Man-eater

[srswamy]

I meant why not offer MAN EATER for legal Hunting, it would have fetched so much money that all the forest gaurds in UP would have got AK47's, better clothes and footewear.
-Inder

We're missing a point that any tiger can be "branded" as a man eater, and legally be shot, if such a process came into practice.

[winnie_the_pooh]

Myth-Man eaters kill people when they are no longer able to hunt their normal prey.

Reality-On the Indian sub continent tigers have been hunted on a regular basis and so have learned to avoid man.There is no such fear of man in tigers in the sunderbans who routinely kill and eat humans.Medieval accounts tell of predation by tigers leading to people leaving certain areas.On pilgrimage and trade routes passing through forests,there was always the danger of being taken by a tiger.Predators will kill and eat whatever is the easiest to catch and kill.Humans are the easiest.I do not think tigers have a liking for a certain type of meat while they will avoid other types(read humans).

Man is an easy prey as compared to the 'normal' food for a tiger
1.Limited sense of smell
2.Limited sense of hearing
3.Can not run very fast
4.Has no God given means of defending himself(no hooves,horns,tusks,thick skin..)
5.There is limited chance of the tiger injuring himself in a struggle with a human.

= to a lot of calories with minimum effort for the tiger


M24,

You want to save all tigers,even the ones who have become a danger to man.Why do you not work on this and then come back and tell us,or rather the powers that be,how it can be done.

But wait,it is not your father/mother/brother/sister/wife/son/daughter eaten by a tiger/leopard nor is there any chance of this happening.Also it is not you who is going to do the catching.Hence the argument.

As far as I am concerned,if I spot a leopard/tiger lurking around my house.I WILL take my rifle and shoot it.

Now I am sure some tree hugger is going to rant on how he would like to see me being eaten by one

[m24]

You want to save all tigers,even the ones who have become a danger to man.Why do you not work on this and then come back and tell us,or rather the powers that be,how it can be done.

But wait,it is not your father/mother/brother/sister/wife/son/daughter eaten by a tiger/leopard nor is there any chance of this happening.Also it is not you who is going to do the catching.Hence the argument.

I am not saying any of that, winnie. I am just trying to understand the whole kill-the-man-eater-thing. As I said in my earlier posts, I am not here or anywhere to make things right. I have neither the capability nor the knowledge to do so. But, that will not stop me from getting my facts right.

When government can't even provide ample clean water to our forces fighting in naxal hit areas then AK47 for forest gaurds from charity and other funds seems a far fetched dreams isn't it..

Its a BAD world out there and sadly in this BAD world tigers have to pay for their survival, only problem right now is Tiger is doing the payment already but not getting anythign in return.

Totally agree with you, Inder.

Regards

[mundaire]

m24, IIRC the person in question (who shot the Faizabad man-eater) has somewhat of a dodgy reputation... unless I am mistaken he has even spent some time as a "state guest" at one of those govt. facilities with barred windows! Wouldn't be surprised one bit if there is more to it (the Faizabad story) than meets the eye...

[m24]

Can't comment on that, mundaire, as I don't know the gentleman. I only mentioned the man-eater of Faizabad as it was a recent incident and had been reading up on that.

Regards

[kanwar76]

I meant why not offer MAN EATER for legal Hunting, it would have fetched so much money that all the forest gaurds in UP would have got AK47's, better clothes and footewear.
-Inder

We're missing a point that any tiger can be "branded" as a man eater, and legally be shot, if such a process came into practice.

Who will do that? If I am not mistaken only Government has the powers to declare a tiger man eater

So you don't trust your government? If not then why do you think they will save the tigers right now when they are of no use?

-Inder

[fantumfan2003]

Winnie

You will shoot one just because one is lurking near your house ? Not sure of where you live but if you are living close to a jungle, I say you are the intruder in the big cats house and not the cat in yours.

If you said it in a lighter vein, that's fine but if not then I see no difference between you and our society gardener who wants to kill every reptile he lays his eyes on. The ignorant chap just does not know that our society is built in what was a jungle 50 years ago. And also does not know who is the intruder and in whose house.

As for maneaters and what make them one, who has better brains and should know better about going in harms way ? Man or the Cat ?

M.

As far as I am concerned,if I spot a leopard/tiger lurking around my house.I WILL take my rifle and shoot it.

Now I am sure some tree hugger is going to rant on how he would like to see me being eaten by one

-- Tue Jun 01, 2010 17:26 --

Swamy,

I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU. And it has already happened. In the Faizabad case another tiger was mistaken as the maneater and shot dead by someone else before the real maneater was killed.

Yes the sarkari machinery will ensure that such things will happen if that's done.

M.

I meant why not offer MAN EATER for legal Hunting, it would have fetched so much money that all the forest gaurds in UP would have got AK47's, better clothes and footewear.
-Inder

We're missing a point that any tiger can be "branded" as a man eater, and legally be shot, if such a process came into practice.

[mundaire]

Can't comment on that, mundaire, as I don't know the gentleman. I only mentioned the man-eater of Faizabad as it was a recent incident and had been reading up on that.

Regards

My comment was further to srswamy's contention that corrupt officials may be possibly incorrectly branding tigers as man eaters. IMHO wildlife conservation is too crucial a subject to be left in the hands of our (by and large) corrupt officialdom. There needs to be more citizen participation, as Inder suggests ways and means must be sought to create an economically viable wildlife conservation ecosystem, with benefits flowing directly to the locals (giving them a stake in preserving wildlife) as well as to various conservation schemes & initiatives.

Unless wildlife can be made into an economically viable business model, it will be extremely difficult if not impossible for us to preserve even what we have left with us.

[Vikram]

Winnie got it very right.Predators are opportunistic and old age/disability are not the only cause of a tiger/leopard/lion turning into a man eater. As Winnie rightly said about the Sundarbans tigers, there has been a history of highest concentration of man eating tigers there.Opportunity,habit and learning young from a man eating mother etc, have turned quite a few tigers to eating humans. Jim Corbett wrote about how it was the practice in the hills of Kumaon to dump bodies unburied/uncremated during epidemics and how that had turned the quite a few predators around that region to eating people.

Another example are the famous man eating lions of Tsao,made famous by the film 'Ghost and the Darkness'. The spot where the bridge was being built also used to be a slave trading post and it was common to dump the bodies of those who perished and the lions around that place had a habit of eating humans,alive or dead.

Re rehabilitation- In the present scenario,there have been examples of tranquillising the 'offending' beast and move them to zoos.At this moment, if it can be done,why not? Billy Arjan Singh type of quixotic experiments are not only impractical but could prove to be dangerous to both the animal and humans.

Inder's idea is again can yield very positive results and it is quite practical.Of course there is always a danger of what Swami has pointed out,i.e, manufactured man eaters.But, it is well worth a try.

At the very basic level,humans are animals too and for a hungry predator we are no better or worse than an antelope.

Best-
Vikram



Again

[shooter]

Hi M24 i am sure you are quite knowledgable about tigers etc but i am still answering your post at face value.

Man eater: an english term used loosely. it is neither a scientific term nor a legal one therefore doesnt have a fixed definition.

Since vedic times it has been mentioned that it is hazardous to go into the forests because of robbers, tigers leopards etc. But maybe these were the city folks. what we forget there were a number of tribes and villages in the forest who have been settled in the forest since millinia without being decimated in the forests.

The old indian explanations about the man eaters were that they were shaitan/devil or that the soul of the last victim rode the tiger and guided him towards the next victim and didnt rest in peace till the tiger made its next kill and had the next soul ride the tiger hence the man eating trend continued (depending what part of india one came from).

In the indian context, the first person to study the tiger scientifically and write about maneating was Corbett. He was a pioneer just like Bohr was in study of an atom. He is still remembered for his valuable contribution but just because bohrs model was later found incorrect doesnt lessen its importance.

Corbett had many theories, some correct and others have been modified over the years by other tiger experts. This doesnt take away anything from Corbett.

The incidence/prevalence of injuries in big cats is higher than the incidence of man eaters. Thus not all old/injured animals become man eaters. I dont want to elaborate with examples of lions/cougars bears etc in other parts of the world. So we will stick to tigers.

They are predators but man has never been their natural food. Even corbett says that a lot of times their first kill is accidental and then they may become maneaters (not will).

Resorting to cattle lifting is more common for old injured ones than killing a man.
Despite killing several humans, tigers still continue to stalk them as they would stalk an animal with good hearing and a good smell. We know that humans have bad sense and hearing, not the tiger.

But on the other hand whats also true is that a proper veteran man eater loses fear of man to a great degree (no s#%t sherlock).

I am not going to go into corbett bashing now as he is dead and he did start the idea of conservation. But I can tell you the explanation behind man eating is still not simple. Old age, injuries,accidental killing etc etc. But still as all pet owners know, animals have personalities, iq which differs from one animal to the other. This is tue of dogs cats monkeys etc etc all animals esp mammals. To hunt a quarry, one must be able to outwit it somehow. To hunt man............ well do the math. Not all tigers can turn maneater. As i have mentioned, tigers dont know of our weakness and doesnt always go for just brute strength to kill humans............ but then again some do. You see again... personality and thinking etc etc.

I hope i have (un)answered some queries about maneating behaviour. Now legally, it is declared a maneater if there is enough complains and hue and cry. There are several posts on the law regarding hunting so i wont quote the wildlife act 72 but it doesnt give a limit to the no. of kills and cattle lifting before being declared a man eater or cattle lifter.

Now the second part of management. All serial killers cant be apprehended in the same manner (in humans). Police will try to arrest them but if they fire back, they are also killed in an encounter. If the cops are dishonest, they can kill innocent people in the name of encounetrs. This can also happen in case of mistaken identity. Ditto for tigers.

These are humans who we can recognise, differentiate etc. but this still happens. How many forest people can differentiate between tigers by looking at them or tell their age sex etc. If we can be mistaken in people, forget about tigers. Esp at dusk, in the lantana bushes, light playing tricks on your eyes and adrenaline doing thesame to ones senses.

Secondly, dart gun range 30-40 yards. Takes many minutes to work. It takes a tiger less than 5 seconds to cover that distance. Man imagine poking a tiger, and one with an attitude at that, plus he is in constant pain, with a needle in the backside.

Well one could try but then one should have a backup with a rifle as well. Who will bell the cat?

Thirdlly, rehab. A lot of big cats who have spent many years in the wild dont take easily to zoos and many die. Man even feral humans who have spent childhood in the forest die when kept in the hospitals forget cages. It has been noted that many even self harm and self mutilate.

If its a cub whose mother has been a maneater and thats all they have been exposed to.......well i cant say. Maybe they can be 'taught' to hunt and rehabilitated to semi-zoos like the 'safari' parks they have in the uk. but there are no such places in India.

I dont agree that they have to be given live baits etc. They can be given dead meat and they wll still eat it. The old saying that has led to lot of clapping and whistles when narrated by the likes of Dharam paaji, big bi -"Sher doosrey ka shikaar nahi khaata"- is a myth.

Conservation: to ensure a species survival it is important that it is worth more alive than dead. (in practial worldly terms not in an ecological, aesthetic perspective). It is sad and i dont necessarily agree with it but it is true. What is also true and sadder is that the tiger doesnt fall into this category.

Now how does one make the tiger worth more alive than dead?

a) increase the entry to the national parks to rs 10000 per person. (and thousands of tourists are happy and flock there)
b)or... every sighting/picture of a tiger gives the sighter/photographer rs. 10000
c)Spread a rumor and start practicing alternate medicine that includes live tigers/tiger parts a la civet coffee. Or that a live tigers tail when immersed in water makes it an aphrodisiac (and to stick viagra powder to the tigers tail after darting them)
d) Hunt a limited quota say two tigers a year; target older males/rouges etc; charge $250000 trophy fees per tiger.
This additional 2 crores a year can be used to get more land into the parks, relocate villagers/ stop poaching/education.
e) other members please contribute.

[Yaj]

My comment was further to srswamy's contention that corrupt officials may be possibly incorrectly branding tigers as man eaters. IMHO wildlife conservation is too crucial a subject to be left in the hands of our (by and large) corrupt officialdom. There needs to be more citizen participation, as Inder suggests ways and means must be sought to create an economically viable wildlife conservation ecosystem, with benefits flowing directly to the locals (giving them a stake in preserving wildlife) as well as to various conservation schemes & initiatives.

Unless wildlife can be made into an economically viable business model, it will be extremely difficult if not impossible for us to preserve even what we have left with us.

I agree with srswamy and Abhijeet on this. You can bet that soon there will be a racket on denoting maneaters and tags being sold at govt rate + baksheesh!
Regards,
Yaj.

[fantumfan2003]

IDEA : Declare all the Sunderban tigers maneaters, because they eat man. Float tenders internationally for their heads. Award tenders to highest bidders. Bang, bang, bang........Bye Bye Sunderban Tigers.
Money will never be used for "conservation" and another scam will be born.......

TIGERS WILL PERISH, MAN WILL GET RICH......

Scary thought...........

VERY BAD IDEA.

But why not do something for man who goes fishing in tigers home in the sunderbans ?
Is'nt that what the govt. should do ?

M.

[prashantsingh]

The greatest challenge in shooting a maneater is when there are more than 2 tigers/big cats in the same area. One can follow the pug marks and get close to an animal , but when a tiger presents itself, there is little time to decide........How does the shikari decide whether this IS the actual man eater or an otherwise innocent animal.They all look the same.
Even when the great hunter Jim Corbett decided to shoot only maneaters .He landed up killing more "innocent" tigers and leopards in a case of mistaken identity before he got the real culprit.
The fact that the maneater has been shot comes into light only after the human killings in the area (the animal operated) come to a complete stop.

[winnie_the_pooh]

If hunting is to be used for conservation ,tiger need not be on the list.When nilgai and boar are allowed to be hunted in some areas,why not sell permits to hunt them.

I am sure,nilgai and wild boar can be hunted elsewhere but the idea of shikar in India would have many willing to come over and pay good money to do so.Use that money to secure the future of wildlife in India including the habitat of the tiger.Maybe some day will come when the tiger numbers would have increased to the level where even they can be hunted.

I would like to point out that Forest and Wildlife are two different departments.While forestry earns good money for the govt. wildlife does not,to that extent.When you allow hunting,you also automatically create a lobby whose interest lies in the preservation of forest and who would be willing to spend money to ensure their survival.

Another thing,most of the illegal logging and poaching takes place in the core areas which are inaccessible to tourists.Start hunting and all the forest would be accessible by knowledgeable folks.

So far,from what I am aware none of the "Save the tiger" campaigns by media groups (NDTV being one) have raised a lot of money.

I sure would like to ask the people at NDTV how much paper was used in their last 'campaign' and how many trees would be needed to cut down to make that amount of paper.

How about making Forest and Wildlife a Central Subject and notification or de-notification of forest areas subject to approval by both houses of the Parliament.

[srswamy]

Who will do that? If I am not mistaken only Government has the powers to declare a tiger man eater
So you don't trust your government? If not then why do you think they will save the tigers right now when they are of no use?
-Inder

Well, well, well....I do not trust the Government! I never said they will save the tigers now.
If at all, people believed it -- there won't be so much of blogs, awareness programs etc, for the cause!!