CA - Jonathan Gerrish, Ellen Chung, daughter, 1 & dog, suspicious death hiking area, Aug 2021 #2

[RickshawFan]

Interesting. That would *POINT* to one primary source of water which was 3L.

Unless they also carried bottles or she was carrying a day pack with water.
I would have taken gatorade, too.

I wonder if they had snacks?

 

[RickshawFan]

Now, that brings up the dog, in Vegas, we had "booties" for our dog. On super hot days, we didn't walk him. But if he had to go to work, he wore "dog boots". (He was a therapy dog).

I wonder if the ground was so hot that the dog started having problems walking.

That’s a great idea…

 

[rahod1]

Let's look at this another way.
They may have died, trying to save their dog...

JMO

All so very sad....

Definite scenario.

 

[mickey2942]

I know Golden Retrievers, they are happy to go for a walk. But they are not Rhodesian Ridgebacks, who can lope along for miles. A Retriever will keep going to please a human, but after a few miles, they are usually ready for a rest. Not the greatest dogs for long hikes. Labs, yes, Retrievers, not so much.

I wonder how old the dog was...

 

[Figuring]

Agree...But we know they were found going back up on the steep grade. So the only other scenario would be down and back on that trail. I was simply trying to show the *whole enchilada* to the poster asking for some perspective. I did edit my post taking your input into consideration.

This map is so helpful, thank you so much! I know it says in at least one article that LE believes they hiked most of the trail, which makes me think a) they can tell the direction the footprints were facing, & b) because of that, they can tell that the family did go clockwise (because if they went the switch-back way straight from the car it would only be IDK only 20% of the trail?). But that's just my inference & I could be wrong. I really wouldn't pretend to be sure of anything with this case. From the evidence so far, I do presume it was likely heatstroke, but that doesn't explain what so many comments on this forum have made me aware of, namely how unpleasant the weather was that day & how challenging a journey this would have been with a dog & a baby.

 

[NSamuelle]

Let's look at this another way.

If the baby carrier was indeed a Kangaroo, (not the sling kind), one parent had the baby, in front. Not a back carrier. A front one.

Let's look at intention, not outcome.

Now we know they started early.....

How long ought that trail take? Anyone know?

Is it reasonable to think they planned to start early and finish before hell breathed on the earth?

If they got a later start, even if only by a half hour or an hour, what a vital difference that could have made!

So let's put them an hour behind schedule.

Mom, Dad with baby, dog.

They were found a mile and a half from their vehicle. What's a reasonable length of time, given favorable conditions, to hike that distance?

Remember that late start (JMO).... they were so very close to completing their hike! Even with whatever chain of events they were enduring, if they'd had lower temperatures longer, they might've made it out!

If we assume the dog was unleashed (seems to be their habit), it's reasonable to assume the dog might run ahead, run askance, make its own trail... and hot and thirsty, find water. Algae infested water.... (it's also possible as someone suggested upthread that the dog got separated from them and they had to spend considerable time looking -- while the mercury climbed -- even hot, too hot, who could turn back and just leave the pup to die?)....

My theory is that the dog is in distress first.... whether by algae or heat. And a decision is made (never once thinking the decision, not only wouldn't save the dog, it would prove deadly for everyone) -- to carry the dog.

Still JMO, mom takes the baby -- by now, they are all hot, thirsty...

Dad carries the dog.... and now they're hurrying... which only increases the exertion... the temperature keeps climbing, the dog is failing.... and dad is way overheated too.... the dog becomes lifeless.... dad sits, says he needs just a minute. But it's clear he's not getting back up. Mom has to get help. Or at least to somewhere with cell coverage. She can go faster alone. So dad becomes a tree, providing the only shade they can for baby.

She tries to hurry to get help.... but she succumbs to the heat....

If they did get an earlier start, if just that singular variable changed, could this have had a better ending?

How I wish this could've been a feel good story, where mom and dad and baby brave the mountain to save the family dog! IMO they were 1.5 miles from that happy ending...

Nothing nefarious. Just a tragic combination of events which pitted them on the trail longer than they planned IMO facing scorching temperatures, compounded by a stifling haze...

They may have died, trying to save their dog...

JMO

All so very sad....

Their apparent plan was to hike 8.5 miles. I am assuming an extremely fast hiking pace of 20 minute miles, so with no breaks, that would put the hike around 3 hours. Realistically, with the switchbacks and change in elevation, closer to 4. If they had Googled anything about how long babies can withstand heat, they would have come across plenty of warnings like:

“When is it too hot to take my baby outside?
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says that children of all ages can and should play outside when the weather doesn't pose a significant health risk, in this case defined as when the heat index is below 90 degrees Fahrenheit as determined by the National Weather Service.

Babies, toddlers and small children shouldn't be outside for any prolonged period of time if the heat index is listed as 90 degrees or higher.”

Regardless of what accidents did or did not happen, they apparently planned to have the baby out in 90+ degree heat for a prolonged period of time.

 

[armchairagatha]

I know Golden Retrievers, they are happy to go for a walk. But they are not Rhodesian Ridgebacks, who can lope along for miles. A Retriever will keep going to please a human, but after a few miles, they are usually ready for a rest. Not the greatest dogs for long hikes. Labs, yes, Retrievers, not so much.

I wonder how old the dog was...

The dog was not a golden retriever. It was an 8 year old Aussie-Akita mix per this article: https://www.mercedsunstar.com/news/local/community/mariposa-and-yosemite/article253770788.html

 

[Figuring]

The thing that boggles my mind is that we have TWO very savvy adult parents who have, at a minimum, significant hiking experience (especially the father) in the outdoors, albeit not *EXPERTS*. I simply cannot fathom their contemplation of taking this hike when facing very challenging circumstances (heat) with an infant and a dog. I don't care how much they *prepared*....you have TWO HELPLESS passengers that are very vulnerable to HEAT. It was 85 when they embarked..knowing it was going to get much hotter. Sure, there are other explanations as to their demise, but it appears they were in denial as to the risk they were ultimately taking. I hate being judgmental here...it's a tradegy of epic proportions, but this was something that was preventable...algae...notwithstanding.

This is precisely what I'm stuck on tonight. From what so many people are saying here, even experienced outdoorspeople (which I am not!), it just seems like these must have been extremely unpleasant conditions from "GO." I just find it really hard to comprehend.

 

[RickshawFan]

Yes, but we don't know if they actually hiked the complete loop. It's still possible that they went DOWN the steep switchbacks to the river and back.

I agree. I think it’s ambiguous from the statement whether the family hiked the loop, just that the trail they were on is part of a loop. The straight road goes the the Gulch Trail, not the Hite Cove trail, as far as I can tell from the map. I can see where they could search the road in the dark with flashlights, but had to wait ‘til dawn for the switchbacks. By then, they would have needed a relief team. Perhaps the first team was LE and by dawn the full SAR protocol was in effect, and SAR teams had mustered.
The steep and straight road was likely dirt, so footprints would be readily visible.

 

[RickshawFan]

Just in case someone doesn't know, there are personal locator beacons of all sorts of varieties, capabilities, and price points. I live where Search and Rescue is getting someone every week, and truly those locator beacons work and do save lives regularly.

It’s surprising the family didn’t have one, given how much they’re in the backcountry, and they were out of cell range. It doesn’t seem as though cost would be an issue.

 

[RickshawFan]

Yes, but we don't know if they actually hiked the complete loop. It's still possible that they went DOWN the steep switchbacks to the river and back.

Maybe they didn’t even go all the way down, but soon ran into trouble and turned back.

 

[RickshawFan]

Someone asked upthread how long the loop hike would take. For me, I calculate 2 miles per hour, including breaks. It’s almost like clockwork. But maybe these folks could go as much as 3, especially if they were along the river, though certainly not up those switchbacks. I’m thinking in acceptable conditions, this would be a 3.5 hour hike, including a couple of quick breaks to give the baby snacks etc.

 

[Quiet Time]

Can't we assume and agree that heat played a part in whatever happened? Either it was the full culprit or part culprit, imo. And if they were in the throes of heat stroke, few rational decisions would have been made at the end of their lives. Finding Dad and Baby in the middle of the trail may have been what gave LE the feeling that it was a mystery. But from what I've read about heat stroke, it progresses quickly and attacks the brain. The brain, then the body just stops.

--

As someone who has had a TBI, one of my major symptoms was intolerance of heat and sunlight. A mild sunny day could make me feel crazed without a hat and sunglasses. Even 3 years later, I still suffer those symptoms, which my doctor says are not unusual.

Thank you. Good post.

jmo

 

[WillieMac]

Are we really sure that we know the route they intended to take? Are we sure that they didn't take a wrong turn and end up on a different route than they intended? (Possibly leaving them out in the heat longer than intended and forced to use a water source they hadn't intended to use?) Have we heard from any locals about the accessibility of the three old mines that were mentioned being close by just a couple of pages ago on this thread? If those mines were truly accessible, they could have served as "layover & cool-off way points" where they could cool off and rest before moving on during their hike (or they could have been *expedted* to have served as such). There are still a LOT of unknowns to us here. I hope that LE is starting to see some more definite answers roll in by now - or that they will soon.

 

[LifeIsAMystery]

I'm stuck now on how it was reported that he researched Hites Cove Trail the day before--not Savage Lundy. I decided to see what was said about each. The Yosemite site (Hite Cove and Merced River | Discover Yosemite National Park) says:

“Hite Cove Trail
Hite Cove Trail hiking offers spectacular early morning spring wildflower displays. The first 3/4 mile of the trail is private land, This moderate hike is 7.2 miles and ends at the remains of the old Hite Mine.

Savage/Lundy Trail
Savage/Lundy Trail is a 3-mile long trail and is the most difficult trail in the area. The other trailhead is at the end of Jerseydale Road.”

I underlined a few things here, primarily the contrast between a moderate hike & the most difficult trail in the area. I also underlined the Mine, as it appears from his history he was interested in checking out mines & caves.

I wonder if anyone who understands the area better than me can comment on how possible it would be to end up on the wrong trail? Or maybe, out of curiosity they decided to investigate the SL without a lot of foreknowledge & just went too far? I'm thinking this could be a possible explanation for why they didn't seem to bring enough water etc? I could be totally wrong about this, just thinking out loud...

I wondered the same, but also how it would fit with where their truck was parked. Any locals or folks who have been on this trail? The more moderate trail makes more sense to me than the loop with the steep 5 mile climb out at the end.

Akitas have very thick fur, I can't imagine they planned to be on the trail with the dog when it was over 100. Although in the 90s by 9, the feels like temp had to be pushing the dog's limits early in the outing. It is hard for me to understand. MOO.

 

[rahod1]

Maybe they didn’t even go all the way down, but soon ran into trouble and turned back.

Unlikely they ran into trouble going down hill. More likely going up, which bolsters the thesis that they were making a round trip (loop) or turning back up the same trail after reaching the bottom. MOO

 

[rahod1]

I wondered the same, but also how it would fit with where their truck was parked. Any locals or folks who have been on this trail? The more moderate trail makes more sense to me than the loop with the steep 5 mile climb out at the end.

I believe the steep trail is 3 miles.

 

[Auntie Cipation]

I agree. I think it’s ambiguous from the statement whether the family hiked the loop, just that the trail they were on is part of a loop. The straight road goes the the Gulch Trail, not the Hite Cove trail, as far as I can tell from the map. I can see where they could search the road in the dark with flashlights, but had to wait ‘til dawn for the switchbacks. By then, they would have needed a relief team. Perhaps the first team was LE and by dawn the full SAR protocol was in effect, and SAR teams had mustered.
The steep and straight road was likely dirt, so footprints would be readily visible.

If they had hiked an intended loop by going the Hite Cove trail first, then there wouldn't have been any of their footprints on the "steep straight road" for LE to follow, right?

So I think the language used suggests they went down Savage-Lundy (how much farther than where they were found we don't know, but LE would know based on footprints) and were trying to go back up.

MOO

 

[rahod1]

If they had hiked an intended loop by going the Hite Cove trail first, then there wouldn't have been any of their footprints on the "steep straight road" for LE to follow, right?

So I think the language used suggests they went down Savage-Lundy (how much farther than where they were found we don't know, but LE would know based on footprints) and were trying to go back up.

MOO

True... and I would think ANY prints on the other trail should be LACKING? That would close the door on a full loop.

 

[Auntie Cipation]

True... and I would think ANY prints on the other trail should be LACKING? That would close the door on a full loop.

Maybe, but what if a week before, let's say, someone else had hiked there? I don't know how long prints last in that soil, wind, etc. (Presumably no rain recently.)

LE said they followed footprints "consistent with the family size" so whichever way they went was known, it's just not been made clear to us.

And I wondered whether LE would have sent searchers down both routes at once -- in hindsight of course we know they would have been found sooner by the searchers going down S-L because they would have only gone 1.5 miles before finding them.

MOO