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

[Matias]

hello @Apex Titan 

I understand your arguments very well, you have posted an enormous amount of material and there is no question as to what you understand about this whole predation story. If you and I read the same book, our observations will still be somewhat different. In the specific case, I brought an element that I consider very valid in this context, based on the reasonableness of perceiving that there are unknown circumstances involving two large animals that confront each other – there is always an aggressor and an assaulted, and only tigers have a relationship direct interest in hunting a bear (for food). In a fight so long that it left many traces on the landscape, it would also inflict wounds on the victor. Can you accept this? I cannot digest all this context for a simple analysis that this tiger (Odyr) specializes in hunting large male brown bears. It is unlikely to be just that.

I kept thinking about the combat itself, and I can't close my thoughts without looking into the existence of something peculiar to this big bear (internal injuries and any wounds, muscle sprains that affected its mechanical capacity, etc.), or even the geography of the landscape. It's my way of seeing and assimilating the subject that doesn't need to deny your argument in any way.

In 1953, “Animal Behaviour” was published for the first time, scientifically approaching articles, essays and studies compiling all available material on all aspects of animal behavior. Since that time, studies have already predicted that animal behavior was something very complex, which escaped the determinisms and stereotypes common at the time, such as the reductionism of behavior by instinct. Since then, as research has progressed, it has become clear that animals make choices, decide paths, set up strategies, carry out medium/high complexity analyses, hesitate, and have multiple attitudes within their own species. What I can say to you in a very constructive way is to keep your eyes and mind open – more interesting is the path and not the arrival. We are always open to good information and good analyzes that find logic in some aspect of animal life and ecology. We should not stick only to the facts, since behind the attitudes and decisions taken there is a whole world of possibilities that can hardly be closed. We should not be replicators of the position of a biologist A or B (it is a point of support, a consistent parameter that opens up possibilities and not that closes a subject), we are free to conjecture and complement any point of view or analysis; after all, how to explain a fact without a set of thoughts that can better compose this situational picture, in a predictive way and with good consistency.

My best lengths! Reply