Eyes on or hands on? A discussion of human interference

[Pckts]

 


 [/quote]

"The case of Ustad isn't as clear cut as you are making it out to be. The fact that he had killed four people, ate two of them, means that he was a danger to humans. But to blame all of that on "harassment" by people is wrong, imo. Tigers are tranquilized for a purpose, not for fun or harassment. The last time ustad was tranquilized (harrassed), his life was saved.  Tigers who feel harassed by humans, simply avoid them. It is very easy for them to do so. If a tiger doesn't want to be seen by humans, he won't be seen even by the most experienced naturalists or guides. They are that elusive. Remember hairyfoot of Panna?

Another thing, India has had a problem with man eating tigers since centuries. Even when India had large tracts of intact forests and a population that is a fraction of what it is now, we had man eating tigers. Yes, if there were no people around in Ranthambore, T-24 wouldn't have been a killer. But then if there were no people in this world, there would never have been any man eaters."

 

 [/quote]



It's not clear cut at all, I thought I was pretty clear about stating that.
So while the intervention of human beings may or may not have saved his life (we don't know if he would have died or not) it still wasn't natural. Animals die in nature all the time, if its a natural occurrence than its fine in my book. If a tiger/big cat is caught in a poachers snare, being poached, something that is unnatural then I think we have the right to protect and save, but look at the long run.
We interfered in with Ustad and now that all the cards have been played, he is gone. So was it good or bad to interfere in the first place?

Will every single tiger react the way ustad has?
Absolutely not, animals have the same emotional gauntlet as we do, they react differently to each scenario, just like human beings do.


"They are that elusive. Remember hairyfoot of Panna?"
Hairy foot was seen on camera, Madla was filmed. Given more time on this earth, they would have been scene more and more. Trying to compare safaris then to now, is impossible. The amount of people that track tigers now is so much more than there ever has been before.
Just look at the image of the first male tiger ever caught on camera in Tadoba, read the story of what it required to search him, the naturalists where on their own, tracked by foot and could only carry so much film.
Today we know every tigers back story that is in Tadoba who isn't in the buffer zone. Its just the way it is, its good for the tigers protection but bad for the tigers emotional state. Unfortunately they can't have it both ways any more, they will have to get used to being constantly tracked but 1000s of people unless drastic changes happen, which I don't think will occur any time soon.

Of course there will be tigers that human beings will never see and that is great but the amount of tigers we now know by name and history is astonishing compared to a few decades ago. Reply