quote:

Lane, I agree with most of what you said.

I can certainly understand that with the situation that we have now we "had to do something" even if its a suboptimal choice as if we did not we would be seen as being not concerned about the population's fate.

My point on the statistics is that even if you gave me the data, I would in all likelihood be unable to determine if the statistics are there. I am a medical doc, you are an equine doc, and Dr. White is a biological researcher- none of us are statisticians. Until you have multiple statisticians look through the data in a published study we CAN'T say that there is a "nearly 100%" correlation, because its not been proven. Even if it is 99%, that means 1 out of the lions taken in any year will be incorrect based on this method alone.

When you look at the high P values in biological studies (which are due to limited sample size principally) we then run into the increasing amount of uncertainty that our conclusions are valid. This is certainly acceptable practice in an area where you are making no guarantees that you are always right, like medicine.

The issue here is that we have crossed over into the legal side, where we are now saying if the shot lion is less than 6, it is illegal (at least in Tanzania).

Everyone here seems to admit that judging a lion's age is also an art. Some things, like presumptively the tooth pulp measurement have a scientific basis, although at this point they are unproven. Unfortunately, who is making the decision in the legal situation? It seems that it will be made by a person who will have a lion skin, a skull, and that's about it, all of which from what I see here is just a portion of what needs to be looked at.

The other thing to remember is the almost religious awe some folks have for "scientific evidence" in that if a study says its true, it automatically becomes dogma to them. Admittedly, this is people who are generally not scientifically trained, as the folks who are trained are supposed to know the limitations of the data they work with- but we are talking about people working in a 3rd world governmental bureaucracy here. Will they know about the limitations that you and I realize that are there?

I could certainly see using the pulp measurement as a backstop for trending the judging of lion by the PH, as that is analogous to the use of scientific data by medical professionals, but if it is used as a legal tool the study is being used in a way that the science was never intended to be used.

I don't think I'm arguing both sides of the fence, rather I am stating that there are certain realities that must be faced when dealing with things that should utilize different levels of confidence when applied to situations in the real world.

quote:

BUT...and this is the real point...if one is asked to say >5 or <5 the % certainty approaches (99.99) 100%. It is a good indicator for that parameter. And a 6+ lion will never be a false negative.

quote:

If someone is cited for an illegal lion in the US under the Lacy Act you can expect that the court and or Jury will decide on the relevence of the data. If the data doesn't hold up to scientific scrutinity the federal prosecotor is highly unlkely to take the case in the first place.

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
If someone is cited for an illegal lion in the US under the Lacy Act you can expect that the court and or Jury will decide on the relevence of the data. If the data doesn't hold up to scientific scrutinity the federal prosecotor is highly unlkely to take the case in the first place.

465H&H

quote:

So who of you want's to volunteer to come and shoot a 3 yo lion in Tz this season and test the system by arguing against the science so far presented? Any takers?

I thought not

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Not really.

The Lacey act in this hypothetical case would be that the hunter violated the law in whatever African nation and then brought the trophy back to the US.

The US issue would be whether or not the foreign jurisdiction found you guilty of violating their law, and then whether you crossed state lines or US borders to do so.

Admittedly adding a jury to the mix makes it a bit more difficult to predict, but I really doubt the US court is going to try and rule on the foreign country's game laws. You went there, you agreed to their rules...

quote:

However...the USF&W will be the prosecuting authority. And they will have access to the animal. A good defense would be to disprove the act of wrong doing by disputing the science.

And that will be most likely how it plays out if such takes place.

quote:

Originally posted by 505 gibbs:

quote:

So who of you want's to volunteer to come and shoot a 3 yo lion in Tz this season and test the system by arguing against the science so far presented? Any takers?

I thought not

Bwana, Is your point that with the new system, no one will be willing to try it? Because, I certainly have not seen any "science" as far as aging lion offered here, despite what others have said.

quote:

Originally posted by 505 gibbs:

quote:

However...the USF&W will be the prosecuting authority. And they will have access to the animal. A good defense would be to disprove the act of wrong doing by disputing the science.

And that will be most likely how it plays out if such takes place.

Is that how that works? I would assume that the Attorney Generals office would be the prosecutor.

quote:

If you claim there is no science behind it why would you or any one else be worried about trying it?

quote:

Originally posted by 465H&H:
I may be wrong about this but you can't export any trophy from Tanzania without an export permit from The Tanzanian govt. If they OK the export then it is a legal export. I believe they will only OK lion trophies for export that are of legal age. I suspect Lacy would only come into play if the trophy was exported without an export permit or as is the case with leopard or elephant no import permit was issued by USF&WS.

There is another possibility.

I see a bigger problem with what they will do if someone kills a five year old lion under the six year old rule. The tooth data has a low ability to separate the 5 and 6 year age classes. Because it is so low, I suspect that it would be difficult if not impossible to prosecute such a case. Lane?

5's & 6's are hard to tell apart for sure. I don't think you will see any trophies confiscated as 5 year olds. I think it will be a "tie goes the runner scenario".

465H&H