|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:13:09 GMT -5
Continued.... A - THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH
After reading everything I have and talking to a few people 'in the know', I concluded there's no such thing as 'absolute truth'. Tigers hunt bears in some regions and not at all in others. In regions where they hunt bears, tigers hunt them occasionally in some seasons. In others, bears are an important source of food. Some male bears, according to researchers, hunt tigers at times. Nearly all researchers think males of both species are most active as hunters, but I think females could be more active regarding bears than is assumed.
When tigers hunt bears, they usually hunt immatures and females. Same for male bears hunting tigers. The reason is risk limitation, I think. There are few clashes between males. One could conclude adult males of both species, as a result of an advantage in size, would seldom perish in fights. But those who provided information on fights and victims wrote the score is about two to one in favor of tigers. In about half of the fights, there was no decision reached.
If tigers hunting bears, as many suggest, are experienced large males hunting smaller bears, how is it possible so many tigers perish in fights? Are they no match for smaller bears, do they hunt larger bears than we think (including males), would a significant number of (tiger) victims be immature males or females or is there something else going on? Something we don't know about.
B - JOHN VAILLANT
What about John Vaillants remarks on tigers and bears in his great book on the Sobolonye man-eater? Everything he wrote was based on what researchers, hunters and locals saw or found. Authentic, first-hand information only, I mean. Miquelle also thought it was a great book.
Do male tigers occasionally take on bears as a result of what Vaillant described as 'principle'? They apparently do, meaning not all fights are a result of food or displacement. I read time and again that male Amur tigers are vindictive animals. Do they target large bears as well? I'm not sure. Based on what I read, I concluded large male bears are not targeted, but others, about similar in size to a tiger, are. Some of these probably are male.
What is 'a large male brown bear' and do they really go unchallenged? If so, why have different researchers concluded male tigers are seldom displaced (I only read about one case)? When a bear persists, a male tiger would have to give way, one would think. But it very seldom happens, researchers say.
Do large bears, as some suggest, use tigers as hunting dogs, to be robbed at will without a fight? If so, why did Krechmar say adult males of both species are very close in tooth and claw? Not one is dominating the other in a fysical fight, he said. Could it be large bears try their luck because they often have no option, whereas male tigers can hunt again? If so, what about this 'vindictiveness' so many talk about?
All in all, there still are many unanswered questions. I also noticed many findings of researchers contradict others. Finally, I noticed there apparently are tiger-researchers and bear-researchers. Both often seem to come up with 'proof' for statements of a dubious nature at the right time. I really don't know what to make of it.
C - ANIMOSITY
The only thing I can say from experience is there often is a lot of animosity between captive tigers and bears, especially between Amur tigers and brown bears. The animosity between both is much more pronounced than what I saw in tigers and lions. Tigers and lions often don't like each other. They would fight given the opportunity, but it wouldn't be all the way. In many cases, it isn't that intense. It would be about dominance in most cases.
The emotions regarding brown bears I saw are close to hate and obsession. The objects of their hate, often large male brown bears, knew it and obviously felt nervous, even with bars between them. I talked to trainers who had experience with both and they confirmed what I had seen. Males can't be mixed.
After what I saw, I concluded the (unconfirmed) stories on fights between wild males are true in that tigers probably often take the initiative. Bears, like in wild boars, would use their energy to defend theirselves. The intensity would be such, that tigers probably would spend themselves very fast, which would result in very frequent breaks. They would target the neck of their opponent. As male bears have a lot of muscles in that area, it would take a lot of time to reach the vertebrae. Tigers would succeed in some cases and not in others. It's do or die, I think. Most tigers who perish probably pay for a mistake, just like in wild boars. Those prone to mistakes are those driven by rage and hate and my guess is young adults would be the most likely candidates.
Although I still think I am probably close, I was surprised to find that researchers concluded many fights between wild animals were initiated by bears (...). So what do we really know? And if we know something, would it hold? Would it be the 'absolute truth'? My guess is no. The only thing I'm quite certain about is the animosity.
Bears living close to big cats usually make a living of robbing them whenever possible. Size, I think, is irrelevant. Even the black bears severely hunted by tigers in the reserve Tkachenko worked in didn't fear tigers and robbed them whenever possible.
What do we know for sure about all true wild carnivores? They don't accept any kind of intrusion when eating, let alone an attempt to rob them. As this is what bears do for a living, my guess is this specific treat is the most likely explanation for the animosity I saw time and again. Cougars lack the size to engage a bear, but tigers do not. They probably often are so enraged, that they, after a period of loss after loss, probably are prepared to risk life and limb in a fight with a larger kleptocrate. If they lack the power to win an open fight, they would try to get even in another way.
D - AMATEURS AND PRO'S
As both species have lived in close proximity for thousands of years in spite of the animosity, there has to be a balance. The only way bears would be able to get there is immunity of some animals, both male and female. These outsized animals, I think, are the ones who keep tigers in check. If they wouldn't be there, tigers would have made short work of them.
Not in Indonesia, south-east Asia and India, but Russia only. The reason is bears in Russia in particular often feed on tiger kills. At times, perhaps often, they maybe have no other option.
Apart from these exceptional bears, it would be very close in the other leagues. My guess is tigers could have their nose just in front (they are, after all, professionals and often choose the conditions). On the other hand. If they don't have to meet, they no doubt would use the oportunity. Males, I think, in particular. The reason is both would prefer to minimize the risk.
This is what we see in Indonesia, south-east Asia and India. The number of encounters is very limited and most animals involved in attacks are large male tigers. Sloth bears, although larger than their distant relatives in south-east Asia, could be targeted more often than other bear species. But 'targeted' would be too heavy to describe the intention of tigers regarding sloth bears.
Adult male Himalayan bears, larger than their relatives in north-east Asia, probably are never threatened. Males usually are larger than sloth bears and some males are not to be trifled with. The old boy I saw in the Zoologischer Garten in Berlin was just as large and robust as the one in my previous post.
The only real professionals in bears and tigers are Amur tigers and Ussuri brown bears. In some parts of Primorye, clashes between giants only seen by very few still happen every now and then. We can only imagine what they saw.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:15:37 GMT -5
Continued.... - PANTHERA TIGRIS ALTAICA IN RUSSIA
a - ARSENIEV AND KAPLANOV
Like in China, the Amur tiger was severely hunted in Russia. Arseniev, in 'Dersu, the Trapper', wrote tigers, like all other animals in Primorye, were already severely endangered at the turn of the century. A few decades later, Kaplanov found they were all but gone. Kaplanov was killed by a poacher, but his study became a classic and it had an effect. The Sowjet-Union, as Putin said, was the first country to ban tiger hunting completely.
Although the ban very probably saved the Amur tiger from extinction, genetic diversity was affected. It shows partly in the lack of variation in size in today's tigers. In this respect, they are decidedly different from other subspecies. Amur tigers, therefore, still walk the edge.
Today, there are about 350-450 individuals in Russia and 10-50 in China and North-Korea together. When they have recovered numberwise, they'll spread. When they have established themselves in all former regions, chances are they will start to produce the animal described by reliable observers a century ago. I wouldn't know about the average size back then, but there's enough evidence to state tigers, although similar in length to today's Amur tigers, were a bit heavier.
For example. Of the three tigers captured by the Morden-Graves expedition, one male about average in length was 550 pounds, whereas the tigress, at 368 pounds, was the heaviest I know of. The second male, at 480 pounds, also wasn't a small animal. For comparison. Not one of the adult males measured and weighed in the last two decades even approached 480 pounds and the heaviest tigress, at 287 pounds, also was well below the 368-pound tigress shot in 1930. A very pronounced difference, that is. If we add that today's tigers were compared to three individuals shot in the 1930s only, I would skip 'coincidence' right away. The first words that come to mind are genetics and food.
I wouldn't know about the numbers needed to make a full recovery, but 350-500 animals (cubs and immatures included) apparently isn't enough. Not even close, I think.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:17:28 GMT -5
Continued.... Brotherbear, I'm going through the information I have. Might take some time, as I would need to scan quite a bit. In the meantime, you could read posts 94, 95 and 114. Post 95 has a lot of information on bears in south-east Russia, whereas post 114 has a few scans of a recent article (Tkachenko) on tigers and bears in a smallish reserve close to Chabarowsk. I added a summary which has a bit more on tigers and bears.
The Ussuri brown bear (also referred to as black grizzly or horse bear) is different from the Kamsjatka brown bear in that they have a relatively long skull, elongated nasal bones, narrower arches and much larger teeth. They lack the elevated brow typical for many coastal bears (also seen in many Kodiak bears). Compared to Yellowstone brown bears, they seem a bit larger. Females, according to recent information posted by Guate, are about 145 kg. (320 pounds) whereas males average 582-595 pounds (264-270 kg.). Sexual dimorphism, therefore, is well pronounced.
Many bear-posters underlined that 'average' is a tricky way to describe size in bears, especially large subspecies. The reason is the range in size often is pronounced, more so than in big cats. I have reliable information about females exceeding 600 pounds and one has to assume the range in males is even more outspoken. Furthermore, there is hibernation and seasonal variation. In adults, the difference between minimum (just after hibernation) and maximum weight (just before hibernation) can be as much as 25-35%.
There are some reports on clashes between male tigers and male brown bears. With the exception of one, all incidents happened in winter, meaning non-hibernating bears ('Schatuns') were involved. A bear unable to gain enough weight to last through hibernation usually is forced to find food in winter. These malnourished wanderers often are desperate animals. Many, as a result of a lack of weight, do not survive the winter.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:18:31 GMT -5
Continued.... THE SUNGARI RIVER TIGER AND THE LARGE MALE BROWN BEAR
In his letter of May 8, 1970 (pp. 185), W.J. Jankowski wrote the largest Amur tiger he, his brothers and his father ever shot was a giant male killed in the Sungari River Basin at July 9, 1943 in Heilongjiang Province (Manchuria, China). This tiger was 11.6 (350,52 cm.) measured 'over curves' and Jankowski more than once wrote it was an exceptional animal, much larger than all the others tigers they had shot. After an interlude, Mazak continues with the giant male tiger on page 189. The part on him is again within the thin red lines. It says:
" ... Regarding the giant Amur tiger shot by W.J. Jankowski and his team in the Sungari River Basin in 1943; the precise weight is unknown. Jankowski, however, estimated the tiger at about 300 kg. (660 pounds). He wrote (Mazak quoted from his letter, dated May 8, 1970):
'The tiger was so large, we had to get help in order to get the tiger out of the forest. When the assistents arrived, there were 9 strong man alltogether. We devided the tiger into pieces and each of us carried a load of 30-40 kg. I do not hesitate to say the tiger very probably wasn't below 300 kg.'
Mazak added:
To complete the information on this giant tiger, I should perhaps mention that Jankowski wrote that the tiger had killed and eaten a very large male brown bear a few days before he was shot, of which only a leg and the head, found by Jankowski, remained ..."
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:19:53 GMT -5
Continued.... CONCLUSIONS
So what to make of Mazak's information on the giant tiger and the very large male brown bear? Well, it isn't as straightforward as you think it is. There are big differences between researchers and posters and then there aren't. Jankowski's giant tiger and the bear he killed were discussed in different forums. The participants didn't succeed to get to a kind of agreement. Below is an attempt to get to a conclusion in spite of that.
a - Those opposing the authenticity of the information Mazak offered in his book say it isn't first-hand. This is correct. W.J. Jankowski was the one with first-hand information, not Mazak. He shot the tiger and made the photograph. Mazak quoted from his letter dated May 8, 1970. For this reason, Mazak should have added a copy of the letter, I think.
Does this mean the authenticity can be questioned? No. It means Mazak, for some reason, didn't do what he should have done. Does it mean the tiger never existed? No. The photograph says it did. The conclusion is no questions regarding authenticity, but bad marks for accuracy.
b - Was the tiger accepted by his peers? No. I don't know why, but I have an idea. We have to return to the first edition of Mazak's book (published in 1965). After publication, Mazak was faced with questions about the quality of the information on the alleged size of Amur tigers. His sources (Barclay and Baikov) didn't deliver a shred of evidence regarding their 13 feet tigers. Mazak didn't check what had to be checked and for this reason also misinformed the public, many biologists thought.
Their criticism was correct. Mazak acknowledged his mistake in the third edition of his book (1983, pp. 183). The information on the size of tigers in that edition is both unique and impeccable (I never saw anything even close), but the damage had been done in that his peers never completely trusted him again. Their attitude compared to those who indulge in things like 'Seen one tree, seen 'm all'.
So one mistake was all it took to be dismissed? Looks like it. This attitude, in my view, compares to a death sentence for ignoring a red light. Shall we sideline Miquelle because of his slops regarding Aldrich-snares? No, we shouldn't. His contribution to tiger ecology is beyond question, if not great. We all make mistakes and it is through mistakes we, most unfortunately, often learn most.
Back to Mazak. He made a mistake and paid. Now just imagine the one who reported on a large male bear killed by a freak Amur tiger, of all people, had to be him. Need a say more? c - Was the information on the large male bear killed by the freak male Amur tiger accepted by his peers? Or anyone else, for that matter? Of course it wasn't. Like Mazak, the Jankowski's were not, ehhh, much respected. That's two reasons to not even give it a try.
For me, the information is both authentic and reliable. One of the two involved is a as experienced as they come regarding wild Amur tigers and the other as motivated as it gets in biologists. I might add that both had learned their trade the hard way, but I could just as well waste my energy on explaining why a one-legged duck would swim in circles.
d - So what about the second report on a large male brown bear killed by a large male Amur tiger (referring ot K.G. Abramov's unpublished notes)? Well, K.G. Abramov died well before his time and the information he had was never published. If we add that the one who got hold of his notes wasn't respected by his peers, I think we can keep it real short. No publication is no proof is no dead bear. I could try to explain why the information stands for me, but that would compare to the story on the duck.
e - Anything else on male tigers and dead male brown bears? Yes. Rakov also reported on a large brown bear killed by a tiger, but he apparently forgot to provide information on the gender of the bear. His peers accepted a large brown bear was killed by a tiger, but the lack of information on the gender means that's about it.
f - More on male tigers and male brown bears in Russia? Yes, more than you think. Most unfortunately, the information available often is far from complete. For this reason, today's biologists in Russia concluded there is no reliable report on a male bear killed by a male Amur tiger. I could start a debate based on the information I have (not only the information discussed above), but I concluded it would compare to talking about duendes.
g - Anything else on Mazak? Yes, quite a bit. I have measured skulls in the former Zoological Museum of Amsterdam. I saw Mazak's notes in some of the skulls. He was there many years before I was. I copied the notes and went to see Dr. P. van Bree, who was then conservator of the Zoological Museum of Amsterdam.
Van Bree told me he and Mazak were good friends. He often talked about him. I could tell you stories. The only thing I want to say is Dr. P. van Bree thought Mazak was one of the best biologists he had known. And he knew a lot of them, including some of those who published on tigers in the last decades.
Did he, by the way, have a high opinion on them? Not quite. He was contacted by many and he provided the information they needed, but he was never mentioned in their books or articles. This is not done. Mazak, on the other hand, wrote about his good friend Van Bree in the third edition of his book (pp. 217). Mazak, Van Bree and Colin Groves wrote an article about the Bali tiger skulls they had measured. I'll post the article in some time. h - Is there anything on male tigers killed by male bears? Yes. I found two reports on male tigers killed by male bears. One was a young adult (probably the one Sysoev referred to) killed in 1960 and the other was an average-sized male killed in 1972. In both cases, the male bear was described as 'large' or 'very large'. Details? No. Zilch. Accepted by researchers? Of course.
i - Mazak died in 1987. He had an impressive collection of books, articles and notes. What happened with his archive after he died? I asked Dr. P. van Bree. He told me most of it went to Dr. C. Groves in Australia. I was in Australia, but that was before I knew about Mazak's archive. I'll contact Dr. Colin Groves.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:20:43 GMT -5
Continued from post #58... Although an ambush would be an initial advantage, it wouldn't be decisive in an encounter between a male Amur tiger and a male Ussuri bear. The reason is adult brown bears, and males in particular, usually have a thick layer of muscles in the area a tiger would target (the neck). A tiger wouldn't be able to get to the vertebrae with one bite in a large male brown bear. Although every discussion on this topic is speculative by nature, there's plenty of circumstantial evidence to suggest it would take a lot more to kill an adult male brown bear. I propose to use two examples. 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 Mar 19, 2017 3:26:00 GMT -5
Continued.... Is a male brown bear capable of performing the feat described above? I think so. Male Amur tigers average 420-430 pounds, whereas male Ussuri bears average just below 600 pounds, with some well over that mark. A tiger would need a lot of skill and power to overcome a bear of that size. When a bear, on the other hand, gets a hold, it would be difficult to break out of it.
BART SCHLEYER
Bart Schleyer worked for the WCS (the Siberian Tiger Project). In the USA, he often went out on his own. Alaska and Canada. Wild country. One fateful day, he was killed in Alaska. They think it was a brown bear, but wolves also used his body to feed on. Some time after his death, an article was published. One could also say it was a kind of obituary. I posted parts of it on this thread (see post 54).
Schleyer knew about Amur tigers and bears. He often followed the tracks of tigers in the snow. At times, he found a dead bear. Schleyer was able to get to the story in most cases. He said most bear killers were experienced male tigers who had about a hundred pounds on their victims. Every attack was a hit and all bears were killed with a bite to the base of the neck. The bears killed in that way, however, were immatures or females and they faced a heavier male tiger.
Most bears killed in this way died without a fight. In a number of cases, however, there had been a fight. Schleyer didn't offer details, but my guess is the fights were a result of the size of the bear. The larger the bear, the more difficult it is to kill with a single bite. I remember two cases discussed in other articles. In both, the females targeted were estimated between 150-200 kg. (330-440 pounds) and both only succumbed after a prolonged fight.
Adult brown bears, as was stated before, usually have a thick layer of large muscles in the neck. This means it's very unlikely even a large male tiger would be able to kill a large bear with one bite. This assumption was confirmed in the two cases mentioned. Many think the fights Schleyer mentioned were a result of ambushes gone wrong. My guess is the bears targeted were too large to kill with a single bite.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:29:40 GMT -5
Continued.... AMBUSHES, OPEN FIGHTS, RUMOURS AND TRAINERS
Many think a tiger's best chance in a fight is an ambush, but Clyde Beatty wrote his large male Russian bear usually got whipped when he attacked the Amur tigresses. This means tigers apparently do quite well in encounters. After a number of bad experiences, his Russian bear decided for a different approach. The tigress he finally killed was ... ambushed. The attack also was remarkable in that he didn't bite the tigress multiple times, as bears often do, but held on. It was this, Beatty thought, that saved him. At that time, Beatty thought bears wouldn't stand a chance in a fight with a tiger.
Later, he changed his opinion, but every encounter he reported on was between a large bear and a small tiger. He said tigers usually spent themselves quickly and added a lot more that underlined there was no love lost between Beatty and tigers. Could have been a result of a bad experience when he was young. Beatty was targeted by a tigress and saved by the bell, I mean a male lion. After that experience, tigers were done for.
Beatty, to underline his opinion, reported on two fights between his female brown bear 'Doris' and two tigers (a male and a female) in different interviews. Doris killed both within a few months while defending herself. Beatty talked about it at every opportunity, but forgot to add Doris, at about 700 pounds, was as large as they come, whereas the two tigers were half her size or less (...). I saw a photograph of Doris. I wouldn't know about the 700 pounds, but there's no question she was a very large female.
Beatty, because he wrote books and knew about public relations, influenced public opinion. The consequence is many still think tigers quickly spend themselves and stand no chance in a fight against a 'calculator' (all lions and bears). I'm not going to discuss the crap he offered, but I will say many of his 'views' were a result of distortions born from what I consider to be a strong dislike.
I talked to many trainers over the years. They were long interviews with dedicated and unbiased people who had worked with big cats and bears for many years. I also talked to a director of a facility situated in the southern part of the Netherlands. In the facility, a kind of training school, many big cats, brown bears and polar bears were trained. Most were sold to circuses when they had 'graduated'. The facility featured in a documentary I saw. The director was Klant Hagenbeck. He was related to the other Hagenbecks and as experienced as they come. What did he and the others had to say about big cats and bears?
One is there is no love lost between tigers and brown bears. Two is brown bears, in contrast to what many think, are calculators. Three is they, in a one-on-one, often suffer against a big cat of similar size, especially tigers. The reason is tigers are faster, more agile and more aggressive. Four is brown bears, although powerful, very intelligent and confident, often overestimate themselves. After a beating, they, as a result of pride, often try to get even in some way. Many trainers said adult brown bears try to surprise (ambush) the tiger they hate. Sometimes, they succeed and sometimes they pay.
Five is the rumours about endurance are just that. Tigers are able to fight for a very long time. The problem is they, as aggressors, often overheat, especially against heavier and agile opponents. This is the reason they need short breaks. This is different from 'spending themselves quickly'. One could say tigers are 'interval-fighters' and be right. At times, a bear is able to use a break. One reason is they have the energy needed (defence is less consuming than offence). Another is bears are exceedingly intelligent animals. They know when to act or not. When you forget to lock the cage, they will know and let you visit them. It will be your last visit. Before you go to the land of no return, they will have had a lot of fun. In this respect, they are close to (male) lions.
Six is tigers and bears almost compare to tigers and lions. Size often is important and defence is less costly than offence. Ambushes are the best way to conserve energy. An even better way is to avoid an all-out.
All in all, I think Krechmar could be about right regarding wild Amur tigers and Ussuri brown bears. He said not one dominates the other in a fysical fight. Large male bears can displace a male tiger, but it doesn't happen often. The reason they succeed at times is they, as non-hunters, need the protein because of their size. They are willing to risk injury, whereas tigers can hunt again. But Amur tigers are vindictive animals, many say. At times, males clash. The outcome of a fight between an average-sized male tiger and an averaged-sized male Ussuri bear, I think, is anybody's guess. This, regarding the difference in weight (430 vs 590 pounds), says something about the ability of an Amur tiger. A real big bear, as Sysoev said, would get it his way more often than not, but there are not that many. These 'Equalizers' are few and far between.
The only thing I really agree with regarding both animals is inborn animosity. That's why the bear who escaped the Canadian facility decided to demolish the tigress first before returning home and that's the reason why the tiger who killed a cagehand in Beatty's circus decided to pay brown bear 'Doris' a visit before continuing his escape. Both tigers were killed quickly, but the bears had a distinct advantage in size.
Also remember wild tiger 'Boris'. He was one of five youngsters recently released into the wild. All five were about 18 months of age when they were released and all had collars, enabling researchers to monitor their progress. At first, the researchers were happy to find the youngsters tried to avoid brown bears. But the peace didn't last long. Tiger 'Boris', in spite of his young age, recently killed a bear. I don't know what bear was killed and how it was done, but it tells you all you want to know about tigers and bears.
A very long post, which wasn't intended. My apologies. I just wanted to say it's always a bit different than you think it is, Brotherbear. That's why you have to use authentic information only to get to an opinion. An experienced trainer also has something of interest to offer. Also remember opinions differ. Same for researchers. In some regions, tigers and bears avoid each other. In others, they do not. Tigers and bears, for that reason, is tricky business. As for ambushes. I hope you now know tigers aren't the only ones who specialize in ambushes. Bears are pretty good at it as well. Ambushes save energy, but not when the opponent is a large and strong animal. It's an initial advantage, but not decisive in a fight between large males. It is, in other words, not very likely the large male bear killed in the Sungari River Basin was killed in an ambush. My guess is there would have been a prolonged fight and the tiger was able to win it. One reason could have been his size. Maybe the Sungari River tiger also was an 'Equalizer'.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:32:35 GMT -5
www.brothersofthebow.com/html/solospirits.html Some older tigers would also stalk and kill brown bears, which were easier to catch than elk. Following tigers with radio locators, Bart could read these stories in the snow. The tigers usually just walked the bears down from behind. The big cats had killer instincts and usually about a hundred pound weight advantage on the bears. They would go straight for the neck and sever the spine at the base of the skull. Every once in a while the trampled snow would tell of a furious fight, which always ended with a dead bear. During the study, the team determined that vehicle injuries and poachers caused most tiger mortality. Bart said that if the tigers were going to survive, humans were going to have to want them to and find ways to share the same ecosystems. I could tell that Bart was proud of the team’s work as they made progress in habitat planning, forest usage, establishing travel corridors, and public relations. Insurance policies were provided to farmers who suffered livestock losses. He said, “The science is great, but ultimately we need the support of the people who live and work along side these great cats if we are going to succeed.”
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:33:35 GMT -5
( Original author unknown )... Ussuri brown bears are occasionally preyed on by Siberian tigers, and constitute about 1% of their diet (and up to 18.5% together with black bears in very particular cases). Siberian tigers regularly preying on young bears but adult female Ussuri brown bears are also taken outside their dens as well. Siberian tigers most typically attack brown bears in the winter, in the hibernaculum. They are typically attacked by tigers more often than the smaller black bears, due to their habit of living in more open areas and their inability to climb trees. When hunting bears, tigers will position themselves from the leeward side of a rock or fallen tree, waiting for the bear to pass by. When the bear passes, the tiger will spring from an overhead position and grab the bear from under the chin with one forepaw and the throat with the other. The immobilised bear is then killed with a bite to the spinal column. After killing a bear, the tiger will concentrate its feeding on the bear's fat deposits, such as the back, legs and groin. Tiger attacks on bears tend to occur when ungulate populations decrease. From 1944 to 1959, more than 32 cases of tigers attacking bears were recorded in the Russian Far East. In the same period, four cases of brown bears killing female and young tigers were reported, both in disputes over prey and in self-defense. Gepnter et al (1972) stated bears are generally afraid of tigers and change their path after coming across tiger trails. In the winters of 1970–1973, Yudakov and Nikolaev recorded 1 case of brown bear showing no fear of the tigers and another case of brown bear changing path upon crossing tiger tracks. Despite the possibility of tiger predation, some large brown bears may actually benefit from the tiger's presence by appropriating tiger kills that the bears may not be able to successfully hunt themselves and follow. During telemetry research in the Sikhote-Alin protected area, 44 direct confrontations between the two predators were observed, in which bears were killed in 22 cases, and tigers in 12 cases.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:44:34 GMT -5
Environmentalists are searching for a female tiger called Troya, which was released from a wildlife rehabilitation centre. The tiger disappeared without trace in the Far Eastern taiga. Three months ago, Russian and American experts launched a unique experiment in Russia's Far East. Two young female tigers, Troya and Pakhomovna, were released from the Wildlife Rehabilitation Centre Utes, at the foothills of the Sikhote-Alin Range in the Khabarovsk Region, following a lengthy treatment. Special radio-collars, which transfer information via a satellite to a radio centre, were attached to the two animals. However, soon the radio centre stopped receiving signals from Troya's collar. The ecologists organised helicopter rides over the taiga and hunting experts and rangers combed the area, from where the last signals were received, but no trace of the tiger has been found. Board Chairman of the Regional Wildlife Foundation and Doctor of Biology Alexander Kulikov told RIA Novosti that "most probably, Troya has become yet another victim of poachers." "Even if the tiger died in a fight with another stronger animal, e.g. a female brown bear, the collar would have shown where she died," Mr. Kulikov said. He stressed, "poachers possess technical means that might be superior to those of ecologists and hunting experts; they can intercept radio signals, calculate where an animal is going, and set up an ambush." The value of the fur, bones, and internal organs of a tiger is extortionately high on the black market. It is extremely hard to find the poachers. However, even when they are caught, they only end up paying fines and receiving a suspended sentence," Mr. Kulikov said. Chinese law provides strict penalties - up to death -- for the intentional killing of a tiger. "We do not even talk about such penalties here," the scientist stressed, "but we should, as it would than prevent people from killing and selling an animal who is listed in the World Endangered Species List." Mr. Kulikov also mentioned that five years ago 65 to 70 Amur tigers inhabited the forests of the Khabarovsk Region. Today there are less than 60. - See more at: www.pravdareport.com/news/society/09-11-2001/28806-0/#sthash.IbnVNr95.dpuf
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:47:26 GMT -5
voices.nationalgeographic.com/2012/04/30/the-biggest-of-the-big-the-brown-bears-of-alaska-and-the-far-east/ If you can get past the concept that all grizzlies are brown bears, but not all brown bears are grizzlies—a source of great confusion to some—there is an opportunity to learn about the most wide-ranging species of bear in the world, and one of the most wide-ranging mammals on Earth.Although “grizzly bear” is used interchangeably with “brown bear” up here in Alaska, “grizzly bear” really refers to any brown bear found in interior North America. Bears found within interior regions of Alaska and Canada as well as remnant interior populations in the western portion of the contiguous US are grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis).There are only about 1200 grizzly bears found in the lower 48. They primarily exist in designated Recovery Zones in Montana, Wyoming, Washington, and Idaho. Bears of other interior regions and sometime even coastal zones in Eurasia may be referred to as grizzlies, to add to the confusion.In contrast, there are approximately 32,000 brown bears living in Alaska. Some of Alaska’s islands like Admiralty Island in the Southeast part of the state and the Kodiak Archipelago off the southern coast of mainland Alaska are home to some of the densest populations of brown bears in the world. Kodiak is home to about 3400 brown bears of a particularly large subspecies. The the Kodiak brown bear (Ursus arctos middendorffi) is often touted as the largest terrestrial carnivore on the planet. Because of access to an abundance of fish Alaska’s coastal brown bears, similar to the Kodiak, can attain weights upwards of 1400 pounds.Here at the Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center, we currently have Alaska coastal bears, a grizzly, and Kodiak brown bears, as well as two American black bears. Most of these are permanent residents at the facility. Kamchatka brown bear feeding on Pacific salmon (Nat Geo Archives)Just across the Bering Strait from Alaska lives another gigantic brown bear–the Kamchatka brown bear (Ursus arctos beringianus) or the Far Eastern brown bear. Considered to be the ancestor of the Kodiak, the Kamchatka brown bears are dark brown and the largest carnivorans in Eurasia. These are the bears that were featured in the PBS special Walking with Giants: The Grizzlies of Siberia. The film documents the work of Charlie Russel and Maureen Ebbs–two naturalists who sought to discover some insight into the lives of the bears of the famed Kamchatka Peninsula of Siberia.The black grizzly or Ussuri brown bear (Ursus arctos lasiotus) is another big bear occasionally attaining a size greater than the Kamchatka brown bear. These bears are found in the Amur and Ussuri River regions of the Russian Far East, northeastern China, the Korean Peninsula and Japan. In the Amur region these bears cross paths with Siberian (Aumr) tigers on rare occasions, primarily because there are so few Siberian tigers left in the world. Tiger attacks on bears have been reported when the bears were in hibernaculum as well while ambulatory. Supposedly, the brown bears are attacked with more frequency than the smaller Asiatic black bears because of habitat preference and an inability to climb trees. But these bears also attack the typically smaller tigers on occasion. The bears are more commonly known to track tigers, following the big cats’ foot prints to ungulate kills, where they ultimately force the cat off the carcass, taking possession of it.“Huang Di” which translates in Chinese to “King” is the name of the celebrity Ussuri brown bear (Manchurian brown bear) who calls the San Diego Zoo his home. Nicknamed “Blackie,” Huang Di is one of the largest and most beautiful bears I have ever seen. The black bear is a gentle giant, standing nearly 5 ft at the shoulders and weighing in at nearly 900 lbs. Today his enclosure sits adjacent to two young brother grizzlies. When I last visited Huang Di who was born at the Bejing Zoo in 1984 he lumbered over toward the large metal divider, that when closed, safely separated the younger bears from the big Ussuri brown bear in the adjacent bear grotto. Smell or sound of this gigantic boar in their proximity sent them scrambling to a distant hiding place on the other side of their enclosure. Click here for a photo of Huang Di (A.K.A. Blackie).Jordan is an ex officio council member of the International Association for Bear Research & Management and member of the Coordinating Committee for the Bear Specialist Group of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (World Conservation Union).
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:50:15 GMT -5
www.researchgate.net/publication/281480792_Relationship_of_bears_and_tigers_in_the_Russian_Far_East 51 long term monitoring of prey species, habitat type and mitigation measures is proposed to take up for proper conservation and management plan. 2006 Relationship of Bears and Tigers in the Russian Far East Ivan Seryodkin1, Yuri Petrunenko1, Dale Miquelle2, 1Pacific Geographical Institute, FEB RAS, Vladivostok, Russian Federation; 2Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, NY, Contact: yurbarius@rambler.ru In the southern Russian Far East, brown bears (Ursus arctos) and Asiatic black bears (U. thibetanus) co-exist with Amur tigers (Panthera tigris altaica). In the Sikhote-Alin Reserve the relationships between these three species were studied in 1992-2013 during extensive telemetry and snow-tracking efforts. Bears often fed on Amur tiger kills. Of the 353 tiger kills we found during the non-denning period for bears (April-November) 62 kills (17.6%) were used by bears including 37 (60%) brown bear, 9 (14%) by Asiatic black beer and 16 (26%) of uncertain bear species. The proportion of tiger prey scavenged by bears is likely higher than what our data indicate, since utilization by scavengers was not always complete when we visited kills. Often bears fed on kills after tigers abandoned them. However, in at least in 8 cases (12.9%) bears displaced tigers from a kill, and in 7 cases (11.3%) both tigers and bears utilized a kill during the same period. Analysis of prey items revealed that bears represent 3.4% in the diet of tigers in the non-denning period (1.7% for each species of bears). In 44 recorded encounters between tigers and bears, the tiger initiated contact in 12 cases while the bear initiated contact in 8 cases, while in all other cases the individual initiating contact could not be determined.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:52:36 GMT -5
Heaviest reliable confirmed record lion in the wild weighed 260 kg ( 573 pounds ). Heaviest reliable confirmed record tiger in the wild weighed 388.7 kg ( 857 pounds ). Heaviest reliable confirmed record grizzly in the wild weighed 751.15 kg ( 1656 pounds ). *The heaviest tiger outweighed the heaviest lion by 284 pounds. *The heaviest grizzly outweighed the heaviest tiger by 799 pounds. ( pictured is an East Siberian Brown Bear )
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 3:57:02 GMT -5
Average Weights: I will not give specific numbers here. Truth is, no number can be carved in stone as the average weight of any animal. They are all individuals. But, I can say this: The average mature male lion weighs less than 400 pounds ranging from about 350 to about 380 pounds. The average mature male tiger ranges from about 400 to about 450 pounds. The average mature male inland grizzly ranges from about 300 to roughly 500 pounds ( depending on location ). The average mature male coastal grizzly ranges from about 600 to roughly 1000 pounds. The average mature male polar bear ranges from about 900 pounds to roughly 1200 pounds. Size is not a constant. It is affected by environment and food availability.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 4:21:20 GMT -5
www.sdl.lib.mi.us/history/curwood.htmlJames Oliver Curwood was an avid hunter long before he became a conservationist. He wrote fiction novels which were based on the real natural world. His book, 'The Grizzly King' ( 1916 ) was made into a popular movie, 'The Bear' in 1988. Of course, the French director, Jean-Jacques took a few liberties ( Disney style ). The book is much more exciting and informative than the movie. Also note that Thor was a real-life grizzly. One of the things that got me to thinking came from a conversation between the two fictional hunters, Langdon ( the older, wiser, more experienced ) and the younger hunter, Bruce. I will not copy word for word from the book; much too lengthly. But here is the gist of it: The old hunter was saying that most books written about grizzlies either make a hunter laugh or make him angry. For example, the idea of a grizzly making his scratch marks on a tree and, supposedly the next boar grizzly that comes along tests his reach against the dominant boar who had made his mark. Utter nonsense! Most grizzly experts today will tell you that a grizzly is not territorial. Curwood had another idea. The dominant boar grizzly is indeed territorial; but the rules of a grizzly are not the same as the rules of a big cat ( big cats not mentioned in the book ). The apex boar grizzly will allow other grizzlies and other predators to live within his domain. After all, while some grizzlies are more predatory than others, no grizzly depends solely on meat. The top grizzly will ignore the other males so long as they stay out of his way. To challenge him over a berry bush, a choice fishing spot, or a female will not go unpunished. He will patrol his kingdom often, making sure that all who live there knows and understands that he is their lord and master. *It has occurred to me that this might indeed be the cause of at least some of the grizzly/tiger fights in Russia. If a mature male grizzly wanders into the domain of a dominant male tiger will the tiger not attempt to kill or remove the bear? And, if a tiger should decide to hunt within the domain of a dominant boar grizzly, perhaps the tiger may remain and do so just so long as he is submissive to the bear.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 4:22:41 GMT -5
( in my own words )... I have read more tales than I care to count by hunters telling of grizzlies, in knowing that they are being stalked, either circling around and coming-up behind the stalker or simply hiding and ambushing the unwary stalker. So, if a tiger were to be following a mature male grizzly, and the bear thinks himself as potential prey for the big cat, there will always remain the possibility that the tiger might himself be ambushed.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 4:23:40 GMT -5
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 from owners. 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 Mar 19, 2017 4:24:49 GMT -5
First posted by Graaah...
The brown female was similar but smaller (150-200 kg), Dale still struggled. The hype on Dale was this silly 'twice his size' statement which was shown to be inaccurate. I fail to see what makes Dale any more special than other dominant male Amur tigers? The fact they he killed an adult female brown is impressive. The fact that other tigers have and can repeat the same feat makes him regular.
Look at this way, over the last hundred years (poaching & all) we have wild male Amur tigers weighing from 175 - 350 kg (if not heavier). I think most will agree on this. We have also had male browns weighing from 200-600 kg. The excessive weights for both animals being trophy exceptions not the average. So basically, we have had a working model of every hypothetical match up possible. The 260 kg male tiger against a 230 kg male brown, a 300 male brown vs. a 220 kg male tiger - the 220 male tiger vs. 220 male brown or the 240 female brown vs. 210 kg male tiger. Every scenario we can think of already exists or has existed. With that said, the best recourse we have for answers is the research literature that has been pooled from numerous sources. For the male browns, the data confirms what history has shown vis-à-vis dominant bear relations with other apex predators be it food extraction or predation based: the male bear is on top.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Mar 19, 2017 4:26:00 GMT -5
Here is the story behind the taxidermy diorama: wildfact.com/forum/
TIGERS AND BEARS IN RUSSIA TODAY - VII
I think PC is close here, Brotherbear. Although an ambush would be an initial advantage, it wouldn't be decisive in an encounter between a male Amur tiger and a male Ussuri bear. The reason is adult brown bears, and males in particular, usually have a thick layer of muscles in the area a tiger would target (the neck). A tiger wouldn't be able to get to the vertebrae with one bite in a large male brown bear. Although every discussion on this topic is speculative by nature, there's plenty of circumstantial evidence to suggest it would take a lot more to kill an adult male brown bear. I propose to use two examples.
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. Both photographs (the second was posted to show both animals were large) were first posted by Grahh, who posted on AVA some years ago. He now has his own site called 'Shaggy God'.
|
|