• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Kodiak Bear vs African Lion

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks Silver Prime for your interesting contributions to this thread. No sarcasm meant, you go to some lengths to research claims!

Somebody mentioned grizzly vs hippo on the previous page - as a born and bred South African, its well known that hippos are among the most dangerous animals in Africa. Hippos can snap crocodiles in half. Yes, in half. They are aggressive and tutorial and I think they weigh in the thousands of pounds. And they can run really fast. If a hippo wants you dead, you are dead. I think they cause more deaths in African than even crocs.
 
Thanks Silver Prime for your interesting contributions to this thread. No sarcasm meant, you go to some lengths to research claims!

Somebody mentioned grizzly vs hippo on the previous page - as a born and bred South African, its well known that hippos are among the most dangerous animals in Africa. Hippos can snap crocodiles in half. Yes, in half. They are aggressive and tutorial and I think they weigh in the thousands of pounds. And they can run really fast. If a hippo wants you dead, you are dead. I think they cause more deaths in African than even crocs.

Hey thanks bro, and Aloha mai

African eh? Cool mate, I'm Hawaiian from oahu (Born and raised) still here lol. Ahh? I would call what I know the basics I guess, its just that its alot easier to remember things if they are organized and saved, via forums or just on the PC.

Hippos are badass too, dont think single lions would wanna tangle with a angry hippo, I read alot my self on there agression twards man, but no insults intened to the locals and natives of africa but I guess in some ways hippos being that agressive is a natrual balance for the carnage that men (including) others like british hunters, china-men medicine bone diggers; and others as well, those who take and kill alot more than they give back.

As for the debate itself, I guess its inevitavble, someone would have eventualy dig for creditable answers and shared it, I my self have wittnessed alot of knowledgable people on this arcaine subject...it is in fact very intresting and is basicaly one thing every one at some point has that crosses there minds a few times who would win, but I make it perfectly clear that I dont want to emit or impliment any cruelty or dis-like to any animals and like to keep it purely for educational purposes and above all hypothtical.
 
Last edited:
I wish all Rhino poachers would get mauled by angry hippos.

lol me too,

Just seen a documentary on poaching ivory from elephants and rhino horns a month or so ago, almost wanted to cry; but I'm a man, so I went outside and punched down a few banana trees, they are harder than the average punching bag but not hard enough to break or tear skin. lol

I dont really get the whole slaughtering of tens of thousands of them each year; cant they just wait till the animal dies of natrual causes and harvest the remains? I mean still each year a newer cycle of old animals will die from natrual causes, so thats still alot of ivory and horns, why cant they be allowed to live out there lives until mother nature says so?
 
Unfortunately its market forces at work.

I'm not so worried about elephants, because Africa is overpopulated with elephants in any case. They can cause massive habitat destruction if their numbers are too high. Dont get me wrong - they are highly intelligent and I dont agree with poaching them. What I'm saying is that their numbers are not threatened like that of the Rhinos.

I think the Kruger National Park (South Africa's largest national park) has a stockpile of ivory, of which it is allowed to sell a small amount every year. I think this stockpile is mainly from the animals that they need to cull every year.

In the case of Rhinos, the man living in China who thinks he needs rhino horn to get a boner, will pay top dollar for a rhino horn, but he does not want to wait for one to die. So they will them and take the horns.
 
Unfortunately its market forces at work.

I'm not so worried about elephants, because Africa is overpopulated with elephants in any case. They can cause massive habitat destruction if their numbers are too high. Dont get me wrong - they are highly intelligent and I dont agree with poaching them. What I'm saying is that their numbers are not threatened like that of the Rhinos.

I think the Kruger National Park (South Africa's largest national park) has a stockpile of ivory, of which it is allowed to sell a small amount every year. I think this stockpile is mainly from the animals that they need to cull every year.

In the case of Rhinos, the man living in China who thinks he needs rhino horn to get a boner, will pay top dollar for a rhino horn, but he does not want to wait for one to die. So they will them and take the horns.

Oh? I havent researched the actual numbers yet, but from that documentary was, what I remember only a century ago there was like a 500,000 elephants, and now theres less then 80,000, thats a extermination in the process if you ask me, there should be no culling what so ever unless used specifically for food of starving regions.

I actually dont like that word culling; for shooting any animal is pretty stupid, they should be transfered to places where there are higher amounts of starving predators or in fact the opposite, bring in a few mis-treated circus animals and animal trade rescued predators; and let them kill off the over populating herbivores; its alot more eco-friendly.

As for the asians, its a no brainer; if they truely worked...stuff like tiger bones, and rhino horns more asians on adult sites would be packin, but nope; they are all the same size as our middle fingers (Possibly smaller). lol They need to stop beliving in century old folk tales thats not scientifcaly possible and stick to viagra or what ever else is on the market.

Just read one on asians turning to lions for there sexual enhancers since the poor tiger is going extinct; cant see how that will play out, since to most of what I read the lion is to africans, lions are sacred and held high in there cultures historical healdry, like gods...if anything I'd probably go all whale wars on there asses too if I ever had the chance, except I wouldent be lobbing water balloons, I'd be whipping cansters of gas and light them up on fire...while singing ....

C'mon baby; light my fire. lol
 
From reading wikipedia, it sounds like it depends a lot on the area in which the elephants live. In some areas, they do suffer from poaching, while in others, there are too many of them.

In an ideal world, we would relocate rather than cull, but the reality is that relocation is difficult and expensive. Even relocating a single elephant is not an easy task - you need to tranquilize him, move him, and then release him, keeping alive in the process. Its not that easy. Remember, most African countries do not have sufficient money for even basic education - then you ask them to spend money they dont have on preserving creatures that they do not see the value of. I think all wildlife needs to be preserved, but can you understand how someone who does not have the money to eat 3 meals a day could feel differently? Moving that one elephant would probably cost as much as it would take to feed a man for a few months.

Westerners are far from immune from such idiocy - the difference is that the remedies we take do not cause extinction of worldlife. Things like, believing in homeopathy, or that vaccines cause autism, or psychics, or that some celebrities can talk to the dead. Complete rubbish, and yet millions of westerners believe it.
 
From reading wikipedia, it sounds like it depends a lot on the area in which the elephants live. In some areas, they do suffer from poaching, while in others, there are too many of them.

In an ideal world, we would relocate rather than cull, but the reality is that relocation is difficult and expensive. Even relocating a single elephant is not an easy task - you need to tranquilize him, move him, and then release him, keeping alive in the process. Its not that easy. Remember, most African countries do not have sufficient money for even basic education - then you ask them to spend money they dont have on preserving creatures that they do not see the value of. I think all wildlife needs to be preserved, but can you understand how someone who does not have the money to eat 3 meals a day could feel differently? Moving that one elephant would probably cost as much as it would take to feed a man for a few months.

Westerners are far from immune from such idiocy - the difference is that the remedies we take do not cause extinction of worldlife. Things like, believing in homeopathy, or that vaccines cause autism, or psychics, or that some celebrities can talk to the dead. Complete rubbish, and yet millions of westerners believe it.

Well of course I would be out of place telling of some problems the africans are facing because I wouldent know, I have neither gone there or studyed in detail of quality and quanity of some of the poverty that is situated there...but I can tell you regardless, if it is so that bad, poverty is still a man made fictional implimation, I my self have some knowledge of agriculture and know that even my modern people cannot be self sustaining, but it is only because we have been striped by force of our own ways.

Belive me Hawaiians of formal years before the 17th century was possibly the most self sustaining people on the planet, sort of like Indians we had a dilema and alot of our culture was diminshed and halted birthing into the world of western european poverty/currentcy...all in all thats all it is, fictional; man made ideas.

In the modern world, yes; money can change lives indifinitely, but thats only because the socioty s following under those basics of that type of rules.

Belive me, I went to school for agriculture starting off just on land scaping, and in this place and time, I can bank hundreds of thousands of dollars with just the resources of a truck and determination on the basics of what I know; which is self sustaining...sadly the socioty cant even get a hold of the basics and rely on the goverment for everything, because there propaganda (feeling like they own you) wants it that way.


But anyways, as that is another story all in its self, money is non essential, the will power and under standing of the situation is more important; to what I learned (Little of africa) is that they could be as well the wealthiest countrys in world as is, they hold some of the most mineral deposits such as gold, diamonds and other land/A'ina forms of money than any other place in the world.

But I do understand where you are coming from, that it could when specified as almost impossible and weighing/juggling daily life can be very difficult to determine if narrowed down, but when you flip that scenario of narrowing up/out, it can be as easy as pie...hence the saying,


Work is hard in the modern world, and any way you cut it, work is always work, so if you can find something that you truely enjoy in life; you will never work again a day in your life.

And education wise, its easy to understand if alot of positive re-enforcement is involved instead of negative, hence the other saying...


A un-educated man on the brink of death, no home, no job; no nothing, is starving and daily he is asking people for food....if you give that man a fish to eat for the night he will tommorow go hungry still, if you Teach that man to fish, he wont ever go hungry ever again.

In other words the positive things the human can be empowered with, can beautify and benifit all of life a million times over, but there are some assholes who think they are entitled to everything beliving a invisible man as there primary source.

{EDIT:}

It seems I was way off on the numbers, (Crappy memory) but it seems there are alot more than I opinionated, so theres what around 600,000, but still from there formal numbers of 3-5 million in just less than a 100 years...dude, thats genocide...I wish humans was wiped out like that, that way the earth can replenish her self of all the animals we made extinct.

lol
 
Last edited:
bear, obviously

lol At this point I will have no other argument to give other than what has already been provided, which is what should be in that link on page one.

I too feel that its still in no way conclusive with such litte data in each catagorie; but there is a lead so far, and the lion is taking it data wise, I cant see how people can refute data; but again its only little and on paper if you dont know the basics you would go with what little you can find on hand; of course I am inclined to say, I am fighting a river thats in full one way motion because most people will do what ever it takes to be in favor of what they like, deceptive and biasness is undeniable to majority,every one knows so little and that little is in favor of there opinion; then theres nothing I could do to change that right now.

And I would be ignorant my self to say that theres more favoring to my cause, I'm sure there is; but I will rather go and look; instead of bousting out like I know everything like most of the posters do when they cite pathetic sites like wiki, and un-checked sources like the california gold rush storys, or anything not fact checked with credability of quality and quainty.

But what the data suggest so far; is that lions are the superior, when I do start looking for more answers as soon as I get a compatible computer with more modern search engines...I am pretty sure I will find more than 50 accounts of lions defeating the great bruin; it takes literaly hours to find them but again, I am limited with this old gal of a computer (2003) that cant look in majoirty of the sites today like my last one that crashed, but when I do...we'll see who is ahead data wise...I have a feeling it wont be el oso, since not even the top contributers such as carnivora forum, the shaggy god pro boards forum, the yuku team and more pros who know more than average people do on subject; and still have medicore data, couldent even cultivate a decent accumilation of facts in why the bear wins, then I think I can do a better job in terms vice versa...

Since I dident even put that much time in it yet, and when I do, I'm betting I can triple what I have now in every catagorie there is.
 
Are you sure you're not confusing a bear

kodiak-brown-bear.jpg


with a bear?

lumberjack.jpg
 
Bears are like really, really big dogs. They'd rather put a scare into you than attack. Assuming close to equal weight, a lion is stronger, faster, and more aggressive. Much of a bear's mass is bone and fat. They do have a lot of muscle, but they can look relatively lean especially awaking from hibernation. A big bear will take out a younger lion, though. Given a substantial difference in mass and size, a larger bear will win in a fight against a smaller lion, on average. Same as how a particularly large tiger could defeat a small lion. But lions are born predators while bears are omnivores. Bears can hold their ground, no doubt, but lions can pounce and tear efficiently and with agility.

Neither is a match for a rhino. Other animals generally don't mess with rhinos, and vice versa, but a charging multiton rhino is a force to be reckoned with. Only humans are threats to them in any capacity.
 
Last edited:
You seem to confuse that there are different types of bears.

The brown/black bear may get beaten by a lion.

I listed the three most aggressive/largest bears.

Given the way a lion hunts and the way a bear fights; for those three it is a no brainer.
The lion is out sized in weight, height and strength.
 
Bears are like really, really big dogs. They'd rather put a scare into you than attack. Assuming close to equal weights, a lion is stronger, faster, and more aggressive. A big bear will take out a younger kion, though.

Neither is a match for a rhino. Other animals generally don't mess with rhinos, and vice versa, though.

Those are good points. For me its the mane and fighting experince of the male lion that eventualy turns the tides as well.


I am confident with the studys I have so far for the lions accord winning out even against massive bears; I am gathering so far that the lion is superior to the tiger, and I will get alot more later, but as for the lion and grizzly/kodiak.

I think everything stacks up perfectly for the lion to take a huge marginal win as time goes along.

Just gonna have to wait for next time I'm on the hunt for historical accounts.

You seem to confuse that there are different types of bears.

The brown/black bear may get beaten by a lion.

I listed the three most aggressive/largest bears.

Given the way a lion hunts and the way a bear fights; for those three it is a no brainer.
The lion is out sized in weight, height and strength.
lol C'mon what you've posted so far is laughable, you yourself know little to nothing what you are talking about; I've been around this subject long enough to spot a phoney when I see one, none of those bears are the most agressive...the Sloth bear is the most agressive; the same way the sumatran tiger is the (One of the smallest of tigers) yet most agressive...

FIGHT%252520TO%252520A%252520FINISH%25252%200-%252520POLAR%252520BEAR%252520VS%252520SLOTH%252520BEAR.JPG


I've studyed the social patterns of asiatic bears and they are by far the most agressive bears; you say polar bears/grizzly bears are agressive, to what? Where do they emit there agression too? What studys show this? Where is it calculated that they show agression to animals that show agression back to determine how much is being emited? You cant answer none of those things.

That article alone is showing how ignorant you are and you're just making things up as you go along the way, as how I picked apart everything you manifested on page one, since this article of a sloth bear killing a polar bear is direct proof that size dosent mean anything when equaly the statistics stack up to each other, other things are factors in fights besides weight and size.

Where are these feats you are patruding out with no conception, down grading the lions fighting and hunting accomplishments? Theres more than 300 sources of feats and accounts I've showed in my sig from pages 2-10.

You havent and cant show anything that I already mentioned; saying the lion is out sized in weight, height and strength by all the animals I listed by over five different speices on page three, yet still managed to kill them all, and they in fact out weigh the bear in height, weight, and strength by over 2-6x, yet the lion still managed to kill them, what makes the bear different?

Or how about that polar bears can die from heat stroke alone if there man made habitats are not properly adjusted and have constant man made settings that aids cooler temputures?

Huh! That means the lion could just circle the bear until he is exhausted from paniced striken fear (Pumping his heart rate into a heart attack heat stroke) of a 600 pound monster lion that could look potentialy as large as him depending how large the mane is which some can increase there mass by 50%, so a average lion will look on par in mass to a average Kodiak. That means more things are in favor twards the lion since right off the back the temputure not only effects the bears regular breathing patterns it will in verse effect his endurance/stamina as well...something the lion who is in africas heat waves even sporting a huge coat of mane, can handle all day every day.

Agression, XD XD 70% of the grizzly bears diet consist of vegetation and poltry like fish, whos he being agressive to; catapillars and ants?

The bear has no feats to go by; other then you twisting facts and being 110% deceptive, either source something that hasent already been mentioned or stop humilating your self.
 
Last edited:
While 1 on 1 a bear might win vs a Lion, though historical evidence we can see though large cats are much more resilient than brown bears.

The simple mountain lion was able to survive the introduction of the white man in California, while the Golden Bear (same size as Kodiak, and equally aggressive) went extinct very quickly after the whites showed up.

In fact brown bears have shown to be easily eliminated, and have vanished from much of their natural habitat in the wild, unlike the mountain lion.
 
in a death grip with it's much better forepaw dexterity a bear would slice and dice a lion like it rips the bark off a douglas fir. lion may get lucky with a fatal bite, but no, I don't see the lion riding around on the back of a bear like it's a cape buffalo. I see the once wide spread lion running off to sub Saharan Africa where there is no record of a large ursus. 😉 it is after all a pussy.
 
Last edited:
There have been Alaskan Browns that have exceeded 2000 pounds as they gorge on Salmon, but that's not typical nor is 800 pound Lions.

I'd be inclined to favor an Alaskan Brown over most any predatory land animal including Lions and Tigers, but as far as I know the only two species known to kill an Elephant are humans and Lions. Of course, when Lions kill an Elephant they do so with numbers. There is in fact one or more prides in Africa that frequently kill Elephants.

I would love to know if the Romans kept detailed records of the animal death matches in the various coliseums throughout the Roman empire. It would be interesting to see what the outcome of actual matches of this kind would be. Somewhere there must be records...


Brian
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top