There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
11-10-2015, 11:36 AM( This post was last modified: 11-10-2015, 11:45 AM by GuateGojira )
(11-10-2015, 04:46 AM)GrizzlyClaws Wrote: I am not particularly biased toward a certain subspecies or population, I am just more interested about the measurement from those massive individuals.
The Northeast Indians are definitely the largest cat of today, but how big exactly? It will be more visualizing if the measurement and weight of these beasts are published.
I know that there is the popular notion that northern tigers are larger than central or southern tigers, but in fact, after saw several record of sizes and weights of many tiger populations in India, trough history, I can firmly say that there is no difference between the three populations.
The tigers measured in Central India are about the same size than those measured in the northeast and the south of India, all between pegs. f we correct those measured "over curves" in northwest India, they are again of the same size. The longest tiger recorded by Hewett (318 cm over curves) would be of about 301-304 cm "between pegs", which is in the range than those recorded by Brander. All the populations had an average head-body of about 190 cm and a total length of about 280 cm +/- 5 cm in some cases. I saw similar chest girths in all these areas and in the weight issues, we most remember that the sample from Nepal include only adult males, while that of Hewett-Brander-Cooch Behar definitely included subadults of 3 years old or less, so this can also explain the abrupt difference between the average of 200-205 kg in the old days and that of 210-220 kg in the modern ones.
Massive specimens exist in all the regions, I have saw huge tigers in Chitwan, Ranthambore, Kanha, Panna and Nagarahole. In all these regions, the record figures are between 240-260 kg, so I see no difference in weight or length.
From what I have read, only the population of Sundarbans, and probably also those in the Naga Hills (in the old days) were significantly smaller. The few specimens known in the southeast of India are lighter but of the same length that tigers in other regions. The only population that can provide us with a surprise is that of Kaziranga, all the others seems to be of the same size.