|
Post by theundertaker45 on Jan 11, 2021 5:51:54 GMT -5
Scientists researching how far sharks hunt seals in the Arctic were stunned in June to find part of the jaw of a young polar bear in the stomach of a Greenland shark, a species that favors polar waters. “We’ve never heard of this before. We don’t know how it got there,” Kit Kovacs, of the Norwegian Polar Institute, told Reuters of the 10 cm (4 inch) bone found in a shark off the Norwegian Arctic archipelago of Svalbard.“We can’t say whether or not the shark took a swimming young bear” or ate a carcass, she said. “We don’t know how active these sharks are as predators.”www.reuters.com/article/us-arctic/polar-bear-eaten-by-shark-whos-top-predator-idUSLB66891920080811This is the original article dealing with polar bear contents found in the stomach of a greenland shark, it dates back to 2008.
|
|
|
Post by theundertaker45 on Jan 11, 2021 5:56:17 GMT -5
"A big bear is no different from a big cow, a big chewable area for the shark to chew off a huge chunk."
The latter is a rather immobile herbivore who would drown after spending a long time in water while at the same time being uncapable of defending itself whereas the former is a fully specialized marine predator having pulled out and taken down sizeable whales on his own. I absolutely disagree with your statement therefore, a shark attacking a big cow is in no way comparable to a shark attacking a polar bear, it makes absolutely no sense in my eyes.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Jan 11, 2021 5:58:17 GMT -5
Yeah; I had thought of that too. Finding the remains of a polar bear within the belly of a shark is not proof of predation. There are so many ways for a bear to die out in the ocean or on the ice. This remark really surprised me: "Most shark experts contacted said it was likely the bear was dead before the shark found it. Even a young, two- or three-year-old bear would be a ferocious opponent for a Greenland shark, which can grow to up to 7 meters (23 feet) and weigh more than a tonne." *When you're a ferocious opponent for a 23 foot long shark, that's saying something.
|
|
|
Post by OldGreenGrolar on Jan 11, 2021 6:25:51 GMT -5
"A big bear is no different from a big cow, a big chewable area for the shark to chew off a huge chunk."The latter is a rather immobile herbivore who would drown after spending a long time in water while at the same time being uncapable of defending itself whereas the former is a fully specialized marine predator having pulled out and taken down sizeable whales on his own. I absolutely disagree with your statement therefore, a shark attacking a big cow is in no way comparable to a shark attacking a polar bear, it makes absolutely no sense in my eyes. I think I know where Tundra Eagle is coming from. He means the shark can slice through the bear’s skin just as easily as slicing through that of an ungulate. Sharks have one of the best slicing bites. English is just not his first language. I know him back in the Old AVA forum. Just an outline about Tundra:He supports crocs over sharks, and sharks over bears (in general). He supports bears over big cats. Tundra also supports big cats over wolves but he supports fighting dogs over big cats at parity.
|
|
|
Post by brobear on Feb 7, 2021 12:10:12 GMT -5
More polar bears will be eaten by sharks, once they traverse the sea in search of food due to meltimg ice. They are already udr pressure from tougher browner bears. A big bear is no different from a big cow, a big chewable area for the shark to chew off a huge chunk. Mammalian predators like bigcats, bears and wolves are easily killed themselves. Unlike big crocs with armors. Crocodiles dominate sharks, not because of their leathery hide, but because a crocodile can whip around like a snake ( reptilian ). A shark generally hits his target, then swims around in a wide circle before returning. Evidently more "stiff-bodied".
|
|