|
|
Post by Runic on Jun 10, 2013 11:09:07 GMT 5
A tiger killed an *old male grizzly. Not a great accomplishment killing the elderly. And as I have mentioned before, tigers might from time to time kill a shatun bear. They are near death to begin with from starvation. So again, the only known fight between a healthy adult male tiger and a healthy adult grizzly boar was the Amur River fight. The grizzly killed the tiger. Just the way it is.
*Brown Bears don't hibernate in the middle of summer.
In his letter to Mazak, Jankowski clearly stated the tiger, a few days before he was shot, had killed and eaten a large male brown bear. Because of his experience, Jankowski was able to realise the scene he encountered was most remarkable.
*Jankowski, the most reliable source on this incident, never mentioned the Bear being a shatun, ever.
2 - RELIABILITYJankowski's observation doesn't compare to observations made by modern researchers. It's a pity he didn't provide Mazak with more details or a good photograph, but Mazak thought the account was genuine. Which tells us something, because he, for the third edition of his book, would have wanted to prevent mistakes and would have made certain Jankowski was a reliable source.
In order to prevent future discussions on the bear and the tiger, it has to be stated the tiger hadn't ordered brown bear steak a la Heilongjiang in a local pub. Jankowski stated the giant tiger had killed and eaten a large male brown bear and I think he realised it had been a singular incident indeed. That's why he, 27 years after his experience, communicated on what he had seen in Heilongjiang on July 9, 1943.
— Adult male Tiger vs Adult male Brown Bear scorecard is 1-1 for as far as I'm concerned, which is quite remarkable, considering that in Amur regions, Bears generally have a good 150 pounds on Tigers. I don't see the bear fought back or the tiger was injured. No animal fights and kills a brown bear head on without some scars to prove it. The tiger most likely ambushed it from behind a fallen tree. |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Jun 10, 2013 11:17:17 GMT 5
And I feel like being ambiguous here. Yes a brown bear sow killed a 500lb male tiger in the circus (you said has there EVER been an account. You weren't specific  ) Now I ask you. I don't want anything else other than what I'm about to ask. If you don't have it. Don't reply to this particular post. Has there EVER been an account of a SINGLE male tiger no matter the species FIGHTING (as in the bear and tiger engaged in combat) and then killing a brown bear of "larger size" as you say it? I want a head on account with these key words Tiger Fought (the most important word here) Killed Large Brown bear Can you do that much? |
|
|
|
Post by Runic on Jun 10, 2013 11:19:30 GMT 5
Sorry for the constant posts but I'm on a mobile.
Throw the keyword "Male" up into the list.
|
|
grizzly
Junior Member Rank 1
Posts: 38 
|
Post by grizzly on Jun 10, 2013 13:55:11 GMT 5
A few examples. Jankowski wrote he, his brothers and a Korean professional hunter shot a large male tiger near the Sungari in July 1943. The tiger had killed and eaten a large, old male brown bear (Mazak, 1983). Russian authorities didn't accept the report for lack of evidence, but Mazak posted a photograph of the tiger, who was estimated at 650 pounds. Mazak also wrote about a young Russian biologist who died well before his time. His notes say a large, old male brown bear was killed by a tiger in Sichote-Alin. Also not accepted for obvious reasons. Rakov wrote about a 'large brown bear' killed and eaten by a tiger in winter. Alexious thought it was a male brown bear.
Who is Jankowski? tiger kills an elderly grizzly. tiger kills a hibernating bear. there is also an account of a grizzly she-bear killing and eating a hibernating male. problem is, what condition, age, etc were those hibernating bear? Large brown bear = ?
|
|
grizzly
Junior Member Rank 1
Posts: 38
|
Post by grizzly on Jun 10, 2013 13:58:50 GMT 5
Black Ice says: Grizzly bear don't live with tiger. And tiger kill bear bigger than them when they have some significant upper hand (the bears sick, old, ambushed etc). Never have I heard any cat taking out an aware bear actively fighting back. I should also note I haven't read this debate so if a account has been posted I haven't seen it.
Ussuri brown bear also called the black grizzly is believed to be the direct ancestor of our American grizzly. He along with the Japanese brown bear Ursus arctos yesoensis are both true grizzly bears.
|
|
grizzly
Junior Member Rank 1
Posts: 38
|
Post by grizzly on Jun 10, 2013 13:59:39 GMT 5
Black Ice says: Grizzly bear don't live with tiger. And tiger kill bear bigger than them when they have some significant upper hand (the bears sick, old, ambushed etc). Never have I heard any cat taking out an aware bear actively fighting back. I should also note I haven't read this debate so if a account has been posted I haven't seen it. Ussuri brown bear also called the black grizzly is believed to be the direct ancestor of our American grizzly. He along with the Japanese brown bear Ursus arctos yesoensis are both true grizzly bears.  Presenting data of tigers killing weak and elderly ( like me ), sick or starving ( shatun ) or she-bears is cherry picking. Healthy adult male on both sides if you please, Vodmeister. *I haven't yet figured out why I am double posting. I make a poor computer geek. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 10, 2013 19:31:19 GMT 5
1 - SHATUN OR NO SHATUNThe tiger was shot on July 9, 1943. In his letter to Mazak, Jankowski wrote the tiger had killed and eaten a very large male brown bear a few days before he was shot. Jankowski found a leg and the head of the bear himself. The bear, therefore, was killed in July 1943. In the middle of summer, that is.
*Brown Bears don't hibernate in the middle of summer.
In his letter to Mazak, Jankowski clearly stated the tiger, a few days before he was shot, had killed and eaten a large male brown bear. Because of his experience, Jankowski was able to realise the scene he encountered was most remarkable.
*Jankowski, the most reliable source on this incident, never mentioned the Bear being a shatun, ever.
2 - RELIABILITYJankowski's observation doesn't compare to observations made by modern researchers. It's a pity he didn't provide Mazak with more details or a good photograph, but Mazak thought the account was genuine. Which tells us something, because he, for the third edition of his book, would have wanted to prevent mistakes and would have made certain Jankowski was a reliable source.
In order to prevent future discussions on the bear and the tiger, it has to be stated the tiger hadn't ordered brown bear steak a la Heilongjiang in a local pub. Jankowski stated the giant tiger had killed and eaten a large male brown bear and I think he realised it had been a singular incident indeed. That's why he, 27 years after his experience, communicated on what he had seen in Heilongjiang on July 9, 1943.
— Adult male Tiger vs Adult male Brown Bear scorecard is 1-1 for as far as I'm concerned, which is quite remarkable, considering that in Amur regions, Bears generally have a good 150 pounds on Tigers. I don't see the bear fought back or the tiger was injured. No animal fights and kills a brown bear head on without some scars to prove it. The tiger most likely ambushed it from behind a fallen tree. Where, in any point during the record, does it say that the Tiger did not have scars? This record is no more or no less reliable than the 1943 Amur River account. The Tiger fought a healthy adult male Brown Bear in the summer, and won, that simple. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 10, 2013 19:32:59 GMT 5
Are you a parrot? Because you keep repeating things even after proven to be irrelevant. A Bengal Tiger is bigger and heavier than an Amur Tiger; the American Grizzly is smaller than the Russian Brown Bear. The 1943 incident has very little or no significance in this face-off, because the Bear isn't enjoying a size advantage here. Again, has there ever in history been an account of a Brown Bear beating a Tiger larger than himself? No. Tigers have beaten Grizzlies larger than themselves, but Grizzlies have beat Tigers without a size advantage. That's quite telling. Grizzly bear don't live with tiger. And tiger kill bear bigger than them when they have some significant upper hand (the bears sick, old, ambushed etc). Never have I heard any cat taking out an aware bear actively fighting back. I should also note I haven't read this debate so if a account has been posted I haven't seen it. You are parroting just like Grizzly tbh. Brown Bears live with Tigers in Amur. There have been records of Tigers killing Brown Bears larger than themselves, but never records of Ussuri Brownies killing Tigers larger than themselves. Coincidence? Don't think so. |
|
grizzly
Junior Member Rank 1
Posts: 38
|
Post by grizzly on Jun 10, 2013 22:45:06 GMT 5
The tiger was shot on July 9, 1943. In his letter to Mazak, Jankowski wrote the tiger had killed and eaten a very large male brown bear a few days before he was shot. Jankowski found a leg and the head of the bear himself. The bear, therefore, was killed in July 1943. In the middle of summer, that is.
Jankowski discovered a bear which had been partially eaten by a tiger. Possibilities include: The bear died of old age. The bear died from sickness or parasites. The bear was killed by another bear. The bear died from gunshot wounds.
Difference: The Amur River fight was actually witnessed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 10, 2013 23:02:13 GMT 5
Jankowski discovered a bear which had been partially eaten by a tiger. Possibilities include: The bear died of old age. The bear died from sickness or parasites. The bear was killed by another bear. The bear died from gunshot wounds. All of these are unlikely compared to the obvious possibility of the Tiger killing the Bear. Tigers hunt for prey, almost all the food they eat is animals they have killed. Only very rarely do they benefit from carcasses. I have that fixed for you. There was never any photographic or video evidence of the fight, merely claims of witnesses; and let's face it, people like to over-exaggerate, it's a part of human nature. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 10, 2013 23:06:04 GMT 5
Again, the most important point is being ignored here. Russian Brown Bears have a 150 pound weight advantage over Amur Tigers (580 pounds versus 430 pounds). American Grizzlies and Bengal Tigers are about equal in size (both around 485-490 pounds).
If in history, there is only one reliable account of a Brown Bear killing an adult male Tiger in all of the historical confrontations, despite having a considerable size advantage, then how does that put the Grizzly against a Bengal Tiger?
|
|
grizzly
Junior Member Rank 1
Posts: 38
|
Post by grizzly on Jun 11, 2013 2:41:51 GMT 5
All of these are unlikely compared to the obvious possibility of the Tiger killing the Bear.
*The tiger killing the adult male grizzly is by far the least likely scenario. As likely as a Bengal tiger attacking a fully adult bull rhinoceros. While it is theoretically possible, it is very unlikely. Bears, like any other animal do grow old or get sick. He could have died from a gunshot wound, perhaps multiple. He could have been poisoned. The most likely event, in my opinion would be that he was killed by a bigger bear. The story has no merit.
|
|
grizzly
Junior Member Rank 1
Posts: 38
|
Post by grizzly on Jun 11, 2013 2:48:34 GMT 5
All of these are unlikely compared to the obvious possibility of the Tiger killing the Bear. *The tiger killing the adult male grizzly is by far the least likely scenario. As likely as a Bengal tiger attacking a fully adult bull rhinoceros. While it is theoretically possible, it is very unlikely. Bears, like any other animal do grow old or get sick. He could have died from a gunshot wound, perhaps multiple. He could have been poisoned. The most likely event, in my opinion would be that he was killed by a bigger bear. The story has no merit.
I will try to learn who witnessed the 1943 Amur River fight. The strangest part of that story is, Why did an adult male tiger stand his ground against a full grown healthy Russian grizzly? That is very unlike a tiger. |
|
grizzly
Junior Member Rank 1
Posts: 38
|
Post by grizzly on Jun 11, 2013 2:53:47 GMT 5
Again, the most important point is being ignored here. Russian Brown Bears have a 150 pound weight advantage over Amur Tigers (580 pounds versus 430 pounds). American Grizzlies and Bengal Tigers are about equal in size (both around 485-490 pounds). If in history, there is only one reliable account of a Brown Bear killing an adult male Tiger in all of the historical confrontations, despite having a considerable size advantage, then how does that put the Grizzly against a Bengal Tiger?
In all of the historical confrontations? The Amur River fight is the *only witnessed historical confrontation in the wild.
How does that put the grizzly against a Bengal tiger. I believe that the grizzly would win such face-off encounters well above 50%.
We can only speculate - that is my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 11, 2013 4:06:59 GMT 5
Uh, no, Tigers killing Rhinoceros is far less likely than Tigers killing Bears, unless of course you are assuming that Bears are tougher than Rhinos. Nevertheless, Tigers have killed Elephants and Rhinoceros before, freak occurrences but they do happen. If a Tiger can kill a 5 tonne animal, it can kill a 500 pound animal. Tigers have killed adult male Brown Bears before, freak occurrences but they have happened before.
In nature, there is no legal law that Tigers are not allowed by rule to attack an adult male Brown Bear. In nature, anything can happen, is that too hard to understand?
|
|
)
