WildFact
›
General Section
›
Debate and Discussion about Wild Animals
Amur and Kaziranga Tigers - Habitat and Prey Analysis
Amur and Kaziranga Tigers - Habitat and Prey Analysis
|
Amur and Kaziranga Tigers - Habitat and Prey Analysis
|
 (11-18-2014, 03:32 PM)'Amnon242' Wrote:Quote:Some giant captive Amurs are very fit, but they have just reached the prehistoric size. To deal with either requires power and agility. Boars are hunted in India or Assam, same as Siberia. Gaur or Water Buffalo are both hunted in India which require agility (just watch Raja taking down the female Gaur) A tiger most likely is not overpowering a rhino or elephant sub adult, they need to be agile to avoid attacks, stamina to maintain long drawn out battles and power to deliver fatal blows or grasp larger opponents for a long time. Assam tigers are also living a highly more combative life than a Amur (at least now a days) so the idea that Amurs must compete against Bears is negated by the fact that Kaziranga must compete against the highest density of tigers. Remember, Amur tigers aren't taking on bears larger than themselves, usually, so agility is not a factor, they are usually attacking and preying on smaller bears which is where power will come into play.
@Roflcopters, that other wild male that was kept in captivity was a huge guy and just slightly over fed as well. You can see the difference, they are massive but have slightly less muscle mass, I think the same will be said for Amurs. I know many amurs seem to be fit in captivity, which of course they are, but there is no way they will be as fit as a wild counterpart. Its impossible, they simply don't need to meet the demands of a wild animal.
 (11-18-2014, 10:40 PM)'Pckts' Wrote:(11-18-2014, 03:32 PM)'Amnon242' Wrote:Quote:Some giant captive Amurs are very fit, but they have just reached the prehistoric size. For a 400kg class tiger, his athleticism is simply incredible, and look at the size of his forequarter. There is no gigantism or overweight, but only the raw power and the pure muscle.  *This image is copyright of its original author
Pckts: well I think amur boars are larger than indian... Anyway, assam tigers are agile (they are felids), but I think amurs are more agile (they are longer, but not so massive...while assam tigers are built like tanks). On the other hand I belive assam tigers are stronger (but amur tigers are in no case weak animals, there are experts who say that amur tigers are extremely strong felids). Buffalos or rhinos/young elephants are bigger than bears or amur wild pigs, so assam tigers need more power but they don´t need agility THAT MUCH. Bears or wild boar are smaller than those assam animals, but they are faster...so amurs need to be more agile than assam tigers. I don´t say that bears or amur boar are more dangerous opponents, they just require capabilities of different kind. Fights among assam tigers? Well I´d say it´s a fight between strong, heavilly build felids...and bigger/stronger usually wins.
Peter wrote "In fights between tigers, size is important. In fights with wild boars and bears, it seems to be a bit different. Size of course helps, but my guess is a combination of strength, endurance, agility and coordination could be a crucial." BTW I´ve seen Raja taking down a gaur...but I´d say it was about his strenght not about his agility. 
ALL big cats are VERY agile. They have to catch things that don't want to get caught. They play for keeps.
We've all seen the videos. From the tiger attacking the people on an elephant, to the lion doing a flip over a zebra and still holding on, to the leopard dropping 30 feet from a tree on to an unsuspecting impala. They are ALL amazing. So now we are debating imagined agility differences between two SUBSPECIES of the same animal????? They do what they have to do to survive.  (11-13-2014, 10:53 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote: Just a "wild" thought, which prey is more dangerous, an Indian wild buffalo or a giant Russian wild boar? I discard gaur because although is very big, it is know to normally run away instead of fighting. There's a report of a gaur killing a male tiger. (I don't remember exactly it was in Nagarhole or Bandipur) you might be knowing this, are there any reports from Russia of boars killing tigers? I think the wild buffalos of Kaziranga would be the toughest adversary for any lonesome predator. I'll rate them above gaurs. If an Amur can kill a boar so can a beast that preys on buffaloes. Well don't Amur tigers tend to have more body fat as required by the harsh wintery conditions they live in? in that case an Amur would tire before a Bengal. (11-19-2014, 11:41 AM)'Amnon242' Wrote: Pckts: well I think amur boars are larger than indian... Anyway, assam tigers are agile (they are felids), but I think amurs are more agile (they are longer, but not so massive...while assam tigers are built like tanks). On the other hand I belive assam tigers are stronger (but amur tigers are in no case weak animals, there are experts who say that amur tigers are extremely strong felids). Buffalos or rhinos/young elephants are bigger than bears or amur wild pigs, so assam tigers need more power but they don´t need agility THAT MUCH. Bears or wild boar are smaller than those assam animals, but they are faster...so amurs need to be more agile than assam tigers. I don´t say that bears or amur boar are more dangerous opponents, they just require capabilities of different kind. Fights among assam tigers? Well I´d say it´s a fight between strong, heavilly build felids...and bigger/stronger usually wins. The modern Amur tigers have became further more gracilized due the lower density of prey. But I've also seen some extreme robust built male Amurs in the captivity as they were very well fed. So I can imagine that some alpha male Amurs can build like a tank back in the old days when they were plenty of large preys located in Manchuria and Northern China. 
From a fighting perspective, I'd go with a lighter, faster, more muscular and flexible version over the stronger, bulkier version.
Just my opinion. Sorry for being a bit off topic (11-19-2014, 11:41 AM)'Amnon242' Wrote: Pckts: well I think amur boars are larger than indian... Anyway, assam tigers are agile (they are felids), but I think amurs are more agile (they are longer, but not so massive...while assam tigers are built like tanks). On the other hand I belive assam tigers are stronger (but amur tigers are in no case weak animals, there are experts who say that amur tigers are extremely strong felids). Buffalos or rhinos/young elephants are bigger than bears or amur wild pigs, so assam tigers need more power but they don´t need agility THAT MUCH. Bears or wild boar are smaller than those assam animals, but they are faster...so amurs need to be more agile than assam tigers. I don´t say that bears or amur boar are more dangerous opponents, they just require capabilities of different kind. Fights among assam tigers? Well I´d say it´s a fight between strong, heavilly build felids...and bigger/stronger usually wins. Not sure what the size difference between Assam Boars or Siberian boars, so I won't comment on it. But I doubt its much between average sized individuals. I also think Kaziranga tigers would be the stronger tiger as well, but in terms of body size, bengals and siberians are almost identical in length and shoulder height, same would be said for Assam I would assume. The only real difference is Skull size, but actually the few assam tigers that have been measured actually had larger skulls than any other bengal tigers. I agree that the larger cat will usually win in a fight, but exceptions exist, maybe the most dominate and battle tested tiger of all time, Munna is a large tiger, but he is surrounded by large tigers who are all as large as he is. So what makes him the most dominate of them all? A good question to ask, I think. The backwater male is actually a smaller male who has become dominate, so I wonder why that is true, same with T24 who is said to be the most dominate in all of Ranthambhore and he is surrounded by some heavy hitters, T28 and T42 both come to mind, same with his son, T72. Tigers are massive creatures, even the "smaller" tiger in a territory can't really be that much smaller than the others. They may be 100lbs less at max or a couple of inches shorter, but I doubt its that exagerated between males who battle for territory. In regards about Raja, a I thought his agility was quite impressive, especially how he avoided the goar attempt of the Gaur, swung under its neck, then applied the choke from his side. Then used his power to keep the gaur from taking a step backwards and killed it in minutes. Same with the attack on the buffalo, he has a throat hold, avoids a goar attempt while still aplying the hold, avoids another attempt, etc. Its very impressive, imo. The only way a tiger could or would be more agile than another would be because it has more power and muscle to propel its body quicker than a tiger who doesn't. Lets use amurs as a example, if they have similiar body dimensions, then the amur would need to have substantially more powerful limbs, chest, neck, etc. But they don't, the dimensions are extremely similar for body size, while bengals actually hold the record in all dimension and this doesn't include the arguable largest bengals alive, Kaziranga and Corbett. If you want to use terrain as a factor, both live in harsh conditions, snow for the amur, wetlands for the Kaziranga and rocky forests for corbett. Who knows for sure, but I think its truly speculation to try and say one tiger is more or less agile than the other when all are so extremely similar in dimensions and mass. (11-19-2014, 08:13 PM)'chaos' Wrote: From a fighting perspective, I'd go with a lighter, faster, more muscular and flexible version over the stronger, bulkier version. Examples can be made for both sides of the coin. That being said, the two most dominate tigers of all time IMO, Waghdoh (the undeniable size king of his territory) and possibly the most dominate tiger ever and Munna a very large tiger but seems to be the same size as Red Eye, Patewala, Naak Kata, Kankata, Bhima, etc. But these tigers are still close in size to others same. If you want to exagerate the differnces and compare a much smaller tiger or lion to a much larger 75kg + than the tides will undoubtedly be in the larger tigers favor. Hence why Harbin Park has a King Tiger territory where it must keep its largest Siberians. 
If I were a tiger, and I had to choose between ambushing a one ton water buffalo or a 600 pound Russian wild boar, I would choose the buffalo. Not simply because there is more meat on the bovine. Wild hogs fight in a completely different manner. Brown bears also kill wild boar, but certainly not as frequently as would a tiger. Bears are foragers; tigers are predators.
@brobear
I agree. Bears are far more agile, better weapons and designed to kill, just like tigers. Gaur, Cape Buffalo, Water buffalo, etc. Are designed to defend, while they are larger and offer their own threats, it usually a lot easier for a predator to escape a failed attack, I think a failed attack on a large bear or vice versa will usually cost the attacker its life or leave it with a serious injury. But to attack and kill either a bear, guar, cape buffalo etc. Will always require agility, power, ferocity etc. 
Nice Debate
I see many talk about amur tigers facing russian brown bears and say its the most dangerous and requires more agility. But how often in the vast russian fareast these two animals meet in the wild ? And how often a tiger will fight a russian bear bigger than itself ? We all know amurs preying on russian brownies is a very small percentage (generally smaller and equal sized brownies). But some of you seem to forget that there are very dangerous animals in India too muggers, salties, black bears, sloth bears, himalayan brown bears, wolves, dholes etc I dont see why muggers in water are less dangerous than russian brownies. Its just are individual perspectives. I also dont see why bengals have to be less agile to face a black bear, sloth bear, rival tiger, pack of wolves etc Bengals will definitely face more carnivorus opponents than amurs, because the density of these animals are higher in India. In general tigers being a predator will be naturally more agile than an omnivorous bear. What you think may occur more often 1) An amur fighting a bigger russian brownie over a meal (because smaller brownies will generally wont challenge an amur for a meal). 2) A bengal fighting with another rival for mating rights and territory. Definitely the second one will occur more often. Practically and logically a bengal will face more agile opponents than an amur. Regarding the most dangerous prey being russian wild boar which is hunted by amurs, hence it requires more agility. Yes russian boars are very dangerous animals but it doesnt make Indian preys less dangerous. People mistake about gaurs, trust me gaurs are very dangerous animals. They've known to kill tigers, chase them off and they have attacked vehicles too. You have to remember that preys like gaur, buffalo, rhino and elephant all live in herds. Bengals dont have the luxury of packs or prides. So facing a herd and bringing down one animal definitely requires more agility and stamina. To bring down a rhino calf the bengal as to get pass the defenses of mother rhino and for this it requires a very high degree of agility and stamina. Killing an elephant or rhino is not that easy these animals have far thicker hides and fat layer than any russian animals. I would say agility and stamina are equally important for both the subspecies of tigers. When it comes to strength and power among tigers, I generally believe bigger animals are stronger and more powerful.[/size]
Do you guys REALLY think there is a discernable difference in the agility of two subspecies of the same animal???
|
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 17 Guest(s) |