Big cat and Bear tale

[brotherbear]

Big Bonns... Trouble is averages dont work for Bears in a debate like this. Average stats might be ok for a Bear researcher trying to gauge the health of a population or tabulate a mean density of 4 year olds or similar but it does not allow for large numbers of principal males which dominate areas.
Its a little like taking say B2 the largest dominant Tiger from a given location .....not using him in the stats... and average Tigers comng out at 200kg.....but times by a factor 20 in the case of Brown Bear. Bears just do return much bigger males than any cat and on a very routine, high frequency basis......regardless of the average stats.
As a for instance, weve had atleast 8 Bears from one small area of Yelowstone which are atleast double the average weight. If we try that for Tiger, we just dont get Cats twice the weight at all, let alone 8 animals. Thus average stats return nothing in the comparsion argument for Grizzly/Brown Bear. Almost meaningless to bring average weights in th first place when dealing with Bear.
The 843lb road kill will testify to this. Bears here supposed to be 400lb....and then turns up by remote accident infront of a truck that is more than double the weight...and we never even had to look for him!
Another at 847lb 2 900lb animals....incredibly a 700lb female, a raft of 650lb specimens and one at 1120lb....would also suggest something is wrong with averages when dealing with Bear.

Try a visit to the Chicago Museum of NH. Take a look at the skeleton of the Kodiak estimated at 850lb. Not a particulary big specimen (about half the record for the species) now look at its framework.
Thats all there is....theres no skin on the skeletons section in here and you will see that it is about 0.5ft shorter than that of the Lion but almost twice as wide. The legs are placed atleast twice as wide on the stand, where the Lions drop directly below the Lions body. Only the shoulder heights are roughly the same, although even here i would say this moderate Kodiak is taller in the skeleton.
Looking at the leg bones they were atleast half again as thick...as were the joints. Only the jaws of the Lion looked more impressive and this one with particulary large canines.....about the biggest ive ever seen on any bigcat....which did puzzle me a bit.......this is where i would concentrate my argument if i were you.

As regard not accepting Grizzly from Yellowstone at double the weight, John Craighead actually weighed the 1966 1120lb monster himself and reported he wasnt fat....just a huge lumbering, muscular beast.
2 more were weighed at 900lb in the 70s and recently 2 at almost 850lb...both weighed. A 650lb specimen was shot during the spring of 2010 way before his Autumn best weight and even one huge female reportedly managed 700lb.
Grizzly Years reported another 650lb to 700lb male in Wyoming which borders the Yellowstone territory. Largest Khutzy specimens are 1053lb and another 950lb. Largest Yukon specimen 930lb.....all Interior Grizzly. Grizzly just do get upto 850lb ish (freaks removed) its a fact and theres no point arguing against it. Finally take a look at that recent road kill grizzly.
Legs and shoulders twice as big as any lions youll ever see....huge paws and claws but remember some 300lb Light of the potential of the species. Reply