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.
--- Peter Broekhuijsen ---

  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Eyes on or hands on? A discussion of human interference

United States Pckts Offline
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#16
( This post was last modified: 09-30-2014, 10:48 PM by Pckts )

(09-30-2014, 05:58 AM)'Richardrli' Wrote: So radio collars apparently cause the death of tigers but they are just fine on lions, leopards and jaguars? That is bizarre.


 
Are you sure about this?

Its not just the radio collar, its sedation and the stress caused from it.

Mountain lion dies from sedation
http://www.reviewjournal.com/trending/fe...enter-dies

Lion cub dies from sedation
http://yekaterinburgnews.com/daily-news/...dent/9153/

14 sea lions die from sedation
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22779225

Arizona jaguar dies from kidney failure after being captured and collared
http://www.thewildlifenews.com/2009/03/0...y-failure/
"Update: Arizona jaguar’s death probably hastened by capture, zoo veterinarian says "

The jaguar lunged at the pair, but they were able to get a dart loaded with the sedative ketamine into its hindquarters. When the first dart didn't sedate the animal, Rosas applied two more doses, half the quantity of the first.

The animal never recovered from sedation and died as the warm morning turned hot. Rosas attributed the death to "heat stress."
http://tucson.com/news/science/environme...9c706.html

and there are many more.
All of this is absolutely more proof of the stress caused by capture and unnecessary death's of these cats and many more like it.

Lastly, how many lions are collared? Where are the studies and the numbers, what other instances have occurred that go unreported, etc.





 

 
Reply

United States Pckts Offline
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#17
( This post was last modified: 09-30-2014, 11:14 PM by Pckts )

how about a few more
Rhino Dies from sedation
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/...nists?lite

Cougars dies from Tranq
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=30500120

Tranq Kills Leopard
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=13...20,6087478

Leopard Cub dies from overdose
"Leopard cub rescued from treetop, but killed due to tranquiliser overdose in Assam"


African Lion Dies during Immobilization
http://www.desertlion.info/reports/field_immobilize.pdf
Page 141



Another leopard dies from Tranq
http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/an...st/738824/

Tranq kills clouded leopard
http://www.assamtribune.com/scripts/deta...13/state06

Elephant death from tranq
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1990-06...t-zoo-jojo

another
http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-p...59322.html



 
Reply

Netherlands peter Offline
Co-owner of Wildfact
*****
Moderators
#18
( This post was last modified: 10-01-2014, 07:52 AM by peter )

(09-30-2014, 09:14 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote: Good question Richardlri, besides it seems that those sensationalist news always avoid the fact that LESS than 5 tigers have died by radiocollaring in India, Nepal and Bangladesh, together.

Like you say, radiocollars do a very good job on lions, jaguars, leopards, cougars, lynx, elephants, donkeys, etc. etc. etc. [img]images/smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

 


SEDATION IN CAPTIVE BIG CATS

Although the number of accidents is limited, it is a fact that sedation results in problems every now and then. There are many reasons.

In captivity, humans darting big cats disregard protocols at times. It isn't always the vet who darts, that is. I also noticed they seem to disregard the mood of an animal. Animals sometimes are aware of what is about to happen and they act accordingly, meaning the dose administered isn't always correct. Not in those circumstances. Three examples.

- One male captive lion of 400-420 pounds in excellent shape got the correct dose, but wouldn't go down. He got another dose. Same effect. After the third he collapsed, but it took a long time before we were able to transfer him to the stretcher. When we carried him to the operation theatre, he started to growl. Than he moved his muscles and head. On the operation table, we were unable to restrain him any longer. He got another dose and the vet started his work, only to discover the lion just didn't want to cooperate. Another dose was administered. Than we had to carry him back to his cage in a hurry. We moved him from the stretcher to the floor with six as fast as we could. When the door was closed and locked, he went for us with everything he had. Just in time. All this after a dose that would have killed a decent rhino. Exception?

- Two adult male Amur tigers had to be treated. I was to measure them, but assisted when they had to be moved to and from the theatre. One male was 211-215 kg. (weighed at Schiphol Airport a few years later). He got the correct dose, but I saw him smiling all the way. I measured him, but we decided against weighing because of the risks. His brother, only slightly smaller, went down fast, but was nearly fully awake during the treatment. When the vet was done, we carried him to his cage and unleashed him. Then I measured him. But I had to step over him when he suddenly woke. Another narrow escape.

I never saw a more angry animal later. I really thought he would destroy the cage and all the rest of it. That's when I accepted that a male tiger, in an open fight, probably stands a very decent chance against a bear of similar size and weight or even a larger animal. Not disgarding the great brown bear, but the big cats have something many overlook. Not character, temper or aggression (bears do not lack in these departments), but something different.  

- The big brown bear I was supposed to measure and weigh never went down. When I entered the building with my tape, I was overrun by those running for their life. The bear wasn't cooperating.

Some animals are fully awake when they are sedated and treated. Some respond and others don't. Some forget about it, but others do not. Some respond differently when they are sedated again later, but others do not. You just never know.


LESSONS

IN sedation and captive big cats, things can go wrong. There are different reasons. My guess is personality and individual variation are the most important. Than there is bad days, mistakes and coincidence. Even when everything goes well, a wild tiger sedated before, like the Sauraha male, might find something extra to run and hide. Stress?


SEDATION AND COLLARS IN WILD TIGERS

Is everything described above a good reason to refrain from sedation in wild tigers? No for two reasons. In the great majority of cases, things work out just fine. Two is sedation allows for measurements, blood samples, weights and (through collars) invaluable information on territory, social habits, hunting, food and a lot more. 

Is it worth it in wild tigers numbering about 3000 in total considering the potential risks? I again think yes.

A large part of what was known about wild tigers before radio-collars proved to be partly correct in some cases and plain incorrect in many others. With the information collected through collars, biologists and those responsible for management, reserves and everything connected were able to make adjustments. Maybe just enough to stop the collapse of tigers nearly everywhere.


MEASUREMENTS

PC said the new info didn't add a lot in general terms. True? I disagree. Some reasons:

- We now know tigers adjust to circumstances: bad conditions and stress seem to result in dwarfism, whereas good conditions and no stress result in the opposite. How does it work? We don't know. Why is it adult male Terengganu tigers, in less than half a century only, lose 6-8 inches in total length and even more weight if we know the natural conditions didn't change a lot? Why is it male tigers in more central parts of south-east Asia, exposed to similar factors as those in Terengganu, do not? Collaring might provide answers.

- We now know tigers in overpopulated smallish reserves with otherwise good conditions in India seem to get larger (heavier) than tigers in other, but otherwise similar, regions. A result of competition? If so, how does it work? Why foremost in Indian reserves? Collaring again might provide answers.

- We now know information collected by hunters a century ago (regarding size and weight) was close to what we see today in general terms, meaning many were accurate and trustworthy. This means we can use the information they collected. Information on the size of today's tigers can be compared when the method used was the same. Collaring over a long period of time might provide answers to questions regarding developments we didn't really know about. Do smaller tigers disappear in some regions or is there another factor we don't know about? Collars might again provide answers.

- We now know a bit about gene loss and the effect on size. We also know a a bit about the way in which tigers, in some regions, regenerate when conditions change again. Information about the size of wild Amur tigers has proved to be of great importance in many ways. The reason is collars.


THE MEANING OF MORPHOLOGICAL DATA

I've been collecting data for a long time. The averages I found are different from those who reported on averages a century ago. The main reasons seem to be sample size and no selection for size. What is the value of these data?

Well, I now know a bit about the morphological differences between wild and captive tigers of the same subspecies. Could be of use when tigers are re-introduced in new regions. Perhaps they could be selected or trained. Trained? Yes. Different facilities now use trainers and it seems to have an effect. 


RADIO-COLLARS AND WILD TIGERS

One day, when wild tigers exceed 10.000 again, we might decide against sedation and collars. Because we know enough. But not now.

As we continue, biologists will learn about sedation and collars. Just as they learned about the disadvantages of the Aldrich-snare. Maybe tigers react different to collars than other cats. My experience in captive animals suggests tigers are more sentitive to circumstances. Maybe biologists need a different device in tigers.

I definitely agree with PC on wild animals and humans. To see a wild big cat with a collar is sad and even degrading. But the advantages, like Guate said, outweigh the disadvantages and in species walking the edge, like the tiger, it could prove to be the difference. Let's hope we are not wrong.
3 users Like peter's post
Reply

GuateGojira Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
#19
( This post was last modified: 10-01-2014, 09:47 AM by GuateGojira )

I am agree with you Peter, personality and health state of animals also influence in the sedation.

About the cases posted here by Pckts, these are EXCEPTIONS, not the rule. Again, those news from the web are always sensationalists and focus more in the tragedy and ignore the GREAT advantages of the studies developed. Just because ONE cougar died in a sample of 20, this doesn't mean that radiocollars are bad. Again, to say that radiocollaring is bad is just a product of paranoia, just that. Sadly, when in all world, animals are still captured, just the crazy dudes of India don't allow that. At some point, that attitude is hypocrite, because like the case of Dr Chundawat, rangers ignore and attack scientists until the truth slap them in the face, yes DON'T FORGET PANNA PEOPLE!!!
 
Reply

United States Pckts Offline
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#20
( This post was last modified: 10-01-2014, 10:07 PM by Pckts )

Reply

United States Pckts Offline
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#21
( This post was last modified: 10-01-2014, 10:04 PM by Pckts )

(10-01-2014, 09:46 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote: I am agree with you Peter, personality and health state of animals also influence in the sedation.

About the cases posted here by Pckts, these are EXCEPTIONS, not the rule. Again, those news from the web are always sensationalists and focus more in the tragedy and ignore the GREAT advantages of the studies developed. Just because ONE cougar died in a sample of 20, this doesn't mean that radiocollars are bad. Again, to say that radiocollaring is bad is just a product of paranoia, just that. Sadly, when in all world, animals are still captured, just the crazy dudes of India don't allow that. At some point, that attitude is hypocrite, because like the case of Dr Chundawat, rangers ignore and attack scientists until the truth slap them in the face, yes DON'T FORGET PANNA PEOPLE!!!
 

 

"paranoia"
That is not paranoia, these are proven, actually happened and for no reason. You tried to agree with Richardli that sedation or collaring was minimal risk, yet there are tons of examples to prove that it is huge risks. For all species, Lions, leopards, Jags, Pumas, tigers, Rhinos, Elephant, Seal, Clouded Leopard, etc...

What are these animals lives worth to you?
You say you love them, yet you are willing to have a few die as long as most survive. What about the amount of stress they have placed on them, what about the attitude change they have towards human beings, what about the example it sets for humans in the future?

Have a little foresight here, saving these animals doesn't come from knowing how large they are, it comes from protecting their habitat and stopping the unnecessary killing of them.

Simply as that.

 
Reply

Netherlands peter Offline
Co-owner of Wildfact
*****
Moderators
#22
( This post was last modified: 10-02-2014, 08:27 AM by peter )

Reply

tigerluver Offline
Feline Expert
*****
Moderators
#23
( This post was last modified: 10-02-2014, 09:04 AM by tigerluver )

Quick tidbit, didn't a critic of the Aldrich snare project point out that there are less tigers now than there were at the start of the project? Here's the quote:
"How did it happen that the tiger population of Sikhote-Alinskiy Reserve has shrunk from 38 to 15 animals under active supervision by WCS? This is nothing but official info [23], which might be favorably biased upwards."

Same source as my last post: http://bigcats-ru.livejournal.com/125545.html

A lot of good points in this debate. My views have changed some.

From all these arguments, I find one thing in common. Conservation is only achieved when there is interest. Human interest manifests itself into action in different ways. I see the debate here is about the actions of interest. But maybe, all we need is to find ways to encourage the interest? Wherever there has been interest, species make it through. Indochina isn't really interested in their wildlife. India, has been for a while now, and has done relatively well.

Also, the presence of scientists only may not really deter poachers, read of the Dian Fossey tragedy? Poachers have no reason to fear scientists, they're criminally involved often anyhow. Rather, I think it's the presence and interest of the government. The modern research we have was given its opportunity due to the interest of the government (these are government funded projects often and under the approval of the local wildlife authorities). Therefore, I feel modern research is a side effect of governmental interest. The protections of species is another side effect of governmental interest. A motivated government can keep poaching at bay well, they have the influence.

Research can magnify conservation only if it's a side effect of the governmental interest. What do I mean by this? Take Panna. The research was done by scientists alone, not backed by government interest. Their work fell on deaf ears.

Thinking over this once more, I'll make a bit of bold assertion and retreat from my ambivalent approach. Darting, collaring, camera traps and their conclusions in their own being have not proven to be the saviors of nature. Madla was tagged, Panna researched well, scientists threw up the red flags and Panna still went downhill. Assam has been scientifically untouched, and it's doing well last I checked. Then there's Chitwan, there was good research done at the end of the last century, and this century the tigers have been doing relatively well. Looking at these three microcosms together, one factor is in common, governmental interest. Panna did not garner the government's attention no matter the science, Assam and Chitwan did, and here we are.

Now same idea, grander scale. Only India's - the country where tiger research is kept to a minimum during the recovery period - and Russia's government have shown interest in tiger conservation. The rest of the governments, not so much.

Have a corrupt and/or disinterested government, it's over. No science will save the day. Have one that has its own, self motivated interest, man and beast can coexist in the grand scale. We need to summon this self-motivated interest. Tying wildlife to cultural pride, economic success, or even political motives are ways to summon this self-motivation. That's what conservationists now focus on it seems, and thus, hands on research of species had died down in recent years. Only censuses have been done, which is essentially non-intrustive - with animals not coming into contact with the officials - including the tract studies (which is just having a person count up prey numbers rather than using camera traps. This is used for prey because prey items often don't have such obvious "fingerprints" like tigers.)
3 users Like tigerluver's post
Reply

sanjay Offline
Co-owner of Wildfact
*****
#24

Great conclusion Tigerluver. Lack of government interest is biggest drawback.
Reply

Netherlands peter Offline
Co-owner of Wildfact
*****
Moderators
#25
( This post was last modified: 10-02-2014, 10:03 AM by peter )

Very interesting points neglected by most debating, so it seems. You're definitely right about the developments in the reserves you mentioned. I agree Panna has shown research only has an effect when government is interested. The Aldrich-snare article seems to have had an effect as well in that the method now seems to have been abandoned. The Russian research-project also gets more attention than the Siberian Tiger Project of the WCS. The question is how interest is triggered on the level of politics and we might need to explore purpose in order to find answers. 

In the last decade, things have changed to an extent in some countries. There are many photographs with Putin and Amur tigers featuring. Russia also hosted the meeting in St. Peterburg some years ago. It is a fact it got a lot of attention and it also had some results.

Based on what I see, and in that (descending) order, India (cultural pride and tourism too), Russia (a combination of cultural and political pride, so it seems), China (the need to quickly clean the reputation regarding wildlife in general and tigers in particular), Thailand (tigers as unknown national treasures) and Malaysia (same reason) seem to be interested in some way, with Kazachstan not that far away (tourism). 

There's zero activity in Vietnam (no more tigers), Laos (not many tigers left), Cambodja (same) and Indonesia (tigers and conservation oppose economic development), although it has to be admitted that Indonesia now has a number of individuals with some influence interested in the tiger. They are able to get to private initiatives, but seem unable to change policies in general.

I was most interested in your remarks on the motives of governments, the connection with research and the 'self-motivation' based on cultural and/or political identity. I also noticed the relation between these motives and the way conservation is conducted. I propose to explore this new dimension.
Reply

GuateGojira Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
#26
( This post was last modified: 10-02-2014, 10:18 AM by GuateGojira )

(10-01-2014, 10:04 PM)'Pckts' Wrote:
(10-01-2014, 09:46 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote: I am agree with you Peter, personality and health state of animals also influence in the sedation.

About the cases posted here by Pckts, these are EXCEPTIONS, not the rule. Again, those news from the web are always sensationalists and focus more in the tragedy and ignore the GREAT advantages of the studies developed. Just because ONE cougar died in a sample of 20, this doesn't mean that radiocollars are bad. Again, to say that radiocollaring is bad is just a product of paranoia, just that. Sadly, when in all world, animals are still captured, just the crazy dudes of India don't allow that. At some point, that attitude is hypocrite, because like the case of Dr Chundawat, rangers ignore and attack scientists until the truth slap them in the face, yes DON'T FORGET PANNA PEOPLE!!!
 


 

"paranoia"
That is not paranoia, these are proven, actually happened and for no reason. You tried to agree with Richardli that sedation or collaring was minimal risk, yet there are tons of examples to prove that it is huge risks. For all species, Lions, leopards, Jags, Pumas, tigers, Rhinos, Elephant, Seal, Clouded Leopard, etc...

What are these animals lives worth to you?
You say you love them, yet you are willing to have a few die as long as most survive. What about the amount of stress they have placed on them, what about the attitude change they have towards human beings, what about the example it sets for humans in the future?

Have a little foresight here, saving these animals doesn't come from knowing how large they are, it comes from protecting their habitat and stopping the unnecessary killing of them.

Simply as that.

 

 
YES, it IS paranoia, a ridiculous and biased paranoia.
 
In your mind, all operations on humans most be canceled because some people have died. However, this is NOT the case, at all.
 
You say that there is “tons” of evidence against radiocollaring, but the only thing that you have is “your” opinion and a few sensationalist news reports that ONLY focus on the dead animal and IGNORE completely the entire studies and the full sample of captured animals that live very well.
 
I have provided the opinion of the greatest tiger scientists ever, like Dr Sunquist, Dr Karanth and Dr Chundawat. In fact, if Dr Schaller would have the money, he would probably would capture some tigers in his study of 1960, that is sure.
 
In science, we can’t use feelings. Check how many tigers are now safe because scientists study them with REAL science. Modern conservation is alive thanks to those scientists that take the risk and wined in the final fight. Of course that any life is precious, but those “less than 5 tigers” that died in over 40 years capturing tigers, were just ACCIDENTS and scientist learn from that.
 
About the stress, you are using this point like if it was something relevant. Those animals have little stress, the sedatives used simple calm the animal, scientists make little to no noise and contrary to the cases in captivity described by Peter, there are no reports of tigers in India been badly sedated. Read the book “Tiger Moon”, where Fiona Sunquist describes how some tigers even returned to its bait after the sedation. Those tigers were just fine and well, reproduced excellently and those Nepalese studies provided over 70% of modern tiger knowledge.
 
Finally, those cases of tigers aggressive toward humans in Ranthambore is NOT for the radiocollaring, is because the LACK of respect of people and park rangers for those tigers. Ranthambore, in fact, is one of the worst places for tiger-human relation, because people and park rangers there normally use unsafe distances with those tigers and like any human, tigers have they own personality. So, this is not excuse for radiocollars. In fact, there was not a single case of aggression of the Sauraha male or Madla against humans, just to mention two cases, and those were prime dominant males too.
 
Reply

GuateGojira Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
#27
( This post was last modified: 10-02-2014, 10:34 AM by GuateGojira )

(10-02-2014, 07:06 AM)'peter' Wrote: Sedation, collaring and measurements of wild big cats are not needed for conservation and the disadvantages of sedation and collars do not outweigh the advantages. What tigers really need, is protection. From us. Point taken and respected.

However. 

In nearly all reserves where tigers are or have been monitored, some have been sedated, collared and measured. It is a fact wild tigers have been lost as a result of the Aldrich-snare (Russia), sedation (India) and, most probably, human-induced stress, but it also is a fact they have increased in numbers, especially in reserves with researchers.

Maybe it was a result of information collected by researchers and maybe the presence of researchers has unintended positive side-effects in that, for example, poachers retreat from these monitored reserves in particular. We don't know.

In most countries without researchers, tigers have lost ground. Let's take Sumatra, which perhaps has the best conditions. Large forests, few humans and pristine conditions. But these conditions also are preferred by poachers and those interested in burning down the forest. This is why Sumatra has so many fires, this is why poachers go where they want to, this is why they and burners have been able to continue for years and years and this is why the losses are significant. The number of animals turning to violence regarding humans is quite staggering. A war that wasn't the result of sedation and collars, but something else. And in what parts of Sumatra do tigers stand a chance? In regions where they are monitored (the southern tip and northern tips). 

As for measurements. We now know the Russians are unsurpassed for total length, closely followed by Nepal and north-west India. The reason is researchers sedated and measured a number of tigers. In this way, we are able to compare old and recent. In an indirect way, we now know many of the old hunters were reliable. We're not sure about weights, though. The reason? No permission to sedate tigers. The result? Less researchers, more poachers and questions regarding the size of Manas and Kazirangha tigers. If it wasn't for the tenacious rangers over there, tigers would have been long gone.  

All in all, one could conclude research seems to have more positive than negative effects. In regions and reserves with biologists, tigers do ok. In other regions, they are on their way out.

Maybe we can, to an extent, compare tigers, researchers and unintended deaths on one hand with doctors, hospitals and unintended deaths on the other.

It's known some of those admitted to hospital will not return as a result of unintended mistakes. Change 'some' for 'a few thousand every year' in this small country only. Disturbing figures. The alternative is to stay away from doctors or to consult serial killers. A rude comparison, but you get my point. In the end, it's probably best to prefer doctors and mistakes over serial killers when health is at stake.

Same in tigers and researchers. Researchers at times sedate wild tigers. Some perish. In spite of that, the positive effects, and there seem to be many, well outweigh the negatives. If researchers are restrained by regulations, on the other hand, they sometimes leave. When they do, poachers enter. Than the struggle for survival begins in earnest. First, rangers are threatened, bribed or killed. Then it's the tigers turn. In the end, it's either researchers, sedation and unintended victims vs poachers, intended victims and no more tigers.

To conclude. Wild tigers, as far as I can see, are the ones who profit most from researchers and positive side-effects. Especially in the long run.

Remember the aim of the debate is to find out a bit more about research, sedation and effects. I made a case for research, but it could be I missed crucial points.

 
Two points to add:
 
1. Sumatra is the perfect example of how wrong in Pckts. Here, the conflict between tiger and humans is huge, there are very aggressive tigers and the poaching is unleashed. However, there are less than 10 tiger radiocollared since 2005, while there are tons, literally tons of camera traps in the entire island but NOT A SINGLE DOCUMENT ON SUMATRAN TIGER ECOLOGY!!!
 
At 2014, there is practically no scientific knowledge of the Sumatran tiger ecology, sociability or anything, despite the huge amount of camera traps. I challenged Pckts to show me ONE document, at least, about Sumatran tiger ecology, using modern science, but at this moment, there is no one.
 
2. The presence of park rangers and "no intrusion" methodology, sometimes, are not the best help of tigers, scientists DO. The perfect examples are Panna and Sariska. In Panna, Dr Chundawat warned the park rangers that they tiger numbers are simple ridiculous and that tigers where been poached. The result: Chundawat was ignored and with time, even banned, latter the poachers were free in the nose of the rangers and the result was that all Panna tigers died. It is even stupid to think that those rangers blamed Dr Chundawat and the radiocollars for the deaths of the tigers!!!
 
In Sariska, there were no scientists, so the job was even easier. The result was: park rangers said that tigers “migrated” to higher lands, and the poachers cleaned the park entirely.
 
One of the few places where park rangers have actually protected the tigers is Kaziranga, however we don’t know ANYTHING about the ecology, sociability and needs of those tigers. There are hundreds of camera traps in the area, but not a single scientific study with them, just estimations of population, or even a single scat study!
 
Indifference and hate to science, not radiocollars, is what is really killing tigers in India. I quote Valmik Thapar AGAIN: “India has not decided if they want to save they tigers”. Hard and true words.
 
Reply

GuateGojira Offline
Expert & Researcher
*****
#28

(10-02-2014, 09:58 AM)'peter' Wrote: Very interesting points neglected by most debating, so it seems. You're definitely right about the developments in the reserves you mentioned. I agree Panna has shown research only has an effect when government is interested. The Aldrich-snare article seems to have had an effect as well in that the method now seems to have been abandoned. The Russian research-project also gets more attention than the Siberian Tiger Project of the WCS. The question is how interest is triggered on the level of politics and we might need to explore purpose in order to find answers. 

In the last decade, things have changed to an extent in some countries. There are many photographs with Putin and Amur tigers featuring. Russia also hosted the meeting in St. Peterburg some years ago. It is a fact it got a lot of attention and it also had some results.

Based on what I see, and in that (descending) order, India (cultural pride and tourism too), Russia (a combination of cultural and political pride, so it seems), China (the need to quickly clean the reputation regarding wildlife in general and tigers in particular), Thailand (tigers as unknown national treasures) and Malaysia (same reason) seem to be interested in some way, with Kazachstan not that far away (tourism). 

There's zero activity in Vietnam (no more tigers), Laos (not many tigers left), Cambodja (same) and Indonesia (tigers and conservation oppose economic development), although it has to be admitted that Indonesia now has a number of individuals with some influence interested in the tiger. They are able to get to private initiatives, but seem unable to change policies in general.

I was most interested in your remarks on the motives of governments, the connection with research and the 'self-motivation' based on cultural and/or political identity. I also noticed the relation between these motives and the way conservation is conducted. I propose to explore this new dimension.

 
In fact, according with Dr Dinerstein, most of those “parks” that make pride India, are just “dead end” situations, they NEED to be connected. Those places like Ranthambore, Bandhavgarh and Kanha, are only islands with no future, IF India don’t manage to connect them with other parks and reserves.
 
In fact, scientists agree that the only areas that have some hope for tiger survival are:
 
1. The Terai belt: North India (from Corbett to the Assam), Nepal and Buthan together. Kazirange, Chitwan and Corbett are great examples.
 
2. The Western Ghats region: Beginning with Nagarahole and Bandipur, up to the Anamalai region. That entire area has at least 500 tigers and is the best tiger population in India at this time. However, it is still not entirely interconnected.
 
3. The Russian Far East: Russians are making an excellent work on tiger conservation. Now, the Autonomous Jewish region have they own tigers and that is of great hope for conservation.
 
These three areas have both, scientific presence and Government interest.
 
Sumatra needs political interest and direct scientific studies, “together” like Tigerlover mentioned. It is the ONLY way that the wild population could survive, if not, they are already doomed. Interestingly, the captive population of Sumatran tigers is very well and safe at this day.
 
Indochina population is doomed, and there are practically no hopes for them. The only government that is beginning to make efforts is Thailandia and Malaysia, but they are still in “diapers” on the methodology.
 
Finally, China is the great “hypocrite” here. They preach conservation, especially for Amur tigers, but they still promote tigers farms like the famous Harbin breeding center, which is only a hoax for tiger conservation.
 
1 user Likes GuateGojira's post
Reply

United States Pckts Offline
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#29

Reply

United States Pckts Offline
Bigcat Enthusiast
******
#30

(10-02-2014, 10:17 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote:
(10-01-2014, 10:04 PM)'Pckts' Wrote:
(10-01-2014, 09:46 AM)'GuateGojira' Wrote: I am agree with you Peter, personality and health state of animals also influence in the sedation.

About the cases posted here by Pckts, these are EXCEPTIONS, not the rule. Again, those news from the web are always sensationalists and focus more in the tragedy and ignore the GREAT advantages of the studies developed. Just because ONE cougar died in a sample of 20, this doesn't mean that radiocollars are bad. Again, to say that radiocollaring is bad is just a product of paranoia, just that. Sadly, when in all world, animals are still captured, just the crazy dudes of India don't allow that. At some point, that attitude is hypocrite, because like the case of Dr Chundawat, rangers ignore and attack scientists until the truth slap them in the face, yes DON'T FORGET PANNA PEOPLE!!!
 



 

"paranoia"
That is not paranoia, these are proven, actually happened and for no reason. You tried to agree with Richardli that sedation or collaring was minimal risk, yet there are tons of examples to prove that it is huge risks. For all species, Lions, leopards, Jags, Pumas, tigers, Rhinos, Elephant, Seal, Clouded Leopard, etc...

What are these animals lives worth to you?
You say you love them, yet you are willing to have a few die as long as most survive. What about the amount of stress they have placed on them, what about the attitude change they have towards human beings, what about the example it sets for humans in the future?

Have a little foresight here, saving these animals doesn't come from knowing how large they are, it comes from protecting their habitat and stopping the unnecessary killing of them.

Simply as that.

 


 
YES, it IS paranoia, a ridiculous and biased paranoia.
 
In your mind, all operations on humans most be canceled because some people have died. However, this is NOT the case, at all.
 
You say that there is “tons” of evidence against radiocollaring, but the only thing that you have is “your” opinion and a few sensationalist news reports that ONLY focus on the dead animal and IGNORE completely the entire studies and the full sample of captured animals that live very well.
 
I have provided the opinion of the greatest tiger scientists ever, like Dr Sunquist, Dr Karanth and Dr Chundawat. In fact, if Dr Schaller would have the money, he would probably would capture some tigers in his study of 1960, that is sure.
 
In science, we can’t use feelings. Check how many tigers are now safe because scientists study them with REAL science. Modern conservation is alive thanks to those scientists that take the risk and wined in the final fight. Of course that any life is precious, but those “less than 5 tigers” that died in over 40 years capturing tigers, were just ACCIDENTS and scientist learn from that.
 
About the stress, you are using this point like if it was something relevant. Those animals have little stress, the sedatives used simple calm the animal, scientists make little to no noise and contrary to the cases in captivity described by Peter, there are no reports of tigers in India been badly sedated. Read the book “Tiger Moon”, where Fiona Sunquist describes how some tigers even returned to its bait after the sedation. Those tigers were just fine and well, reproduced excellently and those Nepalese studies provided over 70% of modern tiger knowledge.
 
Finally, those cases of tigers aggressive toward humans in Ranthambore is NOT for the radiocollaring, is because the LACK of respect of people and park rangers for those tigers. Ranthambore, in fact, is one of the worst places for tiger-human relation, because people and park rangers there normally use unsafe distances with those tigers and like any human, tigers have they own personality. So, this is not excuse for radiocollars. In fact, there was not a single case of aggression of the Sauraha male or Madla against humans, just to mention two cases, and those were prime dominant males too.
 

 



"In your mind, all operations on humans most be canceled"

Once again, WE must protect them from US!
Do you know what I am saying?
We must protect them from POACHING by us. What does that mean?
It means, forest officials must be payed and allocated weapons to compete against the poachers, they must be given far more money that these gov'ts make from exploiting these animals through tourism. Not so they can INTRUDE on the animals, so they can STOP POACHING!

So please stop misinforming others about what I am saying, because it is absolutely false!

You also have no idea if Ranthambhore is any more or less aggressive towards humans, tigers where just moved from Bandhavargh to stop so much human tiger conflict, the only reason Ranthambhore has more conflict is because its the most popular tourism zone in India and easiest to see tigers, and the most people go there. Hence more interaction between the two species.
Reply






Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

About Us
Go Social     Subscribe  

Welcome to WILDFACT forum, a website that focuses on sharing the joy that wildlife has on offer. We welcome all wildlife lovers to join us in sharing that joy. As a member you can share your research, knowledge and experience on animals with the community.
wildfact.com is intended to serve as an online resource for wildlife lovers of all skill levels from beginners to professionals and from all fields that belong to wildlife anyhow. Our focus area is wild animals from all over world. Content generated here will help showcase the work of wildlife experts and lovers to the world. We believe by the help of your informative article and content we will succeed to educate the world, how these beautiful animals are important to survival of all man kind.
Many thanks for visiting wildfact.com. We hope you will keep visiting wildfact regularly and will refer other members who have passion for wildlife.

Forum software by © MyBB