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

[peter]

(12-13-2023, 10:05 PM)Pckts Wrote:

Quote:I read the book of Tony de Almeida ('Jaguar hunting in the Mato Grosso and Bolivia', Safari Press, 1990) some years ago. It's informative and, datawise, very reliable. He's one of the few who measured jaguars in the correct way ('between pegs'). De Almeida lived and breathed jaguars from day one, but so did Batalov and his department is wild Amur tigers. This thread is about wild tigers, meaning Batalov's opinion has quite a bit of weight. When he talks about prints, heels and weights, you pay attention.

He spoke about estimated print size but with regards to the exaggeration of print size dependent on substance they are held within Almeida said it clearly. And if we are to compare Resumes when it comes to big cat size, measurements and protocols there is probably no one who can surpass Almeida. Few can be held in the same regard but that's a small handful and certainly not Batalov. You are talking about a man that has spent his life capturing and measuring cats, that's not a skill utilized today.
But this isn't about who's resume is better, the point was that soft surfaces embellish print size and that holds true. Like I stated, this is something that's documented by numerous people not just Almeida, you simply asked for how it pertained to an individual cat and I presented that.

Quote:A few years ago, rumours about large males in northeastern China and the Khabarovsk Krai emerged. A few years ago, in a video, Feng Limin said tigers had been weighed in northeastern China. The two heaviest reached or exceeded 250 kg. A young adult male arrested for attacking a car was 225 kg. Loaded, you said. But that isn't the point. The point is northeastern China, in spite of the limited population, seems to produce heavy male tigers.   

 
Unfortunately these aren't presented with valid data to go along with their claims. I'm not questioning the source but it's still 2nd hand and no protocols, measurements, identification or dates are there. Even the 225kg Tiger isn't based off scientific fact more so than it is based off a quote from an article which we've seen can be inconclusive or misleading.

If a population produces heavy tigers or not requires exceptional proof, if we want to speculate, that's fine it's no different than me claiming Kaziranga Tigers are the largest Tigers alive. I don't have verifiable proof but I do have eye witness claims and hypothesis formed from an understanding of what separates their terrain from Bengals elsewhere. 
The same question should be asked for this N.E. Chinese population, what about their habitat would allow them to grow larger than anywhere else?

Quote:Batalov said there is a correlation between the width of the heel and the weight of a tiger. In most wild adult males, the heel width ranges between 10,5-12,0 cm. A heel width of 12,0 cm is considered as 'large'. Batalov thought 'Odor', who had heel width of 12,0 cm, was close to 200 kg. He saw a print with a heel width of 13,0 cm in 2013. Gotvansky, in the Anyuysky National Park, measured prints with heel widths ranging between 14,0-16,0 cm in the period 2015-2022. That's still apart from the male known as 'The Beast', who left a print with a heel width of 13,5 cm. 

Unfortunately this is an estimation based off a standard Amur Tiger size. Not taking into account that a larger print doesn't confirm a larger cat but obviously can, it's not something to base a fact off of. 
How about Batalov himself, how many captures does he have under his belt? Tigers weighed, locations of these captures?
I have seen his camera trap videos and read his statements but if we're going to talk about size it should be done so by people who've performed the task. 
I'm not saying he has or hasn't but I'm not privy to those and if he has, I'd love to see the results.

Quote:And then, out of nowhere, Apex posted information about an unknown, but very experienced, Russian tiger biologist. He said adult wild male Amur tigers today average 220-240 kg. A very large male might exceed 280 kg (618 pounds). Lukarevsky's info is quite precise, suggesting he really was there when males were weighed.  

That is a big presumption and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. A biologist doesn't mean they have first hand experience with captures or even assist in any way. 


In closing, the point I made holds true. A pug mark is great, it can definitely help us id a cat and possibly associate it's size but it can be exaggerated depending on terrain and the sizes mentioned are of a normal range. I'm certainly not saying there aren't larger Amurs than the ones captured but I'm not ready to agree that they are larger now than the past nor am I ready to say one population is larger than another without understanding the differences that would contribute to that growth.

From the top down. 

We don't need field experts and peer-reviewed documents to conclude the size of a print will be affected by the conditions. There's also no need to question the knowledge and ability of experienced trackers and biologists, meaning they know as well and also meaning the information of Gotvansky is reliable.  

As to Almeida and Batalov. It's very likely Almeida is unmatched in the department of size, but Batalov weighed many bears and tigers. 

Feng Limin is a researcher leading a team of experts. His collegues informed him about the two male tigers captured and weighed. They were precise and so was Limin in the video. He corrected the interviewer and said the heaviest of these two was 270 kg. The information is reliable, but there's no peer-reviewed document about the size of tigers in northeastern China. The tigers he referred to are not in my tables for this reason, but that doesn't mean I doubt his info. 

His information doesn't compare to the info from Kaziranga though. There's a big difference between a tiger biologist talking about tigers that have been weighed (northeastern China) in a video on one hand and guesstimates of photographers, rangers and biologists about tigers that have not been weighed on the other (Kaziranga). Apples and oranges.  

Agreed on the conclusions in the last paragraph of your edited post: more information is needed to get to an opinion. Reply