Dholes (Cuon alpinus)

[smedz]

@Wolverine, I've read your posts about this topic, and to be honest, I'm with Guate and pckts on this one. Nothing you've said has convinced me at all, let me explain. 

You can see videos of male Lions chasing off large groups of Spotted Hyenas, and if that happens, then why couldn't a tiger, especially a big male in his prime, do the exact same thing to a Dhole pack?  And what benefits would there be to have a several pack members be killed in a fight just to kill a tiger?

Especially when dholes aren't exactly the biggest canids out there. As for pack size, I believe Karanth on this, as he has spent years in that area, and while I was browsing on here once, I saw something Guate posted on page 34 on this thread, and it said that surprisingly, meat consumption decreases per capita (for each Dhole) when the size of the pack increases. The only way I'll ever believe these tales is if I ever see a film, photograph, or an actually verified account. Not eyewitness testimony, the weakest form of evidence.

(01-25-2019, 11:46 PM)Wolverine Wrote:

(01-25-2019, 06:29 PM)Panther Wrote:

(01-24-2019, 06:07 AM)smedz Wrote: Me personally, I don't believe packs of dholes attack and kill healthy adult tigers, especially since we don't have any physical evidence to support  it. However, what if the tigers in those stories were sick or seriously wounded animals, and hunters just changed them to make the encounters sound more epic. Just a thought.

Here's Ullas Karanth's (Considered by many as the worlds top leading tiger expert) take on this subject from his book:

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

As you can clearly see, even female tigers easily dominate and directly usurp kills from Dhole packs, even killing some of them in the process.

Kenneth Anderson's account is not verified and is disputed by the likes of Karanth, who clearly doesn't believe such nonsense.

Here's one of the greatest biologists of all time, V.Mazak's take on this subject too:

*This image is copyright of its original author

"Rarely bears, wild pigs, gaurs, or other large ungulates can mortally wound a tiger"...

"Nonetheless, it seems that wild dogs could kill only ill or otherwise weakened tigers"...

Here's another legit source, stating: "One has to take Anderson on faith as there are no verified stories of dholes actually killing a tiger, and such tales may be more legend than reality. According to Jenks, the much more common outcome is likely death by tiger"...

And also stating: "However, there are also records of direct competition... this include cases where dholes have been killed by tigers and attacked by leopards, indicating both larger carnivores may be behaviourally dominant over dholes.”...

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/...er-ignored

Hope this helps!

Vegeta San (think this was your original name), I don't see a point for disagreement as long as nobody here said that pack of dholes has attacked and killed healthy male tigers in their prime. The numerous previous sourses not always point what exactly tigers were attacked - healthy or sick. By the way Karanth does not reject the fact that tigers could be attacked by dholes. Quite interestingly he openly admit his LIMITED experience with dholes saying: "My own LIMITED EXPERIENCE suggests that dholes may not instinctively chase tigers as they do leopards".... Actually Keneth Anderson for sure had much more experience than him. In biology sources are separated on 2 categories: reliable and not reliable. Authors like Jim Corbett and Keneth Anderson has always been categorized by biologists as highly reliable sources of information. If we suspect Jim Corbett and Keneth Anderson as "lyers" is not clear what we do here in this forum....

Reginald Innes Pocock, British zoologist:
"The evidence that these dogs may at times attack tigers is too cogent to be set aside."

*This image is copyright of its original author

*This image is copyright of its original author

William Blanford, a famous Britich naturalist admits in his monumentall work "Mammalia of Britich India and Ceylon":

"Throughout India there is general belief that these wild dogs hunt and kill tigers"

*This image is copyright of its original author

Curently the world famous naturalist David Attenborough backed by his BBC scientist team says in the film "Tiger - Spy of the Jungles", minute 43:

"Red dogs once formed a large hunting packs. Today even a small family groups are rare sight. A large pack can even kill a tiger."

*This image is copyright of its original author

Obviosly as pointed Peter, Rishi and Jimmy the size of the packs in the past was decisive factor.

Ok, as was already admitted there are 2 "camps" among current biologists concerning tiger-dhole relations with sometimes mutually contradicting opinions - a "classical-traditional" camp and lets say "Karanth camp". Attenborough obviously ignores Karanth, while the latter ignores Anderson. In this interesting article from Guardian we read following symptomatic words:
"Researchers still debate if stories of dholes killing tigers are myth or truth."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/...er-ignored
And if researchers are still debating this topic and hardly unify on single opinion its clear that bloggers can hardly reach consensus.

Okay, first of all, I read that article myself, and I didn't see that line anywhere. As for the video, it said they formed packs of over 100... 100!!. That isn't realistic at all, how would they be even able to support that many members!? It makes no evoloutionary sense to have groups of that size because quite frankly, that's too many to support. Reply