Man-eaters

[peter]

PC

My lead post has an instruction on how to post in this new thread. I said wild man-eaters and not incidents in facilities. I also said we want to see a bit more than a collection of stories and pictures that could, to use Corbett's words, make a stone weep.

I don't want this thread developing into just another collection of the usual stories. The aim is to get to a bit more insight. We want to know why some wild big cats develop into man-eaters and we also want to know if it's true many of them are man-made. 

After two responses to your posts on the threads I started today, you might think I'm after you. Not so. Your imput is appreciated, but reading a lead post first would also be appreciated. I propose to delete the posts on incidents in facilities first. See what you can find on the Ranthambore tigers.

As to what I mean with 'conclusions' resulting in some kind of insight (see above). Here's some ideas.

One thing I noticed in tigers is they like privacy. If they want to communicate, they will tell you. The problem is many of us seem unable to understand them. If we project this observation to wild India, we could conclude tigers also want privacy. Male tigers in particular seem very sensistive in this respect. Biologists sedating tigers have to realize that some tigers might take an intrusion very personal. So much so, it could result in a loss of respect. Some tigers might decide to turn the tables on humans. When a tiger surprises a human, chances are he will attack more often than not. 

The decision to close some Indian reserves isn't as bad as many think. Tigers and humans just don't mix. Fysical distance is one of the most important conditions to co-exist and the best way to get there is closing a number of reserves.

Another factor to consider is inborn dislike. Those who know about captive tigers think about 1 in 12 is a killer. It often shows right at the start and the best way to prevent problems is to avoid direct contact. My guess is wild tigers produce more animals with an inborn dislike. Many think Indian tigers learned to deal with humans, but my opinion is they didn't. Russia could be the exception to the rule, but one has to remember Primorye is a large place with few tourists and biologists. If a tiger wants privacy, it's right there. The moment tigers lose privacy, their attitude towards humans will change. Anywhere.

A third factor to consider is sudden (and often violent) change and the loss of communication. Sumatra, for instance, is rapidly changing and the result is tigers often have no option but to conquer a place to live the hard way. The moment they clash with humans, accidents are bound to happen.  

Wild lions respond in a different way towards humans. The reason is they evolved in treeless plains also attractive for humans. Wild lions, more so than tigers, know about humans and learned to accept them to an extent. Man-eaters are not uncommon, but most occur in regions in which they are unable to hunt, let alone raise a family. 

The problem nearly everywhere is ever more humans. As most of them are very poor, they often have no other option but to compete with big cats for space. It is a tragedy for both. Reply