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.
(08-29-2014, 09:27 PM)'Pckts' Wrote: Like Guate has said, it's possible for males to reach that weight (according to hunting records) but not verified. The only reason I wanted that to be shown was because Pantherinae used it as a verified record and Richard said it wasn't the same lion after I posted that it was estimated. I just wanted to clear up any misconceptions and post that proof of it being estimated and it being the same lion.
Back to the topic-
Zimbabwe lions seem to be the largest, but lions don't really change much according to body weight. One lion chart, had lions from all over and Kruger had the 3rd largest avg. population but it had the largest individual weight of the entire study.
African lions just don't seem to change much in terms of average size, outside of India and Waza of course.
Thats not true at all. I've seen countless photos of malnourished lions, opposed to healthy ones.
Different regions reflect different weights. The common thread being food supply. During the dry
season, many lions loose weight as the migratory herds move on. In prey rich regions of S Africa,
lions grow larger and appear much more robust. As stated earlier in this thread, certain lion pops,
eg. crater and Okovango, haven't been stiudied enough to comparitively guage their size to lion
groups from other regions. Most agree these lions appear larger and more muscular.
"Thats not true at all"
*This image is copyright of its original author
Yes it absolutely is true.
Notice once again, Kruger has the 3rd highest average and yet it still has the Largest lion weighed at 225kg.