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.
(08-02-2018, 09:19 AM)sik94 Wrote: I feel its a bit unfair to compare the success of the majingalanes against the bigger mapogos coalition. A 6 strong coalition will always have a lot more instability and also will be more likely to lack a well-defined hierarchy. The majingalanes were only four strong at most throughout their reign and as a result acted as a unit, the mapogos didn't do it to the same extent.
So true. Same happened with the Matimbas. But I also feel that the Mapogos instability came from some of the bigger "personalities" in the group. T and Kinky were wild ones. After they separated from the others, they were a great 2 male lion coalition.
Add to that the age gap. Mak was 4 years older than T and KT. By 2008 Mak was 10 and ready to retire...T and KT were 6 and full of hormones.
08-04-2018, 10:02 AM( This post was last modified: 08-04-2018, 10:49 AM by Rishi )
(08-02-2018, 01:54 AM)Musa15 Wrote:
Quote:The Mapogos killed like that all the time. The bad thing is that most of these kills were not recorded and have been lost to time. The Mapogos have been eating lions way before the manginjis.
And I don't think it was revenge kill, they found a prime opportunity and took it. If kinky hadn't kept chase them, he wouldn't have died that day.
And lets be honest, them killing most if not all of their competition actually made it easier for others coalition to come in. Rather than beating 3 or 4 different coalitions, they just have to beat 2 lions.
I wouldn't call the manginjis overly aggressive, they were as aggressive as regular lions are. The Mapogos were overly aggressive, especially kinky and T.
What is the point of killing so many rivals if you're not successfully siring offspring? They failed in that regard which is a shame because each and every one of the Mapogos were great specimens physically. With 6 of them controlling such a vast area it should have resulted in most of SS being filled with their genes in the future. But in the end what happened was they merely reduced the population of both Lions and Hyenas for a number of years, in an era where both are losing numbers in the wild every year, before partitioning due to infighting and losing what they killed so many for. There's many who get a kick out of "Lion brutality" hence their popularity but I look at it from an evolutionary standpoint, and in that regard the Majingilane are unmatched in their greatness. The whole "who killed the most Lions" is meaningless especially if it had no real long-term purpose, that's just for sensationalism documentaries. Mohawk4 was correct, tje Majins do own all the meaninful stats except for territory size which is explained by their smaller coalition numbers.
Because that is what male lions do - Kill and breed. The Mapogo were good in one aspect.
You saying all of this is coming from a Human viewpoint, NOT A WILD ANIMALE ONE. That is what male lions do. If the manginjis were challenged more often in their lifetime, they would have to do the same and I am sure they would have tried to. The biggest difference between the 2 coalitions was that the Mapogos, especially kinky and T went out of their way to kill/attack.
Kinky and T, a 2 lion coalition held a bigger territory than both their other brothers and the manginjis. Stop saying they were only 4 so they couldn't hold a bigger territory, Kinky and T showed you could. Sure they paid the price for that but it also shows they had the confidence, courage and aggression.
(08-04-2018, 10:02 AM)HouseOfLions Wrote: Kinky and T, a 2 lion coalition held a bigger territory than both their other brothers and the manginjis.
It's a little misguided, stating it as that. They stayed in that territory conquered by the six(or five, if Mak wasn't with them, but the idea remains). Not by them alone. By the six, and when the others came back west, they decided to stay.
Defending it wasn't as difficult as it seems, considering it was basically empty, aside of the old Rollercoaster male, who they had running all over the place for his life.
(08-04-2018, 10:02 AM)HouseOfLions Wrote: Stop saying they were only 4 so they couldn't hold a bigger territory, Kinky and T showed you could. Sure they paid the price for that but it also shows they had the confidence, courage and aggression.
It's isn't a matter of "couldn't".
They could, and did hold basically all at some point, following their second takeover, that is in 2014. They just simply decided to move camp and focus on the new one, the new prides.
What they or any other coalition can't (couldn't) do, and this is an issue that will present itself to the Birmingham males now, is protect efectively all of that territory.
So I would make a little change in your statement. To me, what lions do isn't kill and breed.
It is protect a territory and breed. The former involves, from time to time, killing, but killing isn't their first and primary concern.
(08-04-2018, 10:02 AM)HouseOfLions Wrote: Kinky and T, a 2 lion coalition held a bigger territory than both their other brothers and the manginjis.
It's a little misguided, stating it as that. They stayed in that territory conquered by the six(or five, if Mak wasn't with them, but the idea remains). Not by them alone. By the six, and when the others came back west, they decided to stay.
Defending it wasn't as difficult as it seems, considering it was basically empty, aside of the old Rollercoaster male, who they had running all over the place for his life.
(08-04-2018, 10:02 AM)HouseOfLions Wrote: Stop saying they were only 4 so they couldn't hold a bigger territory, Kinky and T showed you could. Sure they paid the price for that but it also shows they had the confidence, courage and aggression.
It's isn't a matter of "couldn't".
They could, and did hold basically all at some point, following their second takeover, that is in 2014. They just simply decided to move camp and focus on the new one, the new prides.
What they or any other coalition can't (couldn't) do, and this is an issue that will present itself to the Birmingham males now, is protect efectively all of that territory.
So I would make a little change in your statement. To me, what lions do isn't kill and breed.
It is protect a territory and breed. The former involves, from time to time, killing, but killing isn't their first and primary concern.
Actually no, kinky and T held the majority of the east with the other 4 settled in the west, similar to the Manginjis. Sure they captured it all together but they still held the east after they split from the other 4, for a majority of the part.
How was it not as difficult as it seems? That big of a territory is absolutely difficult to control and maintain, especially for 2 lions. And It seems you forgot that it was during this time that they beat or killed multiple lion coalitions that brought up the total number of coalitions Mapogos beat.
And sure it was "empty" but that applies to the Manginjis as well. In fact, it was even easier for them as the Mapogos took out all others.
Sorry but you are confusing what it means to protect territory. Male lions do that BY KILLING. So what I am saying is still right - THEY KILL TO PROTECT. And sure killing isn't their primary option but it was for the Mapogos. That is the main reason I mentioned that. And another thing, if multiple lions are attacking you over and over, then killing/defending (can be used interchangeably here) become frequent. In the manginjis case, this wasn't the case as most coalitions were content with their territories, not to mention, they weren't big enough (number wise).
08-04-2018, 10:46 PM( This post was last modified: 08-04-2018, 10:48 PM by Tshokwane )
(08-04-2018, 10:30 PM)HouseOfLions Wrote: How was it not as difficult as it seems? That big of a territory is absolutely difficult to control and maintain, especially for 2 lions.
Of course it's difficult. I say it wasn't as difficult because they barely had competition.
(08-04-2018, 10:30 PM)HouseOfLions Wrote: And It seems you forgot that it was during this time that they beat or killed multiple lion coalitions that brought up the total number of coalitions Mapogos beat.
I didn't forget anything. 1 old Rollercoaster male, and a couple of subadult 2-3 male coalitions hardly count as competition, no matter how much their fanatics try to turn it as a big accomplishment(as a comparison, when the Majingilane defeated and chased away both of the Subadult Selatis and Sand river males, they treated it as a joke because they were young, so there you have it).
It was only with the Gijima males that were a bit older that they proved enough of a competition for the Mapogos to actually make them think twice, and then the Majingilane chased them away easily. That's the only competition they had.
(08-04-2018, 10:30 PM)HouseOfLions Wrote: In fact, it was even easier for them as the Mapogos took out all others.
There were no "others" outside of 2 coalitions of 2 males each, and a couple of lone males. That's it.
08-04-2018, 10:59 PM( This post was last modified: 08-05-2018, 03:59 PM by Musa15 )
(08-04-2018, 10:02 AM)HouseOfLions Wrote:
(08-02-2018, 01:54 AM)Musa15 Wrote:
Quote:The Mapogos killed like that all the time. The bad thing is that most of these kills were not recorded and have been lost to time. The Mapogos have been eating lions way before the manginjis.
And I don't think it was revenge kill, they found a prime opportunity and took it. If kinky hadn't kept chase them, he wouldn't have died that day.
And lets be honest, them killing most if not all of their competition actually made it easier for others coalition to come in. Rather than beating 3 or 4 different coalitions, they just have to beat 2 lions.
I wouldn't call the manginjis overly aggressive, they were as aggressive as regular lions are. The Mapogos were overly aggressive, especially kinky and T.
What is the point of killing so many rivals if you're not successfully siring offspring? They failed in that regard which is a shame because each and every one of the Mapogos were great specimens physically. With 6 of them controlling such a vast area it should have resulted in most of SS being filled with their genes in the future. But in the end what happened was they merely reduced the population of both Lions and Hyenas for a number of years, in an era where both are losing numbers in the wild every year, before partitioning due to infighting and losing what they killed so many for. There's many who get a kick out of "Lion brutality" hence their popularity but I look at it from an evolutionary standpoint, and in that regard the Majingilane are unmatched in their greatness. The whole "who killed the most Lions" is meaningless especially if it had no real long-term purpose, that's just for sensationalism documentaries. Mohawk4 was correct, tje Majins do own all the meaninful stats except for territory size which is explained by their smaller coalition numbers.
Because that is what male lions do - Kill and breed. The Mapogo were good in one aspect.
You saying all of this is coming from a Human viewpoint, NOT A WILD ANIMALE ONE. That is what male lions do. If the manginjis were challenged more often in their lifetime, they would have to do the same and I am sure they would have tried to. The biggest difference between the 2 coalitions was that the Mapogos, especially kinky and T went out of their way to kill/attack.
Kinky and T, a 2 lion coalition held a bigger territory than both their other brothers and the manginjis. Stop saying they were only 4 so they couldn't hold a bigger territory, Kinky and T showed you could. Sure they paid the price for that but it also shows they had the confidence, courage and aggression.
They do more than just kill and breed, and like you said yourself the Mapogo were only good in one aspect so you put forth two criteria's for male lion definitions and they failed at one of them while the Majingilanes literally succeeded at everything a male lion coalition can do.
Others have already responded to your KT-Mr. T statement but let me ask, how long did they last doing this untill they lost to new males? The Majins held their territory for 8 years untill age stopped them.
Actually, my arguments are more based on nature than yours. Your fascination with violence within the animals is exactly a human viewpoint, that is why it was used to create that Brothers in Blood documentary, a sensationalism aspect to draw in viewers even though it portrays an inaccurate picture of this story.
Violence in nature has its intended purposes especially for Lions but over-kill(no pun intended) does the opposite. All of this glorification of the Mapogo's killfests, but what did killing all of those cubs accomplish when they barely replaced them with their own cubs? What about when the males killed and ate cubs of their own brothers and ended their own bloodline? What did it accomplish when they killed off all the rival males in the area when they failed to replace them with eventual adult male sons? What did it accomplish when they killed their own Lionesses during moments like failed mating sessions, a behavior seen as shockingly unusual? That was another huge waste as Lionesses are extremely integral to prides, producing offspring, food, passing on skills to the next generations etc. You are not including these kills, which were many, into your 'Mapogo kill-stats' which you consider so highly. But I maintain that you're glorifying a generally meaningless statistic anyway.
The more one understands the purpose of male Lions the more you realize how much the Mapogo's were unfullfilled potential and the Majingilanes were like a textbook example of evolutionary success. That'll be my final thought on that.
(08-04-2018, 10:30 PM)HouseOfLions Wrote: How was it not as difficult as it seems? That big of a territory is absolutely difficult to control and maintain, especially for 2 lions.
Of course it's difficult. I say it wasn't as difficult because they barely had competition.
(08-04-2018, 10:30 PM)HouseOfLions Wrote: And It seems you forgot that it was during this time that they beat or killed multiple lion coalitions that brought up the total number of coalitions Mapogos beat.
I didn't forget anything. 1 old Rollercoaster male, and a couple of subadult 2-3 male coalitions hardly count as competition, no matter how much their fanatics try to turn it as a big accomplishment(as a comparison, when the Majingilane defeated and chased away both of the Subadult Selatis and Sand river males, they treated it as a joke because they were young, so there you have it).
It was only with the Gijima males that were a bit older that they proved enough of a competition for the Mapogos to actually make them think twice, and then the Majingilane chased them away easily. That's the only competition they had.
(08-04-2018, 10:30 PM)HouseOfLions Wrote: In fact, it was even easier for them as the Mapogos took out all others.
There were no "others" outside of 2 coalitions of 2 males each, and a couple of lone males. That's it.
They didn't have competition because they removed all and kept removing whoever came in.
They defeated 2 manyalelti males, 2 gijima males, 2 golf course males, Rollercoaster male, 2 unknown nomads, 3 toulon males, 2 nomads again and then again 2 nomads. Most of these were not sub -adults like you claim, they were going into their prime. So age 4/5. So yes, it does count as competition.
I didn't laugh when the manginjis chased away the selati or the sand river male. But in the selati's case, they were not coming to take territory from the manginjis, and they were 2.5 - 3. I give them the sand river male victory.
08-05-2018, 08:34 AM( This post was last modified: 08-05-2018, 08:37 AM by Matimbalani )
I enjoyed reading the back-and-forth on this thread as it is quite informative and provides different perspective to lion behavior and the history of different coalitions in Sabi Sands. That said I do find the central question of the debate a bit sterile and one that will probably never have a definite answer.
But my humble take is this: that as with all social animals lions have a complex and rich social lives. While they may have some broad general tendencies, ultimately each individual lion has its own tendencies and predilections that based on specific situations can help or hinder them. That allows them to be adaptable. Some of their behavior will serve them well in certain circumstances but will cause their demise in others. An aggressive lion cub will get to eat more than it's siblings and grow to become a strong and domineering lion in an environment where food is scarce but he will also likely charge into battle with full confidence and get his behind handed to him on a platter. Similarly, an individual lion may not live to his/her full potential as part of a cohesive unit. Think of Sizanani and his limping brother who was clearly a liability and Sizanani could have dumped him found a healthier partner and probably would not have lost two or three years of his life. Or the case of Hip Scar who if I recall correctly did not eat a kill made by the Matshapiris until his brothers returned after chasing their rivals off. So again somethings that's an advantage in one setting is not so in another and ultimately this is what makes lions so interesting.
We as humans tend to ascribe moral weight to these tendencies based on our own value system. So this debate becomes a proxy for our own value systems. Nature zigs and zags.
I think of myself as privileged to be able to follow the lives of lions specially now that loss of habitat and human encroachment may ultimately seal their fate and consign them to displays behind glass walls.
And finally, as the beer commercial goes: Hairy Belly is the most interesting lion in the wold! May be we can all agree on this point?
History's most brutal killers, the Majingilane Male Lions
