RIP Lonesome George

[tyven]

GDI LEROY THIS IS YOUR FAULT

[Dimmauk]

GDI LEROY THIS IS YOUR FAULT

LOL

[Chun Liroy]

its an animal.. Just because they can live to 200 does not mean they will.

he was kept in captivity, most animals die younger when "caged"

This is not an issue when they live in the same environment or when they are tortoises. We're not talking about taking a lion from africa and putting it in a zoo, here.

[Insanecyclone]

[Kuya]

So do we know what precisely killed off his species? Was the cause human or just happenstance?

[Pirian]

So do we know what precisely killed off his species? Was the cause human or just happenstance?

Hunted to extinction, yeah. You gotta admit, that big ass thing would make one hell of a turtle soup

[Chun Liroy]

So do we know what precisely killed off his species? Was the cause human or just happenstance?

Absolutely because of humans. The island of pinta (I believe) was hunted for turtle as food for long voyages because they lasted a long time without many resources before dying, so they could provide fresh food to merchant ships 2-3 months after leaving. This subspecies was believed to be extinct, but they eventually found lonesome george. Have tried mating with close relatives, and even through artificial insemination, but none worked.

[Kuya]

The human is the most dangerous animal of all!

[Howie Roary]

So do we know what precisely killed off his species? Was the cause human or just happenstance?

http://igylatomenafilmeket.blog.nlca...iles/morla.jpg

we are allergic to you....

[Valkrish]

^ Why... why am I laughing ;_; GDI

[Kerberoz]

Sailors used to grab a bunch of tortoises at each stop, because they could be kept aboard the ships for months without food. It's basically meat that can sit around at room temperature without preservatives and still be safe to eat whenever you run low on protein/iron/vitamins.

So yeah, blame the same people who killed off all the 80-100' sperm whales, only allowing the little ones to survive and reproduce.

[dejet]

I thought the opposite was true; most animals live longer when in captivity. I mean, some individuals die very quickly upon being put in captivity, but those who survive the first year or two appear to have much longer lifespans than their wild counterparts.

If a animal lives past the early stages of life in the wild odds are it will outlive one that is in captivity. The average* is lower in the wild mostly because the younger you are the weaker you are(and the higher the odds of being food you become)

If you live past that stage and get your claws(in this case the shell) you should outlive your counterpart.

it also depends on the type animal. larger pray tend to live longer in the wild as well think elephants I would be willing to bet that an animal that can live to 200+ would do better in the wild. It will most likely reach its normal age if left to do its own thing.

That's just my take, its not hard facts as it tends to depend on the individual animal somewhat.

edit: no clue why I said tigers outlive in the wild lol thats false(they live like twice as long in zoos)

[Kerberoz]

And you're basing that on.... what, PETA pamphlets?

Outside of extreme circumstances (for example, whale sharks, though they're released after a couple years anyway) and animals with ideal conditions that can't realistically be replicated (some corals and other marine inverts) life expectancy in captivity is higher. Drastically higher for predators. The vast, vast, vast, vast majority of all wild animals on the planet die of starvation, and it's been like that since long before the first ape discovered kindling.

[Tweek]

If a animal lives past the early stages of life in the wild odds are it will outlive one that is in captivity. The average* is lower in the wild mostly because the younger you are the weaker you are(and the higher the odds of being food you become)

If you live past that stage and get your claws(in this case the shell) you should outlive your counterpart.

it also depends on the type animal. larger pray tend to live longer in the wild as well think elephants I would be willing to bet that an animal that can live to 200+ would do better in the wild. It will most likely reach its normal age if left to do its own thing.

That's just my take, its not hard facts as it tends to depend on the individual animal somewhat.

edit: no clue why I said tigers outlive in the wild lol thats false(they live like twice as long in zoos)

this post is full of facts though

[Correction]

George had a bigger libido in his youth.

[Darkslitter]

I like how that video got to the point where it was no longer funny, just sad and awkward for the people making the video

[dejet]

And you're basing that on.... what, PETA pamphlets?

Outside of extreme circumstances (for example, whale sharks, though they're released after a couple years anyway) and animals with ideal conditions that can't realistically be replicated (some corals and other marine inverts) life expectancy in captivity is higher. Drastically higher for predators. The vast, vast, vast, vast majority of all wild animals on the planet die of starvation, and it's been like that since long before the first ape discovered kindling.

Its mostly based off facts... if we dont understand the animal odds are we can not keep it alive. There is no clear cut answer as to wild V.S. captivity. I gave you the reason why the average age in the wild is lower. And there are some animals that do better with help of humans.

However I think it would be safe to say that he would of outlived 100 if in the wild(he made it to 50~70 after all without our help) we did what was best for his Subspecies, so I do no fault anyone for that. He was the last of his kind, we understood nothing about how he worked outside what other Tortoises did so to say he was better off would be almost 100% wrong. We did what was right for C. n. abingdoni, not the turtle.


also maybe im reading this wrong but

As they began to review their database, the impossible seemed to be possible. First they believe they have discovered a second pureblood Pinta tortoise. A Tortoise known as Tony, thought to be approximately 50 years of age is living at the Prague Zoo – from all current data Tony appears to be the same exact subspecies as George.

As they sifted through the DNA information they discovered the reason the Wolf tortoises appeared to resemble more than one subspecies. Isabela and the area near the Wolf Volcano was often the last stop for pirate ships in Galapagos. It appears that these ships collected tortoises on other islands during their stay only to discard them here. When testing the DNA samples, several of the tortoises living on Wolf were found to be first generation hybrid Pinta tortoises – tortoises born to mothers from Isabela and fathers from Pinta. This discovery meant that some of the tortoises living on Wolf were 50% the same genetic subspecies as Lonesome George. This information provided new hope that by further investigation a pureblood or half-blood female Pinta tortoise can be found – and the Pinta race can survive.

so theres a second pure male with maybe others? is that right?

[Chun Liroy]

Actually, not necessarily. Habitat and introduced pressures influence the tortoise populations a lot on the Islands, to the point that during my 2~ week trip there, we didn't see any outside of the wildlife facilities that are aiding in increasing populations. Granted, we did not travel in the mountains as often (maybe 4-5 trips total), we still didn't see any.

[Pirian]

This is a retarded argument. In the wild, if an animal is getting properly fed then what is going to kill it is either predators or disease and not old age, in the vast majority of the cases. In captivity, it's safe to assume that they are being fed properly, their predators are taken out of the situation, and disease is being mitigated more than it would be in the wild. This is going to lead to longer lives in all animals.

This is akin to looking at tribes of humans today living in bum-fuck-Egypt, seeing that they happen to have a few people over the age of 100 and coming to the conclusion that all people must live longer if they lived like these people. No, just no. It means that they either had A. better genes, B. got lucky, or more likely C. a combination of A and B. Just because it has the potential to live a long life out in the wild does not mean that it is normal. It isn't (save for a very few species that have no natural predators, but disease inevitably comes along and devastates those populations). In captivity, the freak accident is the animal dying, not living. I don't see how you can argue your position besides just not wanting to back down from your argument.

[dejet]

go to a zoo and ask them. We dont fucking no how to take care of some of them. that is the reason, as to why? we have no fucking clue. Have I said fuck enough to make your point worthless WHOEVER SAYS IT LOUDER IS RIGHT!!!!!!!

HOLY FUCK.

edit: As I said Im siding with you, if we understand how it lives then there is a good shot it will live a good long life. That is not the case with a 100 year old, single surviving turtle that we have little information on outside the study's of Darwin.