WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Terrestrial Wild Animals
›
Wild Cats
›
Tiger
White, Black & Golden Tigers
White, Black & Golden Tigers
|
White, Black & Golden Tigers
|
 (07-15-2014, 01:42 AM)'tigerluver' Wrote: Pckts, I disagree with your view point to let the white genes just disappear when saving them with my preposition won't hurt. We killed off the genes, we better fix it, natural or not.Once again, nobody ever said, "let them disapear" 2ndly there is absolutely 0 proof of any of the white tiger genes being killed off. No wild tigers have been taken from any area and studied, no genetics have been carried out on any. Not only that, you would have to test every single tiger that is walking the earth to try and say that the white gene is "killed off" Since that has obviously not happened, there is no way to tell. I am very confused by this view point, if you truly loves these cats, how can you possibly think that human interference and selective genetic manipulation is in the best interest of the cat? 
The modern tiger genome is very, very small compared to what once was. Clearly, if in recent time no white tiger has been produced, there are no heterozygous specimens left. Sometimes you just have to infer the present situation, no scholarly article necessary. Thus, probability is that the white gene is killed off. Tigers do not reproduce in high enough for that mutation to occur as often as it did, so it's not coming back either.
Secondly, there is plenty of proof of white tigers existing in the wild, but you keep denying with the explanation of being skeptical. Corbett is a legitamate, reliable figure. He even has a picture to backup his claims. Hoaxing images in his time wasn't easy, if at all possible. Furthermore, there have been artistic renditions of snow white and striped white tigers in the previous centuries to support other text accounts. Would you think anyone at the time would say they saw a stripeless tiger if they hadn't really seen one? Tigers were considered a striped beast exclusively back then. The overskepticism of old accounts bugs me. With the logic you applied to Corbett, the giant fossils of the Ngandong tiger (1933), Cromerian lion (1908), and American lion (1932) must be lies as the repsective naturalists only described the specimens in text. Our modern knowledge has been built off of these past naturalists. What's to say modern scientists don't fabricate or exaggerate data any less than they could have? I've seen more instances of modern data being skew than data from the last centuries. Finally, you question my love for cats, which is flat out unnecessary. Tell me, how does outbreeding the white gene hurt the population? You're taking an extreme approach and not listening to any of the evidence Guate or I discuss. Tigers in captivity are genetically controlled and manipulated. That why zoos send off their specimens all over the world, to outbreed them. If we let "nature" takes it course then we'd have even more inbred specimens in these captive facilities. The defects in white tigers are the products of inbreeding, not the white gene as Guate mentioned. Outbreeding the heterzygous regular tigers not only saves the gene and the health of the future white specimens, but increases the tigers' genetic variation. So, in the process of zoos sending off their specimens to each other to outbreed, we'd get a natural white specimen occasionaly when heterzygous regular tigers are matched. Supporting Guate's final statement. Nature isn't recovering on its own, especially in today's situation. If you don't want the right people to interfere, then sit back and watch it all disappear.
You cannot say "the modern tiger genome is very, very small compared to what it once was"
You have no proof to compare what it "was" Since there has been only one tiger every brought back from the wild with the white gene. "Secondly, there is plenty of proof of white tigers existing in the wild, but you keep denying with the explanation of being skeptical" Why do you keep misquoting me? I specifically said, white tigers do occur in the wild, hence Mohan. I also specifically said there is no real proof of any white tiger making it to adulthood. If the Gaute or Peter have a clear image of the Tiger, I would be more than happy to look at. It would of been posted right here, btw. "The overskepticism of old accounts bugs me. With the logic you applied to Corbett, the giant fossils of the Ngandong tiger (1933), Cromerian lion (1908), and American lion (1932) must be lies as the repsective naturalists only described the specimens in text. Our modern knowledge has been built off of these past naturalists. What's to say modern scientists don't fabricate or exaggerate data any less than they could have? I've seen more instances of modern data being skew than data from the last centuries." Are you comparing fossils to the claim of a white tiger mother? What kind of logic is that? 2ndly this is not about prehistoric cats, this is about modern white tigers, so one has nothing to do with the other. " Finally, you question my love for cats, which is flat out unnecessary. Tell me, how does outbreeding the white gene hurt the population? You're taking an extreme approach and not listening to any of the evidence Guate or I discuss." Please clarify for me, what evidence have You presented? And 100% I think and tons of biologists, scientists etc.. all believe that human interference is absolutely wrong for any wild animal. The only time humans ever need to "assist" is after they have caused the damage. -Poachers -Oil Spill -fire -deforestation etc.. Even when humans interfere to help injured cats like the lion who was injured by the buffalo, or the Machli being fed by the guards, that is wrong. Nature is about survival of the fittest, not about helping specific cats that drive revenue. When machli dies, we will be sad, but there will be another tigress who will capture our hearts. Just like Charger or B2, or bamera and Waghdoh or any of the up and comers. "Supporting Guate's final statement. Nature isn't recovering on its own, especially in today's situation. If you don't want the right people to interfere, then sit back and watch it all disappear." Again, this is not true. Ranthambhore has seen a baby boom this year, kodiak bears have been put on population control, GWS have made a huge comeback, Many whale species, infact, numbers for most animals put on the endangered species list, meaning Humans cannot hunt them (notice humans being the cause of the death) have made huge comebacks. Every single animal that lives and thrived somewhere can still continue to do so if................... They are protected from humans. That is the only thing they need. Wild fires will occur, flooding will occur etc... they will survive it all and thrive. Just like they have done for 100s of 1000s of years.
" Tell me, how does outbreeding the white gene hurt the population"
How does genetically manipulating tiger genes to create captive tigers hurt a population? They offer no advantage to any wild tiger, its also going to cause the resident tigers to compete with even more tigers in areas that are becoming more and more populated already. It will increase poaching that will now want to catch a man made white tiger. Then lets look at the fact that these man made white tigers will now be used to human contanct, and make them selves more accessable to human beings, easy to poach and possible more dangerous to villagers because of their lack of fear of humans. The list goes on and on....
"Less than one percent of the more than 2,000 plants and animals protected by the Act worldwide have ever been formerly delisted due to extinction – an astonishing success rate. The Endangered Species Act also benefits people by maintaining healthy natural systems that provide us with clean air and water, food, medicines and other products that we all need to live healthy lives. We owe it to our children and grandchildren to be good stewards of the environment and leave behind a legacy of protecting endangered species and the special places they call home."
http://www.defenders.org/endangered-spec...pecies-act Like I said, nature always finds a way. Just get out of the way and let it do what its been doing for long before we ever evolved and long after we are gone.
The proof of the adult white tigress is right there in front of you, and you're denying it. Here, the fault is your's, not Guate's or mine's.
Giant fossils and a white tiger, both extreme oddities that can bring those who find them a good reputation. If you fail to see the link, ask, instead of attacking the proposition. You're answer to my question of how heterozygous regular specimens hurt a population is that you want evidence of my proposition. You dodge the question, we both don't have concrete evidence. You presented a faulty argument. An increase in tiger population when numbers are already low is bad? Furthermore, I said have heterzygous specimens at hand. They're regular colored. They have a larger gene pool, that is an advantage you are overlooking. Why are you jumping to the idea of just letting out some captive white tigers in the wild? I never said that. Even then, a white tiger or two popping here and there will increase poaching? So they'll start shooting orange tigers hoping one of them turns white? Poachers are ignorant, but not that much. The human contact part, what do you mean? If human contact is such a problem, let's end the captive breeding programs. Ecotourism is a big part in conservation. To save animals, we need money. I see your point that we should let it be. We should and we want to, but the rest of mankind won't. That is a utopian society that will never exist as long as humans are on the planet. The people on this forum are a dying breed. Society is too busy with skyscrapers and the bright lights to leave the trees alone. The white genes shouldn't be a focus in tiger conservation, but if worst comes to worst, it'd be beneficial to have heterzygous specimens at hand. (07-15-2014, 03:43 AM)'tigerluver' Wrote: The proof of the adult white tigress is right there in front of you, and you're denying it. Here, the fault is your's, not Guate's or mine's. What PROOF?? A black and white blurry image that you can not even make out a silhoute of a tiger, let alone a face, eyes, ears, nose, fur color, etc????? Good lord, come on. That's ridicolous. 100% we should end "captive breeding programs" That is with out question. Not a single tiger from Harbin's "captive breeding program" has ever been released in the wild. Generate money like how they are doing, safaris increased protection to the animals, camera traps to better locate prime locations to spot animals and get real # 's on these big cats. Lastly, I do not share your bleak outlook on mankind. I think over all, humans have shown a increase in compassion and understanding of our needs to survive and how we are tied in to nature, every single on of us. Look at the tons of electric cars sold now, increased protected lands for big cats, endangered animals coming back from the brink of extinction. It is a slow process, but that doesn't mean it isn't happening right in front of us. Look at how much man has changed since the time of Alexander all the way until the time of massive hunting till now. Look how far we have come, think about the massive amounts of new education we have at the tip of our fingers, the internet is so young and has completely changed the world. It will only open more peoples eyes for years to come. Have faith, we will get there one day. I firmly believe that.
"You're answer to my question of how heterozygous regular specimens hurt a population is that you want evidence of my proposition. You dodge the question"
What question are you asking? I have already stated numerous times that the interfernce of humans to wild animals is the cause of their demise. This of course is backed by the numerous endangered species list, which of course I clearly used to correct you when you said nature needs human interference to survive. In which i said the only human interfernce it needs is protection from other humans. I proceeded to talk about population growth, territorial fighting, poacher increase, as well as man made tigers that would not even be wild. The list goes on and on, which I already stated. I will never "dodge" a question, and I am the one providing proof to back my claims. You are simply arguing against it while not providing any new evidence to back whatever you are trying to say. Telling me that one blurry black n white picture that is undistinguishable is proof? I will not agree with you on that, ever.
The image stands with Corbett's reliable testimony. That is proof. We'll never agree here, as you are skeptical of Corbett.
You should know that the captive breeding I refer to is surely not Harbin. That's insulting. Harbin is a tiger farm. The programs I refer are those that brought the przewalski's horse back, the Smithsonian program I work with, those type of reliable, honest to the cause programs. Finally, yes I have a bleak outlook. Hunting is down, it is great. But deforestation is at an all time high. India is doing ok. But you are forgetting the rest of the world. Indonesia is going through deforestation at a rate unmatched. Oil drilling is starting to become a problem, just look at the Virunga dilemma the WWF is trying desperately to salvage. Man's dropped one bad habit just to pick up another. It's not getting better for the most part in third world countries. Take a look at Indonesia as a microcosm: http://www.greengrants.org/programs/area...diversity/ First world countries are poor representations for the rest of the world. I've first hand experience, I'm associated with both first world and third world countries. People could care less when they're financially struggling. The focus in third-world areas is increased roads, railroads, cities. That is their definition of progress. And that's why we are here today in this dilemma. Alas, this is not for this topic, so let's not discuss this point any further. Edit: Simpy reread my post. You are answering with what you think I'm saying, not what I actually am. Read my last point, captive specimens are not a focus. I shouldn't be repeating myself over and over. Then, you disregard my rebuttal to your "evidence" of a poaching increase, etc., which is just propositions as well. What major evidence are you providing other than your opinions? Guate set the stage with tons of evidence, which I'm working off of.
And have any of those programs released a single wild tiger back to its home?
I know of tigers who where injured and nursed back to health, a wild tiger that is still in captivity and that is it. A third world country will be the last to change, countries like china or cuba which won't allow free access to the internet, N. Korea which will arrest you if you oppose its rule, all of those places of course are still backwards. And times are truly dark, but there is light, there is education and more and more people are joining the fight. It 's not going to happen over night, its decades and centuries of work, but I believe it will happen. It has to happen, human being will not survive if our ozone layer is destroyed, radiation from the sun will kill every human and animal a like. Lastly, the "image" goes along with his claim, that is all. And the image shows nothing of a white tiger. That is fact, to say that it is evidence and proof with out a shadow of a doubt, is wrong and dangerous to think like that. Lastly, what rebuttal are you talking about? If a animal is man made, it is not wild, it is captive. It is a science expierement and nothing more.
Also, 1st world countries are the most important, they have the most $ and resources to positively affect the wild. 3rd world countries learn by example since they do not have the means or resources on their own, most of the time.
Before you read anymore, I will repeat myself. Rewilding and white genes in the tigers case should not be a focus at the moment in my opinion. Doesn't mean having a backup plan will hurt. Read on.
In order of how you posted each point: The horse program successfully re-wilded the species. Think more than just about tigers. It's a big world out there. Tigers, fortunately, aren't in the state of that horse. The Smithsonian program is right now breeding a handful of specimens, outbreeding every generation. The Sumatran tigers are quite genetically heathy at the moment. The cubs are quite big as well. Look up Smithsonian tigers, a great read tracking the cubs. The points I am not replying to is because they derail the topic, so don't discuss the third world dilemma anymore with me, please. These captive specimens should not be rushed back into the wild just to meet their demise like the wild specimens are. These specimens just need to be at hand. Look what happened to the northern white rhino. Not enough captive specimens were collected and bred, and extinction inevitable. The human interference I say is needed is the one to counter the intereference by unwelcome humans. There's no choice, we saved the Przewalski's horse and successfully rewilded it thanks to "counter" human interference. That is a fact of life we have to deal with. The tigress is clearly there, I can make out the facial features on top of it being cited by Corbett, who is very reliable. Denying a reliable figure so stubbornly is also quite dangerous. There are other accounts as well. I'll post them later, but, not to debate, but for the information of the people viewing the thread. Let's just agree to disagree. I rebutted your propostions to the ill effects of adding some heterozygous specimens of wild tiger if ever need be here: "You're answer to my question of how heterozygous regular specimens hurt a population is that you want evidence of my proposition. You dodge the question, we both don't have concrete evidence. You presented a faulty argument. An increase in tiger population when numbers are already low is bad? Furthermore, I said have heterzygous specimens at hand. They're regular colored. They have a larger gene pool, that is an advantage you are overlooking. Why are you jumping to the idea of just letting out some captive white tigers in the wild? I never said that. Even then, a white tiger or two popping here and there will increase poaching? So they'll start shooting orange tigers hoping one of them turns white? Poachers are ignorant, but not that much. The human contact part, what do you mean? If human contact is such a problem, let's end the captive breeding programs. Ecotourism is a big part in conservation. To save animals, we need money." The captive Przewalski's horse we had available were much more than a science experiment my friend, they saved a whole species.  (07-14-2014, 10:49 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: Come on Gaute, I am denying nothing. I expect the same out of any claim. I'm sorry, but you said there are images of this tiger, clearer ones, but I have only seen this blurry, black n white image which you can barely make out anything, let a lone a tiger or even the color of the tiger.Sorry Pckts, but you are denying any evidence in favor of the White tigers. You are against the picture just because is not clear, but I stated very well that you (or any other people) can go an search the book "Maneaters of Kumaon" in your library and you will found THE SAME picture in a much clear form. I have the book in a translated version but it doesn’t have any picture, but this digital version show a relative good view of the white tigress, even better, Jim Corbett himself state that it was a white tigress, check the upper image that I post, before the picture. I have found that Dunbar Brander also mentions some accounts of white tigers in the wild, plus the old picture of the Mughals hunting the two white tigers. Peter put that image in the old AVA forum, I am going to search it in my database, it has not only the picture but also the body measurements of the specimen. About the deformities, the document clearly states that the deformities has nothing to do with the white gene, I copy-paste to you the conclusion, what more do you need? Besides, genetic manipulation doesn’t mean that we are going to take tiger DNA in a “Jurassic Park” form. What we need is to know the level or relation between a population, in order to know which specimens are relatives and which no. Then, we most allow breeding only those which are not related and in that form, it will be possible to recover the white gene in a captive population without the inbreeding system. With time and patience, those genes could be introduced into the wild population in the original areas like Central India. As you can see, there is no “genetic manipulation” here, only a well-controlled breeding program, which is the same that the AZA is doing with the pure breed tigers. About the white gene in the wild, check that most of the records of white tigers are around the Central India region, a population that in modern times is highly fragmented and there are no population of over 30 or 40 specimens, NOT interconnected. The panorama is so bad, that there are no hopes, in long term, for all this population, probably at no more than 10 or 20 years if there is no interconnection. Who do you ask that, in this scenario, there will be white tigers at all? It is impossible, simple as it is and there are so much inbreeds right now in the wild, that at this time there should be white tigers in all those places, but they are not. So, the conclusion, based in empiric evidence, suggest that there is no more white tigers genes in the wild. Not saying that there are no white tiger genes over there, but the evidence and the situation itself in the wild completely show otherwise. About the white tiger conservation, NO ONE has said that white tigers need more help than other groups, NO ONE. Where do you get that??? That is very disturbing, you are “creating” words were they are not. The purpose of this conversation was to show that white tigers are (or not) enough important to be conserve, that is all. In ANY moment had ANYONE here said that white tigers have priorities over the orange ones. ALL of us love tigers, please don’t twist our words in this particular point, ok? By the way, there is no such thing as “black” tigers, only heavily striped tigers that time to time, arise particularly in the Orissa region (this is interesting itself, if you ask me). From my point of view, any tiger is 100% important for conversation, and if there are some white tigers over there that are still 100% Bengal tigers (no Amur genes on them), they MOST be saved too. Finally, about the humans in conservation, Tigerluver have post it very well, many animals had been saved tanks to the DIRECT intervention of humans, other good example is the European bison, which will be extinct if someone have nor created a “farm” to rise them. The tiger problem is more complex than just “leave them alone” to survive. The reports of “baby booms” are just exaggerations with no base. How many of those animals did actually reach adulthood? How many of them died poached or by natural causes? Scientists like Dr Karanth are always against these reports because they give the idea that the tiger population is in constant rise, when there is NOT the case. Indian tiger population has not risen at all; they are STILL at about 1,200 specimens, including subadults, at least this is what the camera trap suggest taking together most regions. Bengal tigers seem stable, but they still need a lot of work to be saved. Tiger conservation need direct actions form humans, there is no point back. If not, there is no hope for about 80% of the regions and populations, including Central India, Sundarbans, all Indochina and even Sumatra. I have stated before that scientists believe that the only populations that have more or less good probabilities to be conserve at long term are: 1. Terai arc (if they manage to join them, from Nepal to the Assam). 2. Western Ghats landscape (including Nagarahole-Bandipur region). 3. The Russian Far East. These areas can be protected only by DIRECT human intervention. Only when humans stop humans, then we could leave nature to do their job alone, but not yet, not yet.
I think we most take a look to these two webpages:
1 - http://messybeast.com/genetics/tigers-white.htm 2 - http://karlshuker.blogspot.com/2012/01/w...eking.html They have some interesting info about white tigers that can help us to know a little more about the historic white tigers, not just the modern captive breed specimens. (07-15-2014, 04:46 AM)'tigerluver' Wrote: Before you read anymore, I will repeat myself. Rewilding and white genes in the tigers case should not be a focus at the moment in my opinion. Doesn't mean having a backup plan will hurt. Read on. Im not sure how you rebutted my position? You said these animals would not make it with out human assistance. Yet these animals will all make with out human assistance. If you mean that these animals must be protected from other human beings and the destruction of their world, then yes, they need assistance. But that has nothing to do with them or nature, that has to do with a outside factor that has the means to stop when ever they want. Its been proven by the numerous animals that have come back on their own the minute they were protected and put on endangered species list and banned the people from killing them. Notice that people had to ban people. Once again, nothing to do with nature. We are arguing symantics at this point. 2ndly I have been absolutey willing to take Corbetts account, but heres the facts. He specifically said he saw them, got them on video and took pictures. So, lets see the video lets see the images. With a image you can actually see! You also speak of corbett like you know everything about him, corbett has quite a few crazy stories that have not been seen by any other man. No man has ever seen two tigers take on any large prey together, let alone two tigers take on a adult tusker. I'm not saying this doesn't happen, it probably does, but no images, video or eye witness accounts of anything like that has ever been reported by any other person. Same with the white tiger adult and then with cubs. 2 accounts never seen by another man..... Gaute also said Sundquist said he saw one, and If i see a email from sundquist saying he saw a white tiger adult or cub, I think i would be more willing to accept his word because from what I have read and seen, he seems to be a more conservative and realistic researcher, IMO. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 3 Guest(s) |