CA - Jonathan Gerrish, Ellen Chung, daughter, 1 & dog, suspicious death hiking area, Aug 2021 #3

[NoSI]

Hi @otto, would love it if you could take a look.

 

[MsBetsy]

Do we know there was no shade where they were? If they were near the algae bloom, they were near water. And if they were near water, from what I read, the river is lined by trees.


I’m so confused.

I don't think they were found near the water. Apparently there was no shade on the part of the trail they were found in.

 

[Parsnip]

@gitana1 , I believe that the trail discussion is most prominent round about the middle of T1. I’d recap, but not being much of a visual/spatial person, my explanation would be muddy .

 

[gitana1]

SAR typically doesn't want people in an SAR area looking for "clues", contaminating the trail, etc. This is normal for SAR operations, and this case was particularly well-publicized.

Not 28 miles of it. Per the news report linked above, the sheriff said that he’s never come across a case like this where there is nothing to explain how they died.

Heat should be the immediate assumption of indeed they were found having hiked UP a brutal trail in 100 degree temps, with no shade. Yet they act like it’s a mystery. Strange.

 

[gitana1]

I don't think they were found near the water. Apparently there was no shade on the part of the trail they were found in.

Thanks. So if it was a steep trail, 1.6 miles or so would maybe take them about 45 minutes or so. They should’ve felt the heat quickly. They should’ve noticed their dog was struggling, trying to stop or pull for the shade of any bush.

It’s possible the dog kept valiantly trying to keep up and collapsed. And then they spent time trying to assist the dog. But I can tell you that there are obvious signs before that. Heavy panting. Trying to stop. Etc.

In any event, it’s possible. And it’s possible they then tried to carry the dog back down but couldn’t due to the weight and heat. At that point it’s possible the baby could’ve start to show signs of distress. Maybe they tried to find brush to put the dog or baby under.

It just seems off to me. IMO, if it was heat related I would expect the strongest of them to quickly to send for help and for the remaining parent along with the baby and dog to be wedged under any piece of brush there was that could provide even a little bit of shade. I hike very similar areas and there are always small bushes at the least under which you could shove a baby or a dog and at least part of your own body. I would also expect them to have their shirts off and over their heads if they did not have hats and/or off and used to shield the dog or baby’s bodies from sun.

I hike in heat in So Cal. But 85-90 degrees can cause heat exhaustion super fast. Rarely are any hikers with even a bit of experience out on a trail going UP for any length of time in heat over 85 or so.

 

[LucyOso]

They are looking into lightening as well as discussed in the first thread...

According to the National Weather Service, being struck by lightning is "primarily an injury to the nervous system, often with brain injury and nerve injury. Serious burns seldom occur."

Another culprit weighed in deaths of Calif. family found on trail

 

[gitana1]

I think we can't assume they went that way. They could have gone on the switchbacks and turned right back.

Ah. Thank you.

Personally, I don’t think it was heat stroke but it would have been—eventually—if they didn’t die some other way (disclaimer: I was a paramedic but didn’t see much heat stroke, so I’m not an expert on HS). I won’t belabor points already made. But - they should not have gone out on that hike in Miju’s vulnerable condition or the dog’s double-coated furriness. It breaks my heart.

Yeah it’s confusing to me. Very. My dog is not as furry. The hottest I will take her out without shade but WITH her core cooler and tons of water is 83 or so. But I shouldn’t say take her out. Because I won’t start a hike if it’s that hot. I start when it’s about 73-78.

(I also bring an umbrella for her if there’s a lot of exposed trails like in this case. I hold it over her as we hike!)

Bringing a dog and a baby on a steep hike in that weather makes no sense at all. After a few minutes it would be clear that you need to go back. The dog would be dead in half an hour.

I’m trying to understand why they did it. Hikers check the temps that day before starting out. They check out new trails to see the conditions. (Like, “No shade. Difficult rating. Etc.).

What the hell were they doing?

 

[happyday]

Not 28 miles of it. Per the news report linked above, the sheriff said that he’s never come across a case like this where there is nothing to explain how they died.

Heat should be the immediate assumption of indeed they were found having hiked UP a brutal trail in 100 degree temps, with no shade. Yet they act like it’s a mystery. Strange.

Yes, that’s the weirdest thing to me about this case. Heat stroke was my very first thought. It sort of seems like a no brainer, but right off the bat LE was saying how “baffled” they were, that it was so “mysterious,” and they’re closing trails for “unknown hazards.” They’re talking about toxic algae, poison mine gases, rattlesnake bites etc. but not the heat! 109 is HOT. Way too hot for a dog and a baby. I don’t know if LE is seeing things that make them truly confused or if they just very dramatic.

 

[lotus777]

I would also add that there was an air quality warning due to smoke from the fires. That can also impact how one tolerates heat and exertion, both for people and dogs.

Great point. According to AirNow's historical measurements, on the 15th at El Portal it was 95--at the high end of Moderate, just below the Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups range, which starts at 101. It very well could have been a factor. And it could have been worse at a lower altitude (I don't know enough to say for sure).

 

[gitana1]

In some ways I feel like this family could become canaries in the coal mine as far as climate change-related heatstroke is concerned. It's troubling to me that no one was out on that trail on Sunday, Monday or Tuesday except this family, LE and SAR. Locals stayed away due to the extremeness of the hike and weather. Examples can be found in that blogger and in AllTrails reviews of people turning back or not bothering with the hike at all, plus further cautions about steepness and bringing enough water. I also noticed that no reviews of that hike have been left on AllTrails in the months of July or August, and only one review left in the month of June. That tells us something as well. JMO.

It tells me that they should’ve known better. So why were they there? It’s so confusing!

 

[Runswithdogs]

@gitana1 Some of what you ask is still very unknown, some has been discussed quite heavily in the early threads. Not a criticism about jumping in the middle, but I’d go back & skim those posts, there’s a lot of good information that may aid your confusion.

The loop trail is roughly 8.5 miles. It is roughly 3-4 miles from either side of the loop from their car to the river (although I don’t think we know if that is river access or just down to the part of the trail that runs parallel with the river). We do not know their path. An early report quoted LE as saying they thought they hiked the loop due to following footprints that could have been from a family of their size with a dog. They theorized they had almost completed it & were 1.5 miles from the car with EC being the closer of the 2 adults to the car by 30 yds.

There was no shade, a fire went through that area in 2018. The only shade would have been small from ground brushes and rock outcrops.

Like you, given the rising temperatures & lack of shade, I have a hard time believing the dog was not in distress & showing signs of heat exhaustion by the time they got to the river. If they’d submerged him in the water, hydrated, & rested in the shade (assuming they could find some along the water), it is possible they would have bought their dog some time. I do wonder if they had fear of the water though due the algae, which I think unfortunately at that time, would have been a risk they’d have to take. IF the Cyanobacteria produced VFDF (& not all does), the dog would have been dead or in extreme distress within 45 min. of ingestion. THe other harmful pathogens produced by Cyanobacteria take roughly several hours to begin showing clinical signs & usually starts out with vomiting & diarrhea.
I think they were entering troubling territory (with the dog at least), about halfway to the river, whether they realized this or not could have impacted their decision to push on to the river, when what they should have done is tried their hardest to get back to the car & race to the emergency vet (me). They may have slightly recovered him at the river, but unfortunately at that time of day it was not safe to attempt to hike out, for any of them. Biding their time at the river until nightfall, would probably have been the only way out of this scenario. But I acknowledge that very few think rationally or clearly when stressed & fear.

I will admit when I first heard of this story (the day they were discovered) my mind instantly went to a dark dateline-y place. The first article I read had a picture of the area around near where their truck was found, & my instant thought was that no dog owner would intentionally take their dog for a walk there in those temperatures. When I read a little bit more about the family, & thought back to the families of patients I have treated for heatstroke, the dark thoughts somewhat dissipated to tragic thoughts in that unfortunately there are a lot of intelligent, well-meaning, “experienced” (quotes because this is SUCH a subjective term in regards to hiking) people that sadly are just completely oblivious to the extreme dangers of the heat. I agree with other posters that I wish the MSM would address this a little more, even if no one wants to point to this as the COD (yet), it should be mentioned that the conditions they were out in were dangerous to both themselves & their dependents, regardless of any experience or athleticism. There’s a reason no other hikers found them before LE went looking..

 

[happyday]

Thanks. So if it was a steep trail, 1.6 miles or so would maybe take them about 45 minutes or so. They should’ve felt the heat quickly. They should’ve noticed their dog was struggling, trying to stop or pull for the shade of any bush.

It’s possible the dog kept valiantly trying to keep up and collapsed. And then they spent time trying to assist the dog. But I can tell you that there are obvious signs before that. Heavy panting. Trying to stop. Etc.

In any event, it’s possible. And it’s possible they then tried to carry the dog back down but couldn’t due to the weight and heat. At that point it’s possible the baby could’ve start to show signs of distress. Maybe they tried to find brush to put the dog or baby under.

It just seems off to me. IMO, if it was heat related I would expect the strongest of them to quickly to send for help and for the remaining parent along with the baby and dog to be wedged under any piece of brush there was that could provide even a little bit of shade. I hike very similar areas and there are always small bushes at the least under which you could shove a baby or a dog and at least part of your own body. I would also expect them to have their shirts off and over their heads if they did not have hats and/or off and used to shield the dog or baby’s bodies from sun.

I hike in heat in So Cal. But 85-90 degrees can cause heat exhaustion super fast. Rarely are any hikers with even a bit of experience out on a trail going UP for any length of time in heat over 85 or so.

Something important about this trail is that it’s downhill into the canyon for a long time. So hiking back to the car would be steep uphill. So if they only got to where they were found, they had only gone downhill the whole time. I personally think they probably did do the whole loop and we’re hiking back UP to the trailhead when they succumbed just 1.5 miles from the car. JMO. I just don’t think they’d be in that much trouble just 1.5 miles into the trail only going downhill. Even in the heat. But doing the loop and then going back UP in the heat of the day is where I see them getting into trouble.

 

[lotus777]

So I am at work and just talked with one of our ED Physicians about this case. He said that both heat stroke and lightning, including ground lightning, are not his first choices. He did say that once a person gets to the level of head stroke, death is imminent if the person doesn’t get out of the hot environment right away (and get medical care). In heat stroke there would be altered mental status, of course, so decisions that are being made would be poor/illogical. Breathing would become shallow and the person would lose consciousness. Sweating stops as well. Prior to heat stroke, there would be heat exhaustion. During heat exhaustion, there would likely be “unquenchable thirst” and people are usually not able to curb the thirst and conserve water. So its curious that they had a bit of water remaining in their camelbak. He felt they wouldn't have been found in the exact same area if it was heat related. Would have expected them to wander off and seek shade, even if there was none visible. He did say that lightning may not leave obvious physical signs. Said both are possible, but he believes that they ingested something poisonous…

Respectfully, the opinion of a physician on this case, unless it's directly related to the biological aspects of their deaths rather than the logistical aspects (the water left and their locations), doesn't mean much.

Two issues with his opinion: "A small amount of water" could be just enough for testing. It could also be just a bit that was hard to get out with the straw used with bladder-type containers. That there wouldn't have been even a bit of water left if it was heat stroke doesn't hold at all. They also could have been so disoriented that it didn't dawn on them to get the very last sips (water doesn't prevent heat stroke either because it's a core body temp issue). The time from heat exhaustion to heat stroke could have also been quite short.

They also weren't found in the exact same area. The mother was 30 yards away. This was a steep, narrow trail with switchbacks. There weren't many places to go except up or down the trail. If she were already in distress it would have been difficult to get very far up the incline. And because we don't know exactly what happened, we can't assume that heat stroke would have happened to them at the same time.

 

[gitana1]

Agree. It is remarkable to me that someone from LE or SAR was also treated for heat-related illness. I appreciate you canary/coal mine analogy. The fact is that similar hyperthermic situations with hikers seem to be rare up to this point. The future will likely tell a different story.

Maybe deaths like this are rare but rescues of people with heat exhaustion and heat stroke are super common along our California trails.

One of the common parks where I hike which has steep, exposed trails and deep canyons, the rangers cruise around on four wheelers with tons of water, and emergency equipment, looking for dingbats who hike in the heat without water, etc. These are pretty much universally, people who are NOT regular hikers.

A shaded park table was even constructed for people half way up one of the trails because they have so many people succumbing.

We have dogs dying on easy trails out here. I get sick when I see these people taking dogs out in the middle of the day. Most have inadequate water and/or are drinking water while not giving any to the poor dog.

I always carry extra water and a dog bowl for them.

 

[Auntie Cipation]

@gitana1 here's a few background bits:

1. There was a forest fire in the area a few years ago so no more shade except perhaps low shrubs that have regrown. Unknown if the fire burned along the river so there may still be shade there.

2. From where they parked, the trail was downhill on the way out and uphill on the way back (regardless of whether loop or down/back. Savage/Lundy is steeper than Hites Cove, at least in sections.)

3. Re the probable loop: The loop would be going down the Hite Cove trail, then along the river trail, then back up the Savage-Lundy trail, where they were found in the midst of the switchbacks about 1.5 miles short of their vehicle.

4. So if they hiked the loop then they were down near the river for a stretch. Algae mats known in the vicinity.

5. They were seen driving toward the trailhead at 7:45am. So presumably they started out around 8am-8:15 although they could have been delayed in various scenarios that we wouldn't know of.

6. There were three recorded lightning strikes on the east side of the Sierra about 25 miles east of them, that afternoon (I think afternoon MOO). No reports of it being an actual thunderstormy day that I've seen. Dry lightning and/or ground lightning have been discussed and not ruled out.

lots more I'm sure but that's all I can think of for now.

 

[gitana1]

Something important about this trail is that it’s downhill into the canyon for a long time. So hiking back to the car would be steep uphill. So if they only got to where they were found, they had only gone downhill the whole time. I personally think they probably did do the whole loop and we’re hiking back UP to the trailhead when they succumbed just 1.5 miles from the car. JMO. I just don’t think they’d be in that much trouble just 1.5 miles into the trail only going downhill. Even in the heat. But doing the loop and then going back UP in the heat of the day is where I see them getting into trouble.

That makes more sense. But still, I would expect them to know better and to have checked the weather before starting out. Also, they would know if they hike that going down means coming back up. It’s a concern for me when I am descending when it’s hot. It’s easy to get stuck down in a canyon and lose the ability to climb out.

 

[lotus777]

Something important about this trail is that it’s downhill into the canyon for a long time. So hiking back to the car would be steep uphill. So if they only got to where they were found, they had only gone downhill the whole time. I personally think they probably did do the whole loop and we’re hiking back UP to the trailhead when they succumbed just 1.5 miles from the car. JMO. I just don’t think they’d be in that much trouble just 1.5 miles into the trail only going downhill. Even in the heat. But doing the loop and then going back UP in the heat of the day is where I see them getting into trouble.

I think you're misinterpreting the data... They were found about halfway up Savage Lundy Trail, which is a very steep trail with switchbacks. If they did the loop starting out on Hites Cove Trail as LE originally estimated, they would have gone downhill only to the river and then started uphill on Savage Lundy.

 

[SophieRose]

LE believe they may have hiked along the river prior to reaching the switchbacks where they were found. One theory is that their dog may have become ill from swimming or drinking from the river. That may have slowed their hike down, especially if JG carried the ill dog. (*speculation)

With the help of the Mariposa sheriff, we were able to create a more accurate map of the suspected hike the family took. And sadly where they were found.”

https://twitter.com/mgafni/status/1428907517019516928?s=20

If the dog was carried because of illness, wouldn't you take the leash off? Even if you sit down, he's still most likely not well and doesn't need it. Or JG puts it on because he thinks the dog could get better while J catches his breath and run away. Sorry just a little detail I think about.

 

[gitana1]

@gitana1 here's a few background bits:

1. There was a forest fire in the area a few years ago so no more shade except perhaps low shrubs that have regrown. Unknown if the fire burned along the river so there may still be shade there.

2. From where they parked, the trail was downhill on the way out and uphill on the way back (regardless of whether loop or down/back. Savage/Lundy is steeper than Hites Cove, at least in sections.)

3. Re the probable loop: The loop would be going down the Hite Cove trail, then along the river trail, then back up the Savage-Lundy trail, where they were found in the midst of the switchbacks about 1.5 miles short of their vehicle.

4. So if they hiked the loop then they were down near the river for a stretch. Algae mats known in the vicinity.

5. They were seen driving toward the trailhead at 7:45am. So presumably they started out around 8am-8:15 although they could have been delayed in various scenarios that we wouldn't know of.

6. There were three recorded lightning strikes on the east side of the Sierra about 25 miles east of them, that afternoon (I think afternoon MOO). No reports of it being an actual thunderstormy day that I've seen. Dry lightning and/or ground lightning have been discussed and not ruled out.

lots more I'm sure but that's all I can think of for now.

Thank you! Great information and makes it easier for me to picture.

So they were found midway up a barren trail, indicating they likely were coming back up?

 

[happyday]

Will the toxicology tests show toxic algae? Does anyone know?