WildFact
›
Premier Section
›
Edge of Extinction
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
|
ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)
|
 (10-24-2024, 09:57 AM)peter Wrote: APEX I get what you're saying about my last posts, however, I made it quite obvious that my posts were addressing the 'bear posters' in particular, especially the people who like to badly exaggerate the size of brown bears, and the people who like to arrogantly dismiss Alexander Batalov's conclusion and ridicule him. Do I trust the 'bear posters' reading my posts? Absolutely not. You know, the same hypocrites who'd rather arrogantly dismiss, ridicule or insult highly reputable and experienced biologists/rangers when it doesn't suit their preconceived ideas and agenda, instead of accepting reality and facts. I don't know why there are "strange spaces" between my sentences, I tried editing that, but it wouldn't allow me. I was also confused as to why that is. I don't like to write long paragraphs with too many sentences, it makes it more difficult for people to read. I like short paragraphs with some highlighted words, so it makes it easy and clear for everyone to read and understand my point. As for Ochkarik. Although not a 'large' tiger (probably 180 kg), he was a very confident, powerful and formidable tiger who occupied and defended his territory for many years. In that entire area in the Durminskoye forest, Ochkarik reigned supreme. He was also a tiger that liked to hunt and eat bears. Like the male tiger "Odyr" (also a medium-sized male) Ochkarik proved that size doesn't mean everything. Both individuals are (and were, referring to Ochkarik who's dead now) very confident, bold, and dominant male tigers by nature. And both were able to kill and eat large (significantly bigger) male brown bears. The vast majority of the general public (laymen) do not understand or know what it takes to win a serious fight, particularly a street fight. They think "size" or "weight" is the only important factor, which is ridiculous and far, far from reality. There are countless examples of people destroying and knocking out much larger and heavier opponents. The same goes for wild animals, especially predators fighting large individuals of different species. From what I've consistently seen, superior skills, weapons, speed, agility, power, reflexes, experience, killer instinct, precision & efficiency will certainly overcome your opponents size/weight advantage more often than not. A very fast, powerful, agile and highly skilled fighter weighing, say, 135 - 150 lbs, can destroy a much larger and heavyweight opponent weighing 250 - 300 lbs, who is much slower, clumsier, less experienced, and much less skilled. I don't care how big you are, but the precision, efficiency, speed, and sheer fighting (or killing) skill will make a huge difference in a street fight where anything goes, or in a serious fight between a 400 lb tiger and a 800 lb brown bear. The experienced 'professionals' you talked to, understand this very well, and know the great importance and effects of training and specialization. Hence why, there are multiple accounts of tigers killing larger / heavier brown bears, including large adult males. Put it this way, is a tiger capable of killing a significantly larger/heavier bear in a head-on fight? Absolutely, more than capable and has done. Is a bear capable of killing a significantly larger/heavier tiger in a head-on fight? No. The bear would always get destroyed and eaten. And history, evidence, and countless accounts confirm this over and over again. This is the difference between tigers and bears.
A young Amur tigress chases a larger adult brown bear in Northeast China
In another new video captured on a Chinese researcher's camera trap, a large adult brown bear was seen fleeing from a smaller young female tiger in Northeast China Tiger and Leopard National Park. This is the 2nd video of an adult brown bear fleeing from a tigress. This recent video was captured in Primorye in the Russian Far East. An adult male brown bear fleeing from a smaller tigress: There are now two very recent videos of Amur tigers interacting with Ussuri brown bears. And in both cases, its female tigers chasing away larger adult brown bears. These videos confirm that even tigresses can be dominant in encounters with larger adult brown bears and chase them out of the vicinity. Hence why extensive modern scientific field research and data shows, that even large male brown bears will rarely directly usurp a tigress's kill, in most cases, even large male bears will patiently wait for the tigress to finish eating, leave the vicinity, and then approach her kill and scavenge on the left-overs. This is why large male brown bears sometimes follow tiger tracks in hopes of finding left-over tiger kills so they can scavenge on the remains. But when tigers, especially male tigers, return to their kills and find a scavenging brown bear, the tiger sometimes will kill and eat the bear. From renowned tiger biologist and ecologist - Dr. John Seidenstecker When a tiger returns to its kill and finds a wild boar or brown bear scavenging the kill, the tiger has a chance to kill another big meal:  *This image is copyright of its original author https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/C...frontcover (11-04-2024, 06:31 PM)Apex Titan Wrote: A young Amur tigress chases a larger adult brown bear in Northeast China A size comparison between the tigress and the large adult brown bear she was chasing. The brown bear was much larger and way more massive than the tigress. This clearly looks like a full-grown male brown bear:  *This image is copyright of its original author
Is a Significant Portion of Bear Consumption by Tigers due to Feeding on Carrion?
Throughout the tigers entire range in the wild, in some areas and regions, bears (brown bears, Asiatic black bears, sloth bears & sun bears) regularly fall prey to tigers. Biologists, zoologists, forest rangers, guides, and hunters regularly find the remains of bears in tiger scats. But does this necessarily mean that the tigers "killed" and ate the bears? Some people speculate that the majority of bear remains found in tiger scats by biologists, zoologists, rangers, and hunters, is mostly due to tigers "scavenging" on already dead bear carcasses (carrion), and not due to tiger predation. Their argument is, that just because bear remains (bones, fur & claws) are found in tiger scats, it doesn't mean or "prove" the tiger "killed" the bear. So apparently, according to their logic and guesswork ... highly trained, experienced, and reputable experts, biologists, zoologists, naturalists, rangers, and hunters are basically not competent enough to study and determine what animals tigers regularly hunt and eat. An example; the claws and fur of an adult Himalayan black bear in the excrement of a tigress. Biologist Sergey Kolchin said the tigress had killed and eaten the bear: (September, 2021)  *This image is copyright of its original author This whole false "carrion" theory is an absolutely nonsensical, badly flawed, and illogical opinion/speculation for various reasons. It's a well known fact that, as a rule, hyper-carnivorous predators like big cats and wolves rarely feed on carrion. Tigers will generally only eat carrion in times of desperation and starvation. These are usually very old, sick or injured tigers who no longer can hunt for themselves. It simply goes against the nature of a tiger, or any pure predator, to regularly eat carrion. This will never happen in reality. This is why in India and Southeast Asia, biologists, researchers, wildlife photographers, naturalists, and rangers never capture any pictures or videos of other predators like leopards, dholes, crocodiles, bears, jackals, wolves, etc, feeding on the dead carcasses of bull gaurs and wild bull buffaloes. They only repeatedly (and often) capture video/photos of tigers eating large bull gaur and wild bull buffalo carcasses. Why? because those are tiger kills, not carrion! If it was "carrion" in many cases, then biologists, naturalists, rangers, tourists, and photographers would also capture numerous photos/videos of many other predators scavenging on the carcasses of large bull gaurs and wild bull buffaloes, not just tigers over and over again. Common sense. The same logic applies to accounts of adult elephants and rhinos killed by tigers. Forest rangers, officials, guides, and naturalists only find evidence of tigers feeding on adult elephants and rhino carcasses, but no shred of evidence of other carnivores like leopards, bears, dholes, and jackals feeding on dead adult elephants and rhinos. This is very telling. Not to mention, forest rangers, park officials, guides, and naturalists also find clear evidence of tiger attacks on the dead carcasses of adult elephants and rhinos, such as multiple claw marks, bite wounds, blood, and tiger pugmarks on the spot, which confirms that its a tiger kill. Why are Bear remains regularly found only in Tiger scats, and not in the scats of other predators? Tigers co-exist with a variety of different carnivores such as bears, wolves, dholes, leopards, crocodiles, jackals, etc. In the Amur-Ussuri region, Amur tigers share their range with carnivores such as brown bears, Asiatic black bears, Amur leopards (in some areas), wolves, raccoon dogs, and badgers. Now, if the majority of bear consumption by tigers was due to feeding on carrion, then why don't biologists, zoologists, scientists, rangers, or hunters regularly find the remains of bears in the feces of other carnivores like Amur leopards, wolves, raccoon dogs, badgers, or other bears? Already dead bear carcasses (carrion) would be available to all predators. So why not? Why do biologists, rangers, or hunters never find evidence of Amur leopards, wolves, bears, raccoon dogs or badgers also feeding on dead brown bears and black bear carcasses? Why plenty of evidence of only tigers feeding on bear carcasses? In the Russian Far East, there are many thousands of bears and only, say, 700 - 750 Amur tigers. Due to the significant population ratio difference between the two species, biologists, rangers, and hunters should find the remains of bears in the scats of both Himalayan and brown bears far more often than in tiger scats. Why? because bears significantly outnumber Amur tigers and would have a much higher chance of finding carrion (already dead bear carcasses) than tigers would, period. Also, a bear's smelling sense is far superior to a tiger's, so they would find carrion far more frequently and easier than tigers would. Bears are active carrion scavengers, whereas tigers are active predators. So why not then? This makes no sense at all. It should be the complete opposite. Omnivores like Himalayan and Ussuri brown bears are scavengers by nature, and both subspecies will regularly and willingly feed on carrion, and in spite of this, bear remains are very rarely found in the scats of both brown bears or Himalayan black bears in the Primorye and Khabarovsk regions. Raccoon dogs and badgers will also habitually eat carrion, but bear remains are never found in their scats during the summer or autumn months. Russian biologists, forest rangers, and hunters will repeatedly find remains of wild boar or deer in bear scats, but why not the remains of bears? (i.e. carrion). Bears are well known to be cannibalistic, and will even scavenge on the dead carcasses of other bears, and yet, biologists, rangers, and hunters will very rarely find bear remains in the excrements of both Ussuri brown bears and Asiatic black bears in the Primorye and Khabarovsk territories. What does this clearly indicate? Cannibalism in Bears: https://publish.illinois.edu/maxallen/fi...-Bears.pdf Wild boars are also active carrion scavengers and will willingly eat carrion at any opportunity, so how come biologists, rangers, and hunters never find bear remains in wild boar scats then? In "Land of the Leopard" National Park, the population of Amur leopards is significantly higher than the population of Amur tigers. In fact, according to the latest reports, the population of Amur tigers in the reserve has stabilized and stopped growing, whereas the population of Amur leopards has significantly increased. There are only 56 adult Amur tigers living in the "Land of the Leopard" National Park and 129 Amur leopards living in the Primorye region, and vast majority (95%) of their (leopards) populations live in the "Land of the Leopard" reserve. "Experts believe that the stabilization of the growth of the Amur tiger population is due to the maximum capacity of the habitat, which, apparently, the tiger population in the reserve has reached. The possibility of further growth of the tiger population will depend on the availability of resources." "Experts also noted that there are 23% more females in the population than males, which corresponds to the optimal sex ratio." https://mir24.tv/news/16597998/chislenno...la-predela Amur leopard population is increasing: https://www.vedomosti.ru/ecology/protect...o-leoparda https://tass.ru/obschestvo/20451819 In the "Land of the Leopard" National Park, Amur tigers often hunt and eat bears, and bear remains are regularly found in tiger scats during the summer and autumn especially. But if the consumption of bears was really due to tigers mostly "feeding on carrion", then why don't biologists, researchers, rangers, or hunters never find the remains of bears in the scats of Amur leopards who significantly outnumber the population of tigers in the "Land of the Leopard" Reserve? Bears are a 'delicacy' for tigers. Some tigers habitually hunt bears, and prefer killing and eating bears instead of ungulate prey. This is normal behaviour for tigers:  *This image is copyright of its original author https://iz.ru/677772/2017-12-01/tigr-i-l...-natcparke https://primamedia.ru/news/650351/ http://programmes.putin.kremlin.ru/en/tiger/news/25644 According to the badly flawed "carrion" theory/guesswork, common sense and logic says that biologists, zoologists, rangers, and hunters would also regularly find the remains of bears in the feces of other predators and omnivores of the taiga during the summer and autumn months, not just in tiger feces. The fact that this is not the case, confirms that Amur tigers are actively hunting, killing, and eating bears during these seasons. Or just before their death, do all bears secretly announce to tigers when and where they're going to drop dead, so tigers can come and feed on their dead bodies? Is this what tigers and bears have been doing for thousands of years? Have they've been fooling all these biologists, scientists, researchers, rangers, hunters, and natives throughout history? Does this explain why bear remains are mostly found only in tiger scats on a regular basis, and not in the scats of other predators or omnivores? In the Primorye and Khabarovsk territories, are a large number of bears, for some weird reason, just randomly dropping dead at an alarming rate during the summer and autumn months? Notice the correlation between bear remains found in the male tiger's scats during the summer and winter months, and the observations of biologists who tracked him while he hunted for hibernating bears in their dens. Both the male tiger (possible sub-adult) and tigress were bear-hunters:  *This image is copyright of its original author How Often do Tigers Feed on Carrion? As specialized apex predators, tigers do not like to eat carrion, as carrion is often old, rotten, and less nutritious meat. Pure predators, especially large apex predators, like to eat fresh meat from animals they've hunted and killed themselves. It's an absolute laughable notion to think that a huge apex predator like a tiger regularly feeds on carrion, this is very far from reality. Tigers being "energy maximizers" always prefer to hunt the largest prey animals and eat fresh meat from actual kills. Wild Tiger Health Project - Dr John Lewis Veterinary Information for Wildlife Vets and Biologists Working with Wild Tigers "Tigers rarely consume carrion." https://wildtigerhealthproject.org/resou...of-tigers/ "Carrion and frozen meat are eaten rarely, only in cases of severe hunger - the tiger prefers live prey." https://amur-tiger.ru/uploads/files/domy...075454.pdf All biologists, scientists, and zoologists observe and report, that the large significant portion of bear remains regularly found in tiger scats, particularly during the summer and autumn months, is due to tiger predation on bears, not eating carrion. Biologists specifically specify this fact. The scat method is a very reliable method because it consistently shows what animal tigers are regularly hunting and consuming. Carcasses are much harder to find. Data from biologist Tkachenko: Carrion did not have a significant importance in the diet of tigers. Note that only twice did a male tiger "A" feed on a Himalayan bear, his old prey, and on a female wapiti that was killed by a tiger:  *This image is copyright of its original author Tigers resort to eating carrion only in times of starvation:  *This image is copyright of its original author https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/M...frontcover Tigers are not known to eat carrion:  *This image is copyright of its original author https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/T...frontcover Bear remains regularly found in Tiger scats in Southeast Asia This study states and strongly suggests that tigers are major predators of bears and commonly prey on bears throughout their distribution in the wild. Tigers were found to kill and consume sun bears and Asiatic black bears in all 4 sites where their diet was studied in Southeast Asia. Indochinese tigers prey on Asiatic black bears, including full-grown adult bears of all ages and genders, while Malayan & Sumatran tigers hunt and kill adult sun bears of all ages and genders. Just like in the Russian Far East, this study also proves that the common occurrence of bears in the diet of tigers in Southeast Asia, is due to active tiger predation on bears: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:82406f...s%20common https://www.researchgate.net/publication..._sun_bears The common consumption of bears by tigers was due to predation, not scavenging:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author The large amount of bears in tiger diets in some regions indicate that tigers can be major predators of bears in some areas. In general, tigers commonly prey on bears throughout their distribution in the wild:  *This image is copyright of its original author By directly comparing the consumption of bears by tigers and dholes, biologists were able to determine that the common consumption of bears by tigers was clearly due to predation, while dholes rarely, if ever consumed bears. Which confirms what I stated above. If mostly "eating carrion" was the case, then biologists, researchers, rangers, and hunters would also regularly find remains of bears in the scats of other predators. It's plain and simple. But they don't, why? because tigers are regularly hunting, killing and devouring bears. Other predators do not. Carcass of an adult male wild boar, remains of an adult bear (unknown subspecies), and a bull red deer, all killed and eaten by tigers. All 3 prey species are important food sources for Amur tigers: *This image is copyright of its original author *This image is copyright of its original author Conclusion: Tigers, being the largest terrestrial apex predators in their habitats, whose sole purpose is to hunt and regulate the prey populations, will rarely eat carrion. They strongly prefer to eat the meat of live prey (animals they've killed). Tigers, as a rule, only eat carrion in times of desperation and starvation. It contradicts the nature of a tiger to often feed on carrion. According to numerous scientific studies and observations, the vast majority of bear meat consumed by tigers, is due to predation, not scavenging on dead bear carcasses. All biologists, zoologists, scientists, rangers, and hunters who study the predatory behaviour and feeding ecology of tigers, agree and report that most, if not, all bear remains regularly found in tiger scats is due to tigers actively killing and eating bears. The fact that bear remains are very rarely found in the scats of other carnivores and omnivores such as leopards, bears, wild boars, raccoon dogs, dholes, wolves, and badgers, and are only (and regularly in some areas and regions) found in the scats of tigers, clearly confirms that tigers frequently hunt and eat bears throughout their range in the wild. The nonsensical "carrion" theory makes absolutely no sense and has no shred of evidence to support this false idea. Reality, nature, and plenty of clear evidence shows otherwise. 
UPDATE ON THE DUTCH AMUR TIGERS IN KAZACHSTAN
Those interested in tigers no doubt heard or read about the intention to reintroduce Amur tigers in Kazachstan some time ago. The intention resulted in a decision to give it a try. After a lot of preparations, a series of interesting articles (some of which were discussed in this thread) and a long pause, two captive Amur tigers from a new zoo in a village in the northwestern tip of the Province of Noord-Holland (in the northwestern part of the Netherlands) were flown to Kazachstan not so long ago. The new zoo, 'Hoenderdaell', is a nice one. Some of the big cats are from the rescue center I often visited in the period 1990-2010. That facility, not open to the public, changed hands some years ago. The former director called to inform me. Most unfortunately, I never heard from him again. Coincidence has it I visited the new zoo about a year ago with my brother, sister and her daughter. On a nice summer day, we took our time to admire quite a few animals not often seen in zoos and the restaurant, according to my brother, wasn't too bad as well. I wrote a post about the brown bears and the Amur tigers I saw. That is to say, I saw the bears (from a few yards). The home of the Amur tigers, however, was covered with bushes and trees. I only saw the female walking. Although the trail was almost invisible, I did, after a few minutes, see she was quite long and tall. One of the keepers I contacted for more information turned out to be a student working on a project. He knew a lot about the big cats and the bears. The brown bears seemed very healthy. The male in particular was an impressive animal. Based on the size of the brown bear I saw in the rescue facility I visited quite some years ago (see above), my guess was he easily exceeded 300 kg (662 pounds). The bear in the rescue facility, most probably, was well over that mark. His exact weight was unknown, but the vet assumed he was about 300 kg or a bit over. That guesstimate didn't quite cover it. When I was about to enter the room where he had been sedated with my tape and notebook, I was pushed aside by those leaving the room in a hurry. They told me the bear had quickly recovered from the drug and had broken a few ropes (...). Anyhow. The male brown bear in 'Hoenderdaell' was one of the largest I saw. Apart from that, he was athletic. After watching the mightby bear from a few yards for a couple of minutes, my brother started a discussion about Amur tigers and brown bears: " .. . So you're saying Amur tigers hunt male brown bears in the Russian Far East ... "? Before i was able to answer, a few visitors decided to enter the debate. It was quickly concluded even a decent male Amur tiger trying to approach the bear had to be very lucky to even reach the ambulance. Apex wasn't there, of course, but the student I referred to earlier (see above) seemed to have a somewhat different opinion. He, however, decided for a smile and told me how to contact him when the project he was working on had been finished. The Dutch Amur tigers, to return to the title of the post, got a few headlines before disappearing into what I expected to be a long silence. But I was wrong. When it was all quiet on the eastern front, my sister sent me a link to an article she found in a local newspaper. It's, of course, in Dutch: https://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/342970/ti...kazachstan I'm not saying it's a very informative article, but it's something and it also has a video (00:58) enabling you to see the female ('Boghdana') and, for a few seconds, the male ('Kuma') entering their new home for the first time. As far as i know, the intention is to 'rewild' their cubs. If there will be cubs, of course (both tigers are well past their prime). The female is long, tall and in excellent shape. The student told me the male is a bit bigger. How do they compare to their wild relatives? Difficult to say, but the videos and photographs I saw suggest today's wild Amur tigers (I'm referring to healthy males with a territory) seem to be a bit more stocky than their captive relatives. ABOUT THE SERIES OF APEX Apex, in his impressive series about (the outcome of) confrontations between male Amur tigers and male Ussuri brown bears, concluded male tigers stand the best chance. Most of (today's) Russian biologists seem to agree, but what I read suggests every fight is close. Kostoglod wrote about a large male brown bear following a tiger for 14 km. The tiger, judging from the heel width of the print he left (10,5 cm), most probably was a male. He 'escaped', but Apex said there is no reason to assume the tiger felt threatened by the bear. Male brown bears, after all, often follow tigers to scavenge their kills. Maybe the tiger just wanted to get rid of the bear, Apex thought. Could be, but it's a fact Kostoglod (as well as other biologists) found reliable evidence of Amur tigers killed by bears. These incidents occurred in the decades before the STP started. After 1992, as far as I know, not even a cub was killed by a bear. Very strange. Kostoglod assumed (most of) the tigers killed by (brown) bears had been struggling with health problems and added they might have developed into troubleshooters. Man-eaters are few and far between in the Russian Far East, but there are many reliable reports about youngsters (tigers ranging between 2-5 years of age), oldtimers and incapacitated adults entering villages in times of need. Most of them are arrested and rehabilitated, but most is not all. More tigers can result in more problems in a long and harsh winter and that's still without an outbreak of a disease affecting the animals they hunt. ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CAPTIVE AND WILD AMUR TIGERS A few years ago, I invested quite a bit of time in reading (scientific and newspaper) articles in order to find reliable information about the length and weight of captive Amur tigers. Adult males, including a small number of young adults, averaged 220-225 kg (486-497 pounds) and 9.11 (302-303 cm) in total length measured in a straight line ('between pegs'), whereas adult females averaged 135-140 kg (298-310 pounds). The male weight sample is reliable (n=61), but the female sample is a bit wanting (n=15). The question is how wild Amur tigers compare to their captive relatives. The answer is we don't know. The famous, much discussed, table published in 2005 (referring to tigers captured in the period 1992-2004 in or close to the Sichote-Alin Biosphere Reserve) said (a limited number of young adult and adult) males averaged 176,4 kg (389 pounds), whereas females averaged 117,9 kg (260 pounds). More recent data (refering to the period 2005-2024) suggest the average today could be closer to 420 pounds (190 kg) for males and 265 pounds (120 kg) for females, but a very experienced Russian biologist who assisted in capturing many wild Amur tigers recently said adult males average 486-535 pounds (220-240 kg) and added the upper limit is over 618 pounds (280 kg). He could be right, as Feng Limin said a male of 597 pounds (270 kg) had been captured in northeastern China some years ago. The difference between the different averages is remarkable. The conclusion for now is adult wild male Amur tigers captured in the period 1992-2024 ranged between 312-597 pounds (141-270 kg). The average is anyone's guess, but according to Batalov and Fomenko (referring to a number of interviews and videos) an adult male of 442 pounds (200 kg) is considered as 'large' in most districts. All in all, one could conclude captive and wild males, rangewise (referring to weight), more or less compare (312-706 pounds or 141-320 kg). Captive male Amur tigers, however, average 486-497 pounds (220-225 kg), whereas wild males seem to be closer to 389-420 pounds (180-190 kg). A bit strange, as it's the other way around in most other tiger subspecies. A result of the population bottleneck in the 20th century? The harsh conditions in the Russian Far East? Poaching? A lack of reliable data? We don't know. The only thing we know is few wild Amur tigers have been captured in the last decade. Photographs, videos and rumours, of course, suggest wild Amur tigers increased in size in that decade, but chances are the situation in this department didn't change in one decade only. It is, however, likely more tigers and better conditions resulted in more variation at the level of individuals. Most large males were seen in remote districts, suggesting poaching could still be a problem in some districts. ABOUT CONFRONTATIONS BETWEEN MALE TIGERS AND MALE BROWN BEARS IN THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST Recent information (referring to the information posted by Apex and the opinions of quite a few Russian biologists) suggests an adult male Amur tiger of average size (353-442 pounds or 160-200 kg) stands a very decent chance in a fight with an adult male brown bear. I'm not only referring to incidents described in books published some decades ago, but to a few recent incidents. The incident between tiger 'Ochkarik' and brown bear 'Chlamyda' (in 2017) was discussed at length. Batalov concluded 'Chlamyda' was killed and eaten by 'Ochkarik'. A conclusion based on a deduction (the body of 'Chlamida', as far as I know, was never found), but it was a deduction of a very experienced biologist who knew both animals. There's, however, no doubt about the incident between tiger 'Odyr' and a male brown bear with a callus width of 18 cm in November 2022. One could use both incidents, and those discussed in the books I referred to above, to get to a conclusion regarding the most common outcome of a fight between adult males of both species, but that could result in a somewhat distorted view. As far as I know, most fights between males of both species resulted in dispersion. Fights with a tragic outcome more often ended with a dead bear, but male tigers have been wounded and killed as well. For this reason, one could conclude the margins are limited. The point, I think, Apex made is a fight between adult males of both species is not a one-sided affair. About 15 months after his fight with the brown bear in November 2022, tiger 'Odyr' again attracted a bit of attention. When patrolling his territory, he found a hibernating male brown bear. The tiger didn't attack the bear, but apparently roared. The sleeping bear rose and left to hibernate elsewhere. In a video published in February this year, Yuri Kya, heavily critized because of his comments about the fight between the male brown bear killed by 'Odyr' in November 2022, suggested the size of the bear could have prevented an attack. Could be, but the bear decided to leave and this, most probably, was the intention of the tiger. I don't doubt there are more examples of male tigers pushing male brown bears out of their territory, but that is different from saying a fight between adult males of both species is a one-sided affair. It isn't. There's reliable evidence of male tigers wounded in a fight with a brown bear (referring to a table discussed in this post some years ago) and that's still without the male tigers killed in 1913 and 1972. The problem is there's no information about both incidents. APEX Although we largely agree in most respects, we disagree in that I think black and white are not the only colours. I agree an encounter between a bear-experienced male tiger and an adult male Ussuri brown bear is not a one-sided affair, but there are many tigers and bears and in the end it always is about individuality and motivation. I do, however, agree tigers have a significant advantage. When they, at 18-22 months of age, disperse, all subadults know how to hunt. There is, however, some evidence size could be more important than you assume. Although an experienced tiger is able to kill a larger bear, it's also likely there is a limit. I'm not saying a tiger would quickly exhaust himself in a fight with a large bear, but it will take time to overcome a bear with a neck circumference exceeding, say, 100 cm. It's quite likely a bear of that size, in particular in a long struggle, will get opportunities to injure or kill his opponent. The impact of injuries often is a bit underestimated. For a professional hunter like a tiger, a relatively minor injury can have serious consequences. Example. Here's tiger 'Snarl' (Kanha, January 1977) after a fight with tiger 'Arjuna':  *This image is copyright of its original author And this is his opponent 'Arjuna':  *This image is copyright of its original author Tiger 'Arjuna', past his prime when he fought 'Snarl', was able to keep his sambar, but he was injured. The flap of skin hanging in front of one of his eyes impaired his vision and his ability to hunt. Not long after this photograph was taken, he perished. Not long after his fight with 'Arjuna', 'Snarl' was beaten by an older male. I found the photographs in 'Through the tiger's eyes' (Stanley Breeden & Belinda Wright, 1996). PROPOSAL For most of us, it's difficult to understand why a male tiger, at times, is able to overcome a male brown bear. For this reason, I don't think it would be superfluous to extent a bit on the difference between experienced big game hunters and omnivores. I'm referring to the impact of specific qualities. I don't want you to post videos of confrontations between humans (doesn't fit the thread), but I don't doubt there's a good information about the abilities of apex predators in books written by those who know more. One could start by describing the difference between a adult wild male and an adult captive male tiger. Every wild male Amur tiger that made it to adulthood and a territory, as Vaillant wrote, is quite something. Many people forget not a few males perish while trying. Male tiger 'Uporny' ('Tenacious'), for instance, wasn't the only male killed by another (larger) male. In captive tigers, this selection mechanism has been removed. Nearly all tigers born in captivity reach adulthood. John Vaillant could be a good idea to start for a discussion, but some letters published in the Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society are as interesting. See what you can do. Your series on tigers and bears, judging from the number of views, attracted many readers. I agree the info you posted was both interesting and informative. If we include the links to the sources you used, I can only get to a job well done. (11-26-2024, 07:54 AM)peter Wrote: UPDATE ON THE DUTCH AMUR TIGERS IN KAZACHSTAN It's very strange that in the last 35 years, Russian biologists, rangers, or hunters have never found a single reliable case of even a little tiger cub killed by a bear. 1990 - 2024 is a long time (2025 is only a month away now), and Amur tigers are still actively hunting and killing bears to this day. There are countless cases from the last century, as well as countless modern day accounts from the 21st century of tigers attacking and killing brown bears, most of which were adult brown bears killed, including some large males and sows. Now, in spite of this, why are there zero modern cases (1990 - 2024) of brown bears killing or seriously injuring any tiger? Have brown bears all of a sudden become useless against tigers? Why did a large male brown bear of impressive size, fail to seriously injure a smaller tiger (Odyr) in a prolonged, fierce battle to the death? How come Odyr received only a minor injury to his front paw and was totally fine? How come the very large female brown bears killed by male tigers in prolonged fights (Siberian Tiger Project), also failed to seriously injure the tigers? How come only one of the tigers received only a minor wound and was completely fine afterwards, whereas the tiger Dima was also completely fine, and had no injuries? Do large brown bears lack the weaponry to seriously injure tigers in a fight in most cases? Way back in the 20th century, Kostoglod found some cases of tigers injured and killed by brown bears, but he specifically noted that these tigers were most likely unhealthy, weakened, and already injured tigers. Which suggests that Kostoglod likely thought that its very unlikely that a brown bear can kill a healthy tiger in a fight. Otherwise why would he say that? Although brown bears are large and powerful animals in their own right, based on the facts above, I do think that brown bears are highly overrated by most people. If they really were that formidable as many suggest, then there should be several modern cases of brown bears killing at least some tiger cubs, but there's nothing in the last 3+ decades. What other conclusion can I come to? Seasoned Russian biologists with over 50 years of field experience like Batalov, Dunishenko, and Yudin, have found nothing. Seasoned forest rangers like Yuri Kya and his team also found nothing. On the contrary, all have reported cases of large bears killed and eaten by tigers. Yes, you and I agree in most respects when it comes to tigers and bears. I agree that nothing in nature is black and white, and reality is far more complex. Individuality and motivation also plays a significant role too, no doubt. You're making good points. However, we also cannot deny the fact that most Russian biologists, naturalists, rangers, and hunters strongly favor an average male tiger in a fight against even a large male brown bear. This fact speaks volumes because these are the opinions and views of very experienced professionals and experts who live and work with tigers and bears in the Russian Far East for their entire lives. They've collected first-hand data on tiger-brown bear interactions and speak (and work) with locals and native peoples. We have to look at the general consensus of experienced Russian experts to come to a conclusion. Consistency is key. And the general consensus is overwhelmingly in favor of the tiger. If we add all the recent information/accounts of male tiger-adult male brown bear interactions, then this adds even more credence to the conclusions of most Russian biologists, naturalists, rangers, and hunters. I have no doubt that an adult male Ussuri brown bear is a formidable opponent for a tiger, but there's also no doubt that, in spite of the male brown bear's massive size and immense strength, a male tiger is the superior and more formidable beast and is able to kill even a significantly larger male brown bear twice his own weight more often than not, and most Russian biologists, zoologists, rangers, and hunters agree. If a fight between a male tiger and male Ussuri brown bear was really a "close all" like you assume, then opinions and views of Russian biologists would be split 50/50. Or at least we would find numerous Russian biologists who favor the adult male brown bear in a fight, but we don't, as far as I know, there's only Krechmar and Sysoev. But they never provided any shred of evidence to support their (guesswork) opinions, and I already debunked their opinions in my previous posts. Biologists like Kucherenko have actually (personally) found hard evidence, on multiple occasions, of large male brown bears killed and eaten by tigers, but not a single case, in over 50 years of field experience in the taiga, of the opposite happening. According to Kucherenko's observations and experiences, even a large male brown bear is not capable of defeating an adult male tiger in a fight. His view is consistent with Aramilev's view. Even the native tribes (Udeghe, Nanai, Tungus) who have lived alongside tigers and brown bears for many thousands of years, all widely regard the Amur tiger to be the superior and more formidable beast, and the undisputed "Lord of the taiga" who reigns supreme over all animals of the forest. This fact is also very telling. Vaillant also makes note of this in his book. So according to vast majority of Russian experts and all natives, a fight between a male tiger and male brown bear is not a "close call", but the tiger is a clear favorite. But I agree with you, that in some cases, an adult male brown bear can also win. Bears are no joke. So yes, its not totally one-sided. I just think, based on the clear evidence, accounts, and expert testimonies, that the tiger will certainly be the usual winner. As I proved in one of my previous posts with plenty of pictures and videos, many people highly exaggerate the size of brown bears in comparison to big cats. In reality, adult male Amur tigers and adult male Ussuri brown bears are very similar sized predators, and in some cases, the tiger is even larger. When both are huge males, they're still similar in size. So a fight between an adult male tiger and adult male brown bear is a clash between a tiger and bear of similar size. The tiger is the heavy favorite. Has a bear ever been reported to have killed a similar sized tiger in a fight, ever? No, there's not a single documented case in all of history. Are there many cases of tigers killing similar sized bears in fights? Yes, plenty of cases throughout history. What does this clearly suggest? Judging by history, evidence, and accounts, the only way a male brown bear stands a chance in a serious fight against a tiger, is if you get a average male Amur tiger (190 - 200 kg) vs a very large male brown bear weighing 300 - 600 kg. Even then, according to most Russian experts, the tiger is still the favorite. Bears don't do well against similar sized big cats in serious fights to the death, they always get killed and eaten. A large bear, at best, can put up a tough fight and injure a similar sized tiger in a serious fight, but cannot kill the tiger. The tiger is just too well armed, faster, more agile, and far more skilled at killing. The bear needs a significant size and weight advantage to stand a chance, otherwise it will always get killed and eaten. A tiger has too many advantages over a brown bear, advantages that I will discuss in my next post. Which brings me to your proposal. Based on everything discussed in mine and your posts, my next post will be about the huge difference between specialized big game hunters (apex predators like tigers) and omnivores (bears). I will also post some impressive tiger predation feats to further prove my points, and explain the difference between the nature, mindset, and capabilities of tigers and bears, as well as the difference between wild and captive tigers. But first, a prelude to the main post is coming up ....
A FEW VIDEOS
Here's a link to a very recent video (08:06) published by Bohai Tours (Olga Krasnykh). It has nice footage of a number of wild animals found in different regions and reserves in (the eastern part of) the Russian Federation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBnXJbTnUx4 Olga Krasnykh has been contacted by members of Wildfact more than once. Her answers to questions about interactions between tigers and bears in the Russian Far East were posted and discussed (this thread). Olga features in a video (about Russia's big cats) published in July 2020: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Lsj7I0t...iTaFuzr4X2 OLGA The videos you posted at YouTube are much appreciated. Same for your answers to questions of members of Wildfact. I don't know if you visit Wildfact every now and then, but if you do please consider joining our community. If you're interested, contact Sanjay and tell him I invited you to post in this thread. This means you can post and join a discussion any time you want. Wildfact (information about 2024) has 1,8-4,4 million views a month. This thread ('ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER') has 26,000-45,000 views a month. Our aim is to present and discuss good (reliable) information about wild tigers, but we don't mind you informing our members and readers about the opportunity to see wild Amur tigers and Amur leopards in the Russian Far East themselves. (12-02-2024, 08:02 PM)Apex Titan Wrote:(11-26-2024, 07:54 AM)peter Wrote: UPDATE ON THE DUTCH AMUR TIGERS IN KAZACHSTAN APEX Good post. Agreed on your proposal, but start with a post about the differences between captive and wild tigers (and bears). The reason is most of our readers have doubts about your conclusions regarding the (most common) outcome of an encounter between an adult tiger and an adult bear. I'll contribute when I have time. It is, I think, about the abilities (and experience) of apex predators (like big cats) and (larger) omnivores (like bears). Why is it experience (knowledge), speed and agility so often determine the outcome of an encounter? What is the difference between Amur tigers and, say, Indian or Indochinese tigers in the department of bears?
A FEW VIDEOS
1 - 'Tiger and Rhino' - Uploaded on YouTube by Wild India Safaris This video is about the interaction between a male Indian tiger and what seems to be an adult rhino. It's of interest, not because of what you see, but because of what you don't see. Watch it a few times to find out more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAJSaWultMM 2 - 'Incredible Russian Wildlife - Siberian Tigers & Others' (09:17) - Uploaded on YouTube by Bohai Tours All videos uploaded by Bohai Tours are of interest, because they enable you to see animals seldom discussed at forums. In the first 15 seconds, you see a male tiger walking on a well kept lawn close to a wooden house somewhere in the Russian Far East. When the tiger sniffs the tree and leaves, you can see him in full glory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATPthtaeiNs&t=13s 3 - 'The rarest Big Cats of Siberia & Ussuri Taiga! Listen to their Roars!' (08:06) - Uploaded on YouTube by Bohai Tours The video shows a tigress and her cubs and, at about 05:00, a male. Judging from the relative size of his head, he most probably is fully grown: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBnXJbTnUx4 4 - 'AMBA - The Siberian tiger - A Short Wildlife Film' (03:38) - Alor Leonel This wildlife film, although short, is special. Read the liner notes for more information. If you do, you'll find a link to an article written by Ekaterina Maksimova about Alor Leonel and his quest to see a wild Amur tiger. The title of the article published in the 'Komsomolskaya Pravda - Far East' on November 19, 2024 is 'My heart has never beaten so fast': Foreigner approaches tiger at dangerous distance and fullfills his dream' . The article, a nice read, has different photographs. One of them shows Alor and the tiger in the video. Although the tiger is a young adult male, it's tall and long. The photograph, by the way, is from Alor Leonel:  *This image is copyright of its original author The (relatively) large size of this (young adult) male is a bit surprising. More than once, I noticed wild Amur tigers are a bit larger than I assumed. It raises the question if the (accepted) information about the dimensions and the weight of wild Amur tigers really covers it. I've seen my share of captive male Amur tigers. My guess is they ranged between 155-265 kg, averaging well over 200 kg. In the table I posted about a year ago (this thread), captive adult males (and a few young adults) ranged between 141-320 kg. The average of 61 was 220-225 kg. In a (Chinese) paper I posted, it was concluded young adult males in two Chinese facilities reached their largest size at 3-4 years of age. After 4, they start to lose the fat typical for many young adult captive tigers. In the period they're 4-6 years of age, not much seems to change. When they reach 6-7 years of age, however, they start growing again. They add a few more inches in total length and their muscles change in that they seem to become more 'dense'. Their bones also seem to increase in size and they start to 'fill up'. This is what I noticed as well when we carried captive tigers (of different subspecies) in the facility I often visited in the period 1990-2010. A 200 kg (442 pounds) young adult male Amur tiger, for this reason, is (and 'feels') very different from a 200 kg male Amur tiger in, or just past, his prime. Compared to young adult males, prime males often have (relatively) larger legs, larger paws, larger necks and bigger heads. Their skulls (referring to measurements) often are a bit wider and heavier. The male tiger at the start of the second video is an example of a mature wild male Amur tiger. If the young adult male in the video reaches his prime, chances are he'll be quite close to the largest captive males I've seen. Meaning the information recently provided by a very experienced Russian biologist, who said adult males average 220-240 kg, could be closer than we assumed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE4MtPJEmuA
TWO MALE AMUR TIGERS CAPTURED ON VIDEO IN FEBRUARY 2022
This video ('How to capture the Amur tiger in the wild') was uploaded on YouTube by Bohai Tours in May 2024. The video (03:17) is from an American Tourist (Tom Ori), who flew from LA (USA) to Moscow and then to Vladivostok in February 2022. My guess is Tom was a client of Bohai Tours. On February 12, his camera captured a large male tiger in Lazo (01:29-02:03). Another male was captured on camera in what must have been the Land of the Leopard National Park (southwest of Vladivostok and just east of northeastern China) on February 23, 2022 (02:41-02:46). Compared to the (photograph of the) young adult male tiger in my previous post, both males (referring to their limbs, necks and heads in particular) seem bigger in most respects. Could be a result of their winter coat, but their proportions suggest they were a bit older. It's all but impossible to get to an estimate, but my guess is both male tigers, weightwise, were well over par: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjQGJ91r-r8
ONE MORE RECENT VIDEO FROM THE RUSSIAN FAR EAST
This, for now, is the last of a series of videos showing wild animals of the Russian Far East in their natural surroundings. The tigers, Amur leopards and Ussuri brown bears featuring in this video (10:21) seem to be in excellent shape. Like most of the previous videos, this one ('Amur tiger - the king of Russian taiga! Incredible videos from the Ussuri region & Siberia') was uploaded by Bohai Tour today (December 11, 2024). Again, the male tigers are stocky, quite robust, individuals. In contrast to a few decades ago, wild Amur tigers today are quite often seen near roads. Although they seem a bit more relaxed near humans, conflicts between tigers and humans still are few and far between: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFdDIan3Fg
Prelude
Here's the opening of my upcoming post about the striking difference between specialized (apex) big game hunters (tigers) and omnivores/scavengers (bears). @peter For some laymen it may be difficult to understand why a male tiger can overcome a (larger) male brown bear more often than not, but for most experienced professionals and experts (biologists, zoologists, naturalists, scientists, rangers, hunters, etc) it seems its difficult for them to understand how it would be possible for an adult male brown bear to defeat such a formidable and specialized apex predator like a tiger more often than not. You mentioned Vaillant's book. Good idea. Let's see what John Vaillant wrote about the Amur tiger. In his exceptional book (Chapter 2), John Vaillant describes the incredibly lethal weaponry, predatory skills, and physical anatomy of the tiger in great detail. Reading this, a person can easily understand why an Amur tiger can kill even a much larger male brown bear more often than not. A person can also easily see why tigers are able to habitually hunt and kill adult bears. A person can easily see why the medium-sized male tigers 'Ochkarik' and 'Odyr' were able to slaughter and devour large adult male brown bears of impressive sizes. Vaillant notes that not only can a tiger, at will, kill any creature of the taiga, but it is also widely regarded by the indigenous peoples as a consummate hunter and the undisputed lord of the taiga. Vaillant also notes that within every major ecosystem nature has produced, there's a singularly formidable predator that rules over it, and in the Primorye and Khabarovsk taiga, the Amur tiger reigns supreme and dominates this ecosystem as the undisputed apex predator. John Vaillant is also very explicit about the Amur tigers' dominance over brown bears, and how the indigenous peoples view the tiger. In my post about Amur tigers and bears in native culture, I'll post Vaillant's statements about the indigenous peoples (Udeghe, Nanai, Orochi) views of the tiger. Vaillant also notes how a tiger has the power, strength, weaponry, and skills to kill animals many times its size. It is these physical attributes and skills, which makes the tiger a more formidable beast than the brown bear, and why Amur tigers win most fights against adult brown bears. The tiger's weaponry is far more devastating than a brown bear's and its predatory skills and capabilities are far greater. In addition to the tigers' much larger and thicker canines, as Vaillant states, unlike a bear's claws which are designed primarily for digging and traction, the tiger's razor-sharp hooked claws are designed solely for fighting and killing, and its paws are extremely dexterous. I will elaborate further in my next post. Physical Description of the Tiger (John Vaillant)  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author https://www.krabarchive.com/ralphmag/GO/tiger.html John Vaillant on Amur tigers vs Brown bears Due to the Amur tigers deadly weaponry, strength, power, and killing skills described by Vaillant above, tigers are able to fight and tear brown bears apart, limb from limb... and also hunt and eat bears on a regular basis:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author In 2022, "Everest Media" published a summary of John Vaillant's book: "The Tiger". Here are some key notes:  *This image is copyright of its original author https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/S...frontcover Vaillant is very clear about the Amur tigers' superiority and dominance over the brown bear, its physical prowess, and how the Amur tiger rules the taiga. As large, strong, and robust a male brown bear is, as an omnivore, it simply does not possess the physicality, attributes, weapons, and skills of a natural born apex killing machine like a tiger. Tigers are able to quickly and efficiently kill very large and dangerous animals that no brown bear would stand a chance of killing, not even by ambush. This difference in ability makes a huge difference in a serious fight between a male tiger and male brown bear. The next part to this post will be about the big difference in experience, qualities, and physical ability (killing prowess & feats) between tigers and bears. And how this usually affects the outcome of a serious fight between a male tiger and male brown bear. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 130 Guest(s) |