ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)

[Shadow]

(11-03-2018, 10:48 AM)Vegeta San Wrote:

Shadow Wrote:Some things can look like confusing, but then again when looking closer, not so confusing after all. Just not enough information or then report is made from another point of view than many readers have.

What you gonna say? Most people had a false opinion on this topic. This is more debatable topic than "lion Vs tiger"! And the final conclusion is different than many people thought.

Shadow Wrote:I put this part here to explain what I mean:
"A few pages later, the authors add that " ... According to Kucerenko (1977), the Smurfs tiger produces on average three bears of two species per year and seizes around 3-4% of the populations of the autumn bears. He noted it is found that the weight fraction of bears in the composition of feed ... reaches 12% and is higher than their frequency occurence, since the average bear is superior in weight to other predator prey ... " (Discussion, fourth paragraph).
The last remark, however, contradicts  a statement of Khramtsov, also in the article published in 2017: " ... Often, the victims of the tiger are young bears (Khramtsov, 1993) ... " (Discussion, second paragraph on page 7)."
First here are two different researches. Then even young bear can be relatively big compared to other prey of tigers. If Khramtsov meant by young bears for instance up to 4-6 years, bear is young and far from full sized, but already reasonable sized and lot to eat if killed. Brown bear especially. It would be nice to know if Khramtsov was talking about brown bears or both, black bears and brown bears. Still it is logical, that tigers kill often younger ones, which are less experienced and easier to surprise even though when target is smaller black bear, tigers for sure can attack any individual when opportunity comes.

Well from the second paragraph...
" ... Often, the victims of the tiger are young bears (Khramtsov, 1993) ... " 
The khramtsov said they "often" be the victims. That is different from "regular"! I hope you understand the difference between them. 
And what aged young bear you mean is far larger than tiger's prey? Siberian tigers mostly prey on formidable russian wild boars and some dear species.
The boars reach 300kgs, and Siberian moose can reach 350kgs. No young ussuri Brown bear reach that size. 

Shadow Wrote:It is hard to say if there is any real contradiction or just observations from so different kind of points of views, that Khramtsov didn´t see it so important to write so detailed information about things he thought to be less important.
When reading older and new information about bears and amur tigers, I think, that there isn´t any fundamental contradiction. Some hunters telling stories, probably 50-70% true. I mean hunters have this strange habit to kill always very big animals if there is no possibility to officially measure killed animal. In photos we see giants, especially when smallest person in group is in the photo with "gigantic animal" : Naturally these beasts have just killed some other monster and so hunter is in "reality" a hero saving half continent taking out that beast :)

Well, I understand what are you talking about. That based on confirmation. The sungari river account was confirmed by biologist V. Mazak. So it still one of the most credible accounts. 

Shadow Wrote:Still the big picture in all information is quite same actually. Black bears are easier prey for tigers and in that species no individual is "untouchable". With brown bears tigers are more cautious and attack only to "softer targets". And it is just logical. When hunting it matters how dangerous the prey is to hunt. What can confuse many readers when looking quickly some document is, that often there is written just "bears", not separated black and brown bears. Tigers do separate those animals though, because brown bear is way more dangerous for a tiger than a black bear. It is nice, that now also researchers have studied a little bit of this subject, because after all it is interesting for many, even though pretty meaningless when thinking conservation of these animals.

We've already met before and discussed about this topic, right. It's nice to see you here JP.

I still didn't understand where did you get this "softer targets"? What you mean by that? 
It's already, officially documented that tigers prey on medume sized to large animals. As for bengals, adult males choose solitary bull gaurs. Because more meat without much risk from cattle. It just shows the Tiger's stragies for survival. I think the same goes for amur Tigers. They choose adult females more often than cubs or juveniles. Because of more meat.

Softer targets means, that attacking to individuals, which aren´t the strongest ones. I think, that it is quite universal way to say it. Reply