There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
Though it was a juvenile, it was much bigger than Helen the shark, about 3 times (and measuring 32–33 ft or 9.7536–10.0584 m), so that was incredible! Humpback whales (Megaptera novæangliæ) have been seen to fight or dominate orcas or killer whales (Orcinus orca), which in turn dominate GW sharks, so if a GW shark can do that to a much bigger creature, then what could Megalodon have done to Livyatan melvillei? https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-megalod...#pid124473
Frankly saying it looks like, that you are making quite wild conclusion from very little.
First, co-operation of some sharks and for instance orcas are in so different level as is intelligence, I don´t think that you can find any marine biologist saying otherwise. Then again humpback whales dominating orcas... based on what? They can confront orcas for sure in pods, but still orcas hunt also humpbacks. Some sharks managing to do the same to some lone humpback, impressive, but still not quite the same. Orcas, when they choose to, can attack against a pod of humpbacks.
While sharks might do sometimes some co-operation (on purpose or by accident can be asked, because there aren´t too much signs of communicating really), it has to be remembered, that whales and orcas can communicate during hunt and use several tactics depending on their prey. In some occasions there are suggestions, that orcas can frankly saying terrorize some other animals just for fun, a little bit like cat playing with mouse.
For me what you write is way too far-fetched and looking like, that you almost tendentiously try to make conclusions from very vague cases. Like you would have first decided, that you want to prove in some way, that megalodons would have dominated everything. And then you have started to look for anything what you could use to make it look like it.
Sorry to say this so frankly, but it´s how it looks like for me now. And not convincing for me personally at least, not at all. Sharks just aren´t that intelligent even though they do swarm often in same places. Still they scatter when bigger shark or orcas approach. No co-operation to overcome even a single bigger predator.
To quote that article in full, it's baleen whale calves that orcas would usually prey on, and even adult baleens (usually barring humpbacks) have been observed to flee from orcas, but aside from the fact that orcas have managed to snatch calves from protective adults, in a fair face-to-face fight, orcas are no match for humpbacks, like how hyenas are no match for lions, though thankfully for the orcas, the baleens don't have the teeth to kill them: http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141209-...pic-battle
New research reveals how orcas attack baleen whales, and how the whales fight back
By Matt Walker
8 December 2014
It's a Battle Royale; one of nature's great confrontations. Under the waves cruises a pod of orcas, huge, sleek predators, each around 8 metres long and weighing some 6 tonnes. Each with big jaws, full of teeth. They are hunting a great baleen whale, one of the largest animals that has ever lived. Such life-or-death battles, between orcas and whales, have captured the popular imagination. But the truth is more complicated.
Adult humpbacks are formidable foes (credit: Christopher Michel / CC by 2.0)
*This image is copyright of its original author
For a start it has been unclear whether orcas, also known as killer whales, really hunt whales, and how often. Nor did we know how the whales themselves might react to such attacks. Now for the first time, scientists have recorded orcas attacking and killing humpback whales, specifically young calves. The results are published in the journal Marine Mammal Science. What's more, the humpback whales themselves aren't passive victims. They aggressively turn to battle the orcas, and even recruit "escort" whales to help fight off the attacks. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full.../mms.12182
Rare sightings
Orcas have developed a reputation for preying on baleen whales, a group that includes blue, fin and humpback whales among others. They have been recorded attempting to attack almost every species, and also sperm whales, the largest species of toothed whale. Many whales display tooth marks made by orcas on their tails and flippers, suggesting such attacks are common.
A washed-up grey whale calf marked by orca teeth (credit: DocentJoyce CC by 2.0)
*This image is copyright of its original author
But with a few notable exceptions, including times when orcas have preyed upon grey whale calves, successful attacks by orcas on whales have rarely been documented. For example, humpback whales are among the most studied large whales, being observed for countless hours at sea by scientists. More orca tooth marks are found on humpbacks than any other whale species. But until now there was no scientific record of an orca killing a humpback whale. Research over recent decades has also revealed a range of orca populations around the world, each hunting different prey using different techniques. Many don't hunt whales at all. Some orcas for example, particularly those living in northern latitudes including the North Pacific and Antarctica, only hunt fish, while others exclusively hunt seals. But now researchers have observed the action close up.
Some orcas are specialist hunters (credit: Doug Perrine / NPL)
*This image is copyright of its original author
Robert Pitman, a marine biologist based at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in La Jolla, California and colleagues from the US and Australia, tracked orcas and humpback whales off the coast of Western Australia. They observed orcas attempting 22 separate attacks on humpback whales. On 14 occasions, the orcas attacked and killed a humpback whale calf.
Orcas hunt in pods (credit: NOAA / Vancouver Aquarium)
*This image is copyright of its original author
To investigate further, the scientists attached a tracker to a female orca, which allowed them to use satellites to monitor her movements. They followed her for six days. During that time, her pod attacked eight humpback whale calves. During the seven attacks in which the researchers witnessed the outcome, the orcas killed the humpback whale calf on three occasions. That suggests that, for this population of orcas at least, humpback whales are a predictable and plentiful prey, although the orcas were only seen attacking calves and not adult whales. But the story doesn't end there.
Adult humpbacks are formidable foes (credit: Simon Ager / CC by 2.0)
*This image is copyright of its original author
Baleen whales themselves are popularly thought to be large but generally unassuming, passive creatures. Pitman's study reveals another side to their character. When chased by orcas, certain species of baleen whale are known to try to outswim their pursuers. Blue, fin and minke whales are thought to do this, sprinting at high speed so that the orcas can't keep up. On some occasions, the humpback whales seen by Pitman's team sought out protection. They swam to shallow water, nearby reefs, or even under the researchers' boats. These tactics often curtailed the attack. But at other times, the humpback whales decided to stay and fight. As the orcas approached, the mother humpback would sometimes move her calf to her side, or lift it out of the water using her head or flippers. She also blew huge breaths of air to disturb the orcas, and lunged or charged at them, slashing and slapping her tail and flippers.
Whales may thrash their tails to defend each other (credit: Liza / CC by 2.0)
*This image is copyright of its original author
Perhaps most surprising, humpback whales also have adult "escorts" that try to protect calves that are not their own, joining the mother in defending the smaller whale. These escort whales either charged at the orcas, or placed themselves between the attackers and calf, thrashing their tails and flippers. It is not yet clear whether escort whales are related to the calves and if not, how they might benefit from defending them. Despite the efforts of the mother whales and escorts, the orcas were more often than not successful in their attacks. But the presence of the escorts did reduce how many times a whale calf was killed. In light of their study, the researchers believe that orcas may congregate each year off the coast of Western Australia to prey on baby humpback whales. Humpbacks usually give birth to one calf every two years, so each calf killed is a significant loss to a mother.
I have to say, that your logic doesn´t quite open up now. Should we start to make comparisons in the way, that luckily cape buffalos and gaurs don´t have fangs and claws etc. ? And maybe then, that luckily lions aren´t 500 kg heavier and sabertooth etc....
Anyway whales and dolphins are in very different level what comes to intelligence than for instance sharks. So they have far better chances to defend against predators. Then again lone whale is in way bigger danger than whales in pods. Still even alone, their intelligence is superior in comparison with most other animals in sea or land or air. So when you compare for instance megalodons and humpback whales, you need to understand that difference, which has been there most likely in past too. It´s not only the size which gives benefits to big whales, it´s also intelligence making it possible to capitalize it in best possible way. Sharks don´t defend themselves in groups, they scatter in panic also when a lot of sharks. In same situation whales co-operate.
Though it's true that cetacea are smarter than sharks and fish, a fact is that sharks can be social (this has also been observed in great whites, even if rarely), and Megalodon was a huge monster with the size and teeth that could help it kill at least one orca, like how a lion has the size and teeth to kill at least one hyena, whereas a baleen whale can't do that with its mouth, though it remains to be seen whether or not a thrash of its huge tail could kill an orca, as was mentioned in the BBC article, and even lone humpbacks are brave enough to tackle pods of orcas, as mentioned by Live Science: https://www.livescience.com/55639-humpba...0attacking.
Sharks are nowhere near the intelligence and social behavior of whales, when looking at it how they act. When there is a danger shark reaction is "everyone takes care of him-/herself and that´s it. There are no defence formations, no communication how to change it etc.
Talking about social sharks can be possible to some point, but it´s a far fetch to compare them to some species which are really social. Lions are in different level, when comparing sharks to lions I can´t see justification. Lions can hunt together, they are loyal and they also fight together against threat many times. For me it looks like, that you reach way too far when trying to make some new theories. Your comparisons doesn´t seem to make too much sense when looking closer.
When using lions in comparison, then it would make more sense to compare lions and orcas, which has been done by some people and big whales are more comparable with buffalos for instance. Cape buffalos can´t protect their calves and even adult ones, but they do defend themselves in groups etc. Of course talking about domination is even there questionable. There aren´t any whales which could be saying to "dominate" orcas. Orcas hunt them all, only biggest blue whales seem to be too big for them or at least too fast when fleeing. Orcas have hunted and killed whales over 20 meters long, so they have what it takes.
Socialisation among sharks (particularly great whites) is actually a complex topic that requires further research, as Martin & Martin put it, and as I showed here, hyenas manage to snatch lion cubs, even with the adult lions being present, but that doesn't mean that adult lions don't dominate hyenas: https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-great-w...#pid124959
That lion-hyena and humpback whale-orca thing, I don´t know what you try to explain with it. Anyway sharks are far behind when comparing to whales and dolphins and co-operation. I really don´t understand how you try to reason your claims even to yourself. Have you ever seen any marine biologist say in serious or even half joking way, that some whale species would dominate orcas? I have never seen such, but maybe you have then? And some reasoning to what such hypothesis would be based on.
In simple terms, the evidence that was shown above shows that orcas can take or kill calves of humpbacks or other whales, but they are no match for adult humpbacks in fair confrontations, due to the superior size and strength of the latter (even if orcas are smarter than humpbacks, pound for pound), like how hyenas can kill or take lion cubs, but they are no match for adult lions in fair confrontations, due to the superior size and strength of the latter (even if hyenas have stronger bites than lions, pound for pound).
Though it was a juvenile, it was much bigger than Helen the shark, about 3 times (and measuring 32–33 ft or 9.7536–10.0584 m), so that was incredible! Humpback whales (Megaptera novæangliæ) have been seen to fight or dominate orcas or killer whales (Orcinus orca), which in turn dominate GW sharks, so if a GW shark can do that to a much bigger creature, then what could Megalodon have done to Livyatan melvillei? https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-megalod...#pid124473
Frankly saying it looks like, that you are making quite wild conclusion from very little.
First, co-operation of some sharks and for instance orcas are in so different level as is intelligence, I don´t think that you can find any marine biologist saying otherwise. Then again humpback whales dominating orcas... based on what? They can confront orcas for sure in pods, but still orcas hunt also humpbacks. Some sharks managing to do the same to some lone humpback, impressive, but still not quite the same. Orcas, when they choose to, can attack against a pod of humpbacks.
While sharks might do sometimes some co-operation (on purpose or by accident can be asked, because there aren´t too much signs of communicating really), it has to be remembered, that whales and orcas can communicate during hunt and use several tactics depending on their prey. In some occasions there are suggestions, that orcas can frankly saying terrorize some other animals just for fun, a little bit like cat playing with mouse.
For me what you write is way too far-fetched and looking like, that you almost tendentiously try to make conclusions from very vague cases. Like you would have first decided, that you want to prove in some way, that megalodons would have dominated everything. And then you have started to look for anything what you could use to make it look like it.
Sorry to say this so frankly, but it´s how it looks like for me now. And not convincing for me personally at least, not at all. Sharks just aren´t that intelligent even though they do swarm often in same places. Still they scatter when bigger shark or orcas approach. No co-operation to overcome even a single bigger predator.
To quote that article in full, it's baleen whale calves that orcas would usually prey on, and even adult baleens (usually barring humpbacks) have been observed to flee from orcas, but aside from the fact that orcas have managed to snatch calves from protective adults, in a fair face-to-face fight, orcas are no match for humpbacks, like how hyenas are no match for lions, though thankfully for the orcas, the baleens don't have the teeth to kill them: http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141209-...pic-battle
New research reveals how orcas attack baleen whales, and how the whales fight back
By Matt Walker
8 December 2014
It's a Battle Royale; one of nature's great confrontations. Under the waves cruises a pod of orcas, huge, sleek predators, each around 8 metres long and weighing some 6 tonnes. Each with big jaws, full of teeth. They are hunting a great baleen whale, one of the largest animals that has ever lived. Such life-or-death battles, between orcas and whales, have captured the popular imagination. But the truth is more complicated.
Adult humpbacks are formidable foes (credit: Christopher Michel / CC by 2.0)
*This image is copyright of its original author
For a start it has been unclear whether orcas, also known as killer whales, really hunt whales, and how often. Nor did we know how the whales themselves might react to such attacks. Now for the first time, scientists have recorded orcas attacking and killing humpback whales, specifically young calves. The results are published in the journal Marine Mammal Science. What's more, the humpback whales themselves aren't passive victims. They aggressively turn to battle the orcas, and even recruit "escort" whales to help fight off the attacks. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full.../mms.12182
Rare sightings
Orcas have developed a reputation for preying on baleen whales, a group that includes blue, fin and humpback whales among others. They have been recorded attempting to attack almost every species, and also sperm whales, the largest species of toothed whale. Many whales display tooth marks made by orcas on their tails and flippers, suggesting such attacks are common.
A washed-up grey whale calf marked by orca teeth (credit: DocentJoyce CC by 2.0)
*This image is copyright of its original author
But with a few notable exceptions, including times when orcas have preyed upon grey whale calves, successful attacks by orcas on whales have rarely been documented. For example, humpback whales are among the most studied large whales, being observed for countless hours at sea by scientists. More orca tooth marks are found on humpbacks than any other whale species. But until now there was no scientific record of an orca killing a humpback whale. Research over recent decades has also revealed a range of orca populations around the world, each hunting different prey using different techniques. Many don't hunt whales at all. Some orcas for example, particularly those living in northern latitudes including the North Pacific and Antarctica, only hunt fish, while others exclusively hunt seals. But now researchers have observed the action close up.
Some orcas are specialist hunters (credit: Doug Perrine / NPL)
*This image is copyright of its original author
Robert Pitman, a marine biologist based at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in La Jolla, California and colleagues from the US and Australia, tracked orcas and humpback whales off the coast of Western Australia. They observed orcas attempting 22 separate attacks on humpback whales. On 14 occasions, the orcas attacked and killed a humpback whale calf.
Orcas hunt in pods (credit: NOAA / Vancouver Aquarium)
*This image is copyright of its original author
To investigate further, the scientists attached a tracker to a female orca, which allowed them to use satellites to monitor her movements. They followed her for six days. During that time, her pod attacked eight humpback whale calves. During the seven attacks in which the researchers witnessed the outcome, the orcas killed the humpback whale calf on three occasions. That suggests that, for this population of orcas at least, humpback whales are a predictable and plentiful prey, although the orcas were only seen attacking calves and not adult whales. But the story doesn't end there.
Adult humpbacks are formidable foes (credit: Simon Ager / CC by 2.0)
*This image is copyright of its original author
Baleen whales themselves are popularly thought to be large but generally unassuming, passive creatures. Pitman's study reveals another side to their character. When chased by orcas, certain species of baleen whale are known to try to outswim their pursuers. Blue, fin and minke whales are thought to do this, sprinting at high speed so that the orcas can't keep up. On some occasions, the humpback whales seen by Pitman's team sought out protection. They swam to shallow water, nearby reefs, or even under the researchers' boats. These tactics often curtailed the attack. But at other times, the humpback whales decided to stay and fight. As the orcas approached, the mother humpback would sometimes move her calf to her side, or lift it out of the water using her head or flippers. She also blew huge breaths of air to disturb the orcas, and lunged or charged at them, slashing and slapping her tail and flippers.
Whales may thrash their tails to defend each other (credit: Liza / CC by 2.0)
*This image is copyright of its original author
Perhaps most surprising, humpback whales also have adult "escorts" that try to protect calves that are not their own, joining the mother in defending the smaller whale. These escort whales either charged at the orcas, or placed themselves between the attackers and calf, thrashing their tails and flippers. It is not yet clear whether escort whales are related to the calves and if not, how they might benefit from defending them. Despite the efforts of the mother whales and escorts, the orcas were more often than not successful in their attacks. But the presence of the escorts did reduce how many times a whale calf was killed. In light of their study, the researchers believe that orcas may congregate each year off the coast of Western Australia to prey on baby humpback whales. Humpbacks usually give birth to one calf every two years, so each calf killed is a significant loss to a mother.
I have to say, that your logic doesn´t quite open up now. Should we start to make comparisons in the way, that luckily cape buffalos and gaurs don´t have fangs and claws etc. ? And maybe then, that luckily lions aren´t 500 kg heavier and sabertooth etc....
Anyway whales and dolphins are in very different level what comes to intelligence than for instance sharks. So they have far better chances to defend against predators. Then again lone whale is in way bigger danger than whales in pods. Still even alone, their intelligence is superior in comparison with most other animals in sea or land or air. So when you compare for instance megalodons and humpback whales, you need to understand that difference, which has been there most likely in past too. It´s not only the size which gives benefits to big whales, it´s also intelligence making it possible to capitalize it in best possible way. Sharks don´t defend themselves in groups, they scatter in panic also when a lot of sharks. In same situation whales co-operate.
Though it's true that cetacea are smarter than sharks and fish, a fact is that sharks can be social (this has also been observed in great whites, even if rarely), and Megalodon was a huge monster with the size and teeth that could help it kill at least one orca, like how a lion has the size and teeth to kill at least one hyena, whereas a baleen whale can't do that with its mouth, though it remains to be seen whether or not a thrash of its huge tail could kill an orca, as was mentioned in the BBC article, and even lone humpbacks are brave enough to tackle pods of orcas, as mentioned by Live Science: https://www.livescience.com/55639-humpba...0attacking.
Sharks are nowhere near the intelligence and social behavior of whales, when looking at it how they act. When there is a danger shark reaction is "everyone takes care of him-/herself and that´s it. There are no defence formations, no communication how to change it etc.
Talking about social sharks can be possible to some point, but it´s a far fetch to compare them to some species which are really social. Lions are in different level, when comparing sharks to lions I can´t see justification. Lions can hunt together, they are loyal and they also fight together against threat many times. For me it looks like, that you reach way too far when trying to make some new theories. Your comparisons doesn´t seem to make too much sense when looking closer.
When using lions in comparison, then it would make more sense to compare lions and orcas, which has been done by some people and big whales are more comparable with buffalos for instance. Cape buffalos can´t protect their calves and even adult ones, but they do defend themselves in groups etc. Of course talking about domination is even there questionable. There aren´t any whales which could be saying to "dominate" orcas. Orcas hunt them all, only biggest blue whales seem to be too big for them or at least too fast when fleeing. Orcas have hunted and killed whales over 20 meters long, so they have what it takes.
Socialisation among sharks (particularly great whites) is actually a complex topic that requires further research, as Martin & Martin put it, and as I showed here, hyenas manage to snatch lion cubs, even with the adult lions being present, but that doesn't mean that adult lions don't dominate hyenas: https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-great-w...#pid124959
That lion-hyena and humpback whale-orca thing, I don´t know what you try to explain with it. Anyway sharks are far behind when comparing to whales and dolphins and co-operation. I really don´t understand how you try to reason your claims even to yourself. Have you ever seen any marine biologist say in serious or even half joking way, that some whale species would dominate orcas? I have never seen such, but maybe you have then? And some reasoning to what such hypothesis would be based on.
In simple terms, the evidence that was shown above shows that orcas can take or kill calves of humpbacks or other whales, but they are no match for adult humpbacks in fair confrontations, due to the superior size and strength of the latter (even if orcas are smarter than humpbacks, pound for pound), like how hyenas can kill or take lion cubs, but they are no match for adult lions in fair confrontations, due to the superior size and strength of the latter (even if hyenas have stronger bites than lions, pound for pound).
Sorry but I can´t see any sense in these postings of yours. Fair confrontation... we are talking about predators and prey. Orcas are match for any whale in "fair confrontation". They have been seen to kill whales over 20 meters long and even big blue whales are known to flee from orcas using their faster swimming speed. And that lion-hyena comparison when talking about orcas and humpback whales or whatever other whales. I don´t see any sense or logic or similarities there either.
You said, that humpback whales would "dominate" orcas, but I haven´t seen a anything to justify such claim. If you really don´t have anything else, I think, that we understand the word domination in very different way. When some species can´t protect their calves even when fully prepared and aware of predators, I don´t see there domination. It´s just normal predator-prey situation.
Lions don´t attack elephant calves, when adults protect them and there are many elephants keeping calves in safety. It can be called domination, imo. Orcas attack humpback whale calves no matter what, no domination from humpback whales there.
08-26-2020, 04:20 AM( This post was last modified: 08-26-2020, 06:39 AM by GuateGojira )
What is going on here??? There are TWO topics with different names and the same collection of incorrect ideas and preconceptions about "megalodons, white sharks, humback whales and orcas". The same discussion with the same argumenst is also in this topic: https://wildfact.com/forum/topic-great-w...carcharias
Honestly this debate is absurd from any point that we can take it and I will make a full answer about this. I think that if it should be merge in one single topic about "Humback whales interaction with orcas and whatever have to do with predation on white sharks" and that is all, as none of these two topics actually contribute to the knowledge of these species. In fact, the same is happening with the topic about the size of the Carcharocles (Otodus) megalodon!
In fact, the arguments used are so childlike that instead of logic arguments it looks like a youtober conversation about transformes, check this example:
A guy says: Humback dominate over orcas but as white sharks kills humback whales, then white sharks are cooler than orcas!
It sound line: Optimus Prime is the only one that can kill the Fallen, but as Megatron killed Optimus, that means that Megatron is more powefull than the Fallen!
Can you see how stupid this sounds? I formaly request fo merge these two topics if possible, as the topics about specific animals shold be about the information of that specific animals and do not repeat the information again and again. I will upt my answer in the Shark topic.
08-26-2020, 06:53 PM( This post was last modified: 08-27-2020, 03:26 AM by peter )
ALL
In spite of the title, this thread didn't developed quite as planned (accumulation of good information). This post is an attempt to analyse the situation and get to a conclusion.
1 - Fact or fiction
Wildfact is a public forum about the natural world. Here, those inhabiting the natural world are heard and respected. The aim is good information. Good information is based on research. This means a thread dedicated to baleen whales has to offer information based on research. This is what visitors expect and this is what they will get.
Good information is different from, say, a debate. If a thread is created to debate, it has to be made clear before you start reading. The best way to get there is to announce it. The title has to be loud and clear, that is.
The title of this thread is 'Baleen whales'. Not 'A debate of a speculative nature about the relation between baleen whales and sharks, mixed with information about the relation between sharks and orcas'. As this didn't happen, the result is confusion.
2 - Focus
The aim of Wildfact is to concentrate information about a species in a limited number of threads. One reason to do it this way is to prevent dispersion of information. Another is we don't want visitors losing their way.
A debate on interaction between different species in a thread dedicated to one of them is not what we want. We also don't want the debate to move from one thread to another. Same for redirections. The reason is it results in a loss of information. Another is it often results in confusion.
3 - Proceedings
As a result of the issues discussed above, Shadow, a moderator, decided to intervene. At first, the intervention resulted in a few questions. When these did not have the intended effect, the problem was discussed in the mod thread. A day later, Guate, a member who knows a few things about (the interaction between) whales, sharks, orcas and megalodon, joined the debate. Conclusionwise, he and Shadow agreed.
4 - Conclusion
The intention of this thread is to get to good information, not debates. Our proposal is to conclude the debate on baleen whales, sharks, orcas and megalodon. We also decided to merge this thread with the white shark thread.
5 - Bornean Tiger
Your contributions range between very interesting (we, for instance, like the contributions in the landscape thread you recently created) and dubious. Our proposal is to focus on good information from now on. If you want to start a debate and add a bit of pepper (referring to speculative remarks), make sure all of us know before we enter the thread. Remember you need permission to start a thread of this nature.
As to your habit regarding 'redirections'. Although it can serve a purpose at times, it isn't appreciated. One reason is it often results in confusion. Another is it enables you to direct a debate. Debates, however, should be directed by mods.
The last remark is about the tendency to get involved in something most of us (referring to the mods) consider as speculation.
Your posts say you're educated and well-spoken. For this reason, we assume you know the internet today is often used as a means to spread misinformation. The main result is confusion.
Wildfact is a public forum about the natural world. Our main aim is to collect and present reliable information about (the ecology and habits of) those inhabiting that world.
Although many assume people today are better educated and, if you will, 'smarter' than, say, a few generations ago, research suggests this is not quite the case.
Example. Not seldom, I'm contacted by people who, regarding animals, seem to lack information we would consider as basic. This although they're (well) educated and know how to find information on the internet. The problem is the information they're offered not seldom is incomplete, if not outright incorrect. I'm not saying sites like Wikipedia are unreliable (far from it), but it is a fact some of them sometimes offer incorrect information. One example is the story on the large skull of a leopard shot near Ootacamund a century ago. There's no question it was the skull of a young adult tigress, but many still think it was the skull of an exceptional leopard. There's a lot more where that came from.
What we're saying is there is a need for forums offering reliable information about wild animals. They really serve a purpose. We don't mind starting a debate in order to find answers to unsolved problems, but there's a difference between asking questions and trying to find answers using reliable sources (a) and using the opportunity to enter the realm of speculation in general terms (b). The difference is the first method often results in a clear answer (yes, no or unclear), whereas the second often results in heated debates, confusion and zero answers.
Our proposal is to resist the temptation to enter the realm of speculation and focus on good information. We know you're very capable in that department.
08-27-2020, 08:41 PM( This post was last modified: 08-27-2020, 09:20 PM by BorneanTiger )
@peter Thanks for that. Frankly, I am not intending that this thread should generate into a debate into what exactly happens between baleens and orcas (if anyone wishes to create a separate thread for that, then I don't oppose it), so I hope that @Shadow @GuateGojira and I can agree on this (without the need for a merger of topics):
08-28-2020, 02:12 PM( This post was last modified: 08-28-2020, 02:16 PM by Shadow )
(08-27-2020, 08:41 PM)BorneanTiger Wrote: @peter Thanks for that. Frankly, I am not intending that this thread should generate into a debate into what exactly happens between baleens and orcas (if anyone wishes to create a separate thread for that, then I don't oppose it), so I hope that @Shadow @GuateGojira and I can agree on this (without the need for a merger of topics):
It´s good, that you understand the point partially. Still to make this as clear as possible. Problem hasn´t been some articles which you have shared. Problem isn´t either in it, that showing how animals confront each others. What has been reason for my criticism have been some claims and conclusions, which you have stated in ways, which don´t seem to make any sense. Like using the word domination in situation, in which no-one else, with whom I´ve discussed, haven´t been able to see. And then using comparisons which don´t seem to have any relevant connections with each others and again making no sense.
Yes, prey animals can fight predators, they do usually everything what they can to protect their offspring. It´s what can be seen everywhere in nature. There are times, when herd of moose is able to make wolves go away, bears don´t succeed every time they hunt moose, tigers can let sloth bears be after some brawl even though their original plan might have been to kill and eat and so on. So can we say, that moose dominates wolves or bears, or that sloth bears dominate tigers just because every hunt isn´t a success? And sometimes a lone moose can charge wolves or a bear and make predator to back off just like sloth bears can make a tiger to back off. Domination there? If so, then I can understand claim, that humpback whales dominate orcas. Same time I personally don´t see any justification to claim, that moose would dominate wolves or bears and sloth bears for sure aren´t dominating tigers if asked how I see it.
I think, that vast majority of people don´t understand those situations above as examples of domination. And that is why I see some of your claims odd and not valid.
What you have shared in your links is quite common knowledge for people who are interested about whales and nice articles to read for people who have started to search information. But when you put there such claims as you have done, then sooner or later moderators have to say something. Reason is, that we prefer to see in wildfact things, which are backed up in reasonable way. Especially when some claim looks to be something what no-one else is suggesting anywhere.
I can´t put here a claim and say "cape buffalos dominate lions" and then put some random link of one failed hunt in which lions back off. Reason is, that there are countless hunts in which lions kill cape buffalo after cape buffalo in different kind of situations. Sometimes in the middle of big heard of buffalos, sometimes some loner gets caught.
So you also can´t say, that humpback whales dominate orcas and then put some random case or a few cases in which orcas fail. Because there are countless hunts in which orcas success.
When you want to make strong claims, then you have to do better with reasoning too. Otherwise your posting doesn´t reach the standard we are seeking here. The stronger and more unusual claim, the more there will be criticism. When someone shares a photo or some "nonchalant" posting, it´s a different thing. But if anyone wants to claim, that he/she has noticed something, what no-one else haven´t, then it´s better to be prepared.
This was a bit longer posting than I thought to write, but I hope that no need to write again about this.
08-28-2020, 05:44 PM( This post was last modified: 08-28-2020, 05:45 PM by BorneanTiger )
(08-28-2020, 02:12 PM)Shadow Wrote: It´s good, that you understand the point partially. Still to make this as clear as possible. Problem hasn´t been some articles which you have shared. Problem isn´t either in it, that showing how animals confront each others. What has been reason for my criticism have been some claims and conclusions, which you have stated in ways, which don´t seem to make any sense. Like using the word domination in situation, in which no-one else, with whom I´ve discussed, haven´t been able to see. And then using comparisons which don´t seem to have any relevant connections with each others and again making no sense.
Yes, prey animals can fight predators, they do usually everything what they can to protect their offspring. It´s what can be seen everywhere in nature. There are times, when herd of moose is able to make wolves go away, bears don´t succeed every time they hunt moose, tigers can let sloth bears be after some brawl even though their original plan might have been to kill and eat and so on. So can we say, that moose dominates wolves or bears, or that sloth bears dominate tigers just because every hunt isn´t a success? And sometimes a lone moose can charge wolves or a bear and make predator to back off just like sloth bears can make a tiger to back off. Domination there? If so, then I can understand claim, that humpback whales dominate orcas. Same time I personally don´t see any justification to claim, that moose would dominate wolves or bears and sloth bears for sure aren´t dominating tigers if asked how I see it.
I think, that vast majority of people don´t understand those situations above as examples of domination. And that is why I see some of your claims odd and not valid.
What you have shared in your links is quite common knowledge for people who are interested about whales and nice articles to read for people who have started to search information. But when you put there such claims as you have done, then sooner or later moderators have to say something. Reason is, that we prefer to see in wildfact things, which are backed up in reasonable way. Especially when some claim looks to be something what no-one else is suggesting anywhere.
I can´t put here a claim and say "cape buffalos dominate lions" and then put some random link of one failed hunt in which lions back off. Reason is, that there are countless hunts in which lions kill cape buffalo after cape buffalo in different kind of situations. Sometimes in the middle of big heard of buffalos, sometimes some loner gets caught.
So you also can´t say, that humpback whales dominate orcas and then put some random case or a few cases in which orcas fail. Because there are countless hunts in which orcas success.
When you want to make strong claims, then you have to do better with reasoning too. Otherwise your posting doesn´t reach the standard we are seeking here. The stronger and more unusual claim, the more there will be criticism. When someone shares a photo or some "nonchalant" posting, it´s a different thing. But if anyone wants to claim, that he/she has noticed something, what no-one else haven´t, then it´s better to be prepared.
This was a bit longer posting than I thought to write, but I hope that no need to write again about this.
I think I see what you mean, but even defining the humpback as a prey of the orca, at least these guys at least did use the word 'domination' in the context of the humpback whale, albeit in a different way than what you might expect: https://whalesanddolphinsbc.com/sighting...-dolphins/#
"DECEMBER 10, 2016 ISSUE NO. 2016-039
Humpback Whales Dominate, Few Orca, Some Dolphins
There are many Humpback Whales holding much farther North than expected this time of year. We feel that many will stay throughout the Winter months, which is both a blessing and a curiousity. As someone once told me, “Why go South if you can hang out with friends and continue to feed”. With the likelihood that we had one Humpback calf born in the upper Georgia Strait this year, and that the Humpbacks have even been doing some singing up here, it is possible that we will continue to see them year round. Please continue to report every sighting.
We had a couple of reports of some Orca, but staying away from the Humpbacks or vice versa. Whereas the Pacific White Sided Dolphins have jumped on the Humpback band wagon of feeding with them as well as harassing them. The larger groups of Dolphins did head farther South, but that may have been due to Orca, which we have had to list in our generic catagory since we did not have any confirmation of Resident (fish eaters) or Transient Bigg’s (meat eaters)."
(08-28-2020, 02:12 PM)Shadow Wrote: It´s good, that you understand the point partially. Still to make this as clear as possible. Problem hasn´t been some articles which you have shared. Problem isn´t either in it, that showing how animals confront each others. What has been reason for my criticism have been some claims and conclusions, which you have stated in ways, which don´t seem to make any sense. Like using the word domination in situation, in which no-one else, with whom I´ve discussed, haven´t been able to see. And then using comparisons which don´t seem to have any relevant connections with each others and again making no sense.
Yes, prey animals can fight predators, they do usually everything what they can to protect their offspring. It´s what can be seen everywhere in nature. There are times, when herd of moose is able to make wolves go away, bears don´t succeed every time they hunt moose, tigers can let sloth bears be after some brawl even though their original plan might have been to kill and eat and so on. So can we say, that moose dominates wolves or bears, or that sloth bears dominate tigers just because every hunt isn´t a success? And sometimes a lone moose can charge wolves or a bear and make predator to back off just like sloth bears can make a tiger to back off. Domination there? If so, then I can understand claim, that humpback whales dominate orcas. Same time I personally don´t see any justification to claim, that moose would dominate wolves or bears and sloth bears for sure aren´t dominating tigers if asked how I see it.
I think, that vast majority of people don´t understand those situations above as examples of domination. And that is why I see some of your claims odd and not valid.
What you have shared in your links is quite common knowledge for people who are interested about whales and nice articles to read for people who have started to search information. But when you put there such claims as you have done, then sooner or later moderators have to say something. Reason is, that we prefer to see in wildfact things, which are backed up in reasonable way. Especially when some claim looks to be something what no-one else is suggesting anywhere.
I can´t put here a claim and say "cape buffalos dominate lions" and then put some random link of one failed hunt in which lions back off. Reason is, that there are countless hunts in which lions kill cape buffalo after cape buffalo in different kind of situations. Sometimes in the middle of big heard of buffalos, sometimes some loner gets caught.
So you also can´t say, that humpback whales dominate orcas and then put some random case or a few cases in which orcas fail. Because there are countless hunts in which orcas success.
When you want to make strong claims, then you have to do better with reasoning too. Otherwise your posting doesn´t reach the standard we are seeking here. The stronger and more unusual claim, the more there will be criticism. When someone shares a photo or some "nonchalant" posting, it´s a different thing. But if anyone wants to claim, that he/she has noticed something, what no-one else haven´t, then it´s better to be prepared.
This was a bit longer posting than I thought to write, but I hope that no need to write again about this.
I think I see what you mean, but even defining the humpback as a prey of the orca, at least these guys at least did use the word 'domination' in the context of the humpback whale, albeit in a different way than what you might expect: https://whalesanddolphinsbc.com/sighting...-dolphins/#
"DECEMBER 10, 2016 ISSUE NO. 2016-039
Humpback Whales Dominate, Few Orca, Some Dolphins
There are many Humpback Whales holding much farther North than expected this time of year. We feel that many will stay throughout the Winter months, which is both a blessing and a curiousity. As someone once told me, “Why go South if you can hang out with friends and continue to feed”. With the likelihood that we had one Humpback calf born in the upper Georgia Strait this year, and that the Humpbacks have even been doing some singing up here, it is possible that we will continue to see them year round. Please continue to report every sighting.
We had a couple of reports of some Orca, but staying away from the Humpbacks or vice versa. Whereas the Pacific White Sided Dolphins have jumped on the Humpback band wagon of feeding with them as well as harassing them. The larger groups of Dolphins did head farther South, but that may have been due to Orca, which we have had to list in our generic catagory since we did not have any confirmation of Resident (fish eaters) or Transient Bigg’s (meat eaters)."
Yes, there were a lot of humpback whales in that area, so they dominated observations. These people saw mostly humpback whales. Then they saw a few orcas and some dolphins. So when they count big sea mammals, humpback whales dominate that statistics.
So what you shared now had nothing to do with my comments before. I wonder if someone sees that article differently?
(08-28-2020, 02:12 PM)Shadow Wrote: It´s good, that you understand the point partially. Still to make this as clear as possible. Problem hasn´t been some articles which you have shared. Problem isn´t either in it, that showing how animals confront each others. What has been reason for my criticism have been some claims and conclusions, which you have stated in ways, which don´t seem to make any sense. Like using the word domination in situation, in which no-one else, with whom I´ve discussed, haven´t been able to see. And then using comparisons which don´t seem to have any relevant connections with each others and again making no sense.
Yes, prey animals can fight predators, they do usually everything what they can to protect their offspring. It´s what can be seen everywhere in nature. There are times, when herd of moose is able to make wolves go away, bears don´t succeed every time they hunt moose, tigers can let sloth bears be after some brawl even though their original plan might have been to kill and eat and so on. So can we say, that moose dominates wolves or bears, or that sloth bears dominate tigers just because every hunt isn´t a success? And sometimes a lone moose can charge wolves or a bear and make predator to back off just like sloth bears can make a tiger to back off. Domination there? If so, then I can understand claim, that humpback whales dominate orcas. Same time I personally don´t see any justification to claim, that moose would dominate wolves or bears and sloth bears for sure aren´t dominating tigers if asked how I see it.
I think, that vast majority of people don´t understand those situations above as examples of domination. And that is why I see some of your claims odd and not valid.
What you have shared in your links is quite common knowledge for people who are interested about whales and nice articles to read for people who have started to search information. But when you put there such claims as you have done, then sooner or later moderators have to say something. Reason is, that we prefer to see in wildfact things, which are backed up in reasonable way. Especially when some claim looks to be something what no-one else is suggesting anywhere.
I can´t put here a claim and say "cape buffalos dominate lions" and then put some random link of one failed hunt in which lions back off. Reason is, that there are countless hunts in which lions kill cape buffalo after cape buffalo in different kind of situations. Sometimes in the middle of big heard of buffalos, sometimes some loner gets caught.
So you also can´t say, that humpback whales dominate orcas and then put some random case or a few cases in which orcas fail. Because there are countless hunts in which orcas success.
When you want to make strong claims, then you have to do better with reasoning too. Otherwise your posting doesn´t reach the standard we are seeking here. The stronger and more unusual claim, the more there will be criticism. When someone shares a photo or some "nonchalant" posting, it´s a different thing. But if anyone wants to claim, that he/she has noticed something, what no-one else haven´t, then it´s better to be prepared.
This was a bit longer posting than I thought to write, but I hope that no need to write again about this.
I think I see what you mean, but even defining the humpback as a prey of the orca, at least these guys at least did use the word 'domination' in the context of the humpback whale, albeit in a different way than what you might expect: https://whalesanddolphinsbc.com/sighting...-dolphins/#
"DECEMBER 10, 2016 ISSUE NO. 2016-039
Humpback Whales Dominate, Few Orca, Some Dolphins
There are many Humpback Whales holding much farther North than expected this time of year. We feel that many will stay throughout the Winter months, which is both a blessing and a curiousity. As someone once told me, “Why go South if you can hang out with friends and continue to feed”. With the likelihood that we had one Humpback calf born in the upper Georgia Strait this year, and that the Humpbacks have even been doing some singing up here, it is possible that we will continue to see them year round. Please continue to report every sighting.
We had a couple of reports of some Orca, but staying away from the Humpbacks or vice versa. Whereas the Pacific White Sided Dolphins have jumped on the Humpback band wagon of feeding with them as well as harassing them. The larger groups of Dolphins did head farther South, but that may have been due to Orca, which we have had to list in our generic catagory since we did not have any confirmation of Resident (fish eaters) or Transient Bigg’s (meat eaters)."
I wonder if someone sees that article differently?
(08-28-2020, 02:12 PM)Shadow Wrote: It´s good, that you understand the point partially. Still to make this as clear as possible. Problem hasn´t been some articles which you have shared. Problem isn´t either in it, that showing how animals confront each others. What has been reason for my criticism have been some claims and conclusions, which you have stated in ways, which don´t seem to make any sense. Like using the word domination in situation, in which no-one else, with whom I´ve discussed, haven´t been able to see. And then using comparisons which don´t seem to have any relevant connections with each others and again making no sense.
Yes, prey animals can fight predators, they do usually everything what they can to protect their offspring. It´s what can be seen everywhere in nature. There are times, when herd of moose is able to make wolves go away, bears don´t succeed every time they hunt moose, tigers can let sloth bears be after some brawl even though their original plan might have been to kill and eat and so on. So can we say, that moose dominates wolves or bears, or that sloth bears dominate tigers just because every hunt isn´t a success? And sometimes a lone moose can charge wolves or a bear and make predator to back off just like sloth bears can make a tiger to back off. Domination there? If so, then I can understand claim, that humpback whales dominate orcas. Same time I personally don´t see any justification to claim, that moose would dominate wolves or bears and sloth bears for sure aren´t dominating tigers if asked how I see it.
I think, that vast majority of people don´t understand those situations above as examples of domination. And that is why I see some of your claims odd and not valid.
What you have shared in your links is quite common knowledge for people who are interested about whales and nice articles to read for people who have started to search information. But when you put there such claims as you have done, then sooner or later moderators have to say something. Reason is, that we prefer to see in wildfact things, which are backed up in reasonable way. Especially when some claim looks to be something what no-one else is suggesting anywhere.
I can´t put here a claim and say "cape buffalos dominate lions" and then put some random link of one failed hunt in which lions back off. Reason is, that there are countless hunts in which lions kill cape buffalo after cape buffalo in different kind of situations. Sometimes in the middle of big heard of buffalos, sometimes some loner gets caught.
So you also can´t say, that humpback whales dominate orcas and then put some random case or a few cases in which orcas fail. Because there are countless hunts in which orcas success.
When you want to make strong claims, then you have to do better with reasoning too. Otherwise your posting doesn´t reach the standard we are seeking here. The stronger and more unusual claim, the more there will be criticism. When someone shares a photo or some "nonchalant" posting, it´s a different thing. But if anyone wants to claim, that he/she has noticed something, what no-one else haven´t, then it´s better to be prepared.
This was a bit longer posting than I thought to write, but I hope that no need to write again about this.
I think I see what you mean, but even defining the humpback as a prey of the orca, at least these guys at least did use the word 'domination' in the context of the humpback whale, albeit in a different way than what you might expect: https://whalesanddolphinsbc.com/sighting...-dolphins/#
"DECEMBER 10, 2016 ISSUE NO. 2016-039
Humpback Whales Dominate, Few Orca, Some Dolphins
There are many Humpback Whales holding much farther North than expected this time of year. We feel that many will stay throughout the Winter months, which is both a blessing and a curiousity. As someone once told me, “Why go South if you can hang out with friends and continue to feed”. With the likelihood that we had one Humpback calf born in the upper Georgia Strait this year, and that the Humpbacks have even been doing some singing up here, it is possible that we will continue to see them year round. Please continue to report every sighting.
We had a couple of reports of some Orca, but staying away from the Humpbacks or vice versa. Whereas the Pacific White Sided Dolphins have jumped on the Humpback band wagon of feeding with them as well as harassing them. The larger groups of Dolphins did head farther South, but that may have been due to Orca, which we have had to list in our generic catagory since we did not have any confirmation of Resident (fish eaters) or Transient Bigg’s (meat eaters)."
I wonder if someone sees that article differently?
Yes, but never mind how.
Climate change etc. can have effect to it, that where whales spend time in different times of the year. If humpbacks whales start to be on that are more regularly, predators follow. It´s how things work in nature. Humpbacks follow their food sources and predators eating humpbacks follow them. In this case, when talking about big whales, naturally orcas are only predators.
