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)
|
I can't see why it should be rediculous to ask a question, when I thought it looked like balls, and ofc a photagapher could be wrong sometimes. if I had not been for that this tiger seemed to have balls I would also think it was a tigress right away, but if Kanwar says it's a female I think so too. also it was never that I did not belive you.
 (05-20-2015, 12:50 AM)'Pantherinae' Wrote: I can't see why it should be rediculous to ask a question, when I thought it looked like balls, and ofc a photagapher could be wrong sometimes. if I had not been for that this tiger seemed to have balls I would also think it was a tigress right away, but if Kanwar says it's a female I think so too. also it was never that I did not belive you.Its ridiculous to deny the fact that he already said it was a "female of course" as well as posting a blurry blown up image that really shows nothing. Its fine to make mistakes with identification, I am as guilty of it as anybody, but if the photographer gives you their word, than you have to take it over your own belief. I had to do the same in regards to the Gaur that was killed by a tigress and Cubs. I swore it was a cow and guate swore it was a bull and few others, I asked the photographer and it turned out to be a Bull. I had to accept that I was wrong and move forward. If anything it just goes to show you how monstrous Kaziranga tigers are in general, female or male.
well it's not rediculous, and it should ofcoures be allowed to say "are you sure?", but silly discussion it's a tigress if Kanwar say's so end of storry.
(05-20-2015, 01:23 AM)'Pantherinae' Wrote: well it's not rediculous, and it should ofcoures be allowed to say "are you sure?", but silly discussion it's a tigress if Kanwar say's so end of storry. No, freedom to debate is fine and appreciated. Showing a blurry image that is blown up and obviously no way to make out what you're looking at to back your point is the part that seems ridicolous to me and I'm sure to the photographer who took it. 
A - RUSSIAN AMUR TIGER DOCUMENTARIES
1 - Radio-collars (on the way young adult Amur tigers establish themselves - about 22 minutes) This documentary, although not recent, is interesting in more than one way. What I saw, indicated it is about young adults trying to establish themselves: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1JQiIf43cQ 2 - Camera traps (male Amur tiger climbing a tree - about 0:30) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8i8kIK5u2Y 3 - Tracks in the snow (how to distinguish between tracks of animals in the snow - about 16 minutes) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bMe8KY2Xmk B - AMUR TIGERS FEATURING IN A RUSSIAN MOVIE Some years ago, I saw a photograph of a fight between an Amur tiger and a wild boar. The one who posted the photograph wrote he had it from a Russian movie. I recently found the film quite by accident. It isn't about Amur tigers, but they feature in some parts of it. The fight (between what turned out to be a tigress and a big boar) most probably was staged (at 52:00-53:00), but there are other parts with Amur tigers and they could be wild animals. One of the males (at 1:04:00-1:05:00) is similar to a typical northern India tiger (long, tall, athletic and well built), but not as heavy. I saw the entire movie, but there is of course another way to get to the parts in which Amur tigers feature: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0tT3wERte8
ABOUT A FIGHT BETWEEN TWO BULLS, ONE OF WHICH WAS A TIGER - I
a - THE TERAI In the last weeks op April and the first weeks of May (2015), at least 750 of people died in India. The reason is heat. In many parts in central, eastern and southern India, the temperature exceeds 45 degrees Celsius. It's so hot, that people are adviced to stay inside. A century ago, it wasn't different. Just before the monsoon starts (April, May and June), many parts of India are dry and hot. This was the reason hill stations in the Himalayas were very popular in those days. Those stationed in the north wrote the Himalayan winter, climatewise, compared to an English spring. The strip just south of the Himalayas, also known as the Terai, was about 100-150 miles from north to south and well over a 1000 more from west to east. The part just south of Nepal was most popular. The Terai had a lot of variation. From north to south, you had the elevated stations. Although this part had a few forests, most of the country was quite barren. The lower you got, the more extended the forests became. Pine forests at first, but the Terai was especially known for the extended sal forests. They stretched for many miles and always attracted a lot of animals. And then there were the bamboos and long grasses. Wet parts of the Terai always had herbivores. Large animals. They in turn attracted large carnivores. Tigers were seen at high altitudes every now and then, but the sal forests always had many more. Large animals they were, but not quite as large as those inhabiting the part with the bamboos and the long grasses. In order to get to them, you needed to contact Col. Hathi. Elephants were a 'must' if you was interested in tigers. After they were caught, elephants took a lot of training and they also needed a lot of care. For this reason, they didn't come cheap. If we add transport and stay usually was a costly affair as well, the conclusion is you needed to have a job in northern India to get a sporting chance to contact stripes. All this to say that those who hunted tigers in the Terai usually lived in northern India (Corbett and Hewett). If not, they had friends who invited them. The book that features in this post was written by someone who had relatives and friends up north. b - G.H. KNOWLES Meet George Knowles, who, about a century ago, lived in India for about 30 years. Knowles was a writer by profession, so it seems. He contributed to different magazins (like 'The Cornhill Magazine' and 'The Tatler') and was well known in those days. Knowles liked the outdoors. A naturalist, one could say. Hunting was on the list as well, but it definitely didn't come first. In spite of that, he too shot every now and then. It was almost unavoidable in those days. If you had friends in India and they, like you, were interested in wild places, you were bound to be invited for a shoot sooner or later. And another. They had plenty of clubs in those days, but many preferred to be out in the open at every possible opportunity. Knowles, so it seems, moved from shoot to shoot. He always had his camera close at hand, but also made notes whenever possible. Notes about experiences and incidents that most probably would evoke quite a bit of frowning today. Some notes developed into short stories. Quite a few of them were published in magazins, but not all. At some stage, he decided to use them for a book. The book was published in 1932. In 2007, a reprint was published by Natraj Publishers. Here's a scan:  *This image is copyright of its original author c - SECRETS OF THE JUNGLE The book has 320 pages and 24 stories, all but a few based on his own experiences. Those not based on his own experience were told by friends. One could say Knowles' book is about wildlife and be right, but one could just as well say the book is dedicated to good old India. One of the stories, 'Secrets of the jungle', is based on a conversation with a man called Diggs. While waiting for a tiger Diggs had been following for quite some time (on a machan), Knowles takes out his notebook, a pencil and a camera: " ... What in the name of worthy Shakes the cow driver, have you brought out all this vast paraphernalia for ... ", Diggs demanded. Knowles explained and Diggs replied it was back luck. Pure imagination, Knowles said. No imagination about it, Diggs said seriously: " ... I've proved it to my satisfaction anyhow! There are certain things in life that, if they are at all predetermined, immediately work by contrarieties. The old adage 'Man proposes but the Almighty disposes', was not handed down for nothing. Nature works in ways inexplicable to us so far, ..., and often carries out this law to the letter; and in the jungles, by some unknown law of universal intelligence, ..., Nature awakens this latent, prognostic instinct of the lower creatures, when a preconceived intention connected with them, is working in the brain of man, for any purpose whatsoever ... " (pp. 224). Knowles said Diggs was touching upon metaphysics, but for Diggs it was different: " ... I laid stress, ..., on preconceived intention. I believe that wonderful things exist and are possible in nature; that all animals are perfect clayrvoyants, with a far greater second sight - ruled by some inherent principle of truth of which we haven't the barest notion - than ever man was possessed with. And, that great force or truth might be some parts of the fourth dimension that scientists imagine they have a clue to ... " (pp. 224). Not quite clear? Here's more: " ... Man's mentality, ..., for some set purpose, has always been differently constituted. Reason with him takes first place - it is the first sight, with result that the powers of his second sense have been proportionalle suppressed. With the animals, it's just the opposite. What we call instinct, has in it something deeper. I could give you innumerable instances of uncanny cleverness ... " (pp. 225). Diggs, regarding the tiger they were waiting for, was to be proven right. It wasn't the only time. All in all, the book is loaded with stories that would come under 'uncanny'. So much so, that one could decide against posting them. I mean, there are so many that would dismiss these stories right away. I, for one, do not. When I am close to animals like big cats, I probably act in the same way Diggs would have. Remember that was well before I read Knowles' book. The reason? There are people who feel like Diggs and those who work with captive animals and studied or hunted wild big cats in particular. Most of today's biologists, on the other hand, have a different way of thinking and acting. They have to, they think. To be continued.
@peter
I know its probably time consuming, but i'd be interested in how you interpret yourself and "diggs" ideology when it comes to what you're speaking about. I find it interesting "" ... Man's mentality, ..., for some set purpose, has always been differently constituted. Reason with him takes first place" I like this quote Also, I have a question in regards to book recommendations, Do you or any others have any book recommendations in regards to hunters/biologist/naturalist who have first hand accounts of both lions and tigers in the wild, how they compare etc? Thanks Pckts\ dateline='\'1432674752' Wrote: @peter INSTINCT IN HUMANS The 'ideology' of Diggs was explained best in the quotes I used. Read them again. Diggs said actions of animals often are based on instinct (or second sight). Humans rely on reason, whereas animals often rely on instinct. The question is what instinct is. When you read everything there is, the conclusion is 'instinct' relates to something most of us heard about, but do not quite understand. Because of a lack of understanding, we are not able to grasp it. A few examples. Those who hunted man-eaters and lived to write about their experiences relied on instinct. They often described it as the sixth sense. A sense that can be trained, they said. I agree to an extent. If you are a specialist in some field and get to a level that can't be trained, you can trigger it at times. Good musicians say 'it' is in the air. You just got to grab it. Although most of us, if not all, have 'it', only very few are aware of it, let alone they are able to use it. Those that can, know how to do it but they can't do it on command. It could be one needs others. At times, these 'others' are with you (collegues, team members or a loved one) and at times they oppose (hunt) you. This also means the sixth sense isn't something that belongs to an (exceptional) individual. It is always there, but can be triggered in certain conditions only. Most often by those who know about it and are prepared to accept the risk. If you are prepared to accept the risk, however, you really take a risk. The reason is 'it' doesn't belong to individuals. It isn't there to help you when you ask for it. INSTINCT IN ANIMALS Wheras humans rely on reason, training, experience and skill, animals rely on something else. Diggs described it as second sight, but it could be something different. Those who work with animals and those who lived close to them or hunted them know it is very real. An example. I've been to wild places, because I like them. I also like animals. The reason is I feel related to them. For this reason, I also 'know' they will not molest humans. Only few, as a result of special conditions, would be prepared to come for you and when they are, you will 'know'. And the other way round. One day, when in Sweden, the weather was too bad to go out. The one accomoding us in his hotel (the same one who rented canoes) took my brother to a shooting range. He could, because he was a pro (police). My brother had never fired a gun, but I 'knew' he was a marksman. And so it was. A few days later, the weather cleared and we returned to wild Sweden. In the two weeks that followed, we didn't see animals. Not one. My brother was at a loss, because our camp had been visited by them all days before. A wolf did, a brown bear did, an elk did, a roedeer did (and even swam with me) and countless smaller animals did. They had no fear. The situation changed the moment my brother tested his skills at the shooting range. That's why I told him not to go. Another example. Sweden again. One year later. The animals had forgotten about it (I'm sure they recognized us). They again visited our camp. We talked about it. My brother didn't understand it and also didn't believe a word of what I said. He asked me to convince him. I said ok, but he would see no more animals from then on. Fine, he said. I changed my attitude and we saw no more animals. He didn't like it one bit, but I couldn't return to the old situation. Once a thief, always a thief. You got to get out of the situation, 'clean' yourself and return when you are only a visitor. TRAINING No believe? Try it at home. With those you know to start with. Convince yourself you despise someone you know well, but never ever show it. When you see him or her, treat him like you always do. Show warmth. Be nice. Go out. Touch. But in most cases he or she will know and tell you at some stage. This is how it operates in humans. Animals are way better at it. There's no comparison. When you like and respect them, they will know. Captivity or no captivity. The moment it changes, they will also know and act accordingly. Test it. When you know they trust you, change your attitude. No gun needed. Try to get close to them. You won't succeed. They will get close to you. INTENTION The key word is intention. Animals, and wild animals in particular, know all about it. Humans, although amateurs compared to them, also know. The problem is they often don't know they know, meaning they are not aware of their attitude and the consequences. If a row erupts somewhere 'unexpectedly', they don't understand. But they should. The point is it is difficult to learn how to recognize, train and control forces that affect relations (of any kind). This is what Diggs was referring to. In wild India, you could carry a gun for protection a century ago. The moment you intend to use it, however, the animals will know. The trick is to go out there with a gun and enjoy the things you see. You are allowed to defend yourself, but you can't hunt. The animals will know. That's why a confirmed wild predator, a true specialist like a leopard or tiger, is so good at what he or she does. We have no idea about their real skills. It also works the other way round. When someone doesn't like you, you will 'feel' it, no matter how friendly he or she is. Same for animals. Nature isn't paradise. Some animals just don't like people. Others perhaps were injured in a fight and feel like revenge. Many have bad experiences with humans. They might try to get even at some stage. But you can learn to 'read' them, even if you can't see them. CONCLUSIONS - The sixth sense There's no question both humans and animals have access to forces usually hidden under 'instinct'. Some of these can be explained in a rational way, but others can't. Those who used it were convinced the sixth sense was (is) as real as it comes. The question is how to discover, train, use and develop it. Although it could compare to a kind of sonar in situations too complex to describe, it doesn't serve the individual who uses it all the time. It could depend on what was described as intention, meaning it only functions when it doesn't benefit one party only. Maybe those not out to kill don't send messages all the time. Contacts between predators and prey animals could be more strongly affected by intuition (or instinct) than we think. Experienced predators seem to be much restricted as a result and, for that reason, often use those parts of their territory they haven't visited in some time. One could say they, trying to evade the intuition of prey animals, use 'surprise' in more than one way. It says a lot that these specialists, in spite of the counters of prey animals, survived and developed for hundreds of thousands of years. Humans often have no idea about the real skills of these specialists. - An open mind Our planet is a miracle. Same for the creatures inhabiting it. Although we think we've seen it all, we probably only scratched the surface. There are many skills we are not aware of, let alone use them. Maybe we, as suggested in very old books, really could be a bit special in some respects, but in order to get to that level, we need to expand our horizon in more than one way and act on it. The first thing to do is to understand there are more senses than those we use. If we keep using the old senses, we will keep running in circles. - The sixth sense and the military My guess is every creature is equipped with forces yet to be discovered. If true, they could be stronger than anything else. The only ones really interested, apart from a few freaks and those interested in (the revenues of selling) courses, faith and books about other 'dimensions', are the military. The reason is some of the unknown forces could shut down things we consider as invincible. They apparently think it could be true. This should tell you something. - Animals If we want to know a bit more, we need to study animals. Not in a laboratory, but in wild places, where they live in more or less natural conditions. Today, wild places are few and far between. This is the reason I read them old books. Way more interesting than studies of those who mean well, but have no clue as to things that (in my opinion) really matter. Animals, although unable to play the fiddle and build a battleship, are not inferior. Far from it. - Machines When I say our world has become a very flat one, I mean we are getting ever more focussed on zilch. As long as we keep relying on the old and trusted senses, we will keep running in circles, meaning humans will concentrate on power. The power to dominate others. It will inevitably result in struggles time and again. Every time a war erupts, the destruction is more impressive. One day, we will blow ourselves into oblivion. A black hole? Sure. But it isn't in space. It right here, in front of our eyes. This time, it's illustrated through machines. Most of us already are addicted to them. Many do not seem to realize they are erasing themselves. The development will result in not being able to write, count and think in some time. It will result in parodies on humans able to operate the machines that will replace them. Way cheaper. Before that happens, they will be tracked, played and exploited. - Respect Modern man regards those who developed the world we live in with disdain. They couldn't measure a big cat, they couldn't count and in their books they came up with all kinds of silly stories about incidents a modern scientist would never ever even contemplate. Everything is dismissed if not treated in a way that would evoke the respect of the most cynical in history. It is a crying shame, but there's not much we can do about it. Arrogance has no limits. - Our forum This forum is a place for those without a voice. We have, however, to remember animals talk all the time. It's up to us to listen and report on what we hear. You do today and I will concentrate on books written a long time ago, when forests still covered half of our planet and animals acted as they did without fear of being apprehended, sentenced, imprisoned or executed. I also read some books of people who got lost in wild places. Some of the survivors reported on what they experienced. I will create a thread for them soon.
" A sense that can be trained, they said. I agree to an extent. If you are a specialist in some field and get to a level that can't be trained, you can trigger it at times. Good musicians say 'it' is in the air. You just got to grab it. Although most of us, if not all, have 'it', only very few are aware of it, let alone they are able to use it. Those that can, know how to do it but they can't do it on command. It could be one needs others. At times, these 'others' are with you (collegues, team members or a loved one) and at times they oppose (hunt) you. This also means the sixth sense isn't something that belongs to an (exceptional) individual. It is always there, but can be triggered in certain conditions only. Most often by those who know about it and are prepared to accept the risk. If you are prepared to accept the risk, however, you really take a risk. The reason is 'it' doesn't belong to individuals. It isn't there to help you when you ask for it."
I couldn't agree with this statement more. Well said and written, i think this holds so true to those that have expierenced being in the "zone" or "on fire" when associating with sports for instance. You cannot maintain this "sixth sense" only grab it for a moment and try to take full advantage of it while you have it.
ABOUT A FIGHT BETWEEN TWO BULLS, ONE OF WHICH WAS A TIGER - II
d - The Lame Ghost Bull This is the real title of the story that features in this post. It is quite a story. Knowles, most unfortunately, didn't add dates in his book, but he was in India for about 30 years. As his book was published in 1932, I assume he was in India somewhere between 1900-1930. My guess is the story happened between 1920-1930. d1 - Location The incident took place in the extreme north of the Bahraich district, some seventy or eightly miles from the first low range of the Himalayas. Bahraich was one of the most northern jungle districts of the old province of Oudh which had Lucknow as its capital. In those days (a century ago), most of the district was covered with extensive forests. Knowles, his brother Col. J.K., an Opium Officer and his guest joined a Christmas party arranged by the Deputy Commissioner of Bahraich. The Charda camp for which they were bound lay just two miles south of the Nepal frontier. d2 - How did they travel in India a century ago? For long journeys, the train was used. At the station where you left the train, the equipment needed for the shoot (tent, food and drinks) was loaded on to a bullock cart and taken to the camp that was selected. This usually took one or two days. In the twenties of the last century, the visitors, usually not the deprived, used their car to get to within 10 miles of the camp selected. In northern India and Nepal, elephants were used to get to the camp. In this story, they had five guns and four elephants. - The cars used in the story:  *This image is copyright of its original author - A buffalo cart:  *This image is copyright of its original author - One of the elephants:  *This image is copyright of its original author - An encampment in the sub-Himalayan forests:  *This image is copyright of its original author d3 - The deserted village Before going to Charda Camp, it was decided to visit a small village deep in the forest. The reason was the village, inhabited by a jungle tribe known as the 'Tharoos', had been deserted. As the 'Tharoos' seemed to have disappeared completely, the Deputy Commissioner decided a visit was necessary. Before they started, they talked to the forest guards and their chief 'chikarri'. They strongly adviced against a trip to the village. Here's why. d4 - The lame Ghost Bull The deserted village was surrounded by primeval forest and wild cattle. Nearly all bulls of the wild herd had been killed by the giant lame Ghost Bull. He wasn't really a bull, but a ghost. In this case it was the soul of a high caste Brahmin who, twenty years before the story happened, desired to possess the power of raising the dead. He studied the necessary magic under a very holy Ascetic and was, in due course, ordered to go out and practise among the untouchables. In this story, the untouchables were the Chandala. One day, a Chandala died and was trown away, to be devoured by the jackals. The Brahmin came to where the body was lying and commenced his incantations. He succeeded in resuscitating one half of the body (the entire length of one side) when he, in sudden terror, forgot the rest of the holy formulas. Panick-stricken, the Brahmin bolted, but he was followed by the shuffling body of the half alive Chandala calling out after him " ... halfdone, underdone, undone ... " (pp. 314). The miserable Brahmin fled from city to city, but could not get away from the awful shuffling sound and terrible cry of the wretched apparition. In the end, he fled to the jungle and found his way to the deserted village last year. The poor village people heard his prayers to the great God, Vishnu (the Protector), who granted him death and transmigration; his soul passing into one of the living bulls of the wild herd, for protection from the Chandala. Soon after this, the apparition arrived at the village crying out " ... half-done, underdone, undone ... ". The village people heard his prayers to the great God Siva (the Destroyer), who changed the Chandala into the dreaded lame Ghost Bull, twice as large as the biggest bull of the wild herd and many times as fierce. The mighty limping Ghost Bull emitted deafening bellows every day. By the mandate of the great God of Siva, the herd of wild cattle had to respond and, therefore, always had to send a bull to dispute the leadership of the mighty lame Ghost Bull. Nearly every second day, a bull of the herd was slain by the monster bull. By calling out all the bulls, the Ghost Bull will eventually meet his enemy and the fight would be momentous: a struggle between the great Vishnu the Protector and Siva the Destroyer. Fearing the battle, the villagers, led by a priest send out to find them, had deserted the village. d5 - To the deserted village After listening to the story, the Deputy Commissioner, Knowles, his brother, the Opium Officer and his guest decided to send the buffalo cart and the elephants to Charda camp and visit the deserted village without local help. In the two cars at their disposal, they slowly covered the distance to the village. After two hours of hard work they reached a large open space covered with grass two or three feet high: this probably was the place where the deserted village had been. The village had been deserted before the start of the monsoon. It was December when Knowles and the others arrived at the place where the village had been. In about 6 months, the grass had grown to a height of 2-3 feet. They saw and heard nothing. Relieved, they poured themselves a fresh beer and talk about the relation between poor people and superstition. Then they suddenly hear a thunderous bellow. Not more than 50 or 60 yards from their cars, they see the grass violently shaken and dust coming up. But no matter how hard they look, there is no bull! Totally flabberghasted, the incident they just saw with their own eyes is discussed. An invisible bull? But they were not the only ones who heard him. Suddenly, from the opposite direction, a monster bull comes out of the jungle: " ... On comes the brute shaking his enormous curved horns, and stopping every ten paces to lower his great head and bellow! At each such demonstration, a cloud of dust rises up to screen him for a few seconds. We bend low under the cover of some bushes and curving grass in the front of the cars, utterly bewildered, and watch the huge bull walk right up to the spot from which the original challenge first came thundering out. But there is no fierce opponent to meet him! A dead silence prevails, and the huge bull stands with his head erect and nostrils expanded, apparently as much surprised and puzzled as we are ... " (pp. 318-319). Just when the Opium Officer understood the situation and informed the others to be ready to shoot, they saw " ... an enormous elongated form ... " emerge from the low grass and two mighty paws " ... hugging the thick-set neck of the monster bull, whose great horned head is suddenly thrown up, and he falls forward with a deep groan. The next instant, a great striped animal with a gigantic cat's head gives a clear view of formidable bulging shoulders, and a volley rushes out immediately ... " (pp. 319). The Opium Officer, an experienced hunter, said he had seen tigers imitate sambar and cheetal calls, but he had never heard of a tiger imitating and challenging a bull before:  *This image is copyright of its original author d6 - Conclusion Five experienced hunters witnessed a large male tiger call and challenge a 'monster bull' with a 'thick-set neck' close to the Nepal border. The bull answered the challenge and was killed in an instant. Broken neck. It happened in broad daylight. You probably remember the post I did on B. Berg. Berg wrote about a very large buffalo-killing tiger ('The Killer of Men') close to the Bhutan border. The 'Killer of Men' only killed the largest bulls. Berg saw many bulls with broken necks and was convinced it wasn't 'collateral damage'. This is the second time I read about a large male tiger who used this technique. I would get to confirmation. The source is as reliable as it comes: Knowles and the others saw what happened with their own eyes. Unfortunately, Knowles didn't add photographs to the story. For this reason, I decided to finish the post with two photographs (taken by B. Berg) posted before:  *This image is copyright of its original author  *This image is copyright of its original author
Hi @peter.
Searching for data, I found this image between my archives. I remember that you posted it, and as the resolution is very low, I ask you if you have it at a higher resolution in order to view the measurements, specially those of the tiger, the leopards and the buffaloes:  *This image is copyright of its original author From advance, thanks. [img]images/smilies/smile.gif[/img]
1 - THE SCAN
The Godavari male tiger, PC, wasn't 5.9, but 9.9 (head and body 6.6 and tail 3.0). The scan is ok, but the original is old, hence the unclear numbers. The scale used (a 300-lbs. Salter's Spring Balance) was tested before and after use and found to be accurate. One of the male leopards, at 7.11 in total length (tail 35 inches or 2.11), was 115 lbs. This is the longest in head and body (5.0) I know of. 2 - THE METHOD USED The question is if the felines were measured 'between pegs' or 'over curves'. I bought 'Tigers of the Raj - the Shikar diaries of Col. R.W. Burton, 1894-1949'. This book was first published in 1987 and is largely based on the diaries of Col. R.W. Burton. The diaries were edited by family members, who decided to use them for a book. Any information about the table in the previous post or the animals mentioned? Yes. 3 - THE BOOK The book is 'Tigers of the Raj - the Shikar Diaries of Col. R.W. Burton, 1894-1949' (Alan Sutton Publishing, Gloucester, 1987). In Chapter 6 ('The Jungles of Jeypore, tigers and bears') a trip to the Godavary River in December 1912 and January 1913 is described. In his diary, Burton wrote: " ... All the tigers in this Jeypore country are potential man-killers and readily take to man if they meet him after dark ... " (pp. 42). A little later, he wrote: " ... News came of a big tiger which had recently killed several people along the Poteru river to the north, so I decided to move camp to Lachipeta ... " (pp. 42). And: " ... The tiger killed a buffalo on the very night of my arrival at Lachipeta. I sat up for him in the machan, and with the moon at full took one shot ... " (pp. m42-43). The tiger was shot when he returned to the buffalo kill. After the shot, the tiger disappeared. They found him next morning: " ... The tracks were followed up and the tiger was found fifty yards from where fired at, having evidently died within a very few minutes. He was very large and would have measured 10 ft. between pegs if measured immediately after death. This was the tiger who killed five people within the last three months. His left upper canine tooth was broken off short and had a deep cavity full of maggots which looked very painful. A bullit was found embedded in the muscles of the lower jaw on the same side, behind the last molar. It seemed to be the base of a .500 hollow point bullit - a most dangerous form of projectile to use. His tootache accounted for his having eaten so little of his kill, only one hind leg in 24 hours. No doubt he was waiting for it to get soft ... " (pp. 43). Anything else on tigers and leopards in this part of India? Yes: " ... All the panthers of these parts are said to be of this small size (referring to a 6.7 panther of 72 lbs. he shot on February 6, 1913), and the tigers all seem to be extra big (there was another very large tiger in the district he was hunting). 4 - THE HIMALAYAN BEAR In the table, Burton referred to a big Himalayan bear of 387 lbs. The animal was shot in Chakrata, where bears were considered dangerous as a rule by the local people. On pp. 51, there is a footnote about the bear, who was killed with one bullit through the back of the neck. The bear had been hunted and shot just before he was killed by Burton. He had bullits in the shoulder and the jaw. 5 - CONCLUSIONS 1 - The tiger mentioned in the table had been shot before he was killed by Burton. He had a bullit in the muscles of the left side of the lower jaw, just behind the last molar. The left upper canine was broken off short and full of maggots. My guess is the canine had been damaged by the bullit as well. 2 - The tiger was a confirmed man-eater who killed and ate at least five humans in three months. 3 - The tiger was measured perhaps 8-12 hours after he had been killed. If he would have been measured immediately after death, he, Burton thought, would have been 10 feet 'between pegs'. About half a day after he was shot, the tiger measured 9.9 'between pegs' and weighed 416 lbs. Hewett, Berg and others confirmed that a tiger measured half a day or so after he was shot usually is 2-3 (closer to 3) inches shorter than when measured immediately after death. The shrinking is a result of rigor mortis. 4 - According to Burton, the tiger had " ... eaten so little of his kill ... " because of a wound. Burton thought the tiger, as a result of the wound and the pain, was unable to eat a fresh kill. The relatively low weight, therefore, could have been a result of the inability to eat properly. 5 - The conclusion is the tiger was measured 'between pegs'. As the scales used to weigh the tiger were accurate and the tiger wasn't gorged (far from it), the weight is reliable as well. 6 As to his fitness. As a result of a severe and painful wound, the tiger probably was unable to eat properly. Although he didn't starve, chances are the tiger was far from fit. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 17 Guest(s) |