Modern weights and measurements on wild tigers

[Pckts]

(04-21-2022, 10:20 PM)LonePredator Wrote:

(04-21-2022, 10:15 PM)Pckts Wrote:

(04-21-2022, 09:54 PM)LonePredator Wrote: @GuateGojira Hello Gaute! How are you doing! I wanted to ask you your opinion on tbe subspecific classification of Tigers. Do you think there should be more than two subspecies of Tigers?

Is the Mainland and Island classification some political propoganda because there is a guy claiming to be a biologist who says this classification is just political propoganda and every biologist disagrees with it.

It's for conservation purposes, easier to offer protections on "Tigers" as a whole than specific subspecies. 
That being said, what does it really matter?
A Tiger is a Tiger, the environment it lives in will dictate differences in morphology. Take a Tigers from Kanha and repopulate the Sunderbans, eventually the Tigers that survive will end up looking as they do now.

I agree and I think subspeciation is also subjective but there are some idiots who argue about every insignificant things for no reason at all. Somewhere I pointed out that IUCN recognises two subspecies of Tigers but he starts saying that IUCN are idiots and all biologists disagree. What is your personal opinion on this?

They sound like an uneducated poster on the topic. Science is always evolving but the IUCN Organization is a collaborative effort with the foremost experts in each field. The results aren't perfect but they're as up to date as possible with the science available. Could there be political agendas involved in some classifications? Maybe, but nothing of actual substance exists and science itself has nothing to do with politics, it's just the politicians that try to skew things from time to time. Reply