Game Hunter Ian Gibson Trampled To Death By Elephant

A professional game hunter has been trampled to death by an elephant while leading a hunt with an American client in Zimbabwe.

Ian Gibson, 55, was tracking animals in Chewore North in the lower Zambezi Valley of Zimbabwe, when the young bull elephant “began a full charge.”

Paul Smith, the managing director of Chifuti Safaris which employed Gibson, told The Telegraph: "We don't yet know the full details of how 'Gibbo' as we called him, died, as the American client and the trackers are still too traumatised to give us full details."

In a note on the website of Safari Classics, the company explained Gibson had been searching for a target for five hours when they stopped for a rest.

"It is with deep sadness to announce the passing of Chifuti Safaris professional hunter Ian Gibson," the note said.

"Ian was tragically killed by an elephant bull earlier today while guiding an elephant hunt in Chewore North."

It adds: “Feeling he was quite close to the elephant, Ian and his tracker Robert continued to follow the tracks in hopes of getting a look at the ivory as the client stayed with the game scout.”

Gibson’s tracker indicated the elephant was in “musth” – a condition where the animal’s urge to mate goes into overdrive and it becomes overly aggressive, but Gibson continued.

The note continues: “They eventually caught up with the bull, spotting him at about 50-100 metres. The bull instantly turned and began a full charge.

“Ian and Robert began shouting in order to stop the charge. At very close range, Ian was able to get off one shot before the bull killed him. The scene was very graphic.”

It is not known if the animal was killed in the incident.

Gibson is paid tribute to as “a fine man and one of the most experienced professional hunters on the African continent.” 

The same company lost a staff member in 2012 when Owain Lewis was killed by a buffalo, NewZimbabwe reports.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.u...-kill_n_7085374.html

Original Post

Managed hunting in Africa provides revenue and meat to impovished villages; thin the herd of selected animals and discourages poaching,  For instance, young male rogue elephants are notorious for killing highly endangered rhinos. 

 

Without the safaris, many of the animals would be killed for body parts use in Asia medicines, such as rhino horn, which is also in demand for dagger hilts in the Middle East.

 
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

How did the villagers eat before the 'kill for sport' crowd came along? Isn't killing one species to protect another tampering with nature?

 

+++

 

Hey Best,

 

I imagine the African villagers have  had their own methods of harvesting game, but here's a Native American method called The Buffalo Jump

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_jump

 

Killing one species to protect another has been going on as long as there have been lambs and lions or more recently here in Alabama, coyotes and goats.

 

Not saying this was exactly the case here, but permits/licenses cost mucho $$  Often times safaris target management approved old bulls which have outlived their ability to reproduce.  Their tusks, ivory, horn are harvested to keep them off the illegal market, the locals get meat, and the national wildlife managers make money to protect the same as well as other species.  Often times, it means hiring a paramilitary outfit to engage poachers.  It's a business, a well managed one.

 

Other times, it's just a matter of thinning the herds, part of wildlife management practices recognized worldwide.  Alabama is no different.

 

You ready to try some smoked feral hog?

 

Originally Posted by Harald Weissberg:

Score ONE for Elephants!

 

Too bad the elephant didn't run over and stomp the $*it out of the "Sport Hunters"...

-----------------------

Wow, isn't it wonderful to see such a fine human applauding the death of another.

 

Maybe you're flying the wrong flag. 

Originally Posted by Harald Weissberg:

Score ONE for Elephants!

 

Too bad the elephant didn't run over and stomp the $*it out of the "Sport Hunters"...

____

You are too ignorant for words, Harald. direstraits and budsfarm have correctly characterized the managed hunting systematic involved in this instance and in numerous areas of Africa.

Originally Posted by budsfarm:
 
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

How did the villagers eat before the 'kill for sport' crowd came along? Isn't killing one species to protect another tampering with nature?

 

+++

 

Hey Best,

 

I imagine the African villagers have  had their own methods of harvesting game, but here's a Native American method called The Buffalo Jump

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_jump

 

Killing one species to protect another has been going on as long as there have been lambs and lions or more recently here in Alabama, coyotes and goats.

 

Not saying this was exactly the case here, but permits/licenses cost mucho $$  Often times safaris target management approved old bulls which have outlived their ability to reproduce.  Their tusks, ivory, horn are harvested to keep them off the illegal market, the locals get meat, and the national wildlife managers make money to protect the same as well as other species.  Often times, it means hiring a paramilitary outfit to engage poachers.  It's a business, a well managed one.

 

Other times, it's just a matter of thinning the herds, part of wildlife management practices recognized worldwide.  Alabama is no different.

 

You ready to try some smoked feral hog?

 

=================

I know all about the buffalo hunts of old. I heard a story that it took a herd three days to move past a village one time, they were so plentiful and there were such large herds. I also know thrill killers and 'fashion' almost made them extinct. NO on the feral hog or any other wild meat. I can't tolerate the smell and the one time I tried it, the taste was awful. IF eating meant hunting now I'd be out there with you chasing the buffalo over the cliff, but not for sport, or the thrill of killing something. No matter what the lefties say about me I don't walk around with a gun just itching to kill something or someone.  I don't know if this was in your article, but Native Americans also thanked the animal for giving it's life to nourish them. We did that in our house when I was a child. The elephant in this story was a young bull as I understand it, not an old over the hill elephant. Again, before my time, but didn't they introduce coyotes to Alabama? I mean in the wild where the animals live naturally, it is tampering with nature to kill one species to protect another. Plus I'd rather have the elephant than the rhino, just an opinion, and if they want to kill off some dangerous things they can start with alligators. Ugh!!

I do take exception to the statement 'horrible rich person' simply because the majority of 'kill for thrill' hunters are not rich. But, neither are they poor folks that have to hunt to eat. Thrill killers come from all economic/political backgrounds and spend hundreds and thousands to kill that deer or hog that will feed their family and friends for a week or so, but goodness, who are we to judge?

=======================

Opinion:

Circle of Life: Elephant Tramples Big Game Hunter to Death

 

Last week, a young bull elephant killed big game hunter Ian Gibson in northeast Zimbabwe.

Gibson was leading an elephant hunt in the lower Zambezi valley and attempting to get a closer look at the ivory of this particular elephant, who happened to be in “musth,” a mating condition that leads to hyper-aggression. The elephant charged, and Gibson shot the animal before being crushed to death. The condition of the elephant remains unknown. According to The Telegraph, Gibson had already killed a leopard that day.

Gibson was employed by Chifuti Safaris. Managing director Paul Smith told The Telegraph: “We don’t yet know the full details of how ‘Gibbo’ as we called him, died, as the American client and the trackers are still too traumatised to give us full details.” Smith categorized the area, Chiwore North, as being “overpopulated by elephants,” an interesting interpretation of the country’s current ecological situation.

The Chifuti Safaris website is creepy at best, featuring a collage of clients posed happily with dead lions, dead hippos, dead elephants. According to their home page, “Operating in the most prime hunting concessions in the country, Chifuti Safaris has made their reputation by offering the finest in classic dangerous game hunting available in Africa today.” Why do these places still exist? Why on earth is someone sacrificing their life to shoot a ******* elephant?

Although big game hunting ostensibly brings in money for conservation projects, and although Smith characterized big game hunters to The Telegraph as the first line of defense against poachers, I’m having a hard time seeing how they aren’t, in many ways, worse—these people aren’t killing for money, but for fun. For the thrill of it. Watching the video on the Chifuti Safaris homepage, it’s clear that this operation is peddling in some whacked out form of retro Tom Cruise-ian masculinity. It quickly becomes pretty horrific; if you can’t handle seeing terrified animals get shot in the head so some horrible rich person can feel like a Big Man, you’re probably better off not watching.

 

 

 

22
 
 
 

 

Originally Posted by budsfarm:
 
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

How did the villagers eat before the 'kill for sport' crowd came along? Isn't killing one species to protect another tampering with nature?

 

+++

 

Hey Best,

 

I imagine the African villagers have  had their own methods of harvesting game, but here's a Native American method called The Buffalo Jump

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_jump

 

Killing one species to protect another has been going on as long as there have been lambs and lions or more recently here in Alabama, coyotes and goats.

 

Not saying this was exactly the case here, but permits/licenses cost mucho $$  Often times safaris target management approved old bulls which have outlived their ability to reproduce.  Their tusks, ivory, horn are harvested to keep them off the illegal market, the locals get meat, and the national wildlife managers make money to protect the same as well as other species.  Often times, it means hiring a paramilitary outfit to engage poachers.  It's a business, a well managed one.

 

Other times, it's just a matter of thinning the herds, part of wildlife management practices recognized worldwide.  Alabama is no different.

 

You ready to try some smoked feral hog?

 

True, but isn't the elephant population being depleted enough by poaching, without adding "Sport" hunting into the demise?

 

Central Africa is one of the last regions with a sizable population of African elephant, but their numbers are only a fraction of what they used to be. In Zakouma National Park in Chad there are an estimated 600 elephants. Twenty years ago there were 40,000.

 

http://gadling.com/2010/01/15/...g-elephants-in-chad/

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

How did the villagers eat before the 'kill for sport' crowd came along? Isn't killing one species to protect another tampering with nature?

_______________________________________

As hunter./gatherers they ate what they caught, Now, mainly root crops and grains.  Hunting is strictly regulated.

Originally Posted by Contendah:
Originally Posted by Harald Weissberg:

Score ONE for Elephants!

 

Too bad the elephant didn't run over and stomp the $*it out of the "Sport Hunters"...

____

You are too ignorant for words, Harald. direstraits and budsfarm have correctly characterized the managed hunting systematic involved in this instance and in numerous areas of Africa.

________________________________

condie and I agree on this point.  One must not let reality interfere with sentiment in such cases.

Originally Posted by Harald Weissberg:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:
 
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

How did the villagers eat before the 'kill for sport' crowd came along? Isn't killing one species to protect another tampering with nature?

 

+++

 

Hey Best,

 

I imagine the African villagers have  had their own methods of harvesting game, but here's a Native American method called The Buffalo Jump

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_jump

 

Killing one species to protect another has been going on as long as there have been lambs and lions or more recently here in Alabama, coyotes and goats.

 

Not saying this was exactly the case here, but permits/licenses cost mucho $$  Often times safaris target management approved old bulls which have outlived their ability to reproduce.  Their tusks, ivory, horn are harvested to keep them off the illegal market, the locals get meat, and the national wildlife managers make money to protect the same as well as other species.  Often times, it means hiring a paramilitary outfit to engage poachers.  It's a business, a well managed one.

 

Other times, it's just a matter of thinning the herds, part of wildlife management practices recognized worldwide.  Alabama is no different.

 

You ready to try some smoked feral hog?

 

True, but isn't the elephant population being depleted enough by poaching, without adding "Sport" hunting into the demise?

 

Central Africa is one of the last regions with a sizable population of African elephant, but their numbers are only a fraction of what they used to be. In Zakouma National Park in Chad there are an estimated 600 elephants. Twenty years ago there were 40,000.

 

http://gadling.com/2010/01/15/...g-elephants-in-chad/

_________________________________________
Most of these nation are desperately poor.  License fees and cost of safaris fund the wildlife management personnel and game wardens stopping poachers.  Cut out the sport hunting and the proven results is less game,

 

 

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

I do take exception to the statement 'horrible rich person' simply because the majority of 'kill for thrill' hunters are not rich. But, neither are they poor folks that have to hunt to eat. Thrill killers come from all economic/political backgrounds and spend hundreds and thousands to kill that deer or hog that will feed their family and friends for a week or so, but goodness, who are we to judge?

=======================

Opinion:

Circle of Life: Elephant Tramples Big Game Hunter to Death

 

Last week, a young bull elephant killed big game hunter Ian Gibson in northeast Zimbabwe.

Gibson was leading an elephant hunt in the lower Zambezi valley and attempting to get a closer look at the ivory of this particular elephant, who happened to be in “musth,” a mating condition that leads to hyper-aggression. The elephant charged, and Gibson shot the animal before being crushed to death. The condition of the elephant remains unknown. According to The Telegraph, Gibson had already killed a leopard that day.

Gibson was employed by Chifuti Safaris. Managing director Paul Smith told The Telegraph: “We don’t yet know the full details of how ‘Gibbo’ as we called him, died, as the American client and the trackers are still too traumatised to give us full details.” Smith categorized the area, Chiwore North, as being “overpopulated by elephants,” an interesting interpretation of the country’s current ecological situation.

The Chifuti Safaris website is creepy at best, featuring a collage of clients posed happily with dead lions, dead hippos, dead elephants. According to their home page, “Operating in the most prime hunting concessions in the country, Chifuti Safaris has made their reputation by offering the finest in classic dangerous game hunting available in Africa today.” Why do these places still exist? Why on earth is someone sacrificing their life to shoot a ******* elephant?

Although big game hunting ostensibly brings in money for conservation projects, and although Smith characterized big game hunters to The Telegraph as the first line of defense against poachers, I’m having a hard time seeing how they aren’t, in many ways, worse—these people aren’t killing for money, but for fun. For the thrill of it. Watching the video on the Chifuti Safaris homepage, it’s clear that this operation is peddling in some whacked out form of retro Tom Cruise-ian masculinity. It quickly becomes pretty horrific; if you can’t handle seeing terrified animals get shot in the head so some horrible rich person can feel like a Big Man, you’re probably better off not watching.

 

 

 The article does not agree with the reality on the ground. Sentiment above reality produces disastrous results.

22
 The article
 
 

 

 

Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Contendah:
Originally Posted by Harald Weissberg:

Score ONE for Elephants!

 

Too bad the elephant didn't run over and stomp the $*it out of the "Sport Hunters"...

____

You are too ignorant for words, Harald. direstraits and budsfarm have correctly characterized the managed hunting systematic involved in this instance and in numerous areas of Africa.

________________________________

condie and I agree on this point.  One must not let reality interfere with sentiment in such cases.

 

 

Then it must be, at this moment "Freezing in Hell".

 

Harald,

 

"True, but isn't the elephant population being depleted enough by poaching, without adding "Sport" hunting into the demise?"

 

Read Best's post "Circle of Life..."  Third paragraph.  Click on "overpopulated" and it will take you to this link:

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...-trophy-hunters.html

 

Zimbabwe plans to sell young elephants – to compensate for funds lost from ban on trophy hunters

 

Originally Posted by budsfarm:

 

Harald,

 

"True, but isn't the elephant population being depleted enough by poaching, without adding "Sport" hunting into the demise?"

 

Read Best's post "Circle of Life..."  Third paragraph.  Click on "overpopulated" and it will take you to this link:

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...-trophy-hunters.html

 

Zimbabwe plans to sell young elephants – to compensate for funds lost from ban on trophy hunters

 

 

 

Well, we are talking Africa here.

Backwards.

Killing young, rogue (unsocialized) male elephants probably saved the life of rhinos, a truly endangered species.  Young male elephants are notorious for killing rhinos for fun. 

 

I refer to the four legged critters with horns.  Not, the two legged ones that some republicans believe have horns, as well.

Killing young, rogue (unsocialized) male elephants probably saved the life of rhinos, a truly endangered species.  Young male elephants are notorious for killing rhinos for fun. 

====================

And I have to ask again, what is the reason for picking rhinos over elephants to survive? It's occurring in nature, not man made, and how many hundreds of years have rhinos survived being 'picked on' by elephants?

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

Killing young, rogue (unsocialized) male elephants probably saved the life of rhinos, a truly endangered species.  Young male elephants are notorious for killing rhinos for fun. 

====================

And I have to ask again, what is the reason for picking rhinos over elephants to survive? It's occurring in nature, not man made, and how many hundreds of years have rhinos survived being 'picked on' by elephants?

_____________________

Best,

 

The saving of rhinos is a side benefit.  An over population of elephants destroys their grazing area, forcing them into farms -- usually subsistence farms for the villages. Villager catch hell for protecting their crops.  Removing the excess population is required.

 

We do the same with deer and feral hogs.

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

Killing young, rogue (unsocialized) male elephants probably saved the life of rhinos, a truly endangered species.  Young male elephants are notorious for killing rhinos for fun. 

====================

And I have to ask again, what is the reason for picking rhinos over elephants to survive? It's occurring in nature, not man made, and how many hundreds of years have rhinos survived being 'picked on' by elephants?

 

+++

 

A quick web check revealed, not surprisingly, that while rhinos are on the critically endangered list, African elephants are not.  From a wildlife management financial standpoint, the revenue gained from the greater goes to support the lesser.  Where have we heard that before. 

 

We do pretty much the same thing.  US wildlife management geared towards protecting endangered species gains financial support by the sales tax on ammunition, part of which is derived from the tax on ammunition used for hunting non-endangered species.  So we're swapping deer for bald eagles.

 

Pittman–Robertson Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...life_Restoration_Act

 

 

My guess is, and it is only a guess because I can't / don't speak for African nations, that this elephant for rhino is their way of obtaining financial resources.

 

There was a special on one of the nature channels where it showed the resources used to protect the black rhino.  Their movements were under surveillance in the air and ground by armed escorts like a convoy in Afghanistan.

 

The Asian elephant, pictured above, is endangered and I can only presume it likewise is protected. 

 

Originally Posted by budsfarm:

  

That's odd.  In the top picture, the elephant is missing it's right leg.

  ===============

Two different elephants. One is younger. That's why I said keep them away from Zimbabwe. I know one, I think the younger one, stepped on a land mine. Not sure about the other but most likely the same fate.

 

Originally Posted by Contendah:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

Neither one of them are winning any beauty contests.

___

And YOU are not winning any rationality contests with your naive, knee-jerk, ignorant protectionist

attitude toward wildlife conservation.

=================

What ARE you talking about drama queen??? Talk about hysterical knee jerk attitude. Good one from a man that likes killing innocent animals that are a part of nature!!! Are you ever happy??? EVER???

 

Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:

  

That's odd.  In the top picture, the elephant is missing it's right leg.

  ===============

Two different elephants. One is younger. That's why I said keep them away from Zimbabwe. I know one, I think the younger one, stepped on a land mine. Not sure about the other but most likely the same fate.

 

+++

 

I thought one of the photos was reversed.  At first, I missed the tusks on the top one.

 

Thanks for the explanation.

 

So is one of them in Thailand and the other ... ?  I just guessed Asian because of the caption.  No way could I tell which one is younger.

 

Originally Posted by budsfarm:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:

  

That's odd.  In the top picture, the elephant is missing it's right leg.

  ===============

Two different elephants. One is younger. That's why I said keep them away from Zimbabwe. I know one, I think the younger one, stepped on a land mine. Not sure about the other but most likely the same fate.

 

+++

 

I thought one of the photos was reversed.  At first, I missed the tusks on the top one.

 

Thanks for the explanation.

 

So is one of them in Thailand and the other ... ?  I just guessed Asian because of the caption.  No way could I tell which one is younger.

 ============================

Mosha the elephant has been fitted with an prosthetic leg in Lampang, Thailand, after losing a limb when she stepped on a landmine.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...-prosthetic-leg.html

 

The other one is Motala. Pretty sure he's at the same hospital. Found them on another site and he stepped on a landmine too.

 

Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Originally Posted by Contendah:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:

Neither one of them are winning any beauty contests.

___

And YOU are not winning any rationality contests with your naive, knee-jerk, ignorant protectionist

attitude toward wildlife conservation.

=================

What ARE you talking about drama queen??? Talk about hysterical knee jerk attitude. Good one from a man that likes killing innocent animals that are a part of nature!!! Are you ever happy??? EVER???

____

Once more you demonstrate your doofusness in spades.  When I advocate control of free-roaming house cats or feral pigs or starlings, I am not referring to "innocent animals that are a part of nature."  It is patently UN-natural for animals to be released within habitats where they become UN-naturally destructive of native plants and animals.  You don't know diddly-squat about wildlife management, just as you don't know diddly-squat about a number of other things you blither about. As to the subject of happiness, it is you who seem devoted to making yourself inordinately unhappy by getting your panties tightly wadded up over things you pretend to understand but have only a shallow knowledge of.

 

Add Reply

Likes (0)

×
×
×
×