1) Humans inhabit now all the Earth, including most of the areas originally "belonging to" tigers, while tigers remain in hardly sustainable numbers on ridiculously small scraps of their original habitats - so it is evident that the only solution making at least appearance of sense is to remove people from the critical area.

2) Tigers are valuable and important not as "raw material" for production of bed-side rugs from their furs or necklaces from their claws but as an element of nature, and nature is of course a nature only as long as it is natural, so tiger remains an element of nature only in its natural environment - transferred to another place it would become hardly more than a museum or zoo exhibit - so it is evident that the only solution making at least appearance of sense is to remove people from the critical area.

It is another question whether Homo sapiens is sufficiently sapiens to accept these evidences; and still another, is he sufficiently sapiens to understand (and act accordingly) that any solution will remain only a very short time "make-believe" unless human population explosion is very quickly stopped and immediately thereafter reversed. Unfortunately, hitherto no sign of such sapientia can be seen...

1) Humans inhabit now all the Earth, including most of the areas originally "belonging to" tigers, while tigers remain in hardly sustainable numbers on ridiculously small scraps of their original habitats - so it is evident that the only solution making at least appearance of sense is to remove people from the critical area.

2) Tigers are valuable and important not as "raw material" for production of bed-side rugs from their furs or necklaces from their claws but as an element of nature, and nature is of course a nature only as long as it is natural, so tiger remains an element of nature only in its natural environment - transferred to another place it would become hardly more than a museum or zoo exhibit - so it is evident that the only solution making at least appearance of sense is to remove people from the critical area.

It is another question whether Homo sapiens is sufficiently sapiens to accept these evidences; and still another, is he sufficiently sapiens to understand (and act accordingly) that any solution will remain only a very short time "make-believe" unless human population explosion is very quickly stopped and immediately thereafter reversed. Unfortunately, hitherto no sign of such sapientia can be seen...

Interesting, that this truly very actual question has been left uncommented, whereas many trivial or idle ones provoke hot disputes... I expected a storm of vehement protests against my comment and perhaps some supporting voices or at least "recommendations", but it seems that the problem does not interest anybody... Sad...

Hello Jason - The question had not been "thrown up" by me, I only answered. As to "outsiders", the problem is that nobody of us is really outsider, because - and one of the aims of my answer was just to point to this fact - each of us lives in some place where either we or some "tigers" (living creatures we, humans, cannot or wish not to coexist with) must be, or already have been, "forced to move"! Hitherto Homo sapiens invariably considers it natural and just to "force to move" (usually forever, by extermination) the "tigers" (be it elephants, frogs, tiny invertebrates or plants); I wished only to suggest that it is neither just nor wise...

Anyway, thank you for helping trigger (or tigger) the debate!

All the best! Roman

No question, humans have the duty to safe the life of the tigers in their natural habitat.

I think , it is no good Idea to force people to change their lifestyle or force them to leave their homes. The protection only works with the people, not against them.

I have not the competence to tell how to manage this, but I think there are people who can do this job.

I agree with you, Roman, that the human population explosion is one of the big challenges we have to manage in the near future. We do not have endless resources, and the water and food problems cannot be solved with technical solutions only.

@ Kirk MacGregor: First upon thanks for your question which shows your sensitivity towards wild life and tigers.

I think that government should plan to relocate the people in a healthy manner. Wild animals are heritage to the humanity. They are not only essential for life system on the earth, but they also have right to sustain their species and life at least in wild which should be a minimum of total land in a country.

I appreciate the comments by @ Roman Bohdan Hołyński.

@ Vivesh V Kapur: Animals have aesthetic importance and enrich gene collection on the earth. Tiger preservation means forest preservation which is essential ecology and environment. 

Humanity had limited meaning. It is humans who are blocking rivers and cutting forests and trees.

We are not alone on the earth.