There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
09-24-2020, 04:54 PM( This post was last modified: 09-25-2020, 11:49 AM by peter )
(09-24-2020, 12:23 AM)Spalea Wrote: Full mature Earless's body ...
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
SPALEA
Great pics of a magnificant wild male lion. The pic of Earless posted by PC, however, compares. The reason is the expression on his face. Anyone involved in movies would offer Earless a contract right away.
As to your response to PC's post. This thread is about similarities and differences between cats of different species. The aim is to accumulate information that will result in knowledge and insight. PC's post fits the thread in all respects. I agree an opinion (referring to the remark on Earless and Indian tigers) will never beat a tape and a scale, but the one who offered his opinion has seen his share of big cats. His opinion, therefore, is of interest.
Next time you read something that results in an urge to 'lecture' another member, count to 10 and remember this forum is about good information. Any attempt to prevent members from posting good info can have consequences. You are a mature member.
Talking about good information. You very often post a photograph and a comment of the one who took it. We don't mind nice pictures, but Wildfact is not a glossy offering pictures while waiting for the dentist in the waiting room. We want to offer good info. Next time you post a picture, add a comment. Your comment. Let us know why you posted the picture and why you think it's interesting.
Wildfact is a large forum with over 20 million views in 6 years only. People from all over the globe visit our forum. One could say it offers quite s stage and be close. In a way, it's a privilege. Don't take it for granted. Use it. And use it in the right way. Add something we didn't know about. Make sure it's special. Make sure we know it's you.
First of all I don't contest that a tiger could be longer or more athletic than a lion. That isn't the point and the lions have other assets. I just disapprove of the fact to drop a sentence with no one argument to back it up. I should have taken into account the PCKTS's past within Wildfact... Sorry.
Then... As concerns your remarks about my posts... Well, I consider we are in front of a wild life which is going to completely vanish in a mere two or three decades at the most and all of us with it, (the actual covid crisis darkening the picture, parcs keepers and guards without incomes formerly generated by the tourism and leaving the fauna without protection against poaching). In my opinion, these pictures depict a sort of last testimony before becoming some relics of a lost world. Human madness... But ok ! I will try to be more "personal" with an additionnal pinch of salt (rather pepper or spice, without sinking into insults or unwarranted affirmations of course) into my future posts.
(09-24-2020, 05:24 AM)Yusuf Wrote: Frederick Vaughan Kirbys Lion Body Length: 218.44 cm (7ft 2 inch.)
Total Length: 314.96 cm (10ft 4inch.)
Shoulderheight: 109.22 cm (3ft 7 inch.)
Forearmgirth: 50.8 cm (20 inch.)
Bodygirth: 149.86 cm (4ft 11 inch.)
Weight≈ 272 kg (600 Pounds) (My Estimate)
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
It is weird that Kirby provided slightly different information for the same lion in other source (specialy the tail length), but as Kirby was a hunter there is a possibility that he also had the habit of hyperbolize in some cases. Check this far more detailed table from him:
*This image is copyright of its original author
The real total length was of 307.4 cm, although the tail was short. Interestingly that Kirby estimated this lion at over 500 lb, about 100 lb less than the largest tiger of Brander.
Hello, thanks for the picture.
He estimated his lion OVER 500 lbs which could mean everything. Anyways he said estimates arent reliable.
So in his other book he said the total Length was 10ft 4inch. , In the book 10ft 7 inch. and if we add Body and Tail the length is 10ft 1 inch.
Its a bit weird..... I add 10ft 7 , 10ft 4 and 10ft 1 and devide it by 3 and i got exactly 10ft 4 (315cm). Therefore its fair in my opinion.
@Shadow @Pckts Also the reports of the 250 kg lions is not only reported in the DAILYPROGRESS WEBSITE. Its mentioned in other websites. Note here we have more infos, pictures and who was there. At the top we have the Infos. https://www.ocregister.com/2015/07/01/lions-reintroduced-to-rwanda-after-being-wiped-out-in-1994-war/
Simon Naylor, Phinda reserve manager, left, with Anton Louw, managing director at another reserve called Zuka, center, and Dr. Mike Toft, wildlife veterinarian, right, supervise as sedated, blindfolded lions laying in the dirt in Phinda Private Game Reserve, South Africa, Monday, June 29, 2015. The five female and two male lions are unwitting passengers about to embark on a 30-hour, 2,500-mile (4,000-kilometer) journey by truck and plane from South Africa to Akagera National Park in Rwanda, whose lion population was wiped out following the country's 1994 genocide.
Its clear that the storie is real. About the Lions that came to from South Africa to Rwanda. 7 Lions which is exactly the amount of lions that were weighed. There are more news on that but this should be enough https://theconversation.com/why-moving-south-african-lions-to-rwanda-is-not-without-problems-46273#:~:text=Recently%20seven%20lions%20made%20a,many%20populations%20in%20recent%20decades. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/06/28/conservationists-to-move-south-africa-lions-to-rwanda/
I think i found his twitter account... from Christopher Torchia. Seem to be a very reliable guy. I have not a Twitter account. Maybe you can write him a message. i try now to find something to the other guys that were also involved. Like https://twitter.com/torchiachris
(09-24-2020, 05:24 AM)Yusuf Wrote: Frederick Vaughan Kirbys Lion Body Length: 218.44 cm (7ft 2 inch.)
Total Length: 314.96 cm (10ft 4inch.)
Shoulderheight: 109.22 cm (3ft 7 inch.)
Forearmgirth: 50.8 cm (20 inch.)
Bodygirth: 149.86 cm (4ft 11 inch.)
Weight≈ 272 kg (600 Pounds) (My Estimate)
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
It is weird that Kirby provided slightly different information for the same lion in other source (specialy the tail length), but as Kirby was a hunter there is a possibility that he also had the habit of hyperbolize in some cases. Check this far more detailed table from him:
*This image is copyright of its original author
The real total length was of 307.4 cm, although the tail was short. Interestingly that Kirby estimated this lion at over 500 lb, about 100 lb less than the largest tiger of Brander.
Hello, thanks for the picture.
He estimated his lion OVER 500 lbs which could mean everything. Anyways he said estimates arent reliable.
So in his other book he said the total Length was 10ft 4inch. , In the book 10ft 7 inch. and if we add Body and Tail the length is 10ft 1 inch.
Its a bit weird..... I add 10ft 7 , 10ft 4 and 10ft 1 and devide it by 3 and i got exactly 10ft 4 (315cm). Therefore its fair in my opinion.
@Shadow @Pckts Also the reports of the 250 kg lions is not only reported in the DAILYPROGRESS WEBSITE. Its mentioned in other websites. Note here we have more infos, pictures and who was there. At the top we have the Infos. https://www.ocregister.com/2015/07/01/lions-reintroduced-to-rwanda-after-being-wiped-out-in-1994-war/
Simon Naylor, Phinda reserve manager, left, with Anton Louw, managing director at another reserve called Zuka, center, and Dr. Mike Toft, wildlife veterinarian, right, supervise as sedated, blindfolded lions laying in the dirt in Phinda Private Game Reserve, South Africa, Monday, June 29, 2015. The five female and two male lions are unwitting passengers about to embark on a 30-hour, 2,500-mile (4,000-kilometer) journey by truck and plane from South Africa to Akagera National Park in Rwanda, whose lion population was wiped out following the country's 1994 genocide.
Its clear that the storie is real. About the Lions that came to from South Africa to Rwanda. 7 Lions which is exactly the amount of lions that were weighed. There are more news on that but this should be enough https://theconversation.com/why-moving-south-african-lions-to-rwanda-is-not-without-problems-46273#:~:text=Recently%20seven%20lions%20made%20a,many%20populations%20in%20recent%20decades. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/06/28/conservationists-to-move-south-africa-lions-to-rwanda/
I think i found his twitter account... from Christopher Torchia. Seem to be a very reliable guy. I have not a Twitter account. Maybe you can write him a message. i try now to find something to the other guys that were also involved. Like https://twitter.com/torchiachris
Best regards.
I reply later better. But shortly, weights of those Rwanda lions are 100% sure incorrect. One of those females was only 1 year old. As it can be seen on different videos, one of those lionesses was really young.
So there is no doubt whatsoever, that weights which are mentioned aren´t reliable. If some reporter has written those in good faith, then he has been simply getting misinformation. I put here later some more sources just to show reality.
While it´s fair to say, that there are no big differences in sizes of lions and tigers, same time objectivity is needed. Mistakes happen and especially newspaper articles are often with mistakes. 250 kg or 550 lbs lion isn´t something like 8th wonder of the world, but still such weight is exceptional, not something what we could wait to see all the time in the wild.
(09-24-2020, 05:24 AM)Yusuf Wrote: Frederick Vaughan Kirbys Lion Body Length: 218.44 cm (7ft 2 inch.)
Total Length: 314.96 cm (10ft 4inch.)
Shoulderheight: 109.22 cm (3ft 7 inch.)
Forearmgirth: 50.8 cm (20 inch.)
Bodygirth: 149.86 cm (4ft 11 inch.)
Weight≈ 272 kg (600 Pounds) (My Estimate)
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
It is weird that Kirby provided slightly different information for the same lion in other source (specialy the tail length), but as Kirby was a hunter there is a possibility that he also had the habit of hyperbolize in some cases. Check this far more detailed table from him:
*This image is copyright of its original author
The real total length was of 307.4 cm, although the tail was short. Interestingly that Kirby estimated this lion at over 500 lb, about 100 lb less than the largest tiger of Brander.
Hello, thanks for the picture.
He estimated his lion OVER 500 lbs which could mean everything. Anyways he said estimates arent reliable.
So in his other book he said the total Length was 10ft 4inch. , In the book 10ft 7 inch. and if we add Body and Tail the length is 10ft 1 inch.
Its a bit weird..... I add 10ft 7 , 10ft 4 and 10ft 1 and devide it by 3 and i got exactly 10ft 4 (315cm). Therefore its fair in my opinion.
@Shadow @Pckts Also the reports of the 250 kg lions is not only reported in the DAILYPROGRESS WEBSITE. Its mentioned in other websites. Note here we have more infos, pictures and who was there. At the top we have the Infos. https://www.ocregister.com/2015/07/01/lions-reintroduced-to-rwanda-after-being-wiped-out-in-1994-war/
Simon Naylor, Phinda reserve manager, left, with Anton Louw, managing director at another reserve called Zuka, center, and Dr. Mike Toft, wildlife veterinarian, right, supervise as sedated, blindfolded lions laying in the dirt in Phinda Private Game Reserve, South Africa, Monday, June 29, 2015. The five female and two male lions are unwitting passengers about to embark on a 30-hour, 2,500-mile (4,000-kilometer) journey by truck and plane from South Africa to Akagera National Park in Rwanda, whose lion population was wiped out following the country's 1994 genocide.
Its clear that the storie is real. About the Lions that came to from South Africa to Rwanda. 7 Lions which is exactly the amount of lions that were weighed. There are more news on that but this should be enough https://theconversation.com/why-moving-south-african-lions-to-rwanda-is-not-without-problems-46273#:~:text=Recently%20seven%20lions%20made%20a,many%20populations%20in%20recent%20decades. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/06/28/conservationists-to-move-south-africa-lions-to-rwanda/
I think i found his twitter account... from Christopher Torchia. Seem to be a very reliable guy. I have not a Twitter account. Maybe you can write him a message. i try now to find something to the other guys that were also involved. Like https://twitter.com/torchiachris
Best regards.
I reply later better. But shortly, weights of those Rwanda lions are 100% sure incorrect. One of those females was only 1 year old. As it can be seen on different videos, one of those lionesses was really young.
So there is no doubt whatsoever, that weights which are mentioned aren´t reliable. If some reporter has written those in good faith, then he has been simply getting misinformation. I put here later some more sources just to show reality.
While it´s fair to say, that there are no big differences in sizes of lions and tigers, same time objectivity is needed. Mistakes happen and especially newspaper articles are often with mistakes. 250 kg or 550 lbs lion isn´t something like 8th wonder of the world, but still such weight is exceptional, not something what we could wait to see all the time in the wild.
Shadow the source even stated in the Paper... 5 lionesses from 396-418 lbs and two males of 550 lbs and SOME CUBS
(09-24-2020, 05:24 AM)Yusuf Wrote: Frederick Vaughan Kirbys Lion Body Length: 218.44 cm (7ft 2 inch.)
Total Length: 314.96 cm (10ft 4inch.)
Shoulderheight: 109.22 cm (3ft 7 inch.)
Forearmgirth: 50.8 cm (20 inch.)
Bodygirth: 149.86 cm (4ft 11 inch.)
Weight≈ 272 kg (600 Pounds) (My Estimate)
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
It is weird that Kirby provided slightly different information for the same lion in other source (specialy the tail length), but as Kirby was a hunter there is a possibility that he also had the habit of hyperbolize in some cases. Check this far more detailed table from him:
*This image is copyright of its original author
The real total length was of 307.4 cm, although the tail was short. Interestingly that Kirby estimated this lion at over 500 lb, about 100 lb less than the largest tiger of Brander.
Hello, thanks for the picture.
He estimated his lion OVER 500 lbs which could mean everything. Anyways he said estimates arent reliable.
So in his other book he said the total Length was 10ft 4inch. , In the book 10ft 7 inch. and if we add Body and Tail the length is 10ft 1 inch.
Its a bit weird..... I add 10ft 7 , 10ft 4 and 10ft 1 and devide it by 3 and i got exactly 10ft 4 (315cm). Therefore its fair in my opinion.
@Shadow @Pckts Also the reports of the 250 kg lions is not only reported in the DAILYPROGRESS WEBSITE. Its mentioned in other websites. Note here we have more infos, pictures and who was there. At the top we have the Infos. https://www.ocregister.com/2015/07/01/lions-reintroduced-to-rwanda-after-being-wiped-out-in-1994-war/
Simon Naylor, Phinda reserve manager, left, with Anton Louw, managing director at another reserve called Zuka, center, and Dr. Mike Toft, wildlife veterinarian, right, supervise as sedated, blindfolded lions laying in the dirt in Phinda Private Game Reserve, South Africa, Monday, June 29, 2015. The five female and two male lions are unwitting passengers about to embark on a 30-hour, 2,500-mile (4,000-kilometer) journey by truck and plane from South Africa to Akagera National Park in Rwanda, whose lion population was wiped out following the country's 1994 genocide.
Its clear that the storie is real. About the Lions that came to from South Africa to Rwanda. 7 Lions which is exactly the amount of lions that were weighed. There are more news on that but this should be enough https://theconversation.com/why-moving-south-african-lions-to-rwanda-is-not-without-problems-46273#:~:text=Recently%20seven%20lions%20made%20a,many%20populations%20in%20recent%20decades. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/06/28/conservationists-to-move-south-africa-lions-to-rwanda/
I think i found his twitter account... from Christopher Torchia. Seem to be a very reliable guy. I have not a Twitter account. Maybe you can write him a message. i try now to find something to the other guys that were also involved. Like https://twitter.com/torchiachris
Best regards.
I reply later better. But shortly, weights of those Rwanda lions are 100% sure incorrect. One of those females was only 1 year old. As it can be seen on different videos, one of those lionesses was really young.
So there is no doubt whatsoever, that weights which are mentioned aren´t reliable. If some reporter has written those in good faith, then he has been simply getting misinformation. I put here later some more sources just to show reality.
While it´s fair to say, that there are no big differences in sizes of lions and tigers, same time objectivity is needed. Mistakes happen and especially newspaper articles are often with mistakes. 250 kg or 550 lbs lion isn´t something like 8th wonder of the world, but still such weight is exceptional, not something what we could wait to see all the time in the wild.
Shadow the source even stated in the Paper... 5 lionesses from 396-418 lbs and two males of 550 lbs and SOME CUBS
I know. I read yesterday many articles and reports concerning those lions. As I told, one of those lionesses was 1 year old, practically a cub herself. It alone proves, that those weights are false. As I wrote before, it´s possible, that someone has reported weights with containers. It´s only explanation making some sense. There are many videos and photos of these lions from the time of relocation and there is nothing special. Average looking lions.
I have read dozens of newspaper articles concerning animals and then asking more from zoos etc. and newspaper articles have often false information. For instance when Kamchatka brown bear Peter the Great was relocated to Orsa zoo in Sweden, newspaper article after another told, that 1000 kg bear. From zoo they then told, that not even close, he was 570 kg at that time.
Odense zoo tiger Igor (Denmark) was mentioned in many newspaper articles to be 300 kg, when he had dental operations. In zoo leaflet he was told to be 250 kg. When I asked from the zoo, they told, that he was weighed to be (now I don´t remember exact weight) about 230 kg so, that tail wasn´t on the scale. Based on that they said, that he was max. 250 kg at that time.
Newspaper articles can´t be trusted too much really. Especially when they give information indicating, that suddenly bunch of almost record braking animals in one place.
(09-24-2020, 05:24 AM)Yusuf Wrote: Frederick Vaughan Kirbys Lion Body Length: 218.44 cm (7ft 2 inch.)
Total Length: 314.96 cm (10ft 4inch.)
Shoulderheight: 109.22 cm (3ft 7 inch.)
Forearmgirth: 50.8 cm (20 inch.)
Bodygirth: 149.86 cm (4ft 11 inch.)
Weight≈ 272 kg (600 Pounds) (My Estimate)
*This image is copyright of its original author
*This image is copyright of its original author
It is weird that Kirby provided slightly different information for the same lion in other source (specialy the tail length), but as Kirby was a hunter there is a possibility that he also had the habit of hyperbolize in some cases. Check this far more detailed table from him:
*This image is copyright of its original author
The real total length was of 307.4 cm, although the tail was short. Interestingly that Kirby estimated this lion at over 500 lb, about 100 lb less than the largest tiger of Brander.
Hello, thanks for the picture.
He estimated his lion OVER 500 lbs which could mean everything. Anyways he said estimates arent reliable.
So in his other book he said the total Length was 10ft 4inch. , In the book 10ft 7 inch. and if we add Body and Tail the length is 10ft 1 inch.
Its a bit weird..... I add 10ft 7 , 10ft 4 and 10ft 1 and devide it by 3 and i got exactly 10ft 4 (315cm). Therefore its fair in my opinion.
@Shadow @Pckts Also the reports of the 250 kg lions is not only reported in the DAILYPROGRESS WEBSITE. Its mentioned in other websites. Note here we have more infos, pictures and who was there. At the top we have the Infos. https://www.ocregister.com/2015/07/01/lions-reintroduced-to-rwanda-after-being-wiped-out-in-1994-war/
Simon Naylor, Phinda reserve manager, left, with Anton Louw, managing director at another reserve called Zuka, center, and Dr. Mike Toft, wildlife veterinarian, right, supervise as sedated, blindfolded lions laying in the dirt in Phinda Private Game Reserve, South Africa, Monday, June 29, 2015. The five female and two male lions are unwitting passengers about to embark on a 30-hour, 2,500-mile (4,000-kilometer) journey by truck and plane from South Africa to Akagera National Park in Rwanda, whose lion population was wiped out following the country's 1994 genocide.
Its clear that the storie is real. About the Lions that came to from South Africa to Rwanda. 7 Lions which is exactly the amount of lions that were weighed. There are more news on that but this should be enough https://theconversation.com/why-moving-south-african-lions-to-rwanda-is-not-without-problems-46273#:~:text=Recently%20seven%20lions%20made%20a,many%20populations%20in%20recent%20decades. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/06/28/conservationists-to-move-south-africa-lions-to-rwanda/
I think i found his twitter account... from Christopher Torchia. Seem to be a very reliable guy. I have not a Twitter account. Maybe you can write him a message. i try now to find something to the other guys that were also involved. Like https://twitter.com/torchiachris
Best regards.
I reply later better. But shortly, weights of those Rwanda lions are 100% sure incorrect. One of those females was only 1 year old. As it can be seen on different videos, one of those lionesses was really young.
So there is no doubt whatsoever, that weights which are mentioned aren´t reliable. If some reporter has written those in good faith, then he has been simply getting misinformation. I put here later some more sources just to show reality.
While it´s fair to say, that there are no big differences in sizes of lions and tigers, same time objectivity is needed. Mistakes happen and especially newspaper articles are often with mistakes. 250 kg or 550 lbs lion isn´t something like 8th wonder of the world, but still such weight is exceptional, not something what we could wait to see all the time in the wild.
GREAT NEWS AGAIN
I searched for SIMON NAYLOR (Phinda Reserve Manager). They have a Website. Personally i search now for his email. If i cant find it i will try to find the E-mail of Anton Louw (managing director at another reserve called Zuka, center) and Dr. Mike Toft (wildlife veterinarian)
And look here are their official Website! https://www.andbeyond.com/contact-us/
So one of their lacation of their one Office is in Johannesburg, South Africa. Christopher Torchias location is also there...
09-24-2020, 11:41 PM( This post was last modified: 09-25-2020, 12:28 PM by Shadow )
Here is one more posting concerning Rwanda lions. Of course this source can be questioned too( I mean description, not content of the video), but looks to be good and as it was mentioned also in NatGeo documentary, one lioness was very young.
Description: "The process has been long and meticulous in the planning, from the selection of the lions through to the logistics of relocating them. It’s been nearly 15 years since lions roamed this beautiful park.
The five females and two males were selected based on their future reproductive potential and their ability to contribute to social cohesion. They were taken by road to Johannesburg and then flown to Kigali before travelling to Akagera National Park.
Lions have a short gestation period and the team at Akagera NP are hopeful of cubs within a year. One of the female lions (10 years old) has had 3 previous litters, the last being in 2014. In addition there is a 5 year old female who also had a litter in 2014. The three younger lionesses, one aged 1 year and two 3 year old sisters, are yet to have cubs. This range of females gives the park the best chances of sustaining a lion population in the future.
Peter Fearnhead, CEO of African Parks says, "The return of lions to Akagera is a conservation milestone for the park and the country. Together with the Rwandan Development Board, we are delighted to have been able to re-introduce one of the charismatic species to this beautiful National Park."
Watch this short video which outlines the story so far!"
(09-24-2020, 11:41 PM)Shadow Wrote: Here is one more posting concerning Rwanda lions. Of course this source can be questioned too, but looks to be good and as it was mentioned also in NatGeo documentary, one lioness was very young.
Description: "The process has been long and meticulous in the planning, from the selection of the lions through to the logistics of relocating them. It’s been nearly 15 years since lions roamed this beautiful park.
The five females and two males were selected based on their future reproductive potential and their ability to contribute to social cohesion. They were taken by road to Johannesburg and then flown to Kigali before travelling to Akagera National Park.
Lions have a short gestation period and the team at Akagera NP are hopeful of cubs within a year. One of the female lions (10 years old) has had 3 previous litters, the last being in 2014. In addition there is a 5 year old female who also had a litter in 2014. The three younger lionesses, one aged 1 year and two 3 year old sisters, are yet to have cubs. This range of females gives the park the best chances of sustaining a lion population in the future.
Peter Fearnhead, CEO of African Parks says, "The return of lions to Akagera is a conservation milestone for the park and the country. Together with the Rwandan Development Board, we are delighted to have been able to re-introduce one of the charismatic species to this beautiful National Park."
Watch this short video which outlines the story so far!"
Shadow, I dint know why you dont approved my post because it had good informations.
And also this doesnt mean that these weights are false especially for all lions there. I even said that Christopher Torchia is a worker from their. He works also at Johannesburg, South Africa. I emailed him now.
Now i try to ask the other guys.
One question. if they agree with info who came from their own OFFICE.. then you will accept its 100% reliable?
(09-24-2020, 11:41 PM)Shadow Wrote: Here is one more posting concerning Rwanda lions. Of course this source can be questioned too, but looks to be good and as it was mentioned also in NatGeo documentary, one lioness was very young.
Description: "The process has been long and meticulous in the planning, from the selection of the lions through to the logistics of relocating them. It’s been nearly 15 years since lions roamed this beautiful park.
The five females and two males were selected based on their future reproductive potential and their ability to contribute to social cohesion. They were taken by road to Johannesburg and then flown to Kigali before travelling to Akagera National Park.
Lions have a short gestation period and the team at Akagera NP are hopeful of cubs within a year. One of the female lions (10 years old) has had 3 previous litters, the last being in 2014. In addition there is a 5 year old female who also had a litter in 2014. The three younger lionesses, one aged 1 year and two 3 year old sisters, are yet to have cubs. This range of females gives the park the best chances of sustaining a lion population in the future.
Peter Fearnhead, CEO of African Parks says, "The return of lions to Akagera is a conservation milestone for the park and the country. Together with the Rwandan Development Board, we are delighted to have been able to re-introduce one of the charismatic species to this beautiful National Park."
Watch this short video which outlines the story so far!"
Shadow, I dint know why you dont approved my post because it had good informations.
And also this doesnt mean that these weights are false especially for all lions there. I even said that Christopher Torchia is a worker from their. He works also at Johannesburg, South Africa. I emailed him now.
Now i try to ask the other guys.
One question. if they agree with info who came from their own OFFICE.. then you will accept its 100% reliable?
Best regards
I´m not the only one checking postings and I didn´t notice that one posting earlier.
Anyway what comes to information from office, it´s naturally better than information from newspapers. Same time it´s good to ask so, that they really check if they have those weights in medical records. In some occasions getting real weight(s) can demand more than one message. Those people can be busy and not really checking things if some vague question comes in by email. Getting real weights can take time, it depends so much of it, that who is replying and how much time he/she has to check this kind of things for some random people writing.
Well, interesting to see if real weights can be found out.
(09-24-2020, 08:01 PM)Yusuf Wrote: Hello, thanks for the picture.
He estimated his lion OVER 500 lbs which could mean everything. Anyways he said estimates arent reliable.
So in his other book he said the total Length was 10ft 4inch. , In the book 10ft 7 inch. and if we add Body and Tail the length is 10ft 1 inch.
Its a bit weird..... I add 10ft 7 , 10ft 4 and 10ft 1 and devide it by 3 and i got exactly 10ft 4 (315cm). Therefore its fair in my opinion.
Estimations are just that, so they are not reliable. Even then he says "over 500 lb", that do not means that he believed that will reach the 600 lb, probably about 550 lb at the most.
Now, about the total length you must check that the 10 ft 7 in is the length "over the curves", so definitelly the figure of 10 ft 4 in "between pegs" seems impossible. Now, the best explanation is that the figure of 4 in is a typo and should be 1 in, that will explain the error. So, the biggest lion that I ever saw (218 cm in head-body) had a total length of 307 cm "between pegs" (10 ft 1 in) and 323 cm "over curves" (10 ft 7 in), in any case it had a very short tail, just like the tiger of Brander.
First of all I don't contest that a tiger could be longer or more athletic than a lion. That isn't the point and the lions have other assets. I just disapprove of the fact to drop a sentence with no one argument to back it up. I should have taken into account the PCKTS's past within Wildfact... Sorry.
Then... As concerns your remarks about my posts... Well, I consider we are in front of a wild life which is going to completely vanish in a mere two or three decades at the most and all of us with it, (the actual covid crisis darkening the picture, parcs keepers and guards without incomes formerly generated by the tourism and leaving the fauna without protection against poaching). In my opinion, these pictures depict a sort of last testimony before becoming some relics of a lost world. Human madness... But ok ! I will try to be more "personal" with an additionnal pinch of salt (rather pepper or spice, without sinking into insults or unwarranted affirmations of course) into my future posts.
Thank you for your suggestions.
My trade is tigers, but that doesn't mean I'm not interested in lions. I often visit the lion section to read. It's the largest section of Wildfact and generates more traffic than all others. You know I was close with Tshokwane, our former lion mod. There was a reason for that. Remember any member disgrading lions one way or another will be noticed and addressed. No worries.
Agreed with your remarks on the destruction of the natural world and the effect of covid on conservation. Most involved in decisions affecting the natural world and those making their home in that unseen world know about the often devastating effects of their decisions. I'm referring to the situation in the western hemisphere in particular. The time for change has arrived. One can only hope voters realize a very different outlook is needed.
Saw your latest contribution in the Ape thread and liked the extended info and the drawing you added. That is a personal touch.
(09-24-2020, 08:01 PM)Yusuf Wrote: Hello, thanks for the picture.
He estimated his lion OVER 500 lbs which could mean everything. Anyways he said estimates arent reliable.
So in his other book he said the total Length was 10ft 4inch. , In the book 10ft 7 inch. and if we add Body and Tail the length is 10ft 1 inch.
Its a bit weird..... I add 10ft 7 , 10ft 4 and 10ft 1 and devide it by 3 and i got exactly 10ft 4 (315cm). Therefore its fair in my opinion.
Estimations are just that, so they are not reliable. Even then he says "over 500 lb", that do not means that he believed that will reach the 600 lb, probably about 550 lb at the most.
Now, about the total length you must check that the 10 ft 7 in is the length "over the curves", so definitelly the figure of 10 ft 4 in "between pegs" seems impossible. Now, the best explanation is that the figure of 4 in is a typo and should be 1 in, that will explain the error. So, the biggest lion that I ever saw (218 cm in head-body) had a total length of 307 cm "between pegs" (10 ft 1 in) and 323 cm "over curves" (10 ft 7 in), in any case it had a very short tail, just like the tiger of Brander.
So we dont know how long the lion really was. But he said in his book that the lion measured 10ft 4 inches between pegs. Can you send me the source again where he said that the lion was 10ft 7 over curves? Why its impossible that he would have 10ft 4 between pegs? Its a difference of 8cm from the curve measurement. I kniw its mostly 10cm or more but not always.
So if we listen to Frederick he said clearly that the lion measured 10ft 4 inch. between pegs. Why he didnt said then 10ft 1 inch instead of 10ft 4inch? anyways he didnt said that the lion was 10ft 1inch. We got that info from the seperated datas and if we ad them together. But there is maybe a possibilty that something where not included or anything.
If the book would not come from himslef i would accept that the length was probably 10ft 1 inch.
09-26-2020, 09:57 AM( This post was last modified: 09-26-2020, 10:19 AM by GuateGojira )
(09-26-2020, 05:54 AM)Yusuf Wrote: So we dont know how long the lion really was. But he said in his book that the lion measured 10ft 4 inches between pegs. Can you send me the source again where he said that the lion was 10ft 7 over curves? Why its impossible that he would have 10ft 4 between pegs? Its a difference of 8cm from the curve measurement. I kniw its mostly 10cm or more but not always.
So if we listen to Frederick he said clearly that the lion measured 10ft 4 inch. between pegs. Why he didnt said then 10ft 1 inch instead of 10ft 4inch? anyways he didnt said that the lion was 10ft 1inch. We got that info from the seperated datas and if we ad them together. But there is maybe a possibilty that something where not included or anything.
If the book would not come from himslef i would accept that the length was probably 10ft 1 inch.
best regards.
We? It is you who don't want to accept the real length of these individual lion.
Ok, how can I explain this to you? Brander and Hewett concluded that the difference between the measurements "over curves" and "between pegs" may range between 8 to 13 cm (3 to 5 inches) on tigers, with the maximum of up to 17 cm reported by the Maharaja of Cooch Behar's biggest tigers. In lions the difference is between 13 to 28 cm, based in the specimens measured by no other than Vaugan Kirby himself. Now, what all the hunters and old zoologist knew is that the bigger the animal, bigger is the difference of the measurements.
So, knowing this, how is possible that a lion of these dimentions, the biggest in all the records that I ever saw, is going to have a difference of ONLY 8 cm? Honestly, do you believe this? I think that any person with a little of logic will conclude that it is not possible that a giant lion will had only a difference of 8 cm between the two methods. Also knowing that Kirby himself measured and reported at least six lions measured with both methods, "between pegs" and "over curves", and that with the measurements that he presented we know that the difference in the methods is between 13 to 28 cm (bigger than in tigers, by the way), it is clear that this giant lion actually had only a total length of 307 cm "between pegs" based in the more detailed table from the book of 1899. So, the explanation is that the number "4" in the book that you presented is definitelly a typo and that it was actually the number "1", and that will match the size reported by him in 1899, which is 10 ft 1 in total length "between pegs".
Now, for any other person that want to corroborate the measurements of the six lions of Kirby measured with both methods, here are the tables:
Kirby, 1896 - Pg 412 - In Haunts of Wild Game:
*This image is copyright of its original author
Kirby, 1899 - Pg 547 - In Bryden (1899) : Great and Small Game of Africa:
09-26-2020, 11:01 AM( This post was last modified: 09-26-2020, 11:44 AM by Rishi )
(09-26-2020, 09:57 AM)GuateGojira Wrote:
(09-26-2020, 05:54 AM)Yusuf Wrote: So we dont know how long the lion really was. But he said in his book that the lion measured 10ft 4 inches between pegs. Can you send me the source again where he said that the lion was 10ft 7 over curves? Why its impossible that he would have 10ft 4 between pegs? Its a difference of 8cm from the curve measurement. I kniw its mostly 10cm or more but not always.
So if we listen to Frederick he said clearly that the lion measured 10ft 4 inch. between pegs. Why he didnt said then 10ft 1 inch instead of 10ft 4inch? anyways he didnt said that the lion was 10ft 1inch. We got that info from the seperated datas and if we ad them together. But there is maybe a possibilty that something where not included or anything.
If the book would not come from himslef i would accept that the length was probably 10ft 1 inch.
best regards.
We? It is you who don't want to accept the real length of these individual lion.
Ok, how can I explain this to you? Brander and Hewett concluded that the difference between the measurements "over curves" and "between pegs" may range between 8 to 13 cm (3 to 5 inches) on tigers, with the maximum of up to 17 cm reported by the Maharaja of Cooch Behar's biggest tigers. In lions the difference is between 13 to 28 cm, based in the specimens measured by no other than Vaugan Kirby himself. Now, what all the hunters and old zoologist knew is that the bigger the animal, bigger is the difference of the measurements.
So, knowing this, how is possible that a lion of these dimentions, the biggest in all the records that I ever saw, is going to have a difference of ONLY 8 cm? Honestly, do you believe this? I think that any person with a little of logic will conclude that it is not possible that a giant lion will had only a difference of 8 cm between the two methods. Also knowing that Kirby himself measured and reported at least six lions measured with both methods, "between pegs" and "over curves", and that with the measurements that he presented we know that the difference in the methods is between 13 to 28 cm (bigger than in tigers, by the way), it is clear that this giant lion actually had only a total length of 307 cm "between pegs" based in the more detailed table from the book of 1899. So, the explanation is that the number "4" in the book that you presented is definitelly a typo and that it was actually the number "1", and that will match the size reported by him in 1899, which is 10 ft 1 in total length "between pegs".
Now, for any other person that want to corroborate the measurements of the six lions of Kirby measured with both methods, here are the tables:
Kirby, 1896 - Pg 412 - In Haunts of Wild Game:
*This image is copyright of its original author
Kirby, 1899 - Pg 547 - In Bryden (1899) : Great and Small Game of Africa:
*This image is copyright of its original author
Now you understand my point?
Thanks for the pictures.
No matter what we believe or not now, it won't change reality anyway. So, if I can't find any more information, I'll just accept for now.
I have a question about the Namibian Lions.
Which data did you use and which data are still published? And can you direct me to the SOURCE, AVERAGE WEIGHT and Sample Size that you used for the Namibian lions for you table n=29?
I know that you included Huberry(17 × 194.8 kg) and the 3 Hobatere lions(3 × 219kg) but the other datas... I couldn't find them...
Did you included to the 29 Namibian lions the 217.5 kg male lion from the documentarie, the two lions from the etosha national park(195 kg and the other 189 kg) and the 215 kg from the lionwhisperer and the 190kg lion shenzi...?
Comparing Cats: A Discussion of Similarities & Differences
