How big are animals, really?

[CJ_BG]

If you have ever measured the width of an animal through the ribs I'd like to hear about it. I've measured some deer and heard about the measurements through elk but haven't heard about anything else. If possible I'd like to hear how wide at the back of the ribs, how wide through the ribs behind the shoulder, and a diagonal from the first to the last rib on opposite sides. For reference my biggest measurements on a deer so far were 11", 7.5", and 20" respectively.

My hope is I get enough measurements on enough animals to really compare how different they actually are. If anyone has bear or bovine measurements I'm extremely interested to hear those.

 

[Macintosh]

Its consistent enough that there are pretty good formula’s for animal weight based only on a girth measurement. For deer, circumference just behind the shoulder cubed, then divided by 425=very close to the gutted weight. Divide by 375 for live weight. People say all sorts of things but this has been very close when Ive measured, and a local taxidermist who has measured a pile agrees that he’s never run into an example that wasnt extremely close. To me this says the thickness also probably varies a little based on weight, but it isnt going to be by much. (It’ll vary significantly less than the circumference)

Deer arent circular, but C=diameter*3.14159 and all…

 

[Pharmseller]

Its consistent enough that there are pretty good formula’s for animal weight based only on a girth measurement. For deer, circumference just behind the shoulder cubed, then divided by 425=very close to the gutted weight. Divide by 375 for live weight. People say all sorts of things but this has been very close when Ive measured, and a local taxidermist who has measured a pile agrees that he’s never run into an example that wasnt extremely close. To me this says the thickness also probably varies a little based on weight, but it isnt going to be by much. (It’ll vary significantly less than the circumference)

Deer arent circular, but C=diameter*3.14159 and all…

How do you get them to hold still long enough to get the measuring tape around them?

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

How do you get them to hold still long enough to get the measuring tape around them?

You see, you kill them first.

 

[Hondo0925]

@Formidilosus

 

[CJ_BG]

You see, you kill them first.

And then instead of doing some middle school geometry you just take the ruler across the spots you want to measure for width

 

[Pharmseller]

You see, you kill them first.

Kill? That’s rather drastic, isn’t it?

Not very neighborly.

 

[Macintosh]

And then instead of doing some middle school geometry you just take the ruler across the spots you want to measure for width

The point is not to do middle school geometry if that's not your thing, the point is to note that there are existing ways to quantify this to a large degree that are already established with relatively large sample sets, without reinventing the wheel altogether with a ruler, since most of us dont have large numbers of deer handy to measure. A deers body is more elliptical so it's not as simple of a formula, but the circumference is still divided by pi (3.1415...) to reach the figure of depth across the body, so that figure is only going to vary by roughly 1/3 the amount the circumference varies...ie it is proving your point that there is relatively little variation in the thickness of a deer.

a 100lb dressed weight deer has roughly a 35" circumference behind the shoulder (35*35*35/425=100)
A 200lb dressed weight deer has roughly a 44" circumference around the shoulder (44*44*44/425=200)

Using a circle just for easy mathing that puts the thickness (diameter) at just over 11" for the runt, and 14" for the monster. In reality the thickness is less than the height so it will be smaller than that, but you might expect the amount of variation to be similar, ie you're going to see only a few inches of variation at maximum.

Would be interesting to prove it out with a ruler, but I'm betting you see roughly 3" of variation in that basic thickness measurement between small yearlings and mature bucks, and that an elk is simply scaled up from there.

 

[5MilesBack]

I've never measured any of my animals. The only reference point I have would be on my CO bull moose. I put an arrow into the ribcage perfectly broadside and the BH stuck in a rib on the offside, and the arrow was inside him up to my fletching at the hide. It is 28.75" from the tip of my BH to the front of my fletching. So I'd guess ~30" for chest width.

 

[cornfedkiller]

Its consistent enough that there are pretty good formula’s for animal weight based only on a girth measurement. For deer, circumference just behind the shoulder cubed, then divided by 425=very close to the gutted weight. Divide by 375 for live weight. People say all sorts of things but this has been very close when Ive measured, and a local taxidermist who has measured a pile agrees that he’s never run into an example that wasnt extremely close. To me this says the thickness also probably varies a little based on weight, but it isnt going to be by much. (It’ll vary significantly less than the circumference)

Using that math, does that mean a deer that field dresses at 200# weighed 226 on the hoof?

 

[Macintosh]

In theory yes, although I've never tested the live weight the way I have with dressed weight, that 375 figure is just what I've been told, although it seems a little suspect to me. The 425 figure I have tested on a handful of deer and the taxidermist here locally has measured on several dozen, ime it's always been within 5% or so. Certainly MUCH more accurate than an eyeball estimate. The PA game commission chart is very slightly different, but very close (and also supports that the 425 is closer than the 375). Dont mean to derail this thread, all in all was just mneaning to use existing info to help support the hypothesis that there isnt that much variation in the "depth" of a animals chest, and to quantify what that actually is.

Deer Weight Chart

Deer Weight Chart

www.pa.gov

 

[AZ_Hunter]

In theory yes, although I've never tested the live weight the way I have with dressed weight, that 375 figure is just what I've been told. The 425 figure I have tested on a handful of deer and the taxidermist here locally has measured on several dozen, ime it's always been within 5% or so. Certainly MUCH more accurate than an eyeball estimate. The PA game commission chart is very slightly different, but very close.

Deer Weight Chart

Deer Weight Chart

www.pa.gov

The OP is not looking for animal weights. He wants straight line width of ribs, quartering through ribs length.

 

[Macintosh]

The OP is not looking for animal weights. He wants straight line width of ribs, quartering through ribs length.

Correct--you can use the same formula backward to arrive at circumference, and from there you can arrive at a reasonable estimate of rib width.

200lb*425=85000
85000^(1/3)=44"
44/pi=14", which becasue deer are taller than they are high is unrealistically large but could serve as a theoretical maximum rib width behind the shoulder, ie it cant possibly be larger than this, and to show what the potential variation could be between different size deer.

Again, apologies for derailing this, thought all this would be obvious. Back to the rulers!

 

[Beendare]

I've never measured any of my animals. The only reference point I have would be on my CO bull moose. I put an arrow into the ribcage perfectly broadside and the BH stuck in a rib on the offside, and the arrow was inside him up to my fletching at the hide. It is 28.75" from the tip of my BH to the front of my fletching. So I'd guess ~30" for chest width.

I can't seem to get my arrows to do that....stay in the body like that.
They all blow through like a hot knife through butter.

Maybe its because on my Moose I was shooting a howitzer of a bow setup compared to you;
47# recurve at a blazing 180fps-grin

and they say the new BH's are better than what's worked for 1,000 years.....

 

[CJ_BG]

Correct--you can use the same formula backward to arrive at circumference, and from there you can arrive at a reasonable estimate of rib width.

200lb*425=85000
85000^(1/3)=44"
44/pi=14", which becasue deer are taller than they are high is unrealistically large but could serve as a theoretical maximum rib width behind the shoulder, ie it cant possibly be larger than this, and to show what the potential variation could be between different size deer.

Again, apologies for derailing this, thought all this would be obvious. Back to the rulers!

I got what you were going for but I'm looking for 2-3 different measurements and one of which is a diagonal length measurement.

It's also easier for me to just, measure the dang thing and then pack it out, than take a field dressed animal back and hang it up on a scale.

Some of what I'm looking for is also animals I'm likely to never see let alone weigh, like the wild bovines and big bears. Also looking at pictures and my observations in deer it seems a lot of these animals really taper down in the front where we're trying to shoot anyway, which is why I'm looking for at least those two measurements.

 

[5MilesBack]

I can't seem to get my arrows to do that....stay in the body like that.
They all blow through like a hot knife through butter.

Well, you know those over the top 3 blade 1.5" cut expandables.......they supposedly take more energy to open and penetrate. I've never gotten a passthrough with those heads, even though guys shooting lighter draw weight, much shorter draw length, and lighter arrows have blown through animals with them.

 

[Formidilosus]

If you have ever measured the width of an animal through the ribs I'd like to hear about it. I've measured some deer and heard about the measurements through elk but haven't heard about anything else. If possible I'd like to hear how wide at the back of the ribs, how wide through the ribs behind the shoulder, and a diagonal from the first to the last rib on opposite sides. For reference my biggest measurements on a deer so far were 11", 7.5", and 20" respectively.

My hope is I get enough measurements on enough animals to really compare how different they actually are. If anyone has bear or bovine measurements I'm extremely interested to hear those.

On average:

Deer- 9-10”, 7-8”, 16-20”

Bull elk- 12-16”, 8-10”, 30’ish “

 

[grfox92]

Using that math, does that mean a deer that field dresses at 200# weighed 226 on the hoof?

Live weight of a whitetail or mule deer is field dressed hanging weight divided by .78612

For example, my biggest whitetail from NY was 231lb field dressed. 231÷.78612= 293.8.

This formula was used by the Benoit family, legendary trackers from Vermont / Maine. No idea where it came from but they swear it rings true.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

 

[Blackcow]

“how wide at the back of the ribs, how wide through the ribs behind the shoulder, and a diagonal from the first to the last rib on opposite sides.”
OP, so….. what you’re really asking for is a way to figure out how much it weighs, right?

 

[CJ_BG]

On average:

Deer- 9-10”, 7-8”, 16-20”

Bull elk- 12-16”, 8-10”, 30’ish “

Have you ever gotten the chance to measure other game? Open to literally anything dik dik - water buffalo for this.