WildFact
›
Premier Section
›
Edge of Extinction
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
|
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
|
PANTHERA TIGRIS AMOYENSIS - L
L1 - Links to newspaper reports, articles, papers and books on the South China tiger There is not much on the South China tiger on the internet. Same for newspaper articles, papers and books. Most of what was published is unknown. For this reason, I decided to post a few links. Remember that not every book or article is up to par. For this reason, I will add a few comments when possible. L2 - Camps and Trails in China This book was published in 1918. The writer, R. Chapman Andrews, was 'Associate Curator of Mammals in the American Museum of Natural History and leader of the of the Museum's Asiatic Zoological experdition in 1916-1917'. Chapters VI and VII are about 'The Great Invisible'. In both chapters, Mr. Caldwell, an American missionary with a keen interest in hunting, features. Caldwell shot a large number of troublesome tigers, most of them man-eaters. Although shortish, both chapters are interesting to a degree because they are largely based on the experience of Caldwell. Caldwell was stationed in Futsing, about 30 miles from Foochow (Fukien Province). Tigers in that region were known as Amoy tigers. Those who wrote about tigers in China, as far as I can tell, didn't distinguish between tigers in the southeastern part of China and those in Shaanxi, Sichuan, Hubei and Hunan. Based on what I found, my guess is there was a difference. Tigers in the southeastern part of China could have been a local type of Panthera tigris corbetti, whereas those in the centre of China could have been Panthera tigris amoyensis. Although some tigers shot in the southeast exceeded 9 feet in total length and approached 400 pounds, most males fell (well) short of that mark. But there was a lot of individual variation (see the paragraphs below). Tigers shot in the elevated regions of central parts of China could have been similar in size at the level of averages. A male of 150 kg. (about 330 pounds) shot during the 'war on tigers' in the fifties and sixties of the last century was considered large for the district, but I also found reports about males well exceeding that mark. The table below was posted by a Chinese poster on the 'Animal versus Animal' (AVA) forum some years ago. The table is a bit deceptive, as it has both young and old animals. Most, if I remember correctly, were captive, but tiger 6400129 was a wild male shot in Shaanxi Province. This male, at 199 cm. in head and body and 190 kg., was both long and heavy:  *This image is copyright of its original author Some parts of Hunan Province were known because of the size of the tigers. Males exceeding 200 kg. (about 442 pounds) apparently were not rare. Tongdao County in particular was quite famous before the 'war on tigers' started. Anyhow. Here's the link to the book: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/12296/12296-h/12296-h.htm (chapters VI and VII) L3 - A site with information about Amoy tigers In the first decades of the last century (1900-1930 roughly), tigers in the southeastern part of China were more often hunted by Europeans and Americans than those in the centre of China. There were many reasons. One of them was access. Another was no forests. Approval of the local rulers also would have made a difference. The population no doubt supported a hunter going for a man-eater. In those days, Amoy tigers often hunted domestic animals as well as humans. Not a few hunters wrote that all Amoy tigers were man-eaters. Although this qualification wasn't accurate, man-eating tigers were not rare. American hunters in particular were quite active. I will post some of their stories in some time. Some years ago, I posted about the site referred to in the title of the paragraph. It has a lot of information. Not everything is reliable, but those interested in the Amoy tiger no doubt would be able to find their way. Here's the link: http://www.amoymagic.com/Amoytiger.htm L4 - A bit more on the size of Amoy tigers Some years ago, at AVA, I found this:  *This image is copyright of its original author I think it was posted by 'KingOfEurope'. Most unfortunately, I don't know where he got it. If one of you would be able to find the source, I would be very grateful. As to the information on the size of Amoy tigers. I remember that the tigers were measured 'between pegs'. The writer thought Amoy tigers more or less compared to Indian tigers for length, but my guess is they were shorter. It's also clear that they were less robust and shorter-skulled. Based on the other measurements, I think that a male reaching 400 pounds would have been quite exceptional. But you never know. Well over a century ago, there were more tigers. Much more. This means that individual variation would have been more pronounced. The newspaper article below was posted on AVA as well. It was published in the New York Herald on June 8, 1889:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
To support the point about camera trap avoidal in post #1180, there is actually a study done which explicitly explored camera trap avoidance in another clever carnivore, the coyote.
The work, Wariness of coyotes to camera traps relative to social status and territory boundaries , found that coyotes were alert to the camera traps and were inferred to a have purposefully avoided them to simply avoid human presence. The tiger, while perhaps not as bright as the coyote, could and very well may display similar avoidance behavior. Avoidance with almost nonexistence would then combine to form no modern photo record, at least in my opinion.
PANTHERA TIGRIS ALTAICA - 1
1a - Introduction Before starting on a series on Sunda tigers, I propose to visit Russia. After the Tiger Summit in St. Petersburg, the situation has improved in a number of respects. One is that there are more tigers. Two is that Amur tigers now have more room at their disposal than before (about 160 000 square km.). Three is that legislation (referring to poachers) is taken more serious than before. Laws are upheld and the media seem to be paying more attention to research and poaching. Not saying that tigers are headlines, but Russia seems to be more interested in wildlife in general and tigers in particular. Things seem to be looking bright. One of the reasons, apart from dedicated researchers and rangers, is politics. I'm not saying that Amur tigers and Putin are great friends, but he has a keen interest in wildlife. When you search the internet, you'll find quite a few videos in which Amur leopards and Amur tigers feature. Putin is never far away. This no doubt has an effect on the general public in the long run. Very different from the US. Russia is one of the few countries in which wildlife is considered important. So far, I'd say well done. 1b - Poaching More Amur tigers, most unfortunately, also means more opportunities for those interested in money. Amur tigers are rare and rare equals money. This paragraph has a few videos in which poached Amur tigers feature. This video is from January 2013. It shows a large male tiger. The poachers were arrested and the case featured in a special on a Russian channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Z2FvmJXl2c This video is from 2015. The poachers were arrested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk2nqKqR_7Y Here's another video from 2015. A young tiger was found dead on a forest road. They found the man who shot him and arrested him. The story made headlines. Watch the man and his weapon. In Russia, some of the young and wealthy consider shooting wild animals from fancy cars as something quite exciting. Not so long ago, also in Russia, a brown bear was killed by a driver of a fancy car. He was encouraged by the others participating (there were 2 cars involved). That story made headlines as well. I don't understand Russian, but those reporting on the case seemed quite upset: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01--CUnwp4o One more to close this paragraph. It shows a big male tiger shot by a hunter in 2015 in suspicious circumstances. The hunter was brought in for questioning: http://siberiantimes.com/ecology/others/news/n0476-rare-tiger-shot-dead-by-hunter-who-claims-he-was-attacked-by-the-predator-which-killed-his-dog/ 1c - Tigers and wild boars When you say wild boar, you say tiger. In nearly every region that has wild boars in Asia, tigers are never far away. The connection between both animals is strong. It also seems as if young tigers have a wild boar button that is pushed the moment they see one. The 3 young Amur tigers recently released into the wild (tiger 'Boris' was one of them), although not much older than 20 months, knew exactly where to find them and how to deal with them. The boars they killed were not small: Boris and the other male both killed and completely consumed a big male wild boar. Here's a video that shows the moment a tiger attacked a boar. Don't know if the boar was overtaken, but it's a remarkable video. It's only 41 seconds, so watch carefully: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2liQzvISnUA Tigers, including adult males, have been wounded and killed by wild boars in the Caspian region, India and Russia. This thread has a few pictures of big wild boars from India and Turkey. But Russian wild boars most definitely do not lack in size. In the eastern part of Siberia, boars well exceed 200 kg. at times. Although the picture in this video was distorted as a result of the angle, it's clear that the boar that featured was a big animal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3ngRwSkhCk 1d - Camera trap videos Wild tigers are elusive animals everywhere. Even researchers seldom see them. Camera traps can assist them in that they document behaviour not well understood. At least, if the tigers do not fear humans. Although tigers are still poached every now and then, Amur tigers have no reason to fear humans. The video below is from a camera close to a smell tree. It shows a big male tiger rubbing himself against a tree: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdeujCZcCFA 1e - The difference between Indian, Amur and Himalayan tigers The last video also shows the features typical for many wild Amur tigers. At about similar length (275-295 cm. in total length in a straight line), male Amur tigers usually have less volume than their Indian relatives. Amur tigers, however, have slightly longer skulls and limbwise they most probably outsize all other wild big cats. When you see a wild Amur tiger, you see exercise. As a result of a lack of large prey animals, Amur tigers need to have large territories. If hills and long winters with deep snow are added, 250 kg. (550 pounds) makes little sense. A wild cat of that size would struggle with energy deficits sooner or later. For an adult male, 160-210 kg. (354-464 pounds) would be just fine in most parts of the year. Although they were a bit heavier a century ago, a professional hunter with a total length of 285 cm. straight and about a kg. per cm. in length still is mighty impressive. When the situation keeps improving in Russia and China, more males will exceed 500 pounds (226,8 kg.) in the near future. But tigers well over that mark will be rare for the reasons mentioned. Unless they add length in the near future, as this will not effect the ability to walk and engage large prey animals. Captive Amur tigers exceeding, say, 600 pounds (272,16 kg.) often are significantly longer and taller than smaller Amur tigers. In Amur tigers, size isn't expressed in body volume and mass, but in length, skull size and limbs. Large wild Indian tigers often have very big necks and chests, whereas large Amur tigers often have long and robust legs. Same for skulls: Indian tigers have shorter but more robust skulls, whereas skulls of Amur tigers are a bit longer. Another difference is in the width of the rostrum in that they are wider and more robust in Amur tigers. The reason is longer and bigger canines need more room. All in all, one could say that Indian tigers adapted to large prey animals and intra-specific pressure in smallish reserves by getting bigger (more robust, especially in the neck, shoulders and chest), whereas Amur tigers adapted to less and smaller prey animals without sacrificing the ability to defend their kills from similar-sized or slightly larger bears. Himalayan tigers generally seem to compare to Amur tigers, but they have plenty of large herbivores close by and didn't need to adapt to scavengers (large bears). This resulted in long and robust cats. It's no surprise that some males exceed 600 pounds at times. 1f - At a glance 1 - Male Amur tigers in late winter/early spring 2013. Although seemingly quite robust on account of the winter coat, they're more long than anything else:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author 2 - Central India (Pench). Similar in size to the male Amur tigers, but more robust:  *This image is copyright of its original author 3a - Male tiger from Banke, Nepal. Although it may seem different, this tiger is both long and very robust in all departments:  *This image is copyright of its original author 3b - Male tiger from Royal Chitwan (Nepal). A different tiger, but similar in built: long, tall and very robust all the way:  *This image is copyright of its original author
 (06-01-2017, 04:57 AM)peter Wrote: PANTHERA TIGRIS ALTAICA - 1 @peter Thanks a lot for your valuable information. 
Wild indian tigers differ from location to location, albeit small variations but still different.
Tigers in Tadoba that I saw have a darker coat and their body structure seems a little less dense compared to pench and kanha where tigers have lighter coats and seemed more muscular. The guides told me that the more hilly areas in Kahna produced larger tigers, not sure if it's true or not, it's hard to tell with the naked eye. But I definitely think the fact that Kanha and Pench or much more hilly with dense vegetation year round, especially Kanha, is a main factor as to why they seem more robust. Maybe the heat of Tadoba plays a role in the Tigers appearance as well, may be not. I would assume that the same should hold true with Amurs, the ones living in hilly terrain should could be more powerful than others. The fact that they have less prey now a days spread over vast territories and the need for fat reserves in the winter may also contribute to their "lean look" in summer months. But in regards to "athletic look" I think you can look towards females and see that there is probably not much difference. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a more athletic tigress than what you see in central india. Males are harder to determine since I only saw 2 and both were large, bulky individuals. 
Traces of the tiger on a snow-covered road. The of Tiger Foot Size can be judged, On the protractor line: it is equal to fourteen centimeters.
http://samlib.ru/s/stukalow_wiktor_ewstafxewich/posledavlastelina.shtml  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
In Primorye, the hunter was found guilty of killing an Amur tiger.
https://www.gazeta.ru/social/2012/11/13/4850937.shtml  *This image is copyright of its original author
Just as recruitment rate of tigers is high, so also is mortality. Natural deaths due to fights, old age and disease keep numbers in check.
http://jlrexplore.com/gallery/photostories/just-tigers  *This image is copyright of its original author
(06-01-2017, 09:49 PM)Pckts Wrote: Wild indian tigers differ from location to location, albeit small variations but still different. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AMUR AND INDIAN TIGERS Although the treats discussed in the previous post are arbitrary, there is reliable information pointing in the direction of distinct regional differences in India. A century ago, tigers shot in the northern part of India were longer and heavier than in southern India. Nepal tigers topped all tables. After World War One, the situation drastically changed in many parts of Asia. Amur tigers nearly completely disappeared in the first decades of the last century. They adapted to more pressure and smaller prey animals by droppping a few inches and pounds. I'm not sure about the conclusion in a paper published a few years ago (in which it was concluded that most historical records are unreliable), but today's Amur tigers do seem smaller than a century ago. Apart from the reasons mentioned before (habitat destruction, prey depletion and tough conditions), I noticed a very limited amount of individual variation in wild Amur tigers. This most probably is a result of the population bottleneck in the thirties and forties of the last century: only 10-15 tigresses survived the unslaught. In Korea and Manchuria, tigers have disappeared completely. Tigers in India and Nepal also were severely threatened in the sixties and seventies of the last century, but there were still more than a thousand tigers left when it was decided to protect them. Those living in reserves today can hunt large animals and the result is many tigers in smallish reserves. As leaving the reserve usually is not an option, competition is intense (see Betty's last post). This might have resulted in robust survivors. In the end, however, conditions could be decisive regarding size. A large and robust specialist facing smallish prey animals, periodal migrations of deer and wild boars, long winters, deep snow and long distances on a regular basis will struggle with energy deficits every now and then. Loss of size is perhaps the best way to adapt. That and the ability to walk long distances (territories of Amur tigers are much larger than in India or Nepal). FEMALES Sexual dimorphism is very outspoken in all members of the Panthera family. Biologists think that sexual drive is the main reason. When measuring tiger skulls, I noticed that female skulls are not as well defined as male skulls. There are distinctions between subspecies, but they are limited. Based on what I have, I'd say that individual variation in Indian tigresses is more outspoken than in other subspecies. Some females are nearly twice the size of others. If we add other measurements, the conclusion on size (between Indian and Amur tigers) is similar as in males in that Indian tigresses, at about similar length, usually are heavier. If you would compare dozens of photographs of wild Indian and Amur tigresses, you would most probably see a pattern. What you see isn't always clear as a result of the outspoken wintercoat and the relatively large skull of Amur tigresses, but they are not as heavy as Indian tigresses. From a distance, you'd conclude that one of the two offered speed and agility for more power. This most probably is an adaption to prey size. When I would be able to get to a few tables, the results most probably underline the impression I have. You can also see it in captive tigresses. I've seen quite a few Amur tigresses exceeding 8.8 in total length in a straight line, but nearly all of them were very symmetrical in built. Captive Indian tigresses, like captive lionesses, often are shorter and more stocky. Same for extra-large individuals. ATHLETICISM When I refer to 'athleticism', I mean symmetry. This means that not one factor really stands out. Maybe symmetrical big cats differ from robust big cats in that a robust cat is robust in all departments, whereas a symmetrical cat is reinforced in some parts of the body without sacrificing agility and speed. The most symmetrical cat could be the puma (a large small cat), closely followed by the leopard (a big cat of similar size). Of the other large cats, the tiger is the most symmetrical. This means that tigers often combine strength with speed and agility. Lions seem to be a bit 'top-heavy' and, whereas jaguars are robust in all departments. In specialised hunters, like wild cats, one often notices a balance between length, weight, strength, agility and speed. But often isn't always. In a cheetah, strength and agility were offered for speed. Jaguars offered speed for strength and lions offered symmetry for a top-heavy front. In pumas, leopards and tigers, balance is the first word that comes to mind. In general, it's easier to be well-balanced when you're not too big. A tiger is the exception to this rule. For this reason, I consider it relatively more athletical than the other big cats. When you see a tiger, you see symmetry. A large male tiger from northeast India, however, is more robust than anything else. Some males are built like a tank. When you think of athleticism, you don't think of a tank. Wild Amur tigers and wild Indian tigers are similar in length and limb length, but Indian tigers often are more robust and heavier. The emphasis is on power, whereas it is on legs in many wild Amur tigers. That and length. SOME EXAMPLES 1 - Puma (Zoologischer Garten, Berlin) Southwestern part of the USA. Spine long, legs muscular and hindlegs longer than front legs. Skull small. Most athletic of all large cats. Pumas have killed and eaten humans, but incidents of this nature are very rare:  *This image is copyright of its original author 2 - Leopard 2a - Java (Zoologischer Garten, Berlin) This is an adult male. Similar in length to the puma above, but hindlegs shorter and skull larger. This cat also is very athletic, but it's more robust and not as fast as a puma. Leopards are more visible than pumas and less timid:  *This image is copyright of its original author 2b - Northern India Although larger and more robust than the Javan leopard above, this male still was well-proportioned. It was shot because it was a notorious man-eater:  *This image is copyright of its original author 3 - Lion 3a - Zimbabwe Adult male lion Zimbabwe. About as large as an Indian tiger, but more cursorial and, as a result of the large skull, a bit 'top-heavy'. Good for penetration, but a bit unstable in heavy seas. Not afraid of humans. Athleticism isn't the word first that comes to mind when you see a male lion:  *This image is copyright of its original author 3b - Okavango Pride male in his prime. Long-skulled, robust and very present, but not athletic:  *This image is copyright of its original author 4 - Jaguar Photo Sascha Siemel. Large male jaguar with a large, wide skull, a powerful neck and robust limbs. Raw power, but not a prime example of athleticism:  *This image is copyright of its original author 5 - Tiger 5a - Central India Although much larger than the wolf, the tiger could get to him. The wolf knows. Wild male Indian tigers often are robust animals. This male still had a bit of growing to do. Less top-heavy than an average lion, Indian tigers also are more elusive and more aggressive towards humans. They still kill dozens of humans every year. Spine long and bow-shaped, long and muscular legs and a more rounded, large skull:  *This image is copyright of its original author 5b - Sumatra This male is wel-balanced in all respects. Maybe this is 'Fearful symmetry':  *This image is copyright of its original author 5c - South-central India Adult male in his prime (Raja). Although very muscular and tall, this male also was fast and agile:  *This image is copyright of its original author 5d - Northeastern India The male below is so robust that he almost seems a dwarf, meaning he lacks length in all respects. He didn't. I'm not saying that all wild males in Kazirangha compare to him, but the number of photographs of robust males in that region is quite extended. When trying to find words to describe him, athleticism would come last. Those who hunted Assam tigers a century ago wrote that not a few males hunted buffalos and elephants. Today, some male tigers added rhinos to the list. The conclusion is that tigers in northeastern India adapted to large prey animals. The result is a stocky and robust animal. Not longer, but heavier than in most other regions. Assam females also hunt large herbivores at times, but not as often. Although relatively less robust than males for this reason, they still outaveraged tigresses in other regions a century ago. The male below, although exceptional, illustrates the robustness typical for quite many Assam male tigers:  *This image is copyright of its original author 5e - Russia (Baikov, 1911) Although I have seen captive male Amur tigers that, weightwise, compare to some of the largest wild male Kazirangha tigers, most wild Amur tigers today are about as heavy as an average wild male tiger from central India a century ago (170-210 kg.). At that weight, they could have slightly longer skulls and legs. Although the front limbs are bigger, the body usually is less robust. Wild Amur tigers often struggle with long winters, deep snow, few prey animals and, as a result, periodic energy-deficits. A century ago, they followed wild boars when the herds moved as a result of a crop failure. Today, they sometimes enter villages when the going gets tough. Most of them are adolescents and young adults ranging between 18-48 months. Learning how to survive takes a lot of time. Not every adolscent grows into an adult. The tiger below, at 11.7 'over curves' in total length and 560 pounds, is the accepted record but experienced researchers think large males might reach 600-650 pounds at times:  *This image is copyright of its original author Surviving includes learning how to deal with bears. The photograph below is a bit deceptive, as the tiger seems to be as big as the bear. This is not the case. Adult male brown bears average about 270 kg. (just under 600 pounds): 30-40% heavier than a male tiger of similar length (referring to head and body length). Amur tigers hunt bears, but most bears killed are smaller (about 100 pounds, Bart Schleier thought). Although interactions have been witnessed, male tigers and male bears seem to avoid each other. Male tigers are seldom displaced, but females with cubs are more vulnarable:  *This image is copyright of its original author
The Siberian tiger, Caspian tiger, and South China tiger are the most interesting subspecies. Especially the Caspian and South China tiger since we don't know anything about them in wild and they distributed in wild range with variety nature environments.
My Chinese friedn translated this This tiger was killed on 8/13/1965 near Zhangjiajige National Forest Park (I think Pokemon: Jirachi Wish Make and famous blue color alien movies were based on here) It was a huge male South China tiger: Total length of 290 cm long, 143 cm high (shoulder was definitely wrong measurement), and 175 kg. He was the same weight as today's male Siberian tiger in wild.  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author I think South China tiger's morphology and size were very different in each provinces of China. Sichuan, Yunnan, ...etc tigers in these areas were generally smaller and athletically built since there's many steep mountain in these area. Jiangsu, Hanam, Shandong, Shanxi..etc. These areas have a lot of plain. Tiger was probably different than Sichuan (tiger was probably a lot different than majority known South China tiger since this is northern northern provinces) https://www.mapsofworld.com/physical-map/maps/china-physical-map.jpg http://upfile.haotianjin.net/news/2011117111940317.JPG  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
PANTHERA TIGRIS ALTAICA 2
2a - The Russian Far East (RFE) The Russian Far East is a very interesting region for a number of reasons. The first of these no doubt is politics. A large part of what's now Primorye belonged to China only a century and a half ago. The Russians got it by making the Chinese an offer they, ehh, couldn't refuse. It might have saved the Amur tiger when the population was down to 20-40 individuals in the thirties and forties of the last century: after Kaplanov had rung the bell, it was decided to protect the Amur tiger. Manchurian tigers were not so lucky. I don't know when they vanished, but the very large male shot by the Jankowski's near the Sungari River in July 1943 could have been one of the last. Climate comes second. The Martime Province is affected by different weather systems. One result is instability. In 'Dersu The Trapper', V.K. Arseniev describes the terrible results of severe storms. Not seldom, he saw large sections of forest completely flattened. Another result is very outspoken contradictions: winters are long and severe, but summers are almost subtropical. This has an effect on both humans and animals. The third reason, no doubt a result of the second, is the unreal mix of animals. Some of them are taiga animals, whereas others are typical for subtropical or even tropical regions. In the RFE, Himalayan black bears, Ussuri brown bears, wolves, leopards and tigers are neighbours. 2b - Bears and tigers in the Russian Far East Bears are omnivores and scavengers, whereas big cats are hunters. This means it's very likely that bears will visit tiger kills. It also means that both meet at times. What is 'at times'? In the RFE, there are about 500 tigers. There could be about 5 000 bears, maybe more. If we add proximity, excellent noses (bears), few prey animals, regular crop failures and competition for food, chances are that interactions between tigers and bears could be quite frequent. More frequent than is assumed. Tiger 'Boris', also known as Putin's tiger, was trained in a rehabilitation center when he was young. When he was ready to go, Boris was released in a region that had few tigers. Important, as he only was a subadult at that time. Boris had no problems making a living in the wild. He hunted wild boars, including large males. We know, because he had a collar. Every now and then, researchers visited the places Boris had used. In this way, they found the remains of the wild boars. They also found the remains of bears on 2 occasions. One of them was a 3-year old brown bear. They couldn't identify the other, as there was not much left of the bear. Was Boris already an accomplished bear-hunter at that young age? Not likely. It's more likely that the wild boars he had killed had attracted bears. At least 2 of them found Boris at home when they visited his kill. Disputes at kill sites are quite common. Was Boris unique regarding bears? Not likely. Another collared tiger, a subadult female, also hunted wild boars. Her kills attracted bears as well. This tigress avoided contact, in this way preventing a potentially dangerous dispute. Based on what was published by THE AMUR TIGER PROGRAMME, the conclusion is that tigers learn about bears the hard way when still in their teens. Some, like Boris, are able to overcome them, whereas others don't know how to deal with them and avoid them when possible. 2c - Fights between bears and tigers As a result of a lack of good information, many assume that fights between adult tigers and bears are singular events. Some years ago, I joined a debate about tigers and bears on AVA. Before I did, I decided to read anything available about tigers and bears. Nearly everything I read had been written by experienced biologists, meaning the information I had was reliable. When I was done, I got to well over a 100 fights (bears killed for food were excluded) that had ended in a tragic way. Assuming that the incidents that were described or pieced together were the tip of the iceberg (the RFE is huge, whereas the numbers of researchers is limited), the conclusion was that disputes could be more frequent than is assumed As to the outcome of fights. The information I collected confirmed the opinion of authorities, who concluded that tigers win most fights. The problem is that details about the individuals involved in disputes often are lacking. Russian authorities concluded that tigers win most fights in their weight category. This means that it is very likely that most of the bears killed were juveniles, subadults and females. Adult male bears, however, are a different story. When a male bear reaches adulthood, extra layers of muscle on the shoulder and neck develop. Adult male brown bears also are heavier than adult male tigers. As they more or less compare in head and body length, this means that adult male brown bears are more robust than adult male Amur tigers. In a fair fight, therefore, one has to fancy the chances of male brown bears. Russian authorities agree, but they added that brown bears 'win on points'. Fatalities, therefore, are rare. One reason is that male tigers can leave a fight not going they way, which is not true for bears. As a result, statistics about the outcome of fights could be biased towards tigers, some think. As to the fatalities. Fights between males that ended in a tragic way have been described in a number of posts in this thread. Two of the male bears killed were 'Shatuns'. Non-hibernating bears are very hungry and desperate animals, prepared to attack anything. Most of them die sooner or later. Another male bear was killed by the largest tiger the Jankowski's had even seen. Most of the male tigers killed were young adults killed by male bears described as 'large' or 'very large' (some individuals of Ursus arctos lasiotus can reach 1 000 pounds and over). Maybe the tigers were desperate as well and maybe they were overconfident. All in all, one could say that abnormal circumstances at times produced casualties (bears). Inexperience also could have been a factor (tigers). 2d - Adult male Amur tiger dies in Khabarovsk Territory The story in this paragraph is based on reports published by THE AMUR TIGER PROGRAMME. This means it is reliable. In November 2014, a young male tiger strayed into a village in the Vyazemsky District. He attacked a dog and was taken to the Utyos Wild Animals Rehabilitation Centre. On May 28, 2015, about 6 months later, the tiger, estimated at about 3 years of age, was released into the wild in the Khabarovsk territory. As he had a collar, researchers were able to monitor him for a long time. About 6 weeks later, he had settled in the Anyuisky National Park. The tiger avoided everything connected to humans, including settlements and roads. This means that researchers often had to move through difficult terrain in order to find out a bit more. Late November 2015, the male nicknamed 'Uporny' (meaning 'tough' or 'tenacious') had moved to the Gur River Basin (part of the Gursky Wildlife Sanctuary in Komsomolsky District). Not much later, he met a tigress. In september 2016, she had cubs. In order to monitor the family, researchers decided to use the collar for another 18 months. On February 17, 2017, the signal was lost. In mid-March, researchers decided to visit the site where the last signal had been received. They found a dead tiger. Experts think Uporny " ... died from wounds to this head and back caused by a brown bear attack ... ":  *This image is copyright of its original author 2e - A few remarks After reading the report above, I decided to find out a bit more about 'Uporny' and the winter in the Khabarovsk Territory. Tiger 'Uporny' was 4,5-5 years of age when he died on February 17, 2017. Although researchers arrived about a month later, the carcass was still there. This means that the tiger had not been consumed. As temperatures had been well below zero between mid-February and mid-March, my guess is the tiger was frozen. Tigers killed by other tigers often die from wounds to the skull. Tigers killed by bears die from strangulation or internal damage (fractures). Uporny died from wounds to his head and back, meaning it isn't a clear-cut case. Although experts concluded a brown bear could have been involved, there are reasons for doubt. Brown bears in the RFE hibernate. Uporny was killed in mid-February. This means he was killed in winter. If he was killed by a brown bear, chances are it was a 'Shatun' (non-hibernating bear). A 'Schatun' is a starving and often desperate animal willing to attack anything in order to eat. But 'Uporny' wasn't consumed. Some bears are known as 'satellite-bears'. These bears do not hibernate. According to researchers, they solve the food problem by following tigresses with cubs. These bears most probably don't fear male tigers. The drive of these bears is food. If 'Uporny' would have been killed by a 'satellite-bear', chances are he would have been consumed. But he wasn't. I found a few recent reports about bears in the Russian Far East. As a result of a crop failure, many bears died in the period 2015-2017. Those that survived, were far below par. This means that it is likely that many bears are close to starvation: http://siberiantimes.com/ecology/casestudy/news/hungry-exhausted-only-half-their-normal-weight-tragedy-for-black-bears/ As it is likely that brown bears also were affected by the crop failures, more of them would have been prepared to risk a fight with a tiger in order to get access to their kills. But if they would prevail in a fight, the tiger would have been eaten. Another possibility is that 'Uporny' was involved in a fight with a male tiger. Amur tigers mate in winter. Many hunters and researchers wrote about intense fights. The ferocity and the sounds drove some of them nearly insane. Male tigers mutilate their opponents at times, but they very rarely eat them. All in all, I would get to unclear for now. It could have been a brown bear, but a male tiger can't be excluded. We have to wait for the autopsy report. I hope it will be published, but I don't think it's likely: THE AMUR TIGER PROGRAMME never published an autopsy report before.
PANTHERA TIGRIS ALTAICA 3
3a - Position of the Russian government on conservation and poaching Between 1890-1910, those who knew about Amur tigers thought they would be gone in a decade. Two maybe. They were close. In the thirties and forties of the last century, 20-40 individuals were left. Lev Kaplanov was the one who rang the bell. Although he was shot (most probably by poachers), the Sovjets heard the bell and quickly acted. Amur tigers have been protected ever since and it had an effect. Today, almost a century later, there are 480-540 Amur tigers. Most live in the Russian Far East, but there is a small population in the northeastern part of China again. North-Korea most probably also has a few tigers. Not bad. But it took a long time to get there. Why was that? It wasn't tigers, as they quickly respond to good conditions. There could have been 500 Amur tigers some decades ago. It didn't happen, because of a number of reasons. One is that the whole region had been neglected for a long time. People took the 'sea of forest' and its natural wealth for granted, which resulted in a lack of interest and, in the end, in near-total destruction. Habitat destruction, a lack of prey animals and severe winters offered few chances for professional hunters. For this reason, Amur tigers needed very large territories. They still do. A tigress collared only a few years ago by researchers of the AMUR TIGER PROGRAMME needed about 900 square km. to survive! This surprised many, as the situation had improved quite a bit in Russia in the last decades. Although true, there is a difference between 'improved quite a bit' and 'good'. In some of the well-stocked reserves of India and Nepal, 10-20 square km. will do for a tigress with cubs. A big difference. Another factor that limited the number of tigers is poaching. Poachers can be divided into 4 groups: locals (villagers and farmers mostly), local hunters (in the RFE, over 60 000 have a hunting license), professionals and opportunists. In general, locals start poaching when they need to (after the collapse of the Sovjet-Union, many lost their job and savings and turned to the forest for food). Hunters consider big predators as competitors (a confirmed habit everywhere). Professionals like markets and rare animals and opportunists like, ehhh, opportunities. There are different ways to fight poaching and habitat destruction. The most effective of them is government. Theoretically, government represents all. Based on everything I read, I'd say that many Russians feel connected to nature. A good start. Most know that the present situation is far from perfect. If you want to change a situation not to your liking, you first need to describe one you prefer. When done, you need to describe a way to get there. All of this requires extensive research. The next step is starting a project directed by a well-known institution. One connected to government. Central government, if possible. From there, it gets tricky. The reason is that most of those involved in politics don't really care about conservation. More often than not, it's right at the bottom. Not so in Russia. Putin has been around for quite some time now and there's no question that he is interested in conservation. This is important, as it will speed thing up in many ways. In 2008, a project was started to protect the Amur tiger: THE AMUR TIGER PROGRAMME. It's an independant project carried out " ... as part of the Russian Academy of Sciences' ungoing expedition to study the animals in Russia's Red Data Book and other particularly important species of animals in Russia. The expedition was launched in 2008 as part of work of The Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution at the Russian Academy of Sciences (IEE RAS). The research supervisor of the expedition is Academician Dmitry Pavlov, who also is the director of IEE RAS; the head of the expedition is Doctor of Biology Vyacheslav Roshov, who also is a deputy director at the institute ... " (THE AMUR TIGER PROGRAMME). What was achieved so far? Apart from the project mentioned above, there was an international meeting in St. Petersburg in 2010. At the Tiger Summit, it was decided to double the number of wild tigers in 2022. In The Russian Far East, new reserves and buffer zones were created. If all proposals are adopted, Amur tigers will have 160 000 square km. at their disposal. Unprecedented. The Russians and the Chinese are discussing plans to enlarge the number of Amur tigers in northeastern China and facilitate movement. Talking corridors. And poaching? One of the goals of THE AMUR TIGER PROGRAMME is to increase awareness among those living in and near Amur tiger territory. Popular science is used to get there, but the project also addresses educational and social issues. Did it have an effect? Based on what I saw so far (schools, zoos, articles in Russian newspapers, videos and reports about poachers on television), I think it had. One long-distance train carries an enormous pictures of an Amur tiger all over Russia and I also saw a large Boeing with an Amur tiger on the nose. Locals in particular seem to have changed their attitude. They alert specialists when they find deserted cubs and adolescents and young adults entering villages in winter are no longer shot, but darted and rehabilitated. How about the local hunters? That one was easy, as researchers used a bigger enemy to convince them that tigers are not too bad. What enemy are we talking about? The big bad wolf, of course. There are way more wolves than tigers, meaning wolves hunt much more wild animals. More food for wolves = less for hunters. If we add that tigers actively hunt wolves at times, it wasn't difficult to convince them to choose sides. How do the Russians deal with the illegal trade in rare wild animals? According to Sergei Donskoi, Minister of Natural Resources and Environment of Russia, the value of the global market was 17-20 billion euros or about 20-25 billion US-dollars roughly. Yes, billion. Every year. Rare wild animals. At the moment, the legal framework to do something about professional poachers is not up to par. In October 2016, Sergei Donskoi proposed to intensify efforts to fight poaching and toughen punishment. Is it needed? Most certainly. In 2015, the Russians discovered over 600 adds in which (parts) of about 2 500 rare wild animals were offered. In about 30% of them, tigers featured. I'm not saying that hundreds of Amur tigers are poached every year, but we're also not talking about a few individuals only:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
PANTHERA TIGRIS ALTAICA 4
4a - Poaching In April 2012, Nachodka 'businesssman' E. Romanov was paid a visit. Police. They found 34 Himalayan black bears, 12 brown bears, 4 rare eagles (Stellers eagle), 6 Amur tigers and a lot more. Although he was jailed, they had to let him go. The criminal case failed because it took too much time. As a result of that, the criminal investigation - the base of the case - expired. Although free, Romanov wasn't off the hook. A civil case was started. In February of this year, almost 5 years after the event, it was finally concluded: Romanov was fined $155,000 by the Primorye Regional Court. Although it was substantial, Romanov, described as an 'influential businessman', most probably considered the fine as a joke. Here's the link to the article in 'The Siberian Times'. The photographs are graphic: http://siberiantimes.com/ecology/others/news/n0864-poacher-fined-155000-for-illegal-hunting-of-6-endangered-tigers-and-46-bears/ The criminal case against Romanov was based on laws that proved inadequate. This is the reason why Sergei Donskoi, the Russian Minister of Natural resources and Environment, proposed to adapt the law in October 2016. His proposal was supported by Putin, but I don't think the new law is ready for use. 4b - New outlook needed I'm not sure what was meant with 'influential' and 'businessman', but my guess is Romanov made some money and used it to start his own empire. This is how it works in capitalism: those able to outwit others profit. In the end, this ability will produce wealth for all. As the system is based on personal initiative and the production of wealth, those able to perform in this department will get to the top sooner or later. Wealthy individuals are no different from others in that they like to be acknowledged as well. Most buy their way into decisions and invisible power, but some need to underline their status in a more visible way. Illegal hunting is one way to show superiority. And this is what is really is, as it shows contempt for those who rule. Although this system produces more (material) wealth than others, it also produces poverty (a basic ingrediënt of capitalism). Another result of free enterprise is habitat destruction. The natural world is getting smaller and smaller. Humans (referring to individuals), at times and to a degree, can overcome some of the consequences of poverty, but this is not true for those making their home in the natural world. When their habitat disappears, they disappear. And when they go, they will not return. Capitalism is not that old, but the effects on the natural world have been severe already. When things don't change, habitat destruction will continue at an ever faster rate. As a result of higher temperatures and more precipitation, ice will melt. Rising sea levels will quickly affect weather systems, resulting in more thunderstorms and more floods. Rivers will need more room, which will affect many settlements. In poor regions, calamities are to be expected. At first, those affected will be assisted in some way. But when the number of calamities rises, only those who can afford it will survive. Many organisations and systems will collapse. Ever considered the consequences? What do you think will happen when states collapse? I'm not saying the system in use needs to be changed drastically as soon as possible, but we got to put things in the right perspective. In capitalism, we have two major players: market and government. As to markets. In theory, consumers and providers meet at a place called reasonable price. Initially, the strategy of a firm was to provide a good product for a competing price. In the last decades, however, most small firms were eaten by big ones. These big corporations concentrated on transforming customers into zombies. That and deals. It had an effect. In the near future, corporations will enlarge their market by affecting behaviour. The next step is providing services that have been put aside by 'modern' government. When government has been sidelined as well, corporations will finish the job by offering a global policy promising wealth and stability for all. It will be just another deal. This time, however, the outcome for those that didn't see it coming will be somewhat different. As the natural world, except for a few 'Jurassic Parks', won't contribute to (material) 'wealth', it's game over in that respect as well. What I'm saying is government, in spite of all problems resulting from incompetence and conflicting interests, has more future than its opponent. It's not a plea for the opposite of capitalism, but we would be better off with a system in which there is a kind of balance between government and business. With 'a kind of' I mean government should have the last word. The reason is it has, or should have, a wider scope than business. If we don't act fast, it could be game over. Maybe it already is. When I watch the proceedings in the world's largest economy, I wonder who is directing who. In Europe leading politicians seem a bit naive, but further east, things are definitely different. Hence the campaign directed at leading politicians, perhaps? I mean, do we really have a free press? And who is misinforming who? And why? Anyhow. Change is in the air and it doesn't look promising. We need to change a number of things. Here's a few ideas. When biologists want to know if an eco-system is healthy, they look at apex-predators. Apex-predators can only survive when the eco-system is ok. When politicians want to know if a society is healthy, they should adopt a similar strategy. The difference between biologists and politicians is in the object of study: for biologists, big cats are apex-predators and for politicians it's us. The easy part is that humans and big cats are no different: both are predatory mammals. This means that we should develop a similar strategy as biologists; preservation and restoration of eco-systems. The means that consolidation has to replace economic growth as the leading objective. Problem solved. As to the Romanovs of this world. Humans are social animals. They adapt to the system used. Same for those considered as criminals. Studies into criminal behaviour have shown that political and socio-economic circumstances, regarding crime, are way more important than anything else. Same for legislation and the way it is applied. Law and order often isn't law and order. Not anymore. When governments have to cut, Justice is the first department they consider. At least, in Europe. Conclusion. The system in use has a number of shortcomings. It's no problem in a period of economic growth, but during a recession things often quickly deteriorate as a result of more cuts. As we've had one crisis after the other in the last three decades, it had an effect. In the country where I live, local politicians, judges and all others involved in justice say they just don't have the capacity anymore to do what is expected. The result is even less trust in politicians and more people voting for parties opposing everything in general and in particular. One day, they'll get a majority. Most of their foremen will dwarf Trump in the department of unsound decisions and I don't mean maybe. What we need is sound decisions taken by responsable people guided by insight. Their policy should be directed at developing a new outlook. An outlook in which preservation and survival are key words. As we can only survive when the eco-system is preserved, we could call it a policy of rehabilitation. In order to contribute, I'll contact the director of the Utyos Wild Animals Rehabilitation Centre in the Russian Far East, Eduard Kruglov. Over there, they know about an apex-predator that could compare to us: the Amur tiger.
PANTHERA TIGRIS ALTAICA 5
5a - Pictures I agree the previous post was a hard nut to crack. In order to make it up with you, this post has a few pictures. It will be edited over time, as I need it to find a few nice ones. I'll start with tiger Zavetny in the Bastak Nature Reserve. The picture at the bottom was taken in summer last year. Watch the forest. Almost subtropical:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author Tigress Zolushka and cubs, November 2016:  *This image is copyright of its original author
PANTHERA TIGRIS ALTAICA 6
6a - Tigers and bears in the Russian Far East The second post of the series on Amur tigers had a recent report about a male Amur tiger who, experts think, was killed by a brown bear on February 17, 2017. The report was from THE AMUR TIGER PROGRAMME, meaning it is reliable. Although those who saw the tiger concluded he had been attacked by a brown bear, there are some reasons for doubt. Brown bears hibernate in winter. As the tiger was killed on February 17 (a very cold day), the bear had to be a large non-hibernating brown bear, meaning either a 'Shatun' (a hungry bear unable to hibernate as a result of a lack of fat) or a 'satellite-bear' (a non-hibernating bear routinely following tigers). Schatuns and satellite-bears, both focussed on food, are known to displace tigers. At times, they attack them in order to eat them. The problem is the tiger wasn't consumed. Very strange, especially when it is known that bears suffered severely from two crop failures in a row. For this reason, it can't be excluded that tiger 'Uporny' died in a fight with a male tiger. Amur tigers mate in winter and fights are not uncommon in that period. At times, one of the two is killed. Those killed are mutilated, but rarely eaten. We have to wait for the autopsy report. Anyhow. This post has a bit more on the relation between tigers and bears in the Russian Far East. 6b - Bear numbers and density in the RFE This table was posted on AVA some years ago. It has interesting information about bears in the Russian Far East. Brown bears, that is. Not black bears. Amur tigers live in two, maybe three, regions (Khabarovsk, Amur and Primoria). These regions have 12 000 - 14 000 brown bears in total. Primoria and Khabarovsk in particular have high densities:  *This image is copyright of its original author Here is a map of the RFE with brown bear densities. Regions with vertical stripes have most brown bears:  *This image is copyright of its original author Conclusion. There are about 500 Amur tigers in the RFE. The part in which they live has about 13 000 brown bears. This means that there are about 25-26 brown bears for every Amur tiger. If we add the number of black bears, the conclusion is that bears severely outnumber tigers. No wonder that tigers consider bears as an important source of food. 6c - Bears as a source of food Over the years, many studies about food habits of Amur tigers have been published. In some of them, bears hardly featured, whereas they were a major food source in others. I got to unclear. Not so long ago, I posted a number of pages from a recent study on, surprise, food habits of Amur tigers. This study is different from others in two ways. One is scats were collected for a number of years in 3 sites. Two is the effect of pseudoreplication (multiple scats collected from a single kill site) were eliminated. Could be one of the most reliable studies I read. Below, you'll find the most important pages and tables. Quite a read, but interesting and very informative:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author 6d - Linda Kerley on tigers and bears in the RFE The scan below was posted on AVA by a member some years ago. It could be she changed her opinion in the last years, but it isn't likely, especially if we know that she was one the researchers who published the report on food habits of Amur tigers discussed in the previous paragraph. Linda Kerley, with about 20 years of experience to her credit, is very much 'in the know' regarding tigers and bears in the Russian Far east. I hope the mail is still readable:  *This image is copyright of its original author What you need to remember is this: - Bears are an important food source for Amur tigers, especially in summer - Bears are not only hunted by specialists (old male tigers); tigresses also hunt bears - Non-hibernating brown bears ('Shatoons' in Kerley's mail) harass, hunt and eat tigers (in winter) - Anything can happen between tigers and bears. 6e - Two photographs of bears killed by tigers The first photograph is from V. Mazak's book 'Der Tiger' (third edition, 1983). Mazak wrote that the bear (an adult, he added) was killed by a tiger. There was a lengthy discussion about this photograph in AVA some years ago. The bear was killed near the Tatibe River in early May 1951 by a tigress. She ate most fatty parts and stayed with the bear for a few days. The bear was 158 cm. in length and weighed 170 kg. As a considerable part of the bear had been eaten by the tigress, it's likely the weight was estimated. Assuming the estimate wasn't too far off, the bear could have been well over 200 kg. in late autumn (bears lose 25-35% of their weight during hibernation):  *This image is copyright of its original author This photograph was also first posted on AVA. The bear is second from the left. Have a look at the tusks of the wild boar (bottom, left):  *This image is copyright of its original author In the next post on tigers and bears, the focus will be on interactions near kill sites, tables with information on mortality (tigers), and observations of those 'in the know'. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |