Book Review

[Dr Panthera]

(12-24-2015, 02:19 AM)Pckts Wrote: Malayan tigers are almost extinct,


"The Malayan tiger qualifies for this category because the best available evidence indicates that the number of mature individuals is likely less than 250 animals and has declined by more than 25% in one generation (seven years).
It also meets a second criteria – there are no pockets of forest in Malaysia with an estimated population of 50 or more mature tigers.
The decline was first brought to national attention by Perhilitan and the Malaysian Conservation Alliance for Tigers (MYCAT) last September when studies across three major tiger landscapes in Peninsular Malaysia between 2010 and 2013 suggested that there may only be 250-340 wild tigers left."
http://www.bagheera.com/journal/malayan-...ngered.htm

Sunderbans could be around 200 between the bangladesh and indian side
"Tapan Kumar Dey, the government’s wildlife conservator, said analysis of camera footage from the year-long survey that ended in April found numbers ranged between 83 and 130, giving an average of 106.
“So plus or minus we have around 106 tigers in our parts of the Sundarbans. It’s a more accurate figure,” Dey told Agence France-Presse about the survey, which has not yet been publicly released.
About 74 tigers have previously been counted on the Indian side of the Sundarbans, which makes up nearly 40% of the forest straddling both countries over 10,000 sq km (3,860 sq m)."
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2...ans-forest


The sumatran is also estimated around the 400-500 mark
"It is estimated that only between 500-600 Sumatran tigers remain in the wild, and the actual number may be as low as 400. And their population is dwindling rapidly."
http://www.tigersincrisis.com/sumatran_tiger.htm

Indo-Chinese
The Indochinese tiger is thought to number around 300 individuals.

However this number is an estimate: due to restricted access to the border areas where the Indochinese tiger lives, relatively little is known about their population status.

Most individuals (around 100) live in Thailand, with no more than 30 individuals per country in Vietnam, Cambodia and Lao PDR. The population in Myanmar is unknown.
http://cambodia.panda.org/projects_and_r...011_16382/

Amur tigers are around 500 as well.

And bengals were said to be around the 3000 mark after the most recent census.

So between the Bengal, Amur and indo chinese you have almost 4,000 with around 600-800 of sumatran, sunderban tigers and malayan

So really, we are looking at around 15% - 20% of the Tiger population being the smaller variety compared to the other sub species which all have no problem being larger than 160kg.

Vietnam has produced large individuals in the past, the buffalo neck breaking tiger was from vietnam.
And many other indo chinese tigers have been said to be much larger than 160kg as well, I know @guate or @peter have quite a library on old hunting weights of these cats. 
Even large male sumatrans have been 150kg or more, but obviously much more rare.

So all that being said, I highly doubt that the significantly smaller number of 150kg or smaller tiger could impact the significantly higher number of 160kg or more tigers to create such a low average.  (in males of course)

Imagine the amur, indo chinese and bengal tiger numbers grow, and yes the sunderban, malayan and sumatran as well, I see no way that they latter 3 could affect the other 3 sub species that all get much larger than 160kg. The numbers are far to skewed in the Bengals favor compared to all others.

The figures that Kitchener and Yamaguchi are quoting are for present day, free-ranging , adult animals.
I only use the IUCN numbers and estimates, they are slower to be published than national census but remain much more accurate, so let s stick to scientific official records: the IUCN latest numbers per subspecies are roughly 400 (altaica) 420 (corbetti) 441 to 679 (sumatrae) 250-350 (corbetti) 2000 (tigris without Sunderban) and 440 in the Sunderban so on average  a total of about 4000 tigers and the presumed smaller tigers 1300 out of 4000 is over 30% .
With time the share of Bengal tigers will increase, the promising increase in numbers of the tiger census in India were criticized by both Indian and western tiger biologists ( I hope they are wrong, tiger populations now are not more than the 1970's despite 45 years of protection).
Again there is no recent scientific record of any Indochinese tiger over 180 kg , tigers can not keep that size by surviving on muntjac, I am in touch with Thai scientists working in the western forest complex but they would not disclose their data before publishing.
Tigers are very adaptable and successful predators that occupy a wide range of habitat, certain conditions favor smaller size ( Sunderban, Malaysia, Sumatra) others medium size ( Indochinese and the extinct South China tigers) and others larger tigers ( most Bengal and Amur tigers)...a small tiger is as much a tiger as a  large one, Indian reserves will reach capacity soon, and Amur tigers do not have a lot of suitable habitat to expand to, the best hope for tigers is to repopulate them in lost areas in China, Indochina, and Sumatra. So even if they are 'too small" for your perception of a tiger they are the tigers that could  possibly save the species. Reply