Modern Weights and Measurements of Wild Lions

[peter]

(08-13-2023, 06:59 AM)Mohaned Wrote:

(03-23-2023, 12:52 PM)peter Wrote:

(03-23-2023, 12:41 AM)AndresVida Wrote: What is happening here? Why was LandSeaLion banned out of nowhere without giving any proper logical explanations for it?

VIDA

It's quite likely you was aware of the last two posts of 'Charger' in this thread. The two posts that were deleted, I mean. Both posts were all but unreadable for members and readers visiting this thread. Members interested in new contributions about the weight and length of free ranging lions, that is.

I was one of them. After reading the last two posts, I decided to respond. In post 626 of this thread, I told 'Charger' why his contributions were considered below par. You know 'Charger' reacted in a way that left no doubt as to his opinion. In his response, he used colours to underline the remarks in my post (post 626) and stripes to let me know the criticism had been dismissed.   

Your pal 'Land and Sea' immediately supported him. He told me they were just having a friendly conversation. As I apparently wasn't aware of that discussion, I had jumped to conclusions. 

So what do we have? We have one (former) member telling me to take a leak somewhere else and another telling me to follow a course in reading. It resulted in two permanent bans. 

As to your remark (" ... without giving any proper logical explanations for it ... "). There are so many reasons, I wouldn't know where to start, but I'll give it a try anyhow. 

Wildfact is a quality forum that offers reliable information about those making their home in the natural world. In order to get there, we decided for a few rules. Forumrulewise, the contributions of 'Charger' didn't qualify. Contentwise, they were below par as well. Interactionwise, it wasn't any different. Same for your pal. What both were saying is they were just having a friendly private discussion on a public forum. They used it, because it suited them. And the thousands visiting the thread because they're interested in 'Modern weights and measurements of wild lions'? Too bad. Maybe they could follow a course in reading? 

After we were done deciding, you popped up telling me your pal was " ... banned out of nowhere without ... proper ... reasons ... " (from your post). Well Mr. Vida, looking at the forum rules, the conclusion is he was banned for the proper reasons.

All in all, I'd say we're quite done with members deliberately ignoring the forum rules, doing as they please, crying murder when addressed and insulting those applying the rules. This is not the first time you question a decision, is it? The first ban was lifted when you said you would never do it again. Unfortunately, you just couldn't resist the urge to do it one more time. Meaning the time has arrived to join another forum. In order to encourage you, we decided for another ban. This time, it's a permanent ban.

Sorry I know this is of topic but may you tell me the average timbavati,ocavongo,nogorongo and SA lions because from what I’ve gathered study’s I have only cover SA and East African lions. East African lions size at (189 kg) and South African (200-206kg) and crater and nogorongo I have yet to have a valid size chart but my estimates put them at (210-230kg). I know this isn’t in this topic but. My estimates put cape lion at (220-260kg) and Barbary (180-230kg). Sorry if I don’t know much first time getting on this app and I also apologise if my English is not the best. If you have the time may you correct my statemtms if they are wrong. Sorry for bothering you or wasting your time.

Mohaned,

Good information (referring to information published by biologists and books of experienced and reliable hunters) strongly suggest a mature wild male big cat exceeding 400 pounds (181,44 kg) on an empty stomach is big. Remember there's a big difference between a wild and a captive big cat. Same for a wild cat and one living in semi-wild conditions (referring to private reserves in the southern part of Africa in particular). 

If you want to know a bit more, read this thread or visit 'On the edge of extinction - The lion (Panthera leo)'. Another option is to contact our member 'Guategojira'. He's been collecting reliable information about the length and weight of wild lions and tigers for quite some time. Last but not least is to read a number of threads about wild lions. You could also contact a few members. There are quite a few that have access to good information. The lion section is a good one.    

As to lions, tigers and size.  

Experience says visitors of zoos and facilities tend to exaggerate the size (weight) of captive lions and underestimate that of tigers. The reason is they often use the size of the head to get to an estimate (lions, apart from Amur tigers, usually have larger heads than tigers). As a general rule, adult male lions are relatively tall, large-skulled, quite robust and stocky. If we add the mane and attitude of many captive male lions, chances are an average visitor will quickly get to 500 pounds (226,8 kg) for an average mature male lion. Also remember captive lions are a bit larger than their wild relatives. The reasons are more food, no competition, no sharing and less work. 

In tigers, sizewise, it's the other way round: most wild tigers are a bit bigger than their captive relatives (referring to tigers of the same subspecies). Tigers are solitary hunters. As it takes a lot of energy to hunt, they often select large prey animals. It takes time to develop in this department and it's risky. Not a few youngsters perish while learning. For a young adult male, it also takes a lot of time to conquer, and keep, a territory. In order to challenge a tiger with a territory, size is needed. Meaning young adults need to learn how to hunt large animals. They also need to learn to avoid dangerous competitors and scavengers. Wild tigers continue to put on weight until they're 7-9 years of age. Compared to a mature male, a young adult often is at a disadvantage. In the long run, this lifestyle can only result in a relatively high number of casualties and that's what we see. As the most able usually get most opportunities to reproduce, chances are this development will produce more able, and larger, individuals over time.  

Wild male lions also fight. A lot, in fact. The difference between both big cats is young male lions trying to conquer a pride live, and operate, in bachelor groups. Clashes between bachelor groups and established coalitions can be severe, but most of those involved will survive. In clashes, the winner takes all. If a bachelor group loses a battle, the winners will project their aggression. More often than not, only the one surrounded suffers. This means the others will survive to fight another day. Meaning the chance to get severely injured or killed in a clash, in most cases, is well below, say, 50%. When wild male tigers fight until a decision is reached, the loser, more often than not, will be seriously injured or killed. 

I'm not saying tiger fights are more intense. I'm also not saying tigers are better fighters. What I'm saying is a serious fight between male tigers often has more consequences for the simple reason only two animals are involved. For this reason, the survival percentage is lower. Pride males (referring to lions) could be great fighters, but it's as likely they could have been in the right coalition at the right time more than once. Maybe the best fighters perished during these clashes and maybe the survivors, because of their efforts (referring to the most able fighters), got a chance to take over as pride. We don't know. We do know this mechanism, to a degree, is present in captive lions as well. Not so in tigers. Their selection mechanism is deleted in captivity. The result is less able, and often smaller, individuals.     

There could be a difference between lions and tigers in a fight. When you see (a photograph of) a human killed by a tiger (referring to captive animals), chances are you'll only see four holes in the most vulnarable body part (the neck). A human killed by a male lion, on the other hand, often has many injuries. Is a tiger a more serious killer, or does a lion have a different intention?

A male lion winning a one-on-one not always kills his opponent. More often than not, the loser will be (severely) damaged. Coincidence or a result of a deliberate decision? I talked to a few people involved in fights. They thought the difference between both species is in the method used to convey a message. More often than not, tigers get straight 'to the point'. They don't want to lose too much energy. Male lions are different. A human attacked by a male tiger will be quickly killed. A human attacked by a male lion will be tormented first. This is why those working with big cats are more afraid of male lions than of male tigers.  

Does this mean the male lion (referring to captive lions) is more sure of himself in a fight? I don't know. I do know lions are social mammals that live, hunt and fight in, and as, a group. They care about the territory and the pride and don't do details. Their aim is to show themselves and to convey messages to other lions and scavengers. Adult tigers are specialized hunters and loners. They want to limit the risk in order to hunt another day. But. Those 'in the know' agree wild male tigers at times enter serious fights with dangerous opponents for unknown reasons. 

Male lions and tigers both confront competitors and scavengers, but for slightly different reasons. In lions, a confrontation seems to be more related to territory and food. In tigers, a confrontation seems to be related to legal ownership if the intrudfer is, say, a bear, and territory is the intruder is another tiger. Lions often confront other lions and hyenas. As they also are social mammals, it's impossible to injure or kill all. This could be the reason male lions are involved in messages. Tigers are solitary animals. Same for (most of) their opponents. Meaning it isn't about messages, but about the direct outcome of a fight. 
                         
Returning to lions and estimates. Lions have a slightly different 'Bauplan' than tigers. Captive males in particular tend to have relatively large heads, necks and chests. There is a quite strong correlation between chest girth and weight in wild big cats, but there are differences between species. The information I have (referring to wild big cats only) suggest a male tiger with a 120 cm chest often is a bit heavier than a male lion with a 120 cm chest. In captive male lions and tigers, it's no different. The three male lions I measured had bigger chests than the three male Amur tigers. In spite of that, the difference in weight seemed (we were only able to weigh one) limited. The Amurs (we transported all 6 big cats on the same stretcher) seemed to have the edge. Seemed. The most likely reason, we thought, was length (most adult male Amur tigers are a bit longer than adult male lions). 

Good information (at the level of averages) suggests southwestern Africa could have the largest wild lions today, closely followed by southern Africa. Lions in eastern Africa could be a bit bigger than many assume. There's not a lot of information about lions living in the Crater, but what we know suggests they're as big as those in Namibia, if not a bit bigger (referring to weight in particular). Lions living in the bend (western Africa) are a bit smaller. Same for those inhabiting the mountaineous and forested regions of Ethiopia. In general, the differences between regions are limited. The longest skull I measured belonged to a male lion captured in what used to be Abessynia. Not a region known for large lions. I also saw a few big skulls from lions shot in central parts of Africa (referring to what used to be Belgian Congo in particular). 

At the level of species, not too long ago, adult male lions averaged about 175 kg (387 pounds). Adult male tigers averaged about 160 kg (354 pounds), but that average is from the period tigers still inhabited central parts of China (P.t. amoyensis), the Caspian region (P.t. virgata), Bali (P.t. balica) and Java (P.t. sondaica). Today, only Sumatra (P.t. sumatrae), southern Asia (P.t. corbetti), India (P.t. tigris), Nepal (P.t. tigris), Bhutan (P.t. tigris), northeastern China (P.t. altaica) and southeastern Russia (P.t. altaica) have wild tigers.  

At the level of species today, wild adult males of both species could average 170-180 kg (375-397 pounds) on an empty stomach. Large males are 50-100 pounds heavier. Exceptional males can reach 550-590 pounds (249,48-267,62 kg), perhaps a bit more. At the level of subspecies (and averages), adult male tigers in northern and northeastern India (and Nepal) seem to top the list, but that's without the Crater lions (no data). Remember most samples used to get to this conclusion are quite small. 

Last year, I tried to find 'reliable' information about the size (length and weight) of captive Amur tgers. The results were posted in the tiger extinction thread. What I found, suggests they top the list. Adult males average 224,2 kg or 494 pounds (n=61) and 303,1 cm in total length measured 'between pegs' (n=14), but I've also seen quite different averages. 

Biologists are not that interested in the size of wild big cats. Their aim is conservation. A very sensible decision, as the natural world is severely threatened. Apex predators are the first to be affected. Tigers in particular face a lot of problems (referring to habitat destruction and poaching). The focus on conservation, however, resulted in a lack of data (referring to size). You could say there's not enough good information to get to sound conclusions and be close. We just don't know, meaning there's a lot of room for speculation.     
        
Hope you enjoy Wildfact. Before you start posting, read the rules section. Remember we take them seriously over here. Check the information you have and do it again. Remember our aim is good information, not hearsay and estimates. One thing we want to avoid at all costs is misinformation. Remember this is a public forum. Contact a lion mod if you have questions. Reply