Modern Weights and Measurements of Wild Lions

[SpinoRex]

(03-02-2022, 04:59 AM)Pckts Wrote:

(03-02-2022, 04:08 AM)SpinoRex Wrote: @Pckts beside your information that i appreciate remember he weighed overall just 41 adult males in Kruger NP. And even then your assumption isnt right. I have few questions for you. 


1) How are the lions of Timbavati 2nd hand sources if they were confirmed by the Reserve HQ and the Ecologist? Note these arent common as said by the LPD and they were the forefathers of the Birmingham Pride. This doesnt sound "common" to me.

2) Note that a male of more or less average dimensions (he may be measured even over curves, which is generally used) in Etosha weighed 260 kg just in a sample of 16. Or a young adult of 244 kg in Etosha. And various lions were heavier recorded in scientific literature (Kocks lion, Sm009, Homob males and so on). Note that Smuts lion was empty and he would be 245-255 kg on an full stomach like ximpoko

He also weighed 3 males from Kalahari "we proceeded to examine their teeth and to measure and weigh each animal. The largest male weighed 192kg" page 259


1) We have already gone over why I consider them 2nd hand sources "post #293"

2)The Etosha male was gorged said to subtract at least 20kg. 
And didn't the entire sample size produce an average of 190kg? This including the 260kg Male as well or not? 
Kochs Lion is the heaviest verifiable Lion today, I have no qualms with his weight although being a significant cattle killer probably exaggerated his weight a bit. 
Adding 20-30kg Smuts Lion is pointless, that's not his weight. He was 225kg empty, anything else is speculation. 
SM009 was 222kg then 246kg so most likely has to do with stomach content.

I'm not saying that Lions can't reach weights above 225kgs but I prefer to use verifiable data and measurements that come from real sources than private reserves that generally use baiting tactics keep their Lions there. There are no outside influences when talking about Smuts and Stevenson and their data base is gigantic. Nothing they mention compares to these alleged weights out of a single place in S. Africa, that's what I'm saying.

2) The male was of 4-5 years old and the male lion from ndutu even younger c.4 years old. Both were 244 and 237 kg, which means surpassing 225 kg even empty shouldnt be a problem. About kocks lion he was a healthy lion and not a fat one (Might be the case for constant cattle killers). Pckts i said on a full stomach like some other males he would be 245-255 kg. Sm009 was collared 1.5 years later when when weighed 246 kg kg. And as you can see.... he is far from being fat.

A 225 kg lion and an empty stomach is a big cat but not the maximum. If you see that a 5-6 year old male in Etosha reached with normal dimensions 240 kg empty or one in kenya 272 kg.... These 2 famous males from kruger are therefore reasonably at the top.. Some infos are given by the lodges and guides. Then you ask the reserve HQ and then you ask the scientists who was the supervisor. I dont get it how it can be more reliable.

Again the 2 males from Timbavati came from Kruger and switched their location many times (Mabande isnt there anymore). I still dont get it why they are linked to be captive ones. Im interested of the birmingham males nowadays are also captive ones. Obviously they arent. Also again Smuts weighed 41 adult males in Kruger NP (overall 344 males from all ages) and therefore the overall number is deceptive. 

"There are no outside influences when talking about Smuts and Stevenson and their data base is gigantic. Nothing they mention compares to these alleged weights out of a single place in S. Africa, that's what I'm saying." Same goes torwards the kenya male and the etosha male (out of a moderate sample, normal dimensions and could have gained some weight). 

Pckts i want to know the exact reason why you dont accept these records. Your argumentation is a bit flawed looking at the whole context. Reply