White, Black & Golden Tigers

[GuateGojira]

(07-14-2014, 10:49 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: Come on Gaute, I am denying nothing. I expect the same out of any claim. I'm sorry, but you said there are images of this tiger, clearer ones, but I have only seen this blurry, black n white image which you can barely make out anything, let a lone a tiger or even the color of the tiger.
I will never blindly believe anything without seeing the data or proof behind it. Thats because of this place and places like it.

If peter has a image of a white tiger in the wild, I will gladly accept it. I will admit that white tigers live till adulthood etc..
I have never once said the white tiger doesn't occur in the wild, I have seen no proof of them surviving till adulthood. If you showed me where sunquist said he saw adult white tigers, I would definitely take that into account and add it to the list with Corbett.


Once again, they said it is still Unknown how it affects deformities. That is from all 3.
But if you are talking about gene manipulation used to artificially create "natural white tigers", that is not right. That is man playing god. You don't do that, there is far to many other things that people can use science for that is actually benefiting all the animals in the forrest, jungles, plains etc...
The idea of Gene manipulation in itself, is unnatural.
The word "manipulation" means "to manage or influence skillfully"
That is not Natural which means "existing in or caused by nature"
These two words live on different sides of the map.

Once again, in regards to your claim of the "white gene" being "extinct" in the wild.
There is absolutely, possitively No way, that anybody, anyone in the world, expert or ammateur has any idea if thats true. There are 1000s of tigers that have never been studied, had blood drawn, etc...
Anybody who would try and say that, is only trying to make an excuse for selectively breeding white tigers to gain financial reward. Wether for more studying, showing to people, etc...
Its definitely the furthest thing from "conservation".

Lastly, what makes a white tiger need more help than a orange tiger or black tiger, etc..
All tigers, all need protection, all need attention to them and their habbitat.

The only human intervention these animals need, is humans intervening with other humans. Stop logging, stop building monstroustaties that are vacant and wasting money, stop mining everywhere for superficial bs, stop using up all the oil etc.... None of these issues have anything to do with tigers or any other animal. They will conserve themselves if we just stop destroying the world. They where here long before us and will be here long after us.
Hopefully, if we don't destroy everything first. But even if we did, life will find a way, if a way is to be found.


 

 

Sorry Pckts, but you are denying any evidence in favor of the White tigers. You are against the picture just because is not clear, but I stated very well that you (or any other people) can go an search the book "Maneaters of Kumaon" in your library and you will found THE SAME picture in a much clear form. I have the book in a translated version but it doesn’t have any picture, but this digital version show a relative good view of the white tigress, even better, Jim Corbett himself state that it was a white tigress, check the upper image that I post, before the picture.
 
I have found that Dunbar Brander also mentions some accounts of white tigers in the wild, plus the old picture of the Mughals hunting the two white tigers.
 
Peter put that image in the old AVA forum, I am going to search it in my database, it has not only the picture but also the body measurements of the specimen.
 
About the deformities, the document clearly states that the deformities has nothing to do with the white gene, I copy-paste to you the conclusion, what more do you need? Besides, genetic manipulation doesn’t mean that we are going to take tiger DNA in a “Jurassic Park” form. What we need is to know the level or relation between a population, in order to know which specimens are relatives and which no. Then, we most allow breeding only those which are not related and in that form, it will be possible to recover the white gene in a captive population without the inbreeding system. With time and patience, those genes could be introduced into the wild population in the original areas like Central India. As you can see, there is no “genetic manipulation” here, only a well-controlled breeding program, which is the same that the AZA is doing with the pure breed tigers.
 
About the white gene in the wild, check that most of the records of white tigers are around the Central India region, a population that in modern times is highly fragmented and there are no population of over 30 or 40 specimens, NOT interconnected. The panorama is so bad, that there are no hopes, in long term, for all this population, probably at no more than 10 or 20 years if there is no interconnection. Who do you ask that, in this scenario, there will be white tigers at all? It is impossible, simple as it is and there are so much inbreeds right now in the wild, that at this time there should be white tigers in all those places, but they are not. So, the conclusion, based in empiric evidence, suggest that there is no more white tigers genes in the wild. Not saying that there are no white tiger genes over there, but the evidence and the situation itself in the wild completely show otherwise.
 
About the white tiger conservation, NO ONE has said that white tigers need more help than other groups, NO ONE. Where do you get that??? That is very disturbing, you are “creating” words were they are not. The purpose of this conversation was to show that white tigers are (or not) enough important to be conserve, that is all. In ANY moment had ANYONE here said that white tigers have priorities over the orange ones. ALL of us love tigers, please don’t twist our words in this particular point, ok?
 
By the way, there is no such thing as “black” tigers, only heavily striped tigers that time to time, arise particularly in the Orissa region (this is interesting itself, if you ask me). From my point of view, any tiger is 100% important for conversation, and if there are some white tigers over there that are still 100% Bengal tigers (no Amur genes on them), they MOST be saved too.
 
Finally, about the humans in conservation, Tigerluver have post it very well, many animals had been saved tanks to the DIRECT intervention of humans, other good example is the European bison, which will be extinct if someone have nor created a “farm” to rise them. The tiger problem is more complex than just “leave them alone” to survive. The reports of “baby booms” are just exaggerations with no base. How many of those animals did actually reach adulthood? How many of them died poached or by natural causes? Scientists like Dr Karanth are always against these reports because they give the idea that the tiger population is in constant rise, when there is NOT the case. Indian tiger population has not risen at all; they are STILL at about 1,200 specimens, including subadults, at least this is what the camera trap suggest taking together most regions. Bengal tigers seem stable, but they still need a lot of work to be saved.
 
Tiger conservation need direct actions form humans, there is no point back. If not, there is no hope for about 80% of the regions and populations, including Central India, Sundarbans, all Indochina and even Sumatra. I have stated before that scientists believe that the only populations that have more or less good probabilities to be conserve at long term are:
1. Terai arc (if they manage to join them, from Nepal to the Assam).
2. Western Ghats landscape (including Nagarahole-Bandipur region).
3. The Russian Far East.
 
These areas can be protected only by DIRECT human intervention. Only when humans stop humans, then we could leave nature to do their job alone, but not yet, not yet.
  Reply