|
Post by brobear on Sept 26, 2018 3:10:43 GMT -5
Post by brobear on Mar 18, 2017 at 5:09pm Tiger, as an object of feeding bears. 12 known cases of brown bears kill tigers (Sysoev, 1950; Sysoev, 1960; Abramov, 1962; Rakow, 1970; Gorokhov, 1973; Kostoglod, 1981). All the tigers were eaten by bears. In such battles more likely weakened by the loss, including injured and old animals, so the brown bear activity contributes to bridging the tiger population of potentially dangerous animals to humans (Kostoglod, 1981).
It is clear that brown bears reap greater benefit from the presence of tigers because tigers killed animals - a source of protein food for bears. Therefore, not surprisingly, bears commonly use this source, even if it requires a direct clash with the Tigers., Tigers, it seems unable to prevent adult male brown bears away from their food.
Dale Miquelle.
and.... Despite the fact that his diet is dominated by food of plant origin, brown bear is the largest ground-based predator before the Far East. This beast is capable to obtain practically all forms of the mammals: from the mouse-like rodents to the tiger myshevidnyh.
In the far Of east are known the cases of the selection of victims by brown bear in Amur tiger and leopard. In of the Of sikhote-Alin preserve before 35% of cases of the victim of tiger they were obtained by the brown bear as a result of their selection fromowners.In this case the tigers departed based on their victim entirely, or alternately divided them with the bear.
([Seryodkin] and other, 2005). (Seryodkin et al, 2005).
At & around 35%. If they stood their ground there would be higher predation events. No different from cougars, wolves, or other apex predators. It's the same dynamic. Ever see the GSB documentary, in it - the GSB is driving off three Saber Tooth Cats from their carcass kill. If they contest it they risk being killed. Bears are not prolific nor great hunters. The predation argument is muted. This is what the bear does. The bear is the ultimate scavenger.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Sept 26, 2018 3:16:17 GMT -5
www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Brown_bear Interspecific predatory relationships Brown bears will often use their large size to intimidate wolves from their kills. Though conflict over carcasses is common, the two predators will, on rare occasions, tolerate each other on the same kill. Given the opportunity, both species will prey on each other's cubs.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Sept 26, 2018 3:18:15 GMT -5
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 at 4:07am - TIGERS AND BEARS IN RUSSIA - wildfact.com/forum/ - by Peter.
The problem with bears is they know how to fight. They are very different from the very large Assam herbivores, that is. Tigers responded by hunting smaller bears, like immatures and females. They also have to be able to defend their kills from male bears, meaning they have to stand a chance in a fight with a heavier cleptocrate. According to Krechmar, they are just about able to to that. The number of male tigers displaced by male bears is very limited.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Sept 26, 2018 3:27:28 GMT -5
This now-famous story tells of a tiger twice-robbed by two bears: 1 - SYSOEV
Sysoev is one of the very few who saw a number of fights between adult tigers and adult brown bears. In one case, the fight ended undecided. In another, a male tiger killed an adult female and in two others the male tigers were defeated. At least one of the two male tigers was killed. Many think this incident happened in 1960. Sysoev later wrote a story about an encounter between a male tiger and a male bear called 'Amba'. Although the story probably is fictional, chances are he used things he actually saw. I'll post the story in some time. For now, I'll try to paint the picture that emerged from the story.
Sysoev wrote about the life of a male tiger in eastern Russia. I'm not sure, but I think the tiger was a youngish adult. He wrote how the tiger hunted, killed and ate a wolf. Later, he killed a male Himalayan black bear. In winter, the tiger had to walk long distances to find the animals he preferred most (deer and wild boars). Some of the animals he killed were confiscated by a large male brown bear. The bear was so large, the tiger wouldn't have had a chance in a fight. He had no option but to accept it. But when another, slightly smaller, male tried to rob him of a wild boar he had killed, the tiger decided to defend his kill.
The bear was a large male, but weightwise below par as a result of a lack of food. Maybe the bear was a 'Schatun' and maybe it was just after hibernation. I don't remember. Anyhow. The tiger first threatened the bear, who wasn't impressed. Then a fight started. In the first stages, the tiger was able to get behind the bear. Every time he succeeded, the neck was targeted. In spite of the severe wounds he inflicted, he couldn't get to the vertebrae because the bear was able to get out of the grip of the tiger using his weight.
After some time, the tiger tired and the bear got his chance. Although he crushed the front paw of the bear, the tiger wasn't able to break the hold of the bear. He died as a result of suffocation. Wild Amur tigers killed by wild Ussuri bears, as far as I know, seldom perish as a result of a crushing blow or crushed ribs. Most are strangled, which means the bear in question had to be a strong animal. Chances are it was a male in most cases. This is one reason why I don't buy the general view on no engagements between male tigers and male bears, but that's another story.
When Sysoev was director of the Chabarowsk Natural History Museum, a diorama was constructed. It shows a male brown bear and a male Amur tiger engaged in battle.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Sept 26, 2018 3:30:42 GMT -5
The Beast that walks like Man by Harold McCracken. Here in Yellowstone, as elsewhere in Montana to the north, there are also more promising developments. Since 1995, there's been a new and enormously interesting scent on those first breezes that the bears inhale when they emerge. They once again, for the first time in several decades, share their domain with a sizable population of wolves, who not only make life exciting in general but also unwillingly provide the bears with a lot of free meat when bears take a fresh kill away from a wolf pack or scavenge an older kill. Life continues to change for the grizzly bears, and, as with the changes in human attitudes about them, the changes are often good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2018 3:39:12 GMT -5
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 at 4:07am - TIGERS AND BEARS IN RUSSIA - wildfact.com/forum/ - by Peter. The problem with bears is they know how to fight. They are very different from the very large Assam herbivores, that is. Tigers responded by hunting smaller bears, like immatures and females. They also have to be able to defend their kills from male bears, meaning they have to stand a chance in a fight with a heavier cleptocrate. According to Krechmar, they are just about able to to that. The number of male tigers displaced by male bears is very limited. I put bears at better fighters than big cats because big cats prefer to fight on their backs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2018 3:46:08 GMT -5
This now-famous story tells of a tiger twice-robbed by two bears: 1 - SYSOEV Sysoev is one of the very few who saw a number of fights between adult tigers and adult brown bears. In one case, the fight ended undecided. In another, a male tiger killed an adult female and in two others the male tigers were defeated. At least one of the two male tigers was killed. Many think this incident happened in 1960. Sysoev later wrote a story about an encounter between a male tiger and a male bear called 'Amba'. Although the story probably is fictional, chances are he used things he actually saw. I'll post the story in some time. For now, I'll try to paint the picture that emerged from the story. Sysoev wrote about the life of a male tiger in eastern Russia. I'm not sure, but I think the tiger was a youngish adult. He wrote how the tiger hunted, killed and ate a wolf. Later, he killed a male Himalayan black bear. In winter, the tiger had to walk long distances to find the animals he preferred most (deer and wild boars). Some of the animals he killed were confiscated by a large male brown bear. The bear was so large, the tiger wouldn't have had a chance in a fight. He had no option but to accept it. But when another, slightly smaller, male tried to rob him of a wild boar he had killed, the tiger decided to defend his kill. The bear was a large male, but weightwise below par as a result of a lack of food. Maybe the bear was a 'Schatun' and maybe it was just after hibernation. I don't remember. Anyhow. The tiger first threatened the bear, who wasn't impressed. Then a fight started. In the first stages, the tiger was able to get behind the bear. Every time he succeeded, the neck was targeted. In spite of the severe wounds he inflicted, he couldn't get to the vertebrae because the bear was able to get out of the grip of the tiger using his weight. After some time, the tiger tired and the bear got his chance. Although he crushed the front paw of the bear, the tiger wasn't able to break the hold of the bear. He died as a result of suffocation. Wild Amur tigers killed by wild Ussuri bears, as far as I know, seldom perish as a result of a crushing blow or crushed ribs. Most are strangled, which means the bear in question had to be a strong animal. Chances are it was a male in most cases. This is one reason why I don't buy the general view on no engagements between male tigers and male bears, but that's another story. When Sysoev was director of the Chabarowsk Natural History Museum, a diorama was constructed. It shows a male brown bear and a male Amur tiger engaged in battle. Yeah alot of tiger fanatics like to say tigers kill brown bears when in relaity tigers mainly kill cubs and small sub adults females. A male adult brown bear is a worthy adversary.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Sept 26, 2018 4:18:41 GMT -5
35% of amur tiger kills taken in the Sikhote Alin reserve. plenty of amur leopards kills taken. plenty of grey wolves kills taken by grizzly bears in Yellowstone national park. almost one third of cougars kills taken by grizzly bears.
correct me if i am wrong, the brown bear is the best kleptoparasite in the world today.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Sept 26, 2018 4:26:57 GMT -5
A kleptoparasite is an animal that routinely displaces accomplished predators from their kills. Some ( non-bear ) animals of the far distant past ( possibly ) includes Tyrannosaurus rex, Andrewsarchus, and Daeodon. The giant short-faced bears ( Arctodus and Arctotherium ) were probably kleptoparasites. By no means do I expect everyone to agree with my assessment of T-rex, but ( IMO ) he was the greatest carnivorous dinosaur of all time. I do not view him as a superb hunter. I believe him to be a scavenger, a kleptoparasite, and a part-time hunter. I can see him in my mind's eye displacing any more accomplished predator from its kill. Andrewsarchus was possibly the biggest land-based mammalian meat-eating animal of all time. I view him as a scavenger and kleptoparasite ( part-time hunter ). Daeodon, the "horror-hog" was a monstrous pig-like meat-eating animal. I view him as a scavenger and kleptoparasite ( part-time hunter ). And the biggest bears ever, Arctodus, Arctotherium, and also Agriotheriom, I consider ( IMO ) them each as a scavenger, kleptoparasite ( part-time hunter ). All of these were "monsters" of the distant past. Today, the grizzly stands in their shadows. Edit and add: I was answering your question as you were asking Kodiak - yes.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Sept 26, 2018 5:17:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Sept 26, 2018 5:41:24 GMT -5
From site given by Kodiak:
The main reason so many paleontologists — and so many Hollywood moguls — subscribe to the fearsome hunter theory is Tyrannosaurus Rex's teeth, which were large, sharp, and extremely numerous, as well as the enormous size of Tyrannosaurus Rex itself (up to nine or 10 tons for a full-grown adult). It seems unlikely that nature would have evolved such a huge set of choppers for a dinosaur that feasted on already dead (or dying) animals, but then again, evolution doesn't always operate in a strictly linear or logical fashion.
Evidence in Favor of T. Rex as a Scavenger There are four main strands of evidence in favor of the theory that Tyrannosaurus Rex happened upon, rather than hunted down, its food:
Tyrannosaurus Rex had small, weak, beady eyes, where you might expect an active predator to possess super-sharp vision. Tyrannosaurus Rex had famously small, almost vestigial arms, which would have been near-useless in a close grapple with live prey. (However, these arms were only puny in proportion to the rest of T. Rex; in fact, they could bench-press 400 pounds!) Tyrannosaurus Rex was none too fast, more a lumbering lummox than the sleek predator of Jurassic Park. It was once thought that this tyrannosaur could chase down prey at a blistering 40 miles per hour, but today, a relatively pokey 10 mph seems to be a better estimate. Most convincing of all too many scientists, analysis of Tyrannosaurus Rex brain casts shows the presence of unusually large olfactory lobes, which would have been ideal for catching the scent of rotting carcasses from miles away. T. Rex May Have Been Both a Hunter and a Scavenger While the Tyrannosaurus Rex-as-scavenger theory has been surprisingly quick to catch on in the scientific community, not everyone is convinced. In the last analysis, this may not be an either/or proposition: like other opportunistic carnivores, T. Rex may have actively hunted at sometimes, and at other times it may have feasted on prey that had either died of natural causes or already been pursued and killed by other, smaller dinosaurs.
Still not convinced? Consider an analogy from the jungles of Africa: even the most majestic lion, if it's starving, will not turn up its nose at the carcass of a days-old wildebeest, and many extant carnivores have been known to raid the kills of other meat-eaters if they themselves have been unsuccessful in the hunt. In other words, it's not only a dog-eat-dog out in the wild; it's a dog-scavenge-dog world as well! *In my own words: Also, the teeth of T-rex are the size of bananas and very thick; unlike the teeth of predatory raptors which are like sharp knife blades. Those teeth are designed for crushing bones. But, in a show-down against a Spinosaurus, Giganodosaurus, or any other dinosaur predator... my nickle is on The Tyrant King.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Sept 26, 2018 5:44:24 GMT -5
Remember that a kleptoparasite has to be big enough and tough enough to bluff or fight his way to a carcass against the top predators of the region. On the case of grizzly vs tiger in the R.F.E., I believe that more often than not, the tiger will relinquish a carcass to the grizzly unless the grizzly is a young bear ( being a foolish teenager ), a grizzly past his best years ( like myself if I were a bear ), or the tiger might stand his ground and try to defend his kill from a she-bear. I doubt that a tiger will ever stand his ground against a healthy, full-grown grizzly boar in his prime.
|
|
|
Post by King Kodiak on Sept 26, 2018 6:03:33 GMT -5
Well most satellite bears are males, And Dale Miquelle was very clear when he said “bears steal 35% of tigers kills, with the tigers either DEPARTING entirely or leaving part of the kill to the bear” so yes, even though most of those are subadult and adult female tigers, we have at least 4 records of bears killing adult male tigers in disputes over kills. So yeah, tigers will not defend their kills, especially vs full grown bears.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Sept 26, 2018 13:40:38 GMT -5
www.actforlibraries.org/the-diet-...wolverine/ The wolverine is often characterized as a ferocious carnivore. This large species of the Mustelidae (weasel) family definitely lives up to its name, more often than not devouring massive amounts of meat, but also consuming plant life on occasion. In fact, some scientists have even been able to link its genus name, Gulo to “glutton,” which can be defined as someone (or in this case, some thing) that loves food. Although from its name one might image that a wolverine looks more like a wolf, it is much more muscular and smaller than a wolf. Adult wolverines can range in size from twenty-five to thirty-four inches in length. They also range in weight from twenty-two to sixty-six pounds. Despite its relative small size, the wolverine displays the diet and feeding habits of classic predators that are often multiple times its size. Undeniably, the wolverine has massive jaws that are powerful enough to crush the frozen flesh they must often consume in their natural cold-weather habitats. But, in addition to powerful jaws, the wolverine also rely on a special molar in the back of their mouths to help them slash through dense meats and even rip their prey apart. Overall, the wolverine’s diet consists mainly of meat. Wolverines will eat virtually any prey, and will usually not care about the size of their kill. They are vicious when it comes to their methods of consumption and they will tear through flesh easily. It is not uncommon to see a wolverine engaged in battle with a much larger animal (a competing predator) in order to take possession of a kill or a carcass.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 3, 2018 10:38:55 GMT -5
Documentary - Casey Anderson's "America the Wild" episode "Night of the Grizzly" ... Casey learns that, while during the day a grizzly spends his ( awake ) time grazing, foraging, and digging for food items, at night ... he is a very different bear. He is an active predator. At least those inland grizzlies of Montana. They hunt elk and moose calves during the night. Very active.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 4, 2018 4:00:59 GMT -5
~~http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/11/24/gps-study-tracks-grizzlies-as-follow-hunters/ GPS study tracks grizzlies as they follow huntersThis GPS system is a real bear.Eight Montana grizzly bears have been outfitted with GPS trackers in an ongoing study that could bring some unnerving news to hunters. The study is aimed at bolstering the theory that grizzlies, which can be as stealthy as they are ferocious, stalk hunters from as close as the length of a football field in order to steal their prey. Already, data has shown at least one grizzly following oblivious elk hunters almost from the moment they left the parking lot, according to the Billings Gazette. Scientists believe the bear may have been following the humans in hopes of getting to a fallen elk before they did."Bears opportunistically scavenge carcasses throughout the active season and commonly usurp kills of other predators, such as cougars and, since their reintroduction in 1995, gray wolves,” stated a report last year by the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team. “Remains left by hunters also provide grizzly bears with meat, and bears are attracted to areas outside of national parks when these remains become available during the fall.” The Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team, part of the U.S. Geological Survey, started the project over the summer, by tagging the grizzlies in the Grand Teton National Park. Next, the study team asked elk hunters to voluntarily carry some 100 GPS units that track their routes.In the most clearly detailed example, a group of hunters turned on their GPS devices moments after leaving a parking area at around 6 a.m. When scientists analyzed their movements later and contrasted them with those of a nearby grizzly, it became clear the bear was tailing them.The bruin stayed downwind of the hunters, at one point coming within 100 yards of them as they moved around a lake. At around noon, the bear bedded down for a nap, but easily picked up the hunters’ trail again when it awoke, according to the report. Grizzly bears’ have a sense of smell seven times greater than that of a bloodhound, and 100 times that of a human by some estimates. Grizzlies also possess a Jacobson’s organ in the roof of their mouth that can detect heavier moisture-borne odors.Scientists tracked the bear as it appeared to smell an elk carcass from 4 miles away, follow the scent and even wound up swimming across the lake to get to it, according to the report. They also observed that the bear made some evasive maneuvers, possibly to avoid an untagged grizzly competing for the same meat. “The temporary movements away from the carcass could be indicative of this particular bear being ‘pushed off’ the carcass by a more dominant bear,” said Frank van Manen, of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team based in Bozeman.Grizzlies have been known to steal the prey of hunters and fishermen alike. Animals such as elk may travel for miles after being wounded, leaving hunters the task of tracking them even as bears may be doing the same. So attuned to the movements of hunters are the bears that scientists believe they may even listen for the sound of gunshots, knowing that they signal a meal to be scavenged. Grizzlies are known scavengers, and officials noted there have been cases of the mighty bruins attacking hunters as they dressed elk in the field. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks now requires successful bison hunters outside of Yellowstone National Park to move carcasses and gut piles 200 yards away from homes, roads and trails to lessen the chances of human-bear interactions, according to the Gazette.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 4, 2018 4:02:39 GMT -5
From Peter: There's no reason to believe it would be any different in the Russian Far East. Even bears actively hunted by Amur tigers for food (Himalayan black bears) visited tiger kills at every opportunity (see the post on Tkachenko's article in the tiger extinction thread). Tkachenko concluded tiger kills were visited by bears or all ages. This was new to me. Everything I read before indicated only large males visited tiger kills.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 4, 2018 5:22:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 5, 2018 4:36:45 GMT -5
Both grizzly and black bears live in Yellowstone National Park. In this and other areas where grizzly bears and black bears are sympatric (share habitat), temporal isolation and behavioral differences tend to reduce direct competition between the two species. In the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, grizzly bears are generally most active from dusk until dawn, while black bears are most active during the daytime. Grizzly bears evolved to forage in open meadow habitats, whereas black bears are primarily adapted to living in forests. Grizzlies also have longer claws and larger shoulder musculature than black bears, making them more efficient at foraging roots and ground-dwelling small mammals abundant in open meadows. Grizzlies are generally larger than black bears, and are much more aggressive in defending themselves and their offspring from predators, including other grizzlies. Black bears typically escape predators by running into forest cover or climbing trees. On August 2, 1998, park visitors looking for grizzly bears from Grizzly Overlook in Hayden Valley observed some ravens on a carcass on the northeast side of the Yellowstone River. Upon focusing their spotting scope on the carcass, they could clearly see the partially consumed remains of a black bear in the tall grass next to the river. The visitors reported the presence of the carcass to Canyon area rangers, who immediately forwarded the report to the park’s Bear Management Office. We received permission from the rangers to canoe across the Yellowstone River to examine and retrieve the carcass. Evidence of grizzly bear predation on a black bear in Hayden Valley www.greateryellowstonescience.org/files/pdf/ys5-gunther.pdf shaggygod.proboards.com/
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Oct 5, 2018 4:39:57 GMT -5
shaggygod.proboards.com/ t's a brown bear. The location believed (my speculation) to be southeast Alaska in and around the Glacier National Park area given the web site (see hyperlink). Because both brown and grizzly bear kill black bear my position was the question to be immaterial. Also, as you know, in the Russian Far East; the brown bear will kill/cannibalize Asiatic black bear.
|
|