Eyes on or hands on? A discussion of human interference

[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