Eyes on or hands on? A discussion of human interference

[Pckts]

(07-15-2015, 02:27 AM)'Shardul' Wrote: "It's not clear cut at all, I thought I was pretty clear about stating that.
So while the intervention of human beings may or may not have saved his life (we don't know if he would have died or not) it still wasn't natural. Animals die in nature all the time, if its a natural occurrence than its fine in my book. If a tiger/big cat is caught in a poachers snare, being poached, something that is unnatural then I think we have the right to protect and save, but look at the long run.
We interfered in with Ustad and now that all the cards have been played, he is gone. So was it good or bad to interfere in the first place?

Will every single tiger react the way ustad has?
Absolutely not, animals have the same emotional gauntlet as we do, they react differently to each scenario, just like human beings do."

Well, you were implying that humans were responsible for T-24s killings, which I had objected to. Because if that were the case, we would have lot more cases like T-24, but we don't. He was a one-off. 

Regarding Hairyfoot, he was only captured on a camera trap, not by a photographer. Some tigers shy away from humans and their presence is only indicated by pugmarks, scats, claw marks or camera trap images. The Indian safari is a relatively recent phonomenon; till early 2000s hardly any people used to visit the tiger reserves. The safaris essentially haven't changed much, the reason you see more pictures now than before is only because more people are visiting now. Even then, some tigers are photographed so much more than others only because they don't mind human presence.

 

Hairyfoot was captured when the recently introduced camera traps then he died. I have no doubt he would of been captured on film more and more if given more time, but like you and I agree, terrain will always dictate the amount of footage shot of a tiger and the personality of the tiger. But remember, not only are Safari a recent phenomenon but portable cameras are, endless film and increase in safari's all are playing massive roles.
Pugmarks have been removed as a vilable source for id'ing tigers, To many errors occur.


"e would have lot more cases like T-24, but we don't. He was a one-off. "
Technically, T-24 is a one off but his case isn't extraordinary, T-42 is another one who has a very similar life and attitude towards humans and he also was invaded by human beings and lives in the same place.
Could simply be coincidence or something else, but I don't pretend to know the answer. But you can certainly make a case either way. Reply