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

[chaos]

(11-16-2014, 12:42 PM)'peter' Wrote: FUTURE POSTS ON TIGERS AND BEARS

I will post a lot of what I have bears and tigers in different regions shortly. The problem is it is a lot. I'll have to make some choices. In the end, the intention is to create different topics with chapters in order to keep things readable. Another object is to let the information speak for itself. I'll add a few comments here and there, of course.  

CHERKASSOV

As for the book on Cherkassov. I didn't know about that book, but I read quite many others. Tigers feature in some and not others. One reason is Amur tigers have always been limited in numbers. Another is those looking for Amur tigers often were noticed and even observed themselves. Many wrote about it and not one liked what he saw. Some, for that reason, decided to call it a day.


THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH

As for 'the truth' about bears and tigers. After reading everything I have and talking to a few people 'in the know', the impression I have is there's no such thing as  'absolute truth'. Tigers hunt bears in some regions and not at all in others. In regions where they hunt bears, tigers hunt them occasionally in some seasons. In others, bears are an important source of food. Some male bears, according to researchers, hunt tigers at times. Nearly all researchers think males of both species are most active as hunters, but I think females could be more active regarding bears than is assumed. 

When tigers hunt bears, they usually hunt immatures and females. Same for male bears hunting tigers. The reason is risk limitation, I think. There are few clashes between males. One could conclude adult males of both species, as a result of an advantage in size, would seldom perish in fights. But those who provided information on fights and victims wrote the score is about two to one in favor of tigers. In about half of the fights, there was no decision reached.

If tigers hunting bears, as many suggest, are experienced large males hunting smaller bears, how is it possible so many tigers perish in fights? Are they no match for smaller bears, do they hunt larger bears than we think (including males), would a significant number of (tiger) victims be immature males or females or is there something else going on? Something we don't know about. 


JOHN VAILLANT

What about John Vaillants remarks on tigers and bears in his great book on the Sobolonye man-eater? Everything he wrote was based on what researchers, hunters and locals saw or found. Authentic, first-hand information only, I mean. Miquelle also thought it was a great book.

Do male tigers occasionally take on bears as a result of what Vaillant described as 'principle'? They apparently do, meaning not all fights are a result of food or displacement. I read time and again that male Amur tigers are vindictive animals. Do they target large bears as well? I'm not sure. Based on what I read, I concluded large male bears are not targeted, but others, about similar in size to a tiger, are. Some of these probably are male.

What is 'a large male brown bear' and do they really go unchallenged? If so, why have different researchers concluded male tigers are seldom displaced (I only read about one case)? When a bear persists, a male tiger would have to give way, one would think. But it very seldom happens, researchers say.

Do large bears, as some suggest, use tigers as hunting dogs, to be robbed at will without a fight? If so, why did Krechmar say adult males of both species are very close in tooth and claw? Not one is dominating the other in a fysical fight, he said. Could it be large bears try their luck because they often have no option, whereas male tigers can hunt again? If so, what about this 'vindictiveness' so many talk about? 

All in all, there still are many unanswered questions. I also noticed many findings of researchers contradict others. Finally, I noticed there apparently are tiger-researchers and bear-researchers. Both often seem to come up with 'proof' for statements of a dubious nature at the right time. I really don't know what to make of it.


ANIMOSITY

The only thing I can say from experience is there often is a lot of animosity between captive tigers and bears, especially between Amur tigers and brown bears. The animosity between both is much more pronounced than what I saw in tigers and lions. Tigers and lions often don't like each other. They would fight given the opportunity, but it wouldn't be all the way. In many cases, it isn't that intense. It would be about dominance in most cases.

The emotions regarding brown bears I saw are close to hate and obsession. The objects of their hate, often large male brown bears, knew it and obviously felt nervous, even with bars between them. I talked to trainers who had experience with both and they confirmed what I had seen. Males can't be mixed.

After what I saw, I concluded the (unconfirmed) stories on fights between wild males are true in that tigers probably often take the initiative. Bears, like in wild boars, would use their energy to defend theirselves. The intensity would be such, that tigers probably would spend themselves very fast, which would result in very frequent breaks. They would target the neck of their opponent. As male bears have a lot of muscles in that area, it would take a lot of time to reach the vertebrae. Tigers would succeed in some cases and not in others. It's do or die, I think. Most tigers who perish probably pay for a mistake, just like in wild boars. Those prone to mistakes are those driven by rage and hate and my guess is young adults would be the most likely candidates.  

Although I still think I am probably close, I was surprised to find that researchers concluded many fights between wild animals were initiated by bears (...). So what do we really know? And if we know something, would it hold? Would it be the 'absolute truth'? My guess is no. The only thing I'm quite certain about is the animosity.

Bears living close to big cats usually make a living of robbing them whenever possible. Size, I think, is irrelevant. Even the black bears severely hunted by tigers in the reserve Tkachenko worked in didn't fear tigers and robbed them whenever possible.

What do we know for sure about all true wild carnivores? They don't accept any kind of intrusion when eating, let alone an attempt to rob them. As this is what bears do for a living, my guess is this specific treat is the most likely explanation for the animosity I saw time and again. Cougars lack the size to engage a bear, but tigers do not. They probably often are so enraged, that they, after a period of loss after loss, probably are prepared to risk life and limb in a fight with a larger kleptocrate. If they lack the power to win an open fight, they would try to get even in another way.


AMATEURS AND PRO'S

As both species have lived in close proximity for thousands of years in spite of the animosity, there has to be a balance. The only way bears would be able to get there is immunity of some animals, both male and female. These outsized animals, I think, are the ones who keep tigers in check. If they wouldn't be there, tigers would have made short work of them.

Not in Indonesia, south-east Asia and India, but Russia only. The reason is bears in Russia in particular often feed on tiger kills. At times, perhaps often, they maybe have no other option.

Apart from these exceptional bears, it would be very close in the other leagues. My guess is tigers could have their nose just in front (they are, after all, professionals and often choose the conditions). On the other hand. If they don't have to meet, they no doubt would use the oportunity. Males, I think, in particular. The reason is both would prefer to minimize the risk.

This is what we see in Indonesia, south-east Asia and India. The number of encounters is very limited and most animals involved in attacks are large male tigers. Sloth bears, although larger than their distant relatives in south-east Asia, could be targeted more often than other bear species. But 'targeted' would be too heavy to describe the intention of tigers regarding sloth bears.

Adult male Himalayan bears, larger than their relatives in north-east Asia, probably are never threatened. Males usually are larger than sloth bears and some males are not to be trifled with. The old boy I saw in the Zoologischer Garten in Berlin was just as large and robust as the one in my previous post.

The only real professionals in bears and tigers are Amur tigers and Amur brown bears. In some parts of Primorye, clashes between giants only seen by very few still happen every now and then. We can only imagine what they saw.

 

Good read. The interaction between the two, makes for an intriguing topic. You outlined scenarios of encounters based on various
sets of circumstances. Not being very informed in this category, I wasn't aware of such familiarity between the two.

A bit curious as to the size potential of these Russian browns. Are they basically grizzly bears, or more like The Alaskan Kodiak? You
remarked some of the larger bears are immune - equalizers? - in the overall equation, so I'm guessing they get quite large.

I'll be tuning in to this thread as it sparked interest. I ask you and other posters to "bear" with me, as I'm not nearly as informed as
others in this category. Thanks in advance 
  Reply