quote:

CHC,
FYI...a large study looking at growth rings or dentin layers in teeth of lions was undertaken and it did not pan out...at least with the current hypothesis.

Is this different than measuring the pulp (I'm going off of memory) that has been previously discussed for use in aging lions?

Tooth growth rings are generally only laid down during periods of no growth or extreme stress. Species that don't stop their growth during some period of the year are not good candidates for the cementum annuli aging technique. North American deer go through a period of no growth during the winter months so it works pretty well with them. Other species such as big horn sheep and mountain goats lay down horn annuli as well as tooth annuli. Bears also are good candidates for this technique because they hibernate, growth all but stops and they live off of their fat reserves. Trees that stop growth for a period of the year also show growth rings. Although I am no expert on African lion teeth, it shouldn't be surprising that this technique doesn't work well as they probably don't have a severe non-growth period due to the mild year around climate.

465H&H

That makes a lot of sense 465H&H. I'd find it hard to believe lions are experiencing "non growth" periods anywhere in their home range.

"Is this different than measuring the pulp (I'm going off of memory) that has been previously discussed for use in aging lions?"

I remember that thread and I want to say they were measuring pulp or cavity diameter rather than anuli. I'm sure Lane will chime in.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:
That makes a lot of sense 465H&H. I'd find it hard to believe lions are experiencing "non growth" periods anywhere in their home range.

"Is this different than measuring the pulp (I'm going off of memory) that has been previously discussed for use in aging lions?"

I remember that thread and I want to say they were measuring pulp or cavity diameter rather than anuli. I'm sure Lane will chime in.

Brett

I am not familiar with the pulp cavity technique so I can't answer that question.

465H&H

465 H&H, Many Thanks for that information. I had never seen it explained that way.

I knew that age was able to be determined by the annuli in the teeth, incisors on deer, and on my bear the first tooth in the upper jaw behind the canine.

Did not know about lions.

quote:

Originally posted by 505 gibbs:

quote:

CHC,
FYI...a large study looking at growth rings or dentin layers in teeth of lions was undertaken and it did not pan out...at least with the current hypothesis.

Is this different than measuring the pulp (I'm going off of memory) that has been previously discussed for use in aging lions?

Basically it is the same idea but applied in a different way.

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
Tooth growth rings are generally only laid down during periods of no growth or extreme stress. Species that don't stop their growth during some period of the year are not good candidates for the cementum annuli aging technique. North American deer go through a period of no growth during the winter months so it works pretty well with them. Other species such as big horn sheep and mountain goats lay down horn annuli as well as tooth annuli. Bears also are good candidates for this technique because they hibernate, growth all but stops and they live off of their fat reserves. Trees that stop growth for a period of the year also show growth rings. Although I am no expert on African lion teeth, it shouldn't be surprising that this technique doesn't work well as they probably don't have a severe non-growth period due to the mild year around climate.

465H&H

Exactly!

That is why measuring pulp cavity width applies when counting Cementum rings won't. They still fill in the center of the tooth just not on a consitent basis.

Lane and Aaron

I think that things may be going in the wrong direction.
Mainly because of a lack of scientific approach from you. If you are going to be the face of a drive to prove beyond doubt that the hunting of lions and your aging techniques etc are beneficial then you must make sure that you are not going to be personally discredited as the results regardless of their validity will go out the window with you.
As has been noted the tone and direction on the wiki site are different, but your public profile rests very much with the membership of AR, many of whom have publicly stated that your attitude and behavior leave you without their support. How do you expect to win over the hunting lobby when your peers don't support you.

I am sure you will not be happy to read this, but the very best thing you could do for this effort now it to step back and let someone with a balanced and less charged approach take this forward using scientific means. Get people with no dog in the fight who can produce and sell the science. If you were to spend your time and zeal on getting funding for the effort you would be far better placed than to be shouting the odds in an arrogant fashion whilst holding the reins.

Sorry if this is offensive, but I don't pull punches, especially not when conservation as a whole is about to take the beating.
If you don't believe me, find a friendly journalist, and ask them to do their worst.

Good luck
HQ

505 - No question, JJ is the biggest proponent of the lion and all that is wildlife conservation. His commitment is beyond reproach, and CF should be supported to the fullest extent. The LCTF, has suggested his support as much as anyone.

But, as you would know, if you had spent hours of your time speaking with JJ, answering and communicating with him via dozens of emails, and attended the personal meetings the LCTF has had with him in the past 2 months. You would know his focus, as it should be is on the application of the law, as it pertains to the ESA listing, or the CITES up-listing! He's an attorney, that's his specialty, and no one knows it better than him!

The focus of the LCTF is changing protocal within our own fraternity! We are NOT legal experts, so we leave the legal stuff to JJ and the CF. We are fighting for the same cause, but taking two different approaches, as to who is the target audience, to some degree. JJ has his hands full dealing with all the legality issues of the ESA listing, etc, etc, etc.

He's fully aware of our approach, and is supporting us too, 100%! I get emails from him on a daily basis. As an attorney, its his motive, to only approach an issue from the stance of the law. He rarely, if ever, gives a nod to the opposition, even when recognizing a problem. Does that make sense, are you following me?

He must take a different approach than us, and WE HAVE ALL discussed that in PERSON. So once again, if you really knew all the info/facts, you might better understand exactly what's going on, and WHY!!! I don't mean to be condescending, but there's much that has been done/said, that you simply have NOT been a party to.

The potential listing, will uphold the 90-day review. The fight will begin after that! Our biggest asset/liability will be what side the likes of Dr. Craig Packer, Dr. Luke Hunter, Dr. Colleen Begg, and others, take. Period, end of story, and I can't stress that enough!! So, if they see and recognize the hunting fraternity's willingness and ability to assert change as it pertains to shooting young lions, dependent pride holding males, etc, etc. They will without a doubt, side with the hunters, they have all but said so. However, is they see status quo, the continued shooting of young lions, etc. They will side in favor of the uplisting. And unfortunately the USFWS, CITES and Ken Salazar are gonna listen to the "EXPERTS", regardless of what you think, say, lobby against, or do!

The needed change, has been proven with the best available science to be sound. So, who do you think they're gonna listen to. I don't like it anymore than you do, but unfortunately "POLITICS", plays a part in African Wildlife Conservation, just like it does in most other aspects of life.

Its important to recognize the difference between what we are doing and what JJ/CF is doing. JJ knows, and so do we, and we ALL support eachother!

quote:

Originally posted by Hunters Quest:
Lane and Aaron

I think that things may be going in the wrong direction.
Mainly because of a lack of scientific approach from you. If you are going to be the face of a drive to prove beyond doubt that the hunting of lions and your aging techniques etc are beneficial then you must make sure that you are not going to be personally discredited as the results regardless of their validity will go out the window with you.
As has been noted the tone and direction on the wiki site are different, but your public profile rests very much with the membership of AR, many of whom have publicly stated that your attitude and behavior leave you without their support. How do you expect to win over the hunting lobby when your peers don't support you.

I am sure you will not be happy to read this, but the very best thing you could do for this effort now it to step back and let someone with a balanced and less charged approach take this forward using scientific means. Get people with no dog in the fight who can produce and sell the science. If you were to spend your time and zeal on getting funding for the effort you would be far better placed than to be shouting the odds in an arrogant fashion whilst holding the reins.

Sorry if this is offensive, but I don't pull punches, especially not when conservation as a whole is about to take the beating.
If you don't believe me, find a friendly journalist, and ask them to do their worst.

Good luck
HQ

HQ,

No offense taken at all.

I do stand to correct you on one point and that is that we are founded in science.

I will challenge you to find a current lion biologist in which we have not involved in our advisorship. Most will be able call us by name due to the many hours we have spent discussing the situations with them.

Science is basis of the LCTF.