ID - DeOrr Kunz Jr, 2, Timber Creek Campground, 10 July 2015 - #5

Status
Not open for further replies.
This whole discussion about campfires makes me cringe.

I haven't used a campfire for years (33), and sometimes I've camped for 100 nights in a year, one year at least 185. It's current campground ethic not to ("leave no trace") because wood foraging takes duff and small twigs (not to mention branches) away from animals that need it to survive (for nesting, cover from predators, etc), but it's also especially discouraged out West because of the risk of forest fire. Often, it is expressly forbidden. In some areas of the country (e.g. Appalachian Trail and many campgrounds) the trees are bare of branches below human reach and the floor of the forest has no debris whatever, as though it's been swept. These areas look completely sterile. Often, the animals have all left.

Not having a campfire is routine procedure for experienced campers. They use gas stoves. They generally do not use the new-fangled one-pot woodstoves that recharge iPhones, either; these also require duff and twiglets and there are many alternative ways of recharging electronic devices. First timers? Maybe that can be forgiven for the one-time experience of somemores, but they'd better be using wood purchased on site, with the fire started using a commercial packaged log. They have no business either bringing wood from elsewhere (which spreads disease) or using wood foraged on site. It does not belong to them: these are public campgrounds, for everyone and for animals.

Just sayin'....

Well, yes and no, and by that I mean different states have different rules. We just finished camping at a state park in Tennessee. The rules for camp fires is you cannot bring in wood but must purchase it at the park AND you can pick up and use twigs and any wood found on the ground. We use fat wood to start our campfires.
 
In looking at the map of the location, I am curious where Dad went when he said he went hauling down the road to see if he could get better reception.

Just to illustrate, I believe it is a half a mile from the upper campground to the lower campground. I believe they we're camped at the lower campground (sitting just beneath the reservoir as we have heard Dad say). So to me 'down the road' has always meant further away from the reservoir, as in back down the same road they came in on? I would like to know where a half mile down the road. Wouldn't going 'up' give you better reception? The campsite was in a clearing. It seems if he went a half mile down there would have been more trees.

Do you think he really went down the road toward Leadore or did he go up the road passed the reservoir toward the upper campground?

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
 
I'm not trying to start an argument over campfires, but your opinion on them is not shared by most people that live in Idaho. Even most of the more environmentally friendly locals I know would not have a problem with bringing wood for a campfire or gathering up some at the campsite. It's legal on the Salmon-Challis National Forest to gather wood for a campfire and a large percentage of houses in Lemhi County burn wood for winter heating. Firewood is also not sold on site with the exception of some of the most popular tourist destinations (like Redfish Lake) and definitely not at any campsites near Leadore or Salmon.

Well I'm in Texas not Idaho. But most if not all the campers I know don't share that opinion either, campfires are all part of the whole camping culture and experience, just wouldn't really be the same without them, IMO. It is a shame that some areas are so dried up they aren't allowed due to fire hazard, during droughts like that it's entirely understandable.
But then it's also a shame that in some areas the environmentalists have gone so overboard that campfires are forever and ever forbidden no matter what. JMO and just sayin'...
 
In looking at the map of the location, I am curious where Dad went when he said he went hauling down the road to see if he could get better reception.

Just to illustrate, I believe it is a half a mile from the upper campground to the lower campground. I believe they we're camped at the lower campground (sitting just beneath the reservoir as we have heard Dad say). So to me 'down the road' has always meant further away from the reservoir, as in back down the same road they came in on? I would like to know where a half mile down the road. Wouldn't going 'up' give you better reception? The campsite was in a clearing. It seems if he went a half mile down there would have been more trees.

Do you think he really went down the road toward Leadore or did he go up the road passed the reservoir toward the upper campground?

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

I checked the wireless coverage map for my service provider, and it shows the coverage up near the Stone Reservoir to be just on the edge. So the better coverage would be back down the road towards Leadore where the cell towers would be. I guess the half mile estimate would be to take you down to flatter ground, out of the trees and the small canyons.
 
I checked the wireless coverage map for my service provider, and it shows the coverage up near the Stone Reservoir to be just on the edge. So the better coverage would be back down the road towards Leadore where the cell towers would be. I guess the half mile estimate would be to take you down to flatter ground, out of the trees and the small canyons.
Thank you!!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
 
For the new people -- Welcome to WS!!!

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
 
I had not seen this video before. It is from the 13th and doesn't say much but it shows a family friend who is JM's ex talking about how they thought he was just lost but because they haven't been able to find him there could be a possibility someone took him.

https://youtu.be/WII65k6buXk

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
 
When I first heard about DeOrr missing, my first thought was "mountain lion got him". I live in the Pacific NW. It is just something we think about around here. I DO think it's possible he could've been scooped up without leaving a trace. If everyone at the camp is telling the truth, then in my opinion, it is the most plausible scenario. If someone at camp is not telling the truth, I think with a lot of questioning, LE would be able to see through it.
ILOKAL - I like your perseverance!

I know we're not alone in our analysis and conclusion. When someone disappears, in this case a 28 lb little boy, and there is virtually no trace whatsoever, there aren't TOO many things that probably happened. In THIS case, I only see two that are possibly. One, of course, is drowning and I would imagine we will know soon enough if that is what occurred (but maybe not). The OTHER is having been instantly and silently pounced on by a mountain lion who grabbed his tiny neck and instantly killed him then swiftly carried him off, some distance, to . . . . . . And in no more than three days there was nothing left at all. I'm not sure if it's been previously pointed out, but lions sometimes move their kill to new locations to keep it hidden from other predators who have been known, at times, to steal the lion's kill.
 
This whole discussion about campfires makes me cringe.

I haven't used a campfire for years (33), and sometimes I've camped for 100 nights in a year, one year at least 185. It's current campground ethic not to ("leave no trace") because wood foraging takes duff and small twigs (not to mention branches) away from animals that need it to survive (for nesting, cover from predators, etc), but it's also especially discouraged out West because of the risk of forest fire. Often, it is expressly forbidden. In some areas of the country (e.g. Appalachian Trail and many campgrounds) the trees are bare of branches below human reach and the floor of the forest has no debris whatever, as though it's been swept. These areas look completely sterile. Often, the animals have all left.

Not having a campfire is routine procedure for experienced campers. They use gas stoves. They generally do not use the new-fangled one-pot woodstoves that recharge iPhones, either; these also require duff and twiglets and there are many alternative ways of recharging electronic devices. First timers? Maybe that can be forgiven for the one-time experience of somemores, but they'd better be using wood purchased on site, with the fire started using a commercial packaged log. They have no business either bringing wood from elsewhere (which spreads disease) or using wood foraged on site. It does not belong to them: these are public campgrounds, for everyone and for animals.

Just sayin'....

Here are the principles of "Leave No Trace" https://lnt.org/learn/7-principles. As you can see, they don't coincide with what you have posted regarding "experienced campers" and campfires. Actually, they are what most others have posted. I understand you may just have been offering your opinion, and I respect that.
 
In looking at the map of the location, I am curious where Dad went when he said he went hauling down the road to see if he could get better reception.

Just to illustrate, I believe it is a half a mile from the upper campground to the lower campground. I believe they we're camped at the lower campground (sitting just beneath the reservoir as we have heard Dad say). So to me 'down the road' has always meant further away from the reservoir, as in back down the same road they came in on? I would like to know where a half mile down the road. Wouldn't going 'up' give you better reception? The campsite was in a clearing. It seems if he went a half mile down there would have been more trees.

Do you think he really went down the road toward Leadore or did he go up the road passed the reservoir toward the upper campground?

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Where I live, my first thought would be to get to higher ground for best reception. I remember too, in the interview, him saying he didn't know about the road overlooking the camp site ..think maybe trying to make good call out is when he found out? Too many missing 2 year old baby boys is weighing heavy on my mind ...where's little DeOrr, little Lonzie Barton and baby Malik Drummond?
 
Where I live, my first thought would be to get to higher ground for best reception. I remember too, in the interview, him saying he didn't know about the road overlooking the camp site ..think maybe trying to make good call out is when he found out? Too many missing 2 year old baby boys is weighing heavy on my mind ...where's little DeOrr, little Lonzie Barton and baby Malik Drummond?

The campsite is sort of in a "bowl" with higher elevations on three sides. It looks like going down the road back towards town would take you out of the bowl. While going to a higher elevation seems to make sense to get better reception, I think going down the road to get away from the mountains and closer to civilization would be a better option.

See the tilted version of the map that shows the "bowl" shape of the area and how the road goes up out of the bowl at the left side of the picture. https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Ti...m2!3m1!1s0x5357b2face15292b:0x50f57ef867884c6

Here is an image of the map:
Timber Creek tilted view.jpg
 
In looking at the map of the location, I am curious where Dad went when he said he went hauling down the road to see if he could get better reception.

Just to illustrate, I believe it is a half a mile from the upper campground to the lower campground. I believe they we're camped at the lower campground (sitting just beneath the reservoir as we have heard Dad say). So to me 'down the road' has always meant further away from the reservoir, as in back down the same road they came in on? I would like to know where a half mile down the road. Wouldn't going 'up' give you better reception? The campsite was in a clearing. It seems if he went a half mile down there would have been more trees.

Do you think he really went down the road toward Leadore or did he go up the road passed the reservoir toward the upper campground?

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

I thought maybe he went up the road toward the reservoir and that could be when he realized that "the road did that." He made it sound like he had no idea the road went up that way at first.
 
There is an E M Tea Coffee Cup Cafe in Buffalo NY. FWIW. I am very curious about the EMT bag. I have listened to the interview so many times and the person in the background is very insistent that it be addressed. JM says she doesn't want things "twisted" which makes me think that, although this piece of evidence COULD be twisted by others, (how?) she personally disregards the "twisted" aspect and considers the existence, or non existence, of the bag to have an innocent explanation. This case is beyond strange.
 
Since things have slowed down in this thread a bit, I've been perusing other threads as well as their associated MSM and SM activity. It's so heartening in those other cases to see the outpouring of community support. Supplies, time, special skills and all other types of resources are being donated. In Austin and Perry's case, people have organized air and ground searches from the Bahamas to the Carolinas. In Lonzie's, sunscreen for searchers and treats for the dogs are being donated. In both situations, there are frequent briefings.

I have time. I have a special skill set. I have resources. There are many, many more people who are local to this case who have some combination of skills, resources, and an ability to contribute to meaningful search efforts. Our desire to see this sweet boy returned to his family is second only to the desire of his family to have him back in their arms. It's not possible for me to overstate the level of frustration then that I, and many others, feel about the complete shut-out by everyone close to this case.
 
GAH I've been lurking for years here and had to make an account for this. The whole 'he's not in the creek because they haven't found him yet' thing is driving me NUTS. IIRC, they haven't found Leighton McComb or Will Charba yet, who were both flood victims... and they've been missing way more than 3 weeks.
 
There is an E M Tea Coffee Cup Cafe in Buffalo NY. FWIW. I am very curious about the EMT bag. I have listened to the interview so many times and the person in the background is very insistent that it be addressed. JM says she doesn't want things "twisted" which makes me think that, although this piece of evidence COULD be twisted by others, (how?) she personally disregards the "twisted" aspect and considers the existence, or non existence, of the bag to have an innocent explanation. This case is beyond strange.

EMP Bag??

http://www.disasterstuff.com/store/pc/EMP-Bags-for-Generators-32-x-38-p1401.htm#.VbrtBfn08YA

An EMP bag is made to protect electronics from solar flares and can also be used to cover generators... if they were camping maybe they brought a generator for the campground for power?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
2,413
Total visitors
2,604

Forum statistics

Threads
589,987
Messages
17,928,742
Members
228,035
Latest member
BossJoss
Back
Top