There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
01-07-2020, 07:08 AM( This post was last modified: 01-08-2020, 12:16 AM by peter )
GUATE
Excellent work, as always. Appreciated. When I'm done with the indexes, I will post a number of tables on the size of tigers (and other big cats). These tables are different from the previous tables in that they're based on reliable information I found in books. I'll also post a few tables with information on the size of captive big cats. Before posting, I'll contact you.
Jhala
A few weeks ago, YV Jhala, indirectly, featured in a debate about a large male tiger in northern India. As a result of the debate, Shadow decided to contact an organisation in India. He ended up talking to Jhala. Jhala told him he had no information about the tiger in northern India, but said he would try to find the man who weighed the tiger in northern India.
Jhala said he never collared tigers in northern India. His trade was tigers in central India. In your post, I read Jhala was in Ranthambore. The question is if Ranthambore is considered as a part of central India?
Jhala, as you know, told Shadow the heaviest tiger he weighed was 280-290 kg. (618-640 pounds) on a full stomach. I know he was referring to a Kanha tiger, but he also said the measurements of tigers in Ranthambore (referring to your post) were among the largest in India. This means he collared tigers in Ranthambore as well. The question is if he, regarding the weight mentioned, only referred to the Kanha tiger. Maybe you can find out a bit more.
Northern India
The information I have strongly suggest that tigers shot in northern India and Nepal were among the largest wild big cats in the period 1870-1940. This conclusion was confirmed in documents published after 1970. Some individuals in central and, in particular, northeastern India can be very large, but at the level of averages tigers in northern India and Nepal most probably still top the lists. By a margin, I think.
The problem is a lack of good information. We know a bit about the size of tigers in southwestern, central and northeastern India, but there's, as far as I know, no document with good information about the length and weight of adult tigers in northern India. My guess is a document of that nature isn't going to be published any time soon.
Proposals
Size, for obvious reasons (tigers really are walking the edge), is not on the agenda of today's biologists. If we want to find out a bit more, therefore, we have to do it ourselves. My first proposal is to start a kind of task force. If you have time, Guate, you could head it. The first goal is to collect reliable data. The second goal is to get to good conclusions at the level of species, subspecies and regions.
If we want good information about the size of Indian tigers today, we have no option but to contact wildlife organisations and biologists working in India. As we want to prevent chaos (posters contacting biologists all the time), my second proposal is to appoint one of us as our contact (ambassador). As Shadow is both interested and able to open just about every door, he seems most suited. I'll talk to him soon.