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

[peter]

ON MR. LIMOUZIN'S SKULL AND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SKULLS OF DIFFERENT BIG CAT SPECIES - II (continuation of post 2,334)

c - The editorial of S.H. Prater in the JBNHS of June 1921

S.H. Prater was one of the editors of the Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society (JBNHS). Not long before Volume XXVII (No. 4) of the JBNHS was published in July 1921, the Society received a skull and a letter from Mr. Eugene J. Van Ingen of Van Ingen & Van Ingen (taxidermists, Mysore). The letter is interesting:

" ... I send herewith the skull and ribs of a Panther (?). As the skull seems abnormally large and more like a tiger's, I should be extremely obliged, if you would examine it and tell me whether it is a tiger's or panther's.

I may mention that the owner, Mr. E.E. Limouzin of Dusandli Estate, Ootacamund, declares it to be a Panther's but yet is not quite sure about it. While out shooting he caught a glimpse of the animal, late in the evening about dusk, and wounded and lost it. It was found some days afterwards but by then decomposition had set in and vultures and jackals had destroyed the skin; the skeleton and skull remained together with strips of skin, and Mr. Limouzin examined what he found of the latter carefully and is positive that the animal is a panther.

Yet I think the skull seems to be quite out of proportion with the ribs and Mr. L. remarked the same. He tells me that he had seen this panther previously on several occasions, and had examined him through his glasses, and though his head and fore quarters seemed to be extremely large and powerfully built, the body and hind quarters seemed to dwindle away!

Before this, in fact almost a year ago, Col. W. told me that he had seen a panther a few miles from Dunsandli, and he described its head, chest and forearms to have been enormous. It was standing on a rock about 20 yards away looking down at him, and Col. W. , who has shot many panthers, claimed it to be the largest he had ever seen. He quite believes this animal of Mr. Limouzin's to be the one seen by him.

Another reason Mr. Limouzin gives by which he is positive is that a few minutes previous to coming on to the Panther he heard the unmistakable call of a panther.

I much regret that I did not send you one of the claws, nearly all of which Mr. Limouzin recovered. They are quite the size of a large tigress. As regards the skull, in the course of my profession, in the course of my profession I have seen many panther skulls; many of them belonging to animals well over 7 ft., but none anywhere approaching this one in size.

Writing later Mr. Limouzin says: " .. By to-day's Mail I have sent the entire skeleton of the panther to your care (with the exception of one rib, smashed to bits by the bullit, and another rib, broken, possibly by the explosion, internally). Before I fired at the panther I was very much struck with the extraordinary size of his head and shoulders, he appeared to be immense, but unfortunately he jumped aside and I was only able to get a 'snapshot' at his side going down hill, from me .. ".

After quoting the letter of Mr. Van Ingen, Mr. Prater, on behalf of the editors of the JBNHS, wrote the skull " ... is undoubtedly that of an adult Panther ... ". He compared the measurements of Mr. Limouzin's skull with those of the largest leopard in 'Rowland Ward's' (obtained by Sir E. Loder in Gaboon), 3 leopards shot in India and the largest leopard skull in the collection of the Society. 

Mr. Prater also referred to the 'points of distinction' between tiger and leopard skulls in Blanford's 'Mammalia':

" ... The upper surface of the skull (Panther) is arched as in the Tiger, but the lower jaw is convex beneath, as in the Lion, the cordyle being proportionally nearer even than in the latter. When a Leopard's skull, with the mandible attached, is placed on a flat surface, the hinder part of the skull almost always touches the surface.

We publish for comparison a photograph of Mr. Limouzin's panther together with a photo of a tiger's skull and that of the largest Panther skull in the Society's collection. Also a Lion's skull,

S.H. Prater

Bombay, Natural History Society, June 1921. (JBNHS, Vol. XXVII, No. 4, July 1921, Misc. Notes, No. II - Record panther skull, pp. 933-935)

Here's the, quite famous, photograph published in the JBNHS, Vol. XXVII (No. 4, Misc. Notes, No. II.):  

*This image is copyright of its original author

  

Below the photograph of the tiger skull, the Society added: Basal Length 14.5''. This is incorrect. It should be 'greatest total length'. The greatest total length of the tiger skull, therefore, was 14.5 x 2,54 = 368,30 mm.

d - The opinion of Mr. Eugene J. Van Ingen

This post isn't about the conclusion of Mr. S.H. Prater, but the letter of Mr. Eugene J. Van Ingen. The information he provided is detailed, interesting and useful. Mr. Van Ingen, refering to the 'abnormal' size of the skull and the large claws in particular, thought Mr. Limouzin, to keep it short, had shot a tigress, not a leopard. This is important, as he had seen many skulls of tigers and leopards.

Mr. Van Ingen wrote Mr. Limouzin had shot the big cat " ... late in the evening about dusk ... " (see Mr. Prater's editorial). He " ... caught a glimpse of the animal ... ", meaning he didn't get a clear view of the cat. He thought it was a leopard, because he heard " ... the unmistakable call of a panther ... " a few minutes " ... previous to coming on to the Panther ... ".

Another reason Mr. Limouzin thought he had shot a leopard was he had seen a very large leopard close to his home on several occasions. Mr. Limouzin wasn't the only one who had seen a very large leopard near his home. Mr. Van Ingen wrote a Col. W. had told him he had seen a very large leopard a few miles from the Dunsandli Estate only a year ago. This is why he thought the cat shot by Mr. Limouzin was the leopard he had seen.

Both had seen a very large leopard near the Dunsandli Estate and both no doubt were fascinated by what they had seen. Experienced hunters often tried to find animals of exceptional size. Ten feet tigers and eight feet leopards were always on their mind. Not seldom, they're haunted by exceptional big cats.    

e - Dunsandle Estate

The Dunsandle (or Dunsandli) Estate is close to what used to be Ootacamund, now Ooty, in the extreme west of Tamil Nadu State. It was built in 1829 as a sanatorium for Europeans. Enclosed on all but its western side by the Nilgiri range of hills and located at about 7 400 feet, it's still considered a healthy environment. Here's a map of Ootacamund in 1911: 

*This image is copyright of its original author

   

The Nilgiri Hills are attractive for both humans and wild animals. To the northwest is the Bandipur Tiger Reserve. Tigers shot in this part of India in the recent past were quite large. According to Ullas Karanth, they, sizewise, more or less compare to tigers in Nepal and Russia ('Tigers', 2001, pp. 48). 

What's true for tigers could also be true for leopards. I don't have a lot on leopards shot in this region in the period 1890-1960, but I know about 30 were shot every year in the period 1910-1930. I also know black leopards have been shot more than once. In contrast to black leopards shot in other parts of southeast Asia, black leopards shot in the Nilgiris were quite large. In 2 books, I found reliable information about robust and large male black leopards. I'll post a few scans when I can.

Those interested in the natural world should consider a visit. The scenery is unsurpassed and tigers are present just about everywhere. Bandipur is not that far away and it isn't the only tiger reserve. This region is one of the few in southern Asia where tigers really stand a chance. Ullas Karanth did a very good job. As a result of the large number of prey animals, including gaur, tigers grow to a large size.

Here's a bit more about this part of India. Interesting read:

https://blog.teabox.com/history-of-the-nilgiri-tea

Here's a photograph of P. Ramakrishnan (2012). The leopard was photographed near a tea estate. This is what Col. W. (see -c-) saw in 1920:

*This image is copyright of its original author

f - Van Ingen & Van Ingen

Van Ingen & Van Ingen (1900-1999) were Indian taxidermists, best known for their tiger and leopard taxidermy trophy mounts. In 2006, a book about them was published. A must read for those interested, I think. 

In order to give you an idea about the number of tigers shot before hunting was banned. In the period 1930-1960, 400-500 tigers were mounted. Every year, I mean. As not all hunters could afford a trophy mount, the real number of tigers shot in that period most probably well exceeded 1 000 every year (...).

Here's 2 links to interesting sites:

https://www.taxidermy.net/ken/?p=941

https://www.africahunting.com/threads/van-ingen-van-ingen-indian-taxidermist.2988/ Reply