Intellect or instinct ? that is the question...

@Philter4

Melanistic Leopards are not very rare in the Wild, especially for the asian subspecies of leopards, the melanistic ones are not uncommon, there are also black leopards known from the cold areas.

In Africa, melanistic leopards are more common for the tropical rainforest. No animal is unfriendly, if a leoaprd or another animal attaks a human in the wild, it is the fault of the human, not of the animal. The only "evil" and most dangerous animal is, of course, the human.

Bongo wrote:

@Philter4

Melanistic Leopards are not very rare in the Wild, especially for the asian subspecies of leopards, the melanistic ones are not uncommon, there are also black leopards known from the cold areas.

In Africa, melanistic leopards are more common for the tropical rainforest. No animal is unfriendly, if a leoaprd or another animal attaks a human in the wild, it is the fault of the human, not of the animal. The only "evil" and most dangerous animal is, of course, the human.

Melanistic leopards are not as common in the population as melanistic jaguars, but I was only talking about black mountain lions (or puma), they are so rare that many people think they are only found in captivity. I have seen photos of dead individuals, and as mentioned 2 of the 3 that I have seen were from the wild, but they are by far the rarest of the melanistic cats. Also, they are not truly black, it is a dark, charcoal color, almost like they are dirty rather then a true black.

I have to disagree with you on the fact that animals are unfriendly, many animals are very unfriendly and attacks happen fairly frequently because the animal is the aggressor. I have lots of experience with medium sized and large cats and any species that lives a solitary life is usually a very aggressive once they are mature. Leopards are the hardest of all cats to tame because they want to be left alone once they reach maturity, and unless they are mating or a female with young you never see two together. If you raise them in captivity once they reach maturity their attitude and actions change, they become very aggressive and territorial. There are none that could be called pets once they are adults, and very few that are even sort of tame, but there are always exceptions, a friend of mine in Miami has a black leopard female that is still fairly friendly with him, but it usually doesn't like anyone she doesn't know. Cats like this are the most dangerous for humans because they are stronger then you, faster then you and meaner then you, add to that the fact that they are not afraid of you and you have a very bad combination.

As far as an attack being the fault of the human, how is an ambush attack of a tiger on a native in India the humans fault, other then the fact that they are in the forest? I know of a 5 year old girl here near the American river that was attacked by a mountain lion and the only reason she survived was she had a life jacket on for swimming and his claws and teeth didn't actually get her, only the foam of the jacket, again, other then the fact that she was there, how is it her fault she was attacked? As far as "evil", I think that is not a term you can use with most animals because the thought process of an animal is so different, so I agree there are no "evil" animals, but I not only disagree with the fact that animals can be aggressive but I know several very aggressive ones personally.

@Philter.

Sorry, but I don't agree with you.

First, Big Cats are wild animal, no pets, and they don't belong into an private household. I know, it's widespread in the USA, but many people there were hurt or killed by their own"pets", and soe of, Sorry,"stupid" people wonder about it, when it happen....I belive, in some States in the USA its now forbidden to keep Big Cats as Pets. By the way, its not possible, to keep big cats in an private household, so I don't like it, beause its not in the interest of the animals.

So there are a lot of facillities in the States which are now full of former "pet" lions,tigers,leopards...

What are you descripe is absoultly natural and normal behaviour for big cats and has nothing to do with unfriendlyness. Only humans can be "unfriendly", and if a big cat or other animals attacking people in the wild, they are not" evil",animals have always a reason for an attack, so they defend themselfs, their young, or their teritory, so people should respect this.

Normally animals don't attack people to eat them. Don't forget, in India, the people have destroyed the natural homes of the tigers, have hunted their natural prey, so some the tigers has become a mankiller, after they found out, how easy it is to kill humans.. It is the fault of humans, never of the animals, which they show only their natural behaviour.

If people go swimming in areas where white shark live, they should not wonder,if something is happening...

Bongo wrote:

@Philter.

Sorry, but I don't agree with you.

First, Big Cats are wild animal, no pets, and they don't belong into an private household. I know, it's widespread in the USA, but many people there were hurt or killed by their own"pets", and soe of, Sorry,"stupid" people wonder about it, when it happen....I belive, in some States in the USA its now forbidden to keep Big Cats as Pets. By the way, its not possible, to keep big cats in an private household, so I don't like it, beause its not in the interest of the animals.

So there are a lot of facillities in the States which are now full of former "pet" lions,tigers,leopards...

What are you descripe is absoultly natural and normal behaviour for big cats and has nothing to do with unfriendlyness. Only humans can be "unfriendly", and if a big cat or other animals attacking people in the wild, they are not" evil",animals have always a reason for an attack, so they defend themselfs, their young, or their teritory, so people should respect this.

Normally animals don't attack people to eat them. Don't forget, in India, the people have destroyed the natural homes of the tigers, have hunted their natural prey, so some the tigers has become a mankiller, after they found out, how easy it is to kill humans.. It is the fault of humans, never of the animals, which they show only their natural behaviour.

If people go swimming in areas where white shark live, they should not wonder,if something is happening...

I do not disagree, wild animals are not pets and people can be stupid, but your statement that animals are not unfriendly is not true, if two leopards meet in the wild and they are not mother and child or two that intend to mate, they fight. Male lions when they take over a pride usually kill all of the previous males cubs, it is a common practice called patricide. You are absolutely correct in the fact that this is normal and natural behavior, but animals can be very unfriendly even to each other. As far as interactions between people and animals, just because a person is in the wild areas does not make it their fault that they get attacked, like your example of swimming with sharks, just the fact that people go in the ocean does not make it their fault that they get bit.

As far as people keeping them as pets, no one who does it through legal methods ever tries to make them pets. There are some who do it for the wrong reasons but that is a very small minority of the people who keep them, they just get all of the publicity because it usually ends badly with someone getting hurt. I know the places you speak of where they have old pets and rescues, I have received some of the cats as rescues myself in the past.

As far as the human always being in the wrong I again disagree, what are people supposed to do, not leave the city or their houses? My point is that humans and animals will always be in contact and just the fact that they live in the same place does not make it the humans fault that they get attacked. Again, I do not disagree that habitat distruction, mostly because of human expansion has caused the populations of wildlife to shrink, but that in itself is not the fault of a single person who is out for a walk in the wild or going to swim in the American River. Your statements are emotional and not necessarily wrong, but they are also not based in the reality of life in an undisturbed forest or managed wildlife area. Places like the state and federal parks here in the USA have interactions with wildlife and it is not always the fault of the human that an attack occurs except for the fact that the person happens to be there. With that in mind, should humans just not go into the forest?

Anyway, I am sorry this went off topic, so I apologize and I'll get back to animal figures.

First i want to congrat Kenny on his new leopards!
A good spotted cat is hard to make as it seems...
The spots on this model are to widely spread, as in most spotted cats, the spots are much more closer to eachother.
A nice melanistic cat could be made, by making a normal spotted model, and then giving it a slight coat of black airbrush, so that the spots can shine through.

I can be very clear on the names of these animals...
Panther is actually an old name giving for the leopard, so black leopard was obvious.
It is true that panther sticked more to the black melanistic version, but black leopard is the correct name, as leopard is for the normal spotted version.
A black jaguar is just a black jaguar, it doesn't matter what names are people giving to them!
But for that we have the scientific names in the first place, so we all talk about the same animal!
Panthera pardus for the leopard(spotted or black), and Panthera onca for a jaguar.
Possibly added with a third name for the sub-species.
The problem is, that locally or in other countries the animals can be named differently, mainly starting with not having enough knowledge about the real name and animal in the first place.
In Florida, the puma or cougar or mountain lion(all 3 correct names) is named Florida panther, as the jaguar is called el tigro(so tiger) in many parts of South-America.....
These facts make it even more complicated sometimes.
Most people who are not specially interested in animals or big cats, can not even seperate a cheetah, leopard or jaguar from eachother, although there are so much differences!
For them the differences or even the likeness are the same as for a zebra, just a big cat with spots, or just a horselike animal with stripes, although there are at least 3 species of zebra, not even counting the sub-species.
I always had in my mind, when i would start a zoo, i would show the people the differences between the different species or sub-species, a kind of sub-species zoo...
Although i never saw a black puma, it will be there i guess, but i know that all spotted cats do have the melanistic gene popping up sometimes, not only the big spotted cats, but serval or other smaller species to.
It has to do with the concentration of the black melanines in the skin, which is more possible on spotted cats, as they have already more black in their skin, or on their furr.
The fact that this melanistic variations still occur, is the fact that they are still usuable as a camouflage colour, specially by species that do hunt for prey in the night, and the fact that most of their prey can only see in black and white.
So a matter of evolution, what is good stays, and what doesn't work out is vanishing...

Then i want to add my few cts to the theme of keeping wild animals...
Well, i do it myself with keeping tropical fish, although 95% of them are bred in captivity, but where is the fine line actually?
For me it is important if we can provide the animal a habitat or surrounding that resambles the natural habitat and way of life as close to nature as possible!
This means, that the must be possible to show their natural behaviours in the complete scale, including breeding and bringing up their young.
Most of the species i keep in my livingroom-tank with 1000 liters content tend to do so, so that says something about my tank, and the way i keep my fish.
In case of big cats, this will be very very difficult, as their natural range is so much bigger as in captivity.
And that besides the fact that they are really dangerous to have around you to, tame or not...
to keep in my field, some people traded some fish with me last week, so i am in the possesion of 2 little red-belly piranhas since then.
People tend to buy them, because it seems to be tough to have such fish in your home, and not even knowing how to keep these fish properly, which is the equivalent of keeping big cats in and around your house.
When you want to keep piranhas, you need to have a fishtank that is at least 250 cm in lenght, with a very big content of water, as the adult versions need 60-80 liters for one animal at least.
But people do no really think about taking some species into their homes...
Thankfully it is not allowed to keep dangerous or most wild animals in your home here in the Netherlands.
But i have respect for the people who made sanctuaries for the animals that were kept in the wrong way by previous owners, or just old circus or zoo animals, to give them the life that they needed...
But not for breeding some variations, which would not survive in nature like white lions and tigers, and for sure not like in South-Africa where they are even bred for the hunt, so that a rich hunter pays about 10-20.000 dollars to shoot a white lion...

And for the rest, of course i don't like when people are attacked by any wild animal, but that is obvious when you are going to live in an area where they live, and that for already many thousands of years!
Not they are wrong, but the people who consisting on living there, same like you persist on living in an area where tornado's regularly occur, or floods or earth-quakes...
Mother nature likes to remember us of the fact, that we are only a very minor wheel in the totall machine of nature and the natural world, and that she rules, and not we, although we like to think different...
The real problem is that our species is to succesfull, and for that we need to much space on this planet with its limited room...

So after all, people need more knowledge in the first place, and must not only think about themselfs...
They are killing sharks by the millions, forgetting, that when they disappear, the foodchains will collaps, including the phyto-plancton, which is the biggest provider for oxygen for us creatures living on the surface of the earth, even much more then the trees, which we are bringing down in a fast rate to!
But i guess it is much to late to turn around all of these things that we people are doing to this world...

And i disagree with you Phil that there are unfriendly animals, as it is only their natural behaviour, unfriendly is a human word, which does not exist in the natural world!

Willy, I will agree that maybe the use of the term "unfriendly" should not be applied to animals, think of it this way, chimps will kill and eat other primates, including other chimps, ants attack and kill other colonies of ants as do bees, how is that different from one human murdering another or two countries going to war? It is just that what we do is not that different from what other animals do, we just apply an emotion to human habits that we don't attribute to an animals actions.

There is a main difference, most animals do their things because it is in their instinct to do so, even chimps, which are very intelligent.
They kill smaller monkees for food, because they seem to need some high-proteines sometimes, and kill other big apes, mostly chimps, to make clear that that is their territory and those are their boundaries of their territory, so no other chimps pass that line...
People in the past did kill for exactly the same reasons, we talk about 30.000-40-000 years ago.
Nobody can tell that we modern humans kill for exactly the same reason today, even when expanding the territory seems to be the reason sometimes, when you look at the latest wars...
We can really think about what we do, more then any animal, even chimps, so you can never compare that i think...
So indeed the term emotion seems typical for our species, although we know know that many other species do have emotions, not only the big apes, but elephants, and some other intelligent species like in the dolphin family...

When i only think of these things, an older movie, from which i forgot the title always runs through my mind, and i saw it only once when i was young...
In this movie, people around the world were not permitted to have any child, they did eat all the same food(namely some green flat cookies, made out of human remains as the main players in the movie found out at the end of the movie), walked around with oxygen containers on their backs, and could go to a kind of museum, to see stuffed animals, in which vitrines were even normal housecats to be seen...
I am very afraid, that the way we live now, and the way we are treating this world right now, will eventually lead to this situation, a matter of time...
I think, that i tell nobody any secret or news, when i say that we people are the worst thing that ever happened to this world!

Willy, I think this will be the last time I write here because this is an animal figure discussion and not the correct forum. I would love to hear more of your thoughts privately if you are also interested because it is a very interesting subject to me, instinct vs intellectual reasoning. Let me make one final point, are you sure it isn't our instinct to kill other humans for territory or resources? We grow food but we also rely on things like oil and other natural resources and if a neighboring village or country has what we need we go and take it. I know there are other reasons, hate over different religions or race, but at some point we have just given an intellectual or emotional argument to something that was at one time instinct. Who is to say that in 2 billion years ants wont justify the killing of a neighboring colony intellectually as a way to get a better position on the side of a tree?

I guess the term unfriendly is where my main problem comes from, dealing with wild animals (as I we both have done most of our lives) I have seen animals do things that seem mean and has no material gain that would help that particular individual survive. I am not talking about a large fish confined, or an animal that is bored, I am talking about animals I have seen on collecting trips and in the wild. Let me know what you think through email if this interests you, I would really like to know when you think instinct becomes intellectual or if intellectualizing an action doesn't change it from being an instinct.

Ok Phil, we will talk about this later over e-mail, otherwise this discussion would go to far in this tread indeed.
I like those discussions, and i think it is not even bad that we animal lovers really think about what we love and see, even on this forum.
Because our love for our models comes from the real natural world in the first place.
Maybe an idea to make a new section for these kind of discussions and thought on this forum...

That would be great. Isn't there a thread where we can discuss whatever we want?

Phil, Willy and Shardur

I don't know if it is an intellect problem or an instinct one, but I'm quite sure human beings are the great specialists for linking one idea to another...
The MOJO leopard and panther topic is a very good example

And I like things are going this way, it brings life to our forum .

But I will split this into a "MOJO black panther and leopard" topic and a "Instinct or intellect ?" topic in the "talk about what you want" section. I would prefer you continue the discussion publicly because it is very interresting. I guess it would be better than PMs

Did it

I agree with Phil, and also with Shardur - that only humans are rightfully considered "evil" for their actions. Animals don't think the way humans do. But humans behave the way animals do. Wars for resources and expansion of territory come from our animal instincts to increase chances of survival. When humans' aggression takes the form of animals, there could be no worse...

Ok that you did make a seperate tread my friend.

Yes Gabe, the only advantage we humans actually have on other animals is our intellect, in which we can seperate feelings or emotions to, which only a few species can as far as we know now...
Stephen Hawking, the worlds most famous scientist right now, said that we probably can live on this earth for 60 years more to come, and then it will be finished, a sad thing to know, isn't it?

By the way, i don't have any problems with people who keep wild animals, and giving them a good home, and a natural enviroment, they will show if they don't feel comfortable anyway...
It is up to the keeper to think and feel for himself if he can really provide these animals to their needs...

I'd have to say I agree with Phil on the whole "unfriendly" subject. Individuals within most species vary in personality. Anyone who has every worked with animals - wild or domestic - or anyone who has multiple pets even can tell that individual animals have individual personalities. While I don't have a lot of personal experience working with big cats, I've known a few people with extensive experience working with them, both in captivity and in their natural environments. There seems to be consensus that the easiest cats to work with are lions. Tigers are generally more standoffish and can be tempermental. Jaguars tend to be fairly laid back and easy to work with. Leopards are apparently usually the worst, almost always more dangerous than the others and much more unabashedly aggressive. I've never really talked to them about Pumas or Cheetahs, sorry.

I know that all of these people that work with big cats have some that they really like, that they would even say (within reason) they trust to not hurt them, while there are other cats they don't really like all that much overall, and they definitely don't trust them. The cats' personalities are as individual and unique as humans' personalities. There are even leopards that are easy to work with and lions that are a total pain in the butt. There are some individual animals that can easily be described as being unfriendly, and at the opposite end of the spectrum, there are some individual animals that definitely could be described as being friendly.

I totally agree on that Sphyrna, so much different characters as animals i guess...
But what i said, is the fact that the term unfriendly is still a human way of calling them, because what these animals do, is still a natural way of behaviour, thats all.
We people tend to use our own terms on animals, you just have to see some episodes of the "Dog Whisperer" from series for that...
But i think to, if we could understand all of the animal languages, they would have a term of beeing unfriendly to in their own language.
So after all, i understand that people use that term, it just depends in which way or in what case this term is used...