Persian Leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor)

[Pckts]

(02-08-2022, 10:55 PM)LoveAnimals Wrote: ^^ that was pretty well explained. No one of course is trying to make 90+ kg leopards look more frequent than they truly are as everybody agrees that a 90-96 kg (estimating also 100+ kg males) leopard is going to be as freak as a 270+ kg Lion/Tiger, 150+ kg Jaguar and so on,therefore being rare.

The only initial statement was estimating the body size of those enormous northern males and to me when comparing their build to the so called 90-100+ cougars of Patagonia they look perfectly comparable, not to mention how massive and bulky they look at least visually when compared to a 80+ kg pusher male (Mawenzi) . So to me (and a lot of others from other platforms including Mammalia server, which is also filled with researchers and qualified people) estimating these animals to be between 90-100 kg is fair.
Estimating them to be average is overrating how average leopards look like, truly. It would be like saying Waghdoh, Umarpani or Kingfisher are average sized Bengal tigers, or that Balam /Edno Jaguars are average Pantanal males (would love them to be average tho). 

We should also remember that the largest "reliably" leopard recorded is just 3.5 kg far from the 100 kg barrer, and it comes from a population that averages definitely less than Northern males in an era where leopards are endangered, considering that their numbers in some parts of Namibia are in a big decline because poaching and hunting is still barbarically legal there. So if we are still able to record 90+males from an endangered population well then imagine when their numbers were at top. 

You're all telling me that during the whole leopard historical reign, with the billions of individuals that have existed when their numbers were very high and not affected by human invasive impact no leopard was ever able to be at least 3+ kg heavier than that Namibian male? Considering there are subspecies that average much higher than Namibian leopards and that we have literally nothing about Aberdare leopards but only two records of two males that already push over 90 kgs? 

When looking at the material I guess anyone doubting the existence of 100+ kg leopard is rather uneducated or lacks commonsense logic.

As much as people that doubt 160+ kg Pantanal Jaguars to have existed through their historical reign or even now but haven't been captured yet

Estimating those males to be 90-100kg without something to actually scale them off of is baseless. You just named Wagdoh and Uma for instance, two of the most photographed and viewed Tigers in modern times. We have tons of shots to scale them off of as well as eye witness testimonies and actually measured cats to compare them too where as those two Persian males you posted have single fleeting shots only. It's like using a camera trap shot of a single cat and claiming it as a record one. 
Not to mention one of the cats mentioned is already considered smaller than M3 which I didn't even know at the time when I said he was more impressive. Adding to the fact that he's been captured and said to be in the 70kg range, claiming them as 100kg cats which is larger than any Persian Leopard has ever weighed outside of the single debatable Persian seems to be an exaggeration. 

If your claim is that Persians can get to 100kg but it's extremely rare, that's fine, no one is debating that. But if your claim is that those two cats you showed are no doubt 90-100kg's based off a single fleeting image, that's a very different debate. Reply