|
Lions and Tigers in India
|
Found this old miniature painting depicting a royal hunt. (Link)
It's from c.1800 & belongs to Kota school of art. Thus the location should be somewhere close to Mukundara Hills Tiger Reserve. In the image while the tigers are pretty obvious, the other animal could be a lion...  *This image is copyright of its original author
 (08-10-2018, 06:57 AM)Rishi Wrote: Found this old miniature painting depicting a royal hunt. (Link)Interesting. Starfox would love this one. (08-10-2018, 07:43 AM)Rishi Wrote:(08-10-2018, 07:37 AM)paul cooper Wrote: Interesting. Starfox would love this one. Oh its clear alright, that animal on the ground has a long tail. But i dont get why there are two tigers there, tho. (08-10-2018, 07:55 AM)paul cooper Wrote:(08-10-2018, 07:43 AM)Rishi Wrote: It could be a cow placed as bait... Can't be said until a clear image is found. Most paintings from the erstwhile Princely states of Kotah, Bundi, Gwalior etc. depicts a pair of tigers. More here: #8  *This image is copyright of its original author As it happens, these dry arid regions of western India were some of the only places with both lions & tigers. I maintain that tigers of the region underwent behavioral adaptation & started pairing up to more effectively counter lion prides... In case you want to read more about the it: #387.  (04-22-2014, 11:24 PM)Pckts Wrote: WOW, Ranthambhore and Kuno are practically neighbors. There will definitely be interaction between them if they are moved there. To answer both of your questions, first let us map out territories of the tiger in India, using the work of expert Karanth (https://web.archive.org/web/201203101741...ENTID=8073), which was modified to have a yellowish circle to indicate where the lions are:  *This image is copyright of its original author Asiatic lions are nowadays found in and around Gir Forest in Kathiawar Peninsula, or the region of Saurashtra in the state of Gujarat. The nearest potential territory of the Bengal tiger to Kathiawar Peninsula is across a body of water known as the Gulf of Khambhat (formerly the Gulf of Cambay), and it's in the region where South Gujarat (more accurately, the southeastern part of Gujarat) meets the states of Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, both of which have tigers. In South Gujarat are located Purna Wildlife Sanctuary and Vansda National Park, both of which are considered as being in what is known as the forest of the Dangs, which borders Maharashtra, and where tigers were officially sighted before 2000 (https://orientalbirdclub.org/wp-content/...-Purna.pdf), but 'officially' doesn't mean that that's what everyone believes. Indeed, people, especially 2 forest guards, claimed to have seen the tiger in the Dangs (https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city...380980.cms + https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city...332055.cms). Map of Gujarat by India Mart (https://www.indiamart.com/proddetail/guj...16730.html), with the district of the Dangs being in the southeast:  *This image is copyright of its original author Image of Purna Wildlife Sanctuary in the Dangs' forest of South Gujarat by Sidarchie Palace (http://sidarchiepalace.in/saputara/sight...ujarat-16/):  *This image is copyright of its original author
I would also like to point out that though the Asiatic lion and Bengal tiger do not share the same habitat in India, they do share the same ecoregion, Kathiawar-Gir dry deciduous forests, because this is the ecoregion where Gir Forest (in the Kathiawar Peninsula of Gujarat State), Ranthambore and Sariska Tiger Reserves in Rajasthan State, and Kuno-Palpur Wildlife Sanctuary in Madhya Pradesh are located. By contrast, neither Purna Wildlife Sanctuary nor Vansda National Park in the Dangs' forest of South Gujarat are treated as being part of this ecoregion: https://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/im0206
Hey. I found this account saying they have found a dead lion in/near tigers/tiger reserves. This lion could have been killed by a tiger.
It was a indian newspaper, i think it was in hindi and proquest (what i am using) translated it. Maybe they made a mistake on the translation or article? Thats weird.  *This image is copyright of its original author
(10-04-2018, 08:24 AM)paul cooper Wrote: Hey. I found this account saying they have found a dead lion in/near tigers/tiger reserves. This lion could have been killed by a tiger. There weren't any lions anywhere near Corbett for hundreds of years... Most likely the article was a translation from Hindi to English, or copied from one. As both species are called sher in the language, translator softwares often jumble it up. It is about infighting amongst tigers in Corbett! 
"Lions are perhaps bolder than tigers, and certainly much more noisy, their habit of roaring, especially in the evening and at night, having necessarily attracted the attention of all who have been in countries infested by them."
These words of prof. Blanford I think explain why lions were much easily and early exterminated in large areas of India than the tigers. Unlike the secretive, illusive and silent tiger, the lion likes to show and demonstrate his royal presence to everybody around, no hide, no secrets, no fear, noisy concerts every night. For the hunters with modern firearms probably there was no easier animal to be exterminated than the lion. When the lions were largely exterminated in the Norh-West and Central India in the period from 17th to 19th century on the their former territories seems moved the secretive tigers, an animals more difficult to be hunted, even in the relatively open landscapes. I guess that for the period of 300 years - from 17th to 19th centuries areal of the Bengal tiger expanded several hundred miles in direction west north-west. This period coincidented with the decline of the Mughal empire and the rise of the British empire. Lately some scientists don't knowing the reason for that expansion created the theory that the tiger displaced the lion due to its larger strength and size.  (04-15-2014, 01:50 AM)Apollo Wrote: I dont think the reintroduction of gir lions to kuno will happen. awesome analogy.  (10-14-2018, 10:56 AM)Wolverine Wrote: "Lions are perhaps bolder than tigers, and certainly much more noisy, their habit of roaring, especially in the evening and at night, having necessarily attracted the attention of all who have been in countries infested by them." Partially agree... Yes the lions are more noisy than tigers, but in Africa, in such areas where they were severely hunted, they were able to modify their behaviour in order not to be totally eradicated, by adopting a much more discreet lifestyle. By this way, we saw they subsisted in Gabon (forests), Ethopia (at altitude), Congo (partially forested areas), in Namibie (desert)... Why wouldn't it be the same thing in Asian ? Lions are perhaps not quite stupid animals. Of course the African countries I named aren't India. The lions were perhaps able to invest new areas that were not inhabited by a super predator like the tiger. Anyway, as you say, I believe that their social way of living in open landscapes make them much more vulnerable than tigers. And this in a exploded-population country during the XXth century, they get absolutely no chance to survive without an human intervention. (11-15-2018, 05:48 PM)Spalea Wrote:(10-14-2018, 10:56 AM)Wolverine Wrote: "Lions are perhaps bolder than tigers, and certainly much more noisy, their habit of roaring, especially in the evening and at night, having necessarily attracted the attention of all who have been in countries infested by them." Of course wild animals could adapt and change a little bit their behavior in result of human pressure. But lions in general are much more communicative animals than tigers, they leave in prides and the members of the pride need to communicate "verbally" regularly. Tiger need more emotional impulses to start roaring. Its like some people are more talkative while other are more silent. I don't think that lion is capable to become noiseless, it will just stop being a lion, it could happen only if it suffer from severe mental depression. That's why lion often been called "animal-voice". For this reason spending of several nights by a tourist in area inhabited by lions is more interesting because sitting on the dinner table with a cup of tea you can enjoy almost every night lion concerts, while in a jungle inhabited by tigers you can seldom hear the roar of "the King of the jungle", while leopard is even more silent. For this reason I think that even in relatively open landscapes in India it was easier for hunters historically to locate and exterminate lions than tigers. With modern weapons in 21 century of course there is no any difference. (11-15-2018, 05:48 PM)Spalea Wrote: Partially agree... Yes the lions are more noisy than tigers, but in Africa, in such areas where they were severely hunted, they were able to modify their behaviour in order not to be totally eradicated, by adopting a much more discreet lifestyle. By this way, we saw they subsisted in Gabon (forests), Ethopia (at altitude), Congo (partially forested areas), in Namibie (desert)... Why wouldn't it be the same thing in Asian ? Lions are perhaps not quite stupid animals. Of course the African countries I named aren't India. The lions were perhaps able to invest new areas that were not inhabited by a super predator like the tiger. The "leftover lions" are probably still around only because of remoteness of where they lived. Tigers from less remote forests had been slaughtered just as easily, and they don't even do mating calls unless living in veryv safe & inviolate habitats. This is how the vicinity of Gir sounds like every evening. I doubt any lions population living in moderately safe area could supress this urge. However today, with legal protection, the lions have a much better chance for survival IMO. Primarily because lions are capable of surviving in grassland, scrubland & desert habitats where tigers cannot... also having a temperament that makes them much more compatible to living in closer proximity to humans without much conflict (if their pathological cattle-lifting habits can be well managed). @BorneanTiger's map shows the potential tiger habitat but not the lion's. Look at this is Bhuvan map (cool, eh?) showing the land-use pattern of India's erstwhile "lion country", comprising of the states of Rajasthan, Gujarat, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh & Madhya Pradesh.  *This image is copyright of its original author While their prime historical habitat in the vast grasslands of Northern plains have been completely cultivated, still a huge amount of viable territory is left for them that dwarfs the Greater Gir landscape. Unlike tiger's fragmented forest cover that remains in the hilly uplands, whereas dense human population have taken over the river valleys between, the lion's potential range is much less populated & threatened. Actually global warming is threatening almost all of northwest India with drought & desertification. The region might lose as much as half of its present agricultural lands in the next few decades. But at the same time whatever few good grasslands remains in the cultivable areas are under immense threat & that's where our lions belong! With cheetahs gone, those areas need an apex predator more ever... for India to start taking her arid ecosystems seriously. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |