Talk:Jaguar

Add Maya mythology wikilink.

Add Maya mythology wikilink. 108.73.113.84 (talk) 19:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

One of the editors made a mistake, I don't have a wiki account or I would change it.

Although once thought to have the most powerful jaws among extant carnivorous mammals, other animals such as the Tasmanian Devil have been proven to have even stronger bites.[29]

The source that he listed for that is an article referring to Tasmanian Devils having a stronger bite (lb for lb) for it's size, it definitely is not talking about it having a stronger bite, just relatively stronger by size.

Here are some of the quotes from the article:

"Somewhat surprisingly, marsupials, pound for pound, were biting far above their weight," says Wroe.

"Among the living species, the Tasmanian devil took the prize for biggest biter relative to its body size." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.2.12 (talk) 09:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Where are you seeing Tasmanian devils in this jaguar article on Wikipedia? Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:44, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Possoble inconsistency

OK, which is it:

Once in America, the jaguar adapted to changing climates and evolved particular characteristics such as losing its roar and learning to swim. [20]

Like the other big cats, the jaguar is capable of roaring (the male more powerfully) and does so to warn territorial and mating competitors away; intensive bouts of counter-calling between individuals have been observed in the wild. [46]

Does the Jaguar roar loudly; or, has it lost its roar?

Good point, These papers indicate that the jaguar can roar. LittleJerry (talk) 02:55, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

File:MocheJaguarLarcoMuseum.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:MocheJaguarLarcoMuseum.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:MocheJaguarLarcoMuseum.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:28, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

West Virginia

The jaguar was first observed and recorded in the United States by Thomas Jefferson in 1799. Jefferson's zoological report included jaguar in the fauna of the Ohio River Valley portion of West Virginia

Is this vandalism? I've never heard of jaguars living in the East. Funnyhat (talk) 02:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't believe it, either, but I located the full text of "The Writings of Thomas Jefferson," and sure enough, J. lists the Jaguar among many other mammals, including something called a "jaguaret". Can't find that anywhere. Jaguarundi? No matter. Put the source in the article. --Seduisant (talk) 04:05, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Looking over that list, it appears to me to be simply a list of animals found in the Americas as a whole, not specifically the Virginia region. The list appears following a discourse on the differences between European and (North) American "quadrupeds". I notice that the caribou, wolverine ("glutton") and tapir are listed, as well as the jaguar. The former three clearly never lived in West Virginia. I'm editing the article to state that Jefferson listed the jaguar in Notes on Virginia as an animal residing in the Americas. We should leave it at that. Funnyhat (talk) 17:50, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Clear error

This statement from the "Jaguar in the United States" section is clearly wrong: "Jaguars were rapidly eliminated by Anglo-Americans in the United States, along with most other large predators." I'm pretty sure that no other large land predators present at the arrival of Euro-Americans have been eliminated from the United States. Many have had their numbers and ranges severely reduced, but not eliminated. TCSaint (talk) 00:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

It's been a few months, and no one seems to have any opinions on this, so I made a simple change by removing the second half of the sentence "along with most other large predators." TCSaint (talk) 04:40, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the sentence again, I'm also a bit concerned about the "Anglo-Americans" part, which seems to imply that no jaguars were killed by members of other ethnic groups, and implication that is almost certainly false. I'm not sure what change to make there. TCSaint (talk) 04:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

My guess is the "Anglo-American" is probably a clumsy attempt to distinguish between Native Americans and more recent immigrants. In some parts of the American SW, the term "Anglo" can br applied to anyone who isn't Mexican or Indian. Wschart (talk) 00:59, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

The Jaguar is a Felid, but not a Feline.

Multiple times throughout this article the Jaguar is refered to as a Feline. This is incorrect. "Feline" refers to a member of the genus "Felinae" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felinae ), the Jaguar is not a member of this genus. It is indeed a "Felid" of the family "Felidae" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felidae ) but its genus is Panthera ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panthera ).

I would suggest replacing each instance with the word "Felid".

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duclicsic (talk • contribs) 23:29, 13 August 2012 (UTC) 

Note: Felidae agrees with you, however the disambiguation page at Feline suggests that it's not entirely inappropriate to call felidae by the name 'feline.' I'm afraid I don't have the necessary background to make a judgment call on this myself, so I will leave your request open. BigNate37_(T) 17:36, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. From what I can gather, in addition to describing members of the subfamily Felinae, "feline" also is widely applied to members of the larger Felidae family. Two dictionaries say so explicitly (1, 2), two others at least imply it (3, 4), and it does appear to be the case (5, 6, 7). While it undoubtedly would be more specific to say "felid", since it's a narrower definition, it seems that it isn't inaccurate to say "feline". In the absence of any endorsements to your request in 15 days, I'm inclined to close it now. Feel free to seek consensus for the change; I won't oppose it. Rivertorch (talk) 06:08, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Dis-ambiguation heading

The dis-ambiguation heading definitely needs attention. To me, the most common definition of panther is the black panther. Any way to improve the heading?? Georgia guy (talk) 17:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it's the most common but not the only one. What do you suggest? Rivertorch (talk) 06:11, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

The heading implies that there are 3 different animals commonly known as panthers; and the black panther isn't one of these. Georgia guy (talk) 13:05, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

It's two of them, actually. Black panther says "In Latin America, wild 'black panthers' may be black jaguars (Panthera onca); in Asia and Africa, black leopards (Panthera pardus)" --Ian Dalziel (talk) 13:49, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I think the problem is that the template doesn't work here - only melanistic leopards and (sometimes) jaguars are called panthers - it's a synonym (one of many) for the cougar. --Ian Dalziel (talk) 13:55, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I've tried to reword it without the template --Ian Dalziel (talk) 11:10, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

No, the cougar is clearly a separate species. It can be called a cougar, a puma, or a mountain lion. And it's not black. The black-colored leopard is a panther. Georgia guy (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

They're all three separate species. Felis concolor can be called a cougar, a puma, a mountain lion, a catamount OR a panther. And no, it's not black - it's the other two which have to be black to be called panthers, that's what I said. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 15:18, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

But how common is it to call a cougar a panther?? Georgia guy (talk) 17:46, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I wish I had a source handy. My recollection (from my reading) is that it was common usage once upon a time among American pioneers, along with the variant painter, and modern usage may still exist regionally. In any event, it's in the dictionary, so we can't dismiss it. Rivertorch (talk) 23:23, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Getting to be pretty topical here

I'm concerned that the current controversy over proposed Jaguar habitat in the United States is the reason why US-related issues are taking over the "Distribution and Habitat" and "Conservation Status" Sections. Given that the US is only one of nineteen nations within the Jaguar's range, this seems unjustified. Maybe it's time to take the controversy to a new page? Jaguars in the United States, perhaps? TCSaint (talk) 04:49, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

More incorrect information in the article

"Apart from a known and possibly breeding population in Arizona (southeast of Tucson), the cat has largely been extirpated from the United States since the early 20th century."

There is no verifiable, reliable evidence that any breeding population of jaguars ever existed within Arizona or New Mexico, since at least the Pleistocene. The northernmost known breeding population of jaguars today is in the Sierra Madre Mountains of Mexico, about 130 miles south of the Arizona border, according to Panthera.org. It is true that occasional lone, male jaguars cross into the southern extremities of Arizona.

There is no verifiable evidence of any wild, naturally occurring female jaguar with kittens in Arizona or New Mexico. There are three urban legends about them but no original documentation stating who first reported these supposed jaguars and any circumstances associated with them. The earliest published reference to these supposed jaguars, Mammals of Arizona by Hoffmeister/AZ Game and Fish Dept.,1986, does not cite source, and the lone sentence mentioning them begins with, "Supposedly...". There has never been a record of a naturally occurring female jaguar in the wild in New Mexico, ever.

There is plenty of evidence as submitted in comments to US Fish and Wildlife Service that the 1963 female jaguar that was killed at an unheard of altitude over 9,000' and hundreds of miles north of the Mexican border was imported for the purpose of sport hunting. A known guide of "canned" jaguar hunts in Arizona lived and led hunts within 50 miles of that location. The jaguar was killed in between the time he was arrested and the time he was convicted on Lacey Act charges for illegal transport of wild animals. The cat and a young male jaguar killed nearby the following January– in the snow– may have been intentionally released to avoid further charges. It is the stated opinion of this guide that those two jaguars had "plenty of help" getting to where they had gotten to. Whether this person released them himself, or they were released by someone else is unknown, but his opinion is the highest expertise on the subject. Both jaguars were killed in his usual hunting grounds on the Mogollon Rim close to the time he was leading dozens of predator hunts. His hounds were the best jaguar hounds in the world, and if jaguars had been naturally present he'd have known about them.

The myth that Coronado's expedition saw jaguars is based on unreliable, incorrect, embellished translations. The original documentation from Coronado's expedition citing jaguars in Coronado's August 3, 1540 letter to viceroy Mendoza is based on a third-hand English translation of an Italian translation by a known, unreliable translator, Ramusio. Ramusio was famous for his exaggerations, as noted by historians Richard and Shirley Flint, who consider Ramusio's translations highly unreliable. Coronado's original letter is lost to history.

The only other document supposedly citing jaguars was Pedro de Castaneda's circa 1563 narrative of the 1540 Coronado expedition. The original of this too, was lost to history, but a supposedly reliable copy was made in 1596 at Seville. This copy does not mention jaguars. They were added in translation to English. The original Spanish states, "Hay leones pardos que se vieron..." The Spaniards used the word "tigres" for jaguars. The nomenclature of animals seen on the expedition corresponds closely to the nomenclature used in 1526 by Oviedo in describing the fauna seen by the first Spaniards to enter the New World. Oviedo wrote the first natural history of New Spain on order from King Carlos V, setting the standard to which later explorers would adhere. Oviedo clearly described tigres as large ferocious, man-eating spotted cats. He mentioned separately, "leones pardos," not mentioning spots, and "gatos cervales," which he described as much smaller ferocious cats. Pedro de Castaneda mentioned "leones pardos" and "gatos cervales" in his narrative of the Coronado expedition, but made no mention whatever of tigres. He lived in Culiacan, an area of western Mexico within the range of jaguars. He would have known them if he had seen them. My conclusion is that "leones pardos" refers to ordinary mountain lions.

There are very few verifiable, reliable records of jaguars in Arizona or New Mexico prior to 1900. This is confirmed by Elliot Coues in his 1847 report, "Mammals of Arizona," among reports written by others in that period. He stated that no jaguars or ocelots were known within the territorial limits of the USA except in the valley of the Rio Grande in Texas. The narrative of James Ohio Pattie's extensive trapping expeditions in 1829 on waterways throughout southern Arizona mentions only one specimen that may have been a jaguar, but this was seen on the Colorado River at least 16 miles south of the present Arizona/Mexico border. The narrative provides much better evidence that jaguars were not present before white settlement than evidence that they were. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Backwardlook (talk • contribs) 04:14, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Speed

How can an article about a big cat fail to mention its sprinting speed? The leopard and tiger articles mention it, but not this one or even that of the lion. Lame. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 23:24, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

The solution, should you choose to attempt it, would be be to seek out a reliable source about the jaguar's sprinting speed and incorporate what you find into the article. Then again, the last sentence in the Social activity section suggests that such sources may be elusive. Rivertorch (talk) 03:34, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Largest Carnivore

Article Says: The jaguar, a compact and well-muscled animal, is the largest cat in the New World and the largest carnivore in Central and South America.[26] Size and weight vary considerably: weights are normally in the range of 56–96 kg (124–211 lb).

The "Black Caiman" or "Jacare Açu", as it is known in Brazil, is bigger (i.e. 6.5 meters/300 kg), so much so that even Jaguars can fall prey to it. Perhaps the wording should read "one of the largest carnivores"

See Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_caiman or Portuguese: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacar%C3%A9-a%C3%A7u — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuncaju (talk • contribs) 19:44, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Nice catch! I've changed it to "the largest carnivorous mammal", which sounds more precise than "one of the largest carnivores". (One of how many, one might ask.) I note that the wording you identified as problematic was sourced to an ostensibly reliable book and that I don't think my change poses a problem, since carnivorous mammals are a subset of carnivores, even if the book did (erroneously) make the broader claim. Rivertorch (talk) 20:10, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 January 2014

The jaguar can take virtually any terrestrial or riparian vertebrate found in Central or South America, with a preference for large prey. The jaguar is more of a dietary generalist *that* its Old World cousins: the American tropics have a high diversity of small animals but relatively low populations and diversity of the

• that* should be *than*

ChasMick (talk) 10:54, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Done, thanks! LittleMountain5 17:40, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2014

I don't think this statement is entirely accurate "Unlike all other Panthera species, jaguars very rarely attack humans. In most of the few cases where a jaguar has turned to taking a human, the animal was either old with damaged teeth or wounded.[59]" This contradicts first hand accounts of indigenous peoples of South America being preyed on by Jaguars, and also written reports by explorers and other visitor to the jungle. Additionally, the reference link is broken. I would recommend rewriting it along the lines of "Jaguar attacks on humans occur in areas where there is frequent contact, and have been known to stalk and kill adult humans." My primary source for this would be "Noble Savages: My Life Among Two Dangerous Tribes -- the Yanomamo and the Anthropologists" (chapter 6, I can provide page numbers if needed) by Napoleon Chagnon, who was himself nearly eaten by jaguars on more than one occasion. He also mentioned that in certain areas they are hunted for food by certain indigenous peoples, but I don't have a text citation for that.

The next statement, although probably true, has source issues "Sometimes, if scared or threatened, jaguars in captivity may lash out at zookeepers.[60]" The source is not what I would consider academically valid or thorough. It's heavily biased, and doesn't cite where that information originated from. I don't have a fix for that and considering that the statement is fairly innocuous (it doesn't strain the imagination much to believe a cranky Jaguar would attack a zookeeper) it probably doesn't hurt anything but I wanted to point it out in case anybody cares.

This is my first time suggesting corrections for an article, please let me know if there's anything I can do to be better at it. Thanks!

173.31.89.47 (talk) 00:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 01:19, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

        EXTINCt