Eyes on or hands on? A discussion of human interference

[GuateGojira]

(11-01-2014, 11:23 PM)'Pckts' Wrote:

(10-31-2014, 10:32 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote:

(10-30-2014, 11:53 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: While some prefer collars, that is by no means, all. And many prefer not to do it, so that is up to the biologist. But a biologist doesn't always have the interest of the species or nature in mind, and human inquires may or may not serve a purpose in cosnervation. And while logistics may not always allow camera traps to be placed all over, they can usually still be placed in abundance in the areas that allow it. We have learned far more about tiger society due to video and camera trap than we ever have learned from radio collars. Think about all the new tiger fathers we now have documented living with their family, hunting together, protecting their young etc. We wouldn't have learned that from a collar, only from visual proof. I am not saying that collars can't offer some good information, I am saying that camera traps and video can offer just as much with a far less invasive means of doing so and with out any tiger dying from unatural causes. While you may be willing to accept a few tiger deaths as long as science is involved, I am not. 1 tiger death or 100, its far to high of a price to pay.

 



 

I think that Peter explained very well the point, although he focused in Russian tigers and not the Bengal ones, which capture method is by far, safe and presented few problems. However, on your post, I will like to point out that the problem here is not to "accept" a few tiger deaths in the name of science, the point here is that those deaths were accidental and this is a risk that any one most take when we begin something new. All, I mean ALL scientific fields had sad stories in they past, from the persecution of the old scientists just because they said that the Earth was not the center of the Universe, up to the dead of Marie Curie, which died from radiation. All new fields have risks and those risks are involved in the famous "curve of learning". Science take a chance and often succeed, yes, two tigers died in Nepal, but all the others survived and now, Nepalese tigers are the only one that we actually know all they morphological, ecological and sociological facts. Obviously the price was low in comparison with what we now have. In fact, Nepalese tigers are about the few populations that actually have a chance to survive in the long therm, specially with the plan of the interconnection of the Terai arc (from Corbett (extreme west) up to Manas (extreme east)).

Other thing, although the behavior of the father tiger was actually discovered trough direct observations, there where not camera traps involved. The pictures and observations came from people that actually saw the events, principally Valmik Thapar, who in his book "Tiger, the secret life", presented by the first time this new insight of the life of the tiger.

I present, again, the case of the Sumatran tigers against the Nepalese tigers. Sumatra is full of camera traps and videos, but how much information we have about Sumatran tigers (size, ecology, behavior)? Now, compare the Nepalese tigers, we have all available data! Sumatran tigers have been studied since 2002 by several scientists, but at 2014 there are maybe two or three documents at the most, and from radiocollared tigers. This show that radiocollaring tigers in one of the best methods to study tigers, and the risk is few for the specimens. In this case, it is incorrect to say that camera traps have produced most of data, for the contrary, they have only produced demographic data, but not biological or social one, this came from Radiocollaring studies and long therm direct observations.

There is other point that have not been touched, the professionals that worked with tigers. Scientists and Vets that work with tigers most be professionals and experts in the field. Is possible that a bad work provoked the death of that tigress in modern times, but that is a human mistake, not that Radiocollar tigers is bad. However, testimonies from Nagarahole, Panna and Sariska, provided no evidence of problems or deaths in captures.

Finally, like Peter said, there is a War here, and if we don't take risks in order to get all possible information, tigers will die and remember this, your utopia of a "alone nature" is an impossibility now. There is not a single tiger population that don't coexist with humans. We can't just left the nature alone, if we do that, other ones will enter, and you know what would happen (Panna and Sariska most sound in your ears).

I sustain my point, if we want TRUE "Tiger science", both methods most be used, if not, only partial information will be available.
 


 

How many camera traps does sumatra have?
What sq. mile % do they cover?
I have seen very little "camera trap" footage from sumatra, and that is because sumatra is not a easy place to view. Tide rises and lowers leaving it almost impossible to have camer traps up since they would be covered by water half the day. The trekking is very harsh and dangerous.

On this statement
"which capture method is by far, safe and presented few problems"
Tigers have died in India due to collaring or sedation, so it is no more safe than any where else.
T24 or T42 (forget which one) has become a man killer and is aggressive towards vehicles, its just a unnecassary risk to the tiger and man.

But even if no tigers ever died, its still wrong. Its wrong to put human devices on animals, plain and simple. I know this is far fetched, but imagine a alien species comes to earth, they pick random people out, then they sedate them, put a collar on them that they cannot take off, then monitor them until a time they see fit.
It would be a cause for war, its no different for a animal. No matter what "good intention" you have, this is wrong. Animals are no different than us.
 

 

First: ALL the pictures of wild Sumatran tigers that you have saw are camera traps, so don't came here to say that you have saw little of them, that is a fallacy from you. We have a huge amount of them and they are used for the specific purpose of counting tigers, which is the function of cameras, nothing more.

Second: You are twisting my words. I said: "he (Peter) focused in Russian tigers and not the Bengal ones, which capture method is by far, safe and presented few problems". What I say here is that in comparison, the method of capture used in the Indian subcontinent seems to be more safe than that of Russia, in fact, only TWO tigers died in the ten years of radiocollaring tigers in Nepal and NO tiger died in the captures in Nagarahole, Panna, Ranthambore and Pench. Apart from that only other TWO died in a period of almost 40 YEARS!!! So, only four deaths in 40 years and about 100 captures, and you STILL say that the method is unsafe??? You are clearly biased agains this method and against any scientific method, judging from your words. Finally, you are still using that SINGLE case of the Ranthambore male that get aggressive toward humans after collaring, but according with your words, this is INCORRECT, check your own post:

PCTS say: "I'd be carefull using singular examples as rules."
Source: http://wildfact.com/forum/topic-are-tige...44#pid6044
 
So, are you cold or are you hot? You contradict yourself.

Third: Now you are delirious, aliens and collars? Don't you have a better example. Funny words: 
PCKTS say: "But even if no tigers ever died, its still wrong"
Wrong by WHO??? Only for you, because several tigers had been collared (and will be collared) and lived a perfectly normal life (Sunquist, 1981, Karanth, 2003), they hunt, they mate, they fight, they have done ALL the normal things that a tiger actually do. You are been paranoic again with this kind of comments. And of course, animals ARE different than us, even the smarts animals can't be compare with a human, there is a difference between us. Be careful in these comments, a dog don't have the same dignity that a human been. Hope you don't twist my words in this last and specific issue here too.
  Reply