resort to this.
"Your faulty argument was that releasing white tigers into the wild would cause increased poaching, "
So the Fact that white tigers where taken from the wild, hunted so that they don't exist in the wild, means what exactly? People are not going to hunt a even rarer version of a animal they are already hunting to extinction? Somebody has a "faulty argument" here, it's definitely not me. I also said numerous other negative effects that would come from selective breeding, genetic manipulation or introduction of more tigers to overly populated areas, so I'm not sure why you only latch on this one and not the fact that none of the cats would be wild, they would be numb to human presence, increased populations would cause higher mortality rates, the white gene still exists in tigers, etc.. "What success story of nature surviving on its own did I post? The horses that saved a species were captive." And the over 2000 species brought back from the brink of extinction on the endangered species list, were wild! If a animal is extinct in the wild, obviously the only way to bring it back is through captive breeding. White tigers are not extinct, neither is the tiger, this is not a logical comparision.
Clearly, you aren't reading anything I post thoroughly. Then you are interpreting the tidbits you read with your preconceptions. My standpoint is not the opposite extreme of you anti-captivity view. Captivity is a side project, a backup plan. You said poaching would increase on the tigers of the area. Copying and pasting from another post you didn't bother understanding and making it more specific so hopefully this time you get it:
Even then, a naturally occuring white tiger or two from rewilded heterozgotes popping here and there will increase poaching? So they'll start shooting orange tigers hoping one of them turns white? Poachers are ignorant, but not that much. I'll make it even more specific. A natural born white tiger from rewilded heterozygous parents occuring just like the accounts. Not one released from captivity. Answer that and maybe you'll convince me. Again, your retort doesn't fit what I'm saying, read the bold in my last post, if populations are low or on the way out. Captivity is a backup plan. Not a focus. Plus, rewilding does work. The horses are just one example. You wrongly claimed that I was the one using that evidence to contradict myself. You posted that piece, not me. That piece is very broad and general. I want specific like you are asking of us. Yes, fortunately there have been success stories of nature making it back, such as the southern white rhino. But there have been more of nature not making its way back. The northern white rhino is a lost cause now for example. Just look up species extinction. More failures than successes. We need to be ready to whatever comes our way. I'm not being pessimistic as you think I am, I'm being realistic. Like Guate said, we're in no utopia. Tigers are on their way to extinction, there's no denying that. In the last decade Panna and Sariska lost their tigers in the most successful tiger nation. Hopefully the wild population makes it, but for the tenth time, a captive population never hurts (it is a side project, the focus obviously should be on the wild population). Guate and I both agree that the white genes are probably gone from the wild. Think of it logically, not enough specimens and nothing has appeared in years. Pretty much how the Amurs are dwarves compared to their past. I've repeated myself multiple times, hopefully you get it now. 
If worst does in fact come to worst then captive tigers must be trained and re-wilded, there is no alternative. Either that or no wild tigers ever again. At this point in time, captive specimens are arguably even more valuable than wild specimens.
 (07-15-2014, 09:27 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: Im not sure how you rebutted my position?Pckts, you are scaring me. You are acting like... Asad! 1. There is not a single account of a large wild animal returning from extinction without the help of humans. There are cases of "invasions" like the pythons in Florida, but there are other factors in those cases. Wild horses, bison and other large mammals, all of them needed the direct help of humans for they recovery. 2. Jim Corbett is one of the most reliable sources, but now you put him in doubt just because he shows wild white tigers! For example, how many times you have defended the account of the two tigers killing the huge tusker, but now you use it to show that Jim made exaggerations? I am sure that many lion-fans would be glad with your words now. However, there is a huge fail in your argument, Jim NEVER said that HE saw that account. Read the book and you will see that he clearly said that some villagers told him that, so he is just telling the story, nothing more. However, in the case of the white tigers, he directly saw it, picture it and his record is in the book. What more do you need? The picture in the book (the digital version, of course) is more clear than many pictures in other post that all of us have accepted. I don't know why you denied its reliability. Why you don't ask Peter? I remember that he have a physical copy of the book. After all, he showed a better version of the two pictures of the Bachelor of Powalgarh. 3. I NEVER said that Dr Sunquist saw a white tigers. I was putting an EXAMPLE, a supposition that IF Dr Sunqusit would saw a white tiger, I will believe in him, just like I believe in Jim Corbett. Be careful with those interpretations. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 10 Guest(s) |