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

[peter]

TIGERS AND BEARS IN RUSSIA TODAY - VI


The incident I referred to is in this book:

*This image is copyright of its original author

1 - DR. VRATISLAV MAZAK

Vratislav Mazak (1937-1987) was a Czech biologist specialized in paleoanthropology, mammalogy and taxonomy. He was a professor at the Charles University's Faculty of Science and a zoologist at the Prague National Museum.

Mazak's first edition of 'Der Tiger' was published in 1965. In the late eighties, but before the collapse of the Sowjet-Union, I bought the third edition of his book in Amsterdam. This edition, again in German, was published in 1983. It's one of the best books I read. The reason is Mazak offered an overview of every aspect of interest regarding the tiger. He invested a lot of time and it shows in every way.

Mazak was the one who proposed to distinguish between Indian tigers (Panthera tigris tigris) and tigers inhabiting other parts of south-east Asia (Panthera tigris corbetti). His proposal was adopted. Panthera tigris corbetti became an official subspecies in 1968.

Mazak was born in 1937 in Kutna Hora in what was then Czechoslovakia. In the last stage of the Second World War, Czechoslovakia was occupied by the Red Army. The occupation lasted until 1989, when the Sowjet-Union collapsed. Children born in Czechoslovakia before 1989 (as well as all other occupied countries in eastern Europa) often were able to understand, read or speak (a bit of) Russian, because it was teached at school (obligatory). Vratislav Mazak, for that reason, was able to understand Russian and to express himself in that language.

This was important, as it meant he was able to read Russian books and articles on (Amur and Caspian) tigers. He was one of the first who used these books for his book 'Der Tiger'. As his book was translated into German and sold in western Europe, it meant those interested in tigers in Europe, apart from biologists (who had access to Russian literature already), were able to take notice of the Russian literature for the first time.     


2 - CONTACTS WITH TIGER EXPERTS IN RUSSIA

a - K.G. Abramov

In the sixties of the last century, Mazak contacted a number of tiger experts in Russia. One of these was K.G. Abramov, a young and talented biologist who, like many Russian biologists, had learned the trade the hard way.  

In 1961, he wrote an article on Amur tigers. Maybe it wasn't an article, but a collection of unpublished notes. I don't know. Anyhow. Mazak wrote (pp. 217) the article was untitled. I assume it was never published. I don't know why that was, but Mazak wrote K.G. Abramov died well before his time. Mazak was contacted by his wife, Mrs. M.V. Abramova. In 1966, all notes of K.G. Abramov were placed at Mazak's disposal.

It must have been a treasure of information. In the unpublished notes, K.G. Abramov wrote about a clash between a large male brown bear and an old male tiger in the southern part of the Sichote-Alin Mountain Range. The incident happened in the 1958-1959 winter, which probably means the bear was a 'Schatun'. The bear was killed and partly eaten. Mazak, who wrote about the incident (pp. 79), referred to K.G. Abramov's 1961 unpublished notes. This was the untitled article he got from Mrs. M.V. Abramova, meaning he probably read about the incident in 1966.

I don't know what to make of it. It is a fact Mazak knew (or heard about) K.G. Abramov and it also is a fact he got his unpublished notes in 1966 from Mrs. M.V. Abramova. Finally, it is a fact he used the notes for his book. Mazak, therefore, considered the notes as genuine and authentic.

If the notes, on the other hand, were never published, which seems likely, it is impossible for his peers to read the notes themselves. This means they are not in a position to get to an opinion. It also means the information has to be rejected from a scientific point of view. It is, however, also a fact unpublished notes or observations are used every now and then in peer-reviewed documents.

What to do when you get authentic information of a biologist who, as a result of circumstances (like a premature death), never published? Should you follow the accepted rules of the scientific community and keep silent about it or should you write about it with the risk the information will be dismissed (for good reasons)? I think I would write about it, but I would also publish the information I used. Mazak apparently didn't and the result was the information K.G. Abramov collected was sidelined. A pity, as loss of information.

There is perhaps a way to find out a bit more. Assuming the information he got from M.V. Abramova in 1966 was in his archive and assuming Colin Groves got Mazak's archive, anyone interested in the incident Mazak referred to could contact Colin Groves. Let's assume the unpublished notes of K.G. Abramov are in Mazak's file. Let's also assume Colin Groves is willing to share the unpublished notes. The next problem then would be to find someone able to translate K.G. Abramov's notes. Not a bad idea, I think. I'll try to contact Dr. C. Groves.                


b - W.J. Jankowski

In the sixties of the last century, Mazak also contacted, or was contacted by, W.J. Jankowski. He was one of the sons of the famous hunter and naturalist J.M. Jankowski. This was the man who featured in 'The Tiger's Claw'. J.M Jankowski, of Polish origin, was a passionate hunter. If there was one who knew about Amur tigers, it was Jankowski. A few years after the Russian Revolution, he fled Russia and settled in what is now North-Korea. It was there that Mary Taylor met with him. Jankowski talked to Taylor at times. The 'The Tiger's Claw' was based on what he said.

After the Manchurian tour of the Red Army in August 1945, the Jankowski's probably were noticed by the Sowjets. I wouldn't know if they acted themselves or had to be 'convinced', but they returned to the Sowjet-Union. My guess is they had some explaining to do, but I'm not sure. Anyhow.

In the late sixties, Mazak and W.J. Jankowski were talking Amur tigers in letters. Mazak (1983, pp. 185-186 and 189) wrote W.J. Jankowski had told him a lot about Amur tigers he didn't know about. He thought W.J. Jankowski was better informed and more reliable than N.A. Baikow, who was considered an authority back then.

After this introduction, we have arrived at the incident you mentioned. 


3 - THE SUNGARI RIVER TIGER AND THE LARGE MALE BROWN BEAR

In his letter of May 8, 1970 (pp. 185), W.J. Jankowski wrote the largest Amur tiger he, his brothers and his father ever shot was a giant male killed in the Sungari River Basin at July 9, 1943 in Heilongjiang Province (Manchuria, China). This tiger was 11.6 (350,52 cm.) measured 'over curves' and Jankowski more than once wrote it was an exceptional animal, much larger than all the others tigers they had shot.

Here's the two pages from his book in German. It is about the part within the red lines, so at the bottom of page 185 and at the top of page 186:

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

   
After an interlude, Mazak continues with the giant male tiger on page 189. The part on him is again within the thin red lines. It says:

" ... Regarding the giant Amur tiger shot by W.J. Jankowski and his team in the Sungari River Basin in 1943; the precise weight is unknown. Jankowski, however, estimated the tiger at about 300 kg. (660 pounds). He wrote (Mazak quoted from his letter, dated May 8, 1970): 

'The tiger was so large, we had to get help in order to get the tiger out of the forest. When the assistents arrived, there were 9 strong man alltogether. We devided the tiger into pieces and each of us carried a load of 30-40 kg. I do not hesitate to say the tiger very probably wasn't below 300 kg.'

Mazak added:

To complete the information on this giant tiger, I should perhaps mention that Jankowski wrote that the tiger had killed and eaten a very large male brown bear a few days before he was shot, of which only a leg and the head, found by Jankowski, remained ...":

*This image is copyright of its original author

4 - CONCLUSIONS

So what to make of Mazak's information on the giant tiger and the very large male brown bear? Well, it isn't as straightforward as you think it is. There are big differences between researchers and posters and then there aren't. Jankowski's giant tiger and the bear he killed were discussed in different forums. The participants didn't succeed to get to a kind of agreement. Below is an attempt to get to a conclusion in spite of that.


a - Those opposing the authenticity of the information Mazak offered in his book say it isn't first-hand. This is correct. W.J. Jankowski was the one with first-hand information, not Mazak. He shot the tiger and made the photograph. Mazak quoted from his letter dated May 8, 1970. For this reason, Mazak should have added a copy of the letter, I think. 

Does this mean the authenticity can be questioned? No. It means Mazak, for some reason, didn't do what he should have done. Does it mean the tiger never existed? No. The photograph says it did. The conclusion is no questions regarding authenticity, but bad marks for accuracy.


b - Was the tiger accepted by his peers? No. I don't know why, but I have an idea. We have to return to the first edition of Mazak's book (published in 1965). After publication, Mazak was faced with questions about the quality of the information on the alleged size of Amur tigers. His sources (Barclay and Baikov) didn't deliver a shred of evidence regarding their 13 feet tigers. Mazak didn't check what had to be checked and for this reason also misinformed the public, many biologists thought.

Their criticism was correct. Mazak acknowledged his mistake in the third edition of his book (1983, pp. 183). The information on the size of tigers in that edition is both unique and impeccable (I never saw anything even close), but the damage had been done in that his peers never completely trusted him again. Their attitude compared to those who indulge in things like 'Seen one tree, seen 'm all'.  

So one mistake was all it took to be dismissed? Looks like it. This attitude, in my view, compares to a death sentence for ignoring a red light. Shall we sideline Miquelle because of his slops regarding Aldrich-snares? No, we shouldn't. His contribution to tiger ecology is beyond question, if not great. We all make mistakes and it is through mistakes we, most unfortunately, often learn most.

Back to Mazak. He made a mistake and paid. Now just imagine the one who reported on a large male bear killed by a freak Amur tiger, of all people, had to be him. Need a say more?


c - Was the information on the large male bear killed by the freak male Amur tiger accepted by his peers? Or anyone else, for that matter? Of course it wasn't. Like Mazak, the Jankowski's were not, ehhh, much respected. That's two reasons to not even give it a try. 

For me, the information is both authentic and reliable. One of the two involved is a as experienced as they come regarding wild Amur tigers and the other as motivated as it gets in biologists. I might add that both had learned their trade the hard way, but I could just as well waste my energy on explaining why a one-legged duck would swim in circles.


d - So what about the second report on a large male brown bear killed by a large male Amur tiger (referring ot K.G. Abramov's unpublished notes)?
Well, K.G. Abramov died well before his time and the information he had was never published. If we add that the one who got hold of his notes wasn't respected by his peers, I think we can keep it real short. No publication is no proof is no dead bear. I could try to explain why the information stands for me, but that would compare to the story on the duck.


e - Anything else on male tigers and dead male brown bears? Yes. Rakov also reported on a large brown bear killed by a tiger, but he apparently forgot to provide information on the gender of the bear. His peers accepted a large brown bear was killed by a tiger, but the lack of information on the gender means that's about it.     


f - More on male tigers and male brown bears in Russia? Yes, more than you think. Most unfortunately, the information available often is far from complete. For this reason, today's biologists in Russia concluded there is no reliable report on a male bear killed by a male Amur tiger. I could start a debate based on the information I have (not only the information discussed above), but I concluded it would compare to talking about duendes.   


g - Anything else on Mazak? Yes, quite a bit. I have measured skulls in the former Zoological Museum of Amsterdam.  I saw Mazak's notes in some of the skulls. He was there many years before I was. I copied the notes and went to see Dr. P. van Bree, who was then conservator of the Zoological Museum of Amsterdam.

Van Bree told me he and Mazak were good friends. He often talked about him. I could tell you stories. The only thing I want to say is Dr. P. van Bree thought Mazak was one of the best biologists he had known. And he knew a lot of them, including some of those who published on tigers in the last decades.

Did he, by the way, have a high opinion on them? Not quite. He was contacted by many and he provided the information they needed, but he was never mentioned in their books or articles. This is not done. Mazak, on the other hand, wrote about his good friend Van Bree in the third edition of his book (pp. 217). Mazak, Van Bree and Colin Groves wrote an article about the Bali tiger skulls they had measured. I'll post the article in some time.            


h - Is there anything on male tigers killed by male bears? Yes. I found two reports on male tigers killed by male bears. One was a young adult (probably the one Sysoev referred to) killed in 1960 and the other was an average-sized male killed in 1972. In both cases, the male bear was described as 'large' or 'very large'. Details? No. Zilch. Accepted by researchers? Of course.


i - Mazak died in 1987. He had an impressive collection of books, articles and notes. What happened with his archive after he died? I asked Dr. P. van Bree. He told me most of it went to Dr. C. Groves in Australia. I was in Australia, but that was before I knew about Mazak's archive. I'll contact Dr. Colin Groves.
 

5 - THINGS THAT DIDN'T EXIST AND INCIDENTS THAT NEVER HAPPENED


a - This never happened and it never will:

*This image is copyright of its original author

b - Same for this:

*This image is copyright of its original author

   

c - This man never existed. Same for the book he wrote:

*This image is copyright of its original author

d - V. Jankowski also only was an illusion. The bear you see is a fata morgana:

*This image is copyright of its original author

  
   

e - This tiger then? As real as it gets, so it seems. I mean, a photograph, a letter of a man who was there and took the photograph himself and all that? No, not really. You're just dreaming:

*This image is copyright of its original author

Reply