AK AK - Steve Keel, 61, missing from hunting trip, from TN - Aug 27, 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry this is nothing really, but just pointing to comment by "CS" in this article in case it's interesting to anyone here:

Unlike "CS," I don't find Steve's disappearance that odd. He went out there alone - no one who knows tundra & its predators goes out alone unless they are very familiar with an area & even then it is foolhardy.

Not blaming SK or BC but to me that one critical error is why we are where we are today.
MOO
 
There are parts of Alaska, and seasons, that are extremely dangerous. I'm not sensing this is one of those places. You are at risk for getting lost, apparently, and you have to pack in all your stuff and carry it and walk forever (or hire someone to do it for you), but otherwise, this doesn't appear to be an unusually dangerous place, in August, which is when he got lost. None of the civilians who went to search for him - his sons, and the group of 5 guys from Tennessee, appeared to encounter any serious challenges. Not like if you're hiking a steep trail in an area where the temperatures are extremely hot and dry, and there's no shade. You can't drive out there, and you can't put a helicopter down, so those are logistical hurdles you have to contend with. Otherwise, up until recently when the weather will be turning cold, this doesn't seem to be an inherently dangerous place. Even that guy with the dog wandering around out there doesn't seem to have encountered difficulties.
This area looks deceptively benign.
The locals don't like to go out in the tundra unless it's frozen (and never without PLB), and SAR wouldn't risk ground personnel. That pretty much says it all.
 
I don't get it if predators aren't in the area, its summer temps. Thers don't appear to be quicksand sinkholes in the area then. There are no cliffs to fall from then what is the danger that can occur. No one else has gotten lost so far in this search for Steve. The other thing I want to ask is he had a glock on him apparently it was wasn't hunting rifle, but okay, say his pack was heavy a glock weighs at least 1.7lbs. So if his pack was a burden then his gun would also be. I wonder how much his pack weighed? If its a standard backpack then say roughly 5lbs. I am going to assume not more than 10 more likely less than ten. That is only 6.7lbs or only a little bit mor that he was carrying along with with his glock. Plus why abandon one's pack not far from the campsite. It wasn't like Steve had walked a long long long distance. So why abandon it here and not farther away. This to does not make sense. What all of a sudden he became weak? If he was that weak then why not rest? If he was that weak he would be closeby. But he is not so I doubt he was weak. IDK this is odd to me for these reasons and obviously as discussed by others those questions/observations too. Its not as simple as some are making it to be. He abandoned his pack in the daytime not at night, also remember that.
 
I don't get it if predators aren't in the area, its summer temps. Thers don't appear to be quicksand sinkholes in the area then. There are no cliffs to fall from then what is the danger that can occur. No one else has gotten lost so far in this search for Steve. The other thing I want to ask is he had a glock on him apparently it was wasn't hunting rifle, but okay, say his pack was heavy a glock weighs at least 1.7lbs. So if his pack was a burden then his gun would also be. I wonder how much his pack weighed? If its a standard backpack then say roughly 5lbs. I am going to assume not more than 10 more likely less than ten. That is only 6.7lbs or only a little bit mor that he was carrying along with with his glock. Plus why abandon one's pack not far from the campsite. It wasn't like Steve had walked a long long long distance. So why abandon it here and not farther away. This to does not make sense. What all of a sudden he became weak? If he was that weak then why not rest? If he was that weak he would be closeby. But he is not so I doubt he was weak. IDK this is odd to me for these reasons and obviously as discussed by others those questions/observations too. Its not as simple as some are making it to be. He abandoned his pack in the daytime not at night, also remember that.
He left his backpack full of caribou meat to collect the next day. It would have been very heavy and awkward. The ground is boggy and hard to walk on.
 
Oh....

I decided to settle the question of the dangers of hiking and camping on tundra, specifically to hunt, and a parallel question of what a "DIY caribou hunt" involves.

It has caught my attention how poorly outfitted these two hunters were (even for anywhere in the lower 48), and how seemingly oblivious to risk in northern AK. Indeed, I didn't know anything about the latter until I settled in with this case. Information is very accessible, however, and there's plenty. There's no reason, as far as I can tell, for folks associated with this case not to fully guess at the hazards and minimize expectations (e.g. for SAR accordingly).

So, I Googled. Natch.

I can answer my second question straightforwardly: a "DIY caribou hunt" involves a transporter. They get you to the hunt spot. This tends to be by plane or boat. The DIY aspect just means you aren't accompanied by a guide. It does NOT mean you park on the Dalton Highway (which has its own set of risks from passing trucks throwing up gravel) and hike in.

My best source is the Government of the State of Alaska. They have a whole HANDBOOK for hunters from out-of-state. Call it a major "mental correction" for lower-48-ers.

Look at this sentence, for instance:
"It is not a good idea for a non-resident, unfamiliar with the country, to try and save money by hunting along the road system [specifically, the Dalton Hwy]"

Check out pp 19-20 for what to do if you get lost, and how off-the-mark media shows are for actual survival.

Check out pp 17 for necessary physical preparation. 30 minutes of jogging 4-6 months before departure; extensive walking with heavy pack.
 
Last edited:
Continued....

I am unable to copy-and-paste from that HANDBOOK, so I offer some screen shots:

Screen Shot 2022-10-01 at 12.08.23 AM.png
 
Continued, from page 55:

Screen Shot 2022-10-01 at 12.17.39 AM.png


Screen Shot 2022-10-01 at 12.21.17 AM.png


This is where I was going with my references to the inadequate shelters and inappropriate apparel. I will spare you the rest. But, yes, these lists are provided by the State of Alaska.

See, "Cotton has little application in most Alaskan hunting".

And, all the items on these lists, combined, are extremely heavy (At least 80 lbs IMO) and very bulky. The sleeping bag they recommend would take up my entire pack. They would require a drop, and could not be packed in for 5 miles. You'd always be carrying your safety equipment; with that, you can only carry so much of the rest of your supplies at once. And then there's the poundage and awkwardness of the meat. Really, I don't see how all of SK's meat was even fitting into his pack.
 
Last edited:
He left his backpack full of caribou meat to collect the next day. It would have been very heavy and awkward. The ground is boggy and hard to walk on.
The stranger thing is..... a whole animal of caribou meat is not going to fit into a pack. It would take several trips. ALL of the meat is required to be packed out, per AK law.
I don't understand the logistics of this for these 2 hunters at all. How were they taking out hundreds of pounds of meat? Plus, the antlers, which were going to yank them backwards ('cos weight and bulk far from torso) as they hiked.
 
Has anyone employed aerial drones in the search for Steve?
Yes, a private owner. The biggest problem with aerial drones there is the difficulty of retrieval if they malfunction. There was an extensive air search via helicopter. The area was unsafe for K-9s.
Keep in mind, SK was wearing camo, designed to blend into wilderness, even though he was not hunting when he went missing. It doesn't seem as though he was likely to carry any bright item, so he'd be easily visible: a colored garbage bag or a mylar space blanket would even have done the trick. I don't understand why the meat cache wasn't marked that way, either.
 
Yes. But very limited use. I'm not sure why. Lack of availability or unable to obtain permission, maybe?
I don't know a whole lot about drones. I think maybe drones are impractical in such a vast territory. They also might not operate that well in below freezing temperatures (which would be most of the year). And there'd be a high risk to the operator from terrain and conditions.
SAR might simply not have put their resources in them, especially for one or two months a year. They extensively used helicopter searches, though, and that resource is often not available for SAR. They were above and beyond with helicopters, especially given that the copters had ambulance service (with potentially saving the life of someone who could actually be saved, as opposed to recovery) has their top priority. SAR was super generous here.

Aha! Obvi. Batteries drain super-fast in cold temperatures. Deadhorse was already below freezing at night in August. Much of the year it would be below zero. Owning a drone would be quite useless.
Ummm.... snow damages the rotors. Yep, useless.

Here's a government source for drone usage in cold weather: How to Fly Your Drone When It’s Thirty Below: In conversation with the St. Cloud Police Department
 
Last edited:
I don't get it if predators aren't in the area, its summer temps.

Yes. Summer temps in the Arctic. It's cold enough to get hypothermia, especially when you have wrong kind of clothing (like cotton trousers) and your feet are wet from all that walking on soggy ground. If Steve did not have some really solid, waterproof boots, he found himself in a deep trouble pretty soon.

Thers don't appear to be quicksand sinkholes in the area then.

Yes, but there are plenty of muskegs, the Arctic bogs.


There are no cliffs to fall from then what is the danger that can occur. No one else has gotten lost so far in this search for Steve. The other thing I want to ask is he had a glock on him apparently it was wasn't hunting rifle, but okay, say his pack was heavy a glock weighs at least 1.7lbs. So if his pack was a burden then his gun would also be. I wonder how much his pack weighed? If its a standard backpack then say roughly 5lbs. I am going to assume not more than 10 more likely less than ten. That is only 6.7lbs or only a little bit mor that he was carrying along with with his glock. Plus why abandon one's pack not far from the campsite. It wasn't like Steve had walked a long long long distance. So why abandon it here and not farther away.

The backpack was loaded with caribou meat. Steve was allegedly too tired to carry it further and decided to leave the pack in that spot to retriever it the next day.

This to does not make sense. What all of a sudden he became weak? If he was that weak then why not rest?

He is a man in his sixties, had very intense day with a lot of carrying and walking on a difficult, soggy terrain. It also seems his eating habits weren't the most reasonable or healthy ones (he went to hard work the next day having only the morning coffee, a big mistake). It is enough to make one exhausted and unable to think clearly, even if we don't count in a possibility of some medical issues.


If he was that weak he would be closeby.

Not necessarily. Weak, even dying people can sometimes walk staggeringly far away, especially when their brain is malfunctioning.
 
Yes. Summer temps in the Arctic. It's cold enough to get hypothermia, especially when you have wrong kind of clothing (like cotton trousers) and your feet are wet from all that walking on soggy ground. If Steve did not have some really solid, waterproof boots, he found himself in a deep trouble pretty soon.



Yes, but there are plenty of muskegs, the Arctic bogs.




The backpack was loaded with caribou meat. Steve was allegedly too tired to carry it further and decided to leave the pack in that spot to retriever it the next day.



He is a man in his sixties, had very intense day with a lot of carrying and walking on a difficult, soggy terrain. It also seems his eating habits weren't the most reasonable or healthy ones (he went to hard work the next day having only the morning coffee, a big mistake). It is enough to make one exhausted and unable to think clearly, even if we don't count in a possibility of some medical issues.




Not necessarily. Weak, even dying people can sometimes walk staggeringly far away, especially when their brain is malfunctioning.
This post may not come out as intended in response or the way it normally woud post when replying, sorry about that. Anyways, Steve a man in his sixites, perhaps as some of the things you mentioned affecting him as well as hypotjermia should have succumbed to those and thus be found. A lack of predators makes that even more so. As far as muskeg no one else has gone into them in the search for Steve. The area where Steve was were there in fact muskeg?
 
@5W's From observing cases involving missing hikers for a few years, you can look at a place and think there’s no chance someone’s remains could still be there because you’ve “looked everywhere” and there are no obvious hazards. Years later, someone might stumble on remains exactly there. It happens all the time.

It happens all the time even to SAR searchers, with their rigorous protocols for conducting searches; the ground searchers in the SK case were not trained or proceeding with the trained standard best practices, and they were unfamiliar with terrain and conditions. There would be a high chance of them missing something, and they ran the risk of destroying whatever clues might be out there.

Don’t forget, SK’s clothing was intended to conceal him.

Here is a desert case in an urban setting from last weekend that you’d think would be an easy find. It used SAR and 200 volunteers (who were invited to participate by SAR). It took several days to find the body, and she had colored clothing.

So, IMO, I don’t think we can judge a find likelihood by appearances. There are so many factors at the AK site that make it very likely SK is on the ground and very unlikely he’d be found.
 
From reading that Alaska.gov Handbook, I was reminded of another safety/survival trick. Take a big garbage bag in your pack. It should be colored (white would work in many places). Folded, it will take up hardly any room. You can get in it if you get cold/wet. You can wear it as raingear. It will retain heat.

Achooooooo! I’m getting the sneezees just looking at the pink cherry flavored garbage bags on Amazon.
 
Last edited:
@5W's From observing cases involving missing hikers for a few years, you can look at a place and think there’s no chance someone’s remains could still be there because you’ve “looked everywhere” and there are no obvious hazards. Years later, someone might stumble on remains exactly there. It happens all the time.

It happens all the time even to SAR searchers, with their rigorous protocols for conducting searches; the ground searchers in the SK case were not trained or proceeding with the trained standard best practices, and they were unfamiliar with terrain and conditions. There would be a high chance of them missing something, and they ran the risk of destroying whatever clues might be out there.

Don’t forget, SK’s clothing was intended to conceal him.

Here is a desert case in an urban setting from last weekend that you’d think would be an easy find. It used SAR and 200 volunteers (who were invited to participate by SAR). It took several days to find the body, and she had colored clothing.

So, IMO, I don’t think we can judge a find likelihood by appearances. There are so many factors at the AK site that make it very likely SK is on the ground and very unlikely he’d be found.
All that said he shouldn't be far IMO. As I've stated before in my reasons. He should be in the general vicinity. I mean talking of hypothermia, exhaustion, lack of food and water should make it even more so. Myabe lets say one day's travel. IMO yes its further away but its still in the general vicinity. I'm sorry but if they did a grid search I don't see how they wouldn't have found him. Which I suspect SAR and LE did & that is why they are themselves puzzled at to what happened to Steve. It isn't as simple as it appears. JMOO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
155
Guests online
497
Total visitors
652

Forum statistics

Threads
625,577
Messages
18,506,451
Members
240,817
Latest member
chalise
Back
Top