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

[lotus777]

Or they were all sat having a rest break and mum looked for somewhere slightly more secluded to go to the toilet, or there was a lightening storm and mum walked up hill slightly to get a better view, or even just to keep stretching her legs whilst everyone else was taking a rest. It’s not such a massive distance that she necessarily was on her way for help and wasn’t just merely away from the rest of her family temporarily when something happened.

30 yards is 90 feet. Pretty far, especially for a toilet break. The trail isn't the place for a toilet break either. And most aren't going to go uphill when lightning is present... Sure, we don't know why she was there, but trying to reach the car or go for help are reasonable explanations.

 

[carbuff]

30 yards is 90 feet. Pretty far, especially for a toilet break. The trail isn't the place for a toilet break either. And most aren't going to go uphill when lightning is present... Sure, we don't know why she was there, but trying to reach the car or go for help are reasonable explanations.

I don't know what the rule is in California, but in the New England mountains, hikers are supposed to go 100 feet from any trail or water source to pee. So that's about the right distance.

 

[EndoraXplorer]

(RSBM)...
Don't want to appear argumentative but outdoor recreation is not optional for a lot of us. It is the way we make a soul connection with our planet, our God, etc. Everyone weighs risk differently. To me, conclusions like this are not helpful at all.

I don't think you're being argumentative--I really appreciate your perspective and I think it's important to consider, especially in light of many posters who wonder why anyone would take a baby and a dog hiking.

For me personally, I enjoy moderate hikes, and go to Burning Man, and love the ocean, and love to be out in nature in general. But I wouldn't call myself an avid hiker, I certainly don't hike every weekend. Outdoor recreation is optional for me. My BF shares your perspective. Climbing a 14,000 ft. mountain is his happy place. He goes on strenuous hikes solo about 90% of the time. He takes safety precautions, always shares his routes, etc. He doesn't want a PLB for reasons I don't agree with, but I respect his choice.

But I think there's lots of people who will agree with the article that a) it is safer to hike with another person and b) that if you do go alone, you probably should err on the side of caution. Yes, everyone does weigh risk differently. However, if this article's conclusions lead to someone taking a moment to re-evaluate their level of preparedness, or to decide whether a particular risk is worth it--well, it could save a life. MOO.

 

[Ruthbullock]

30 yards is 90 feet. Pretty far, especially for a toilet break. The trail isn't the place for a toilet break either. And most aren't going to go uphill when lightning is present... Sure, we don't know why she was there, but trying to reach the car or go for help are reasonable explanations.

I do metres and can’t visualise yards- so 27 metres- it’s twice the length of the hallway in my house (the distance if I got off the couch walked to my daughters bedroom door and back again to the couch)- so really not as far as you think. They absolutely are reasonable explanations going for help, but not the only reasons. I’m also a pacer, so whilst my other half loves to sit and take a rest, I often walk on and back whilst he rests.

 

[woods]

I get that 30 yards isn't a long distance, but it’s still quite a distance between the mom and the rest of the family. To get a visual, here’s a video of a soccer player scoring a goal from 30 yards away:

 

[Ruthbullock]

I get that 30 yards isn't a long distance, but it’s still quite a distance between the mom and the rest of the family. Here’s a video of a soccer player scoring a goal from 30 yards away to get a visual:

You don’t have to agree with me, I’m just pointing out mum wasn’t necessarily off for help- we walk a lot as a family (nowadays much simpler walks, but in my younger days much more adventurously) and we often separated by that sort of distance at points for other reasons.

 

[annpats]

Don't want to appear argumentative but outdoor recreation is not optional for a lot of us. It is the way we make a soul connection with our planet, our God, etc.

Sure, we all do. Outdoor exercise is essential to our physical, mental and spiritual well-being.

But, when doing it becomes dangerous (due to excess heat, floods, ice, fog etc.) and may take your life, then it's prudent to stay local, don't go or find an alternative until the danger passes.

 

[Deleted member 222031]

I don't know if Philip Kreycik's case had any influence on this decision or not, but Strava announced today their Beacon locating feature is now free for all users, at least for those tracking their runs by the Strava app with a phone. This feature sends your location and other information to up to three contacts when you start an activity. It's still a paid feature for those using Applewatches or GPS watches.

Strava’s Beacon Security Characteristic Is Now Free To Use - Healthdaily365

Bringing this over from the Philip Kreycik thread just as an FYI. I guess Strava is used most by runners but great new free "finding" feature might save a life.
MOO

 

[jonjon747]

Here's an older hiking couple dying in scorching heat. It says that their 9 yo boy survived because of more water was given to him.
French couple who died in desert gave son extra water - CNN

Any similarities between the two?

 

[Deleted member 222031]

Sure, we all do. Outdoor exercise is essential to our physical, mental and spiritual well-being.

But, when doing it becomes dangerous (due to excess heat, floods, ice, fog etc.) and may take your life, then it's prudent to stay local, don't go or find an alternative until the danger passes.

Exactly. I believe following my intuition and choosing to go another time, another day or not at all has probably saved me from injury or worse a few times. 'Tis always better to survive today so you can hike another day.

But, to me, prudence is in the eye of the beholder. One reason I chimed in is because there can be understanding of a tragic outcome without belaboring it with harsh judgment against our fellow fallible partners along the trail of life.

No one on this forum has been super judgmental from what I have read, but unfortunately that is the tendency of too many & especially those who consider any outdoor risk a risk too far.

JMO

 

[lotus777]

I do metres and can’t visualise yards- so 27 metres- it’s twice the length of the hallway in my house (the distance if I got off the couch walked to my daughters bedroom door and back again to the couch)- so really not as far as you think. They absolutely are reasonable explanations going for help, but not the only reasons. I’m also a pacer, so whilst my other half loves to sit and take a rest, I often walk on and back whilst he rests.

It's as far as I think (lol) but perhaps not as "far" as your interpretation of my comment. Maybe she went ahead and expected the rest of the family to catch up. Just find it unlikely she'd go uphill on a steep trail for a toilet break only to turn around and go back downhill to them. If they did Hites Cove first, she wouldn't be trying to make a long hike longer.

 

[Newsjunkiejen]

So I've read today in the Daily Mail that they're now considering a lightning strike as a possible cause of death.

Wouldn't being struck by lightning cause some kind of visible injuries of sorts? Scorch or burn marks? Or wouldn't the ground be scorched or burnt in the area where the lightning struck if it did indeed strike an area of ground they were walking upon?

I assume that if lightning is being touted as a possible theory then they're going down the lines of the type of lightning strike where it affects a whole section of ground (and subsequently those stood on that area of ground), as opposed to something that would attract a direct lightning bolt strike such as an isolated structure of height like a human being.

Also, what kind of circumference can a lightning strike cover across an area of ground? I know Ellen was found a fair distance away - you'd think that they would've been closer together for them all to have been killed by the strike.

Perhaps they'd seen lightning in the distance and decided to spread out a bit for safety? They were experienced hikers, so maybe they recognised that they were in an exposed and potentially very dangerous position, and the only way to mitigate against this was to spread out?

Dad was found in a seated position: perhaps he was sitting down because it's a common misconception that making yourself 'small' helps reduce the risk of being struck by lightning?

I'm not sure of his height, but he looks fairly tall on the images I've seen. Carrying a baby carrier on his back could have made him concerned that this was increasing his mass and therefore putting him more at risk of attracting a direct lightning strike. So maybe he sat down, took off the baby carrier, and had the baby next to him to reduce his height?

MOO

Does anyone know when the toxicology reports are due back?

*Edited to correct bad grammar *

 

[woods]

The family was located near the Devil’s Gulch area (Savage-Lundy) in the Southfork of the Merced River drainage.

Savage/Lundy Trail is a 3-mile long trail and is the most difficult trail in the area.

The Hite’s Cove trail is part of a much longer trail along the Wild and Scenic South Fork of the Merced River that extends all the way to HWY 41 at Wawona. This less traveled section of the trail offers a true wilderness experience in some of the most steep and rugged terrain in the area that is accessible only by trail.

Some of the peaks and gulches in this area have "Devil" in their name. There is a reason for that; the terrain is incredibly rugged and steep.
Hite's Cove Trail
Hite Cove and Merced River | Discover Yosemite National Park

 

[woods]

Mariposa County Sheriff Jeremy Briese, in a monthly update last week, said some test results from recent water samples there came back showing “high levels” of anatoxin-a, but that investigators are “not saying” that’s what killed Mariposa residents John Gerrish, Ellen Chung, their daughter, Miju, and family dog, Oski.

Despite the presence there of anatoxin-a, the State Water Board said it’s continuing to recommend a caution advisory in that location, near where the family was found dead, which is two tiers below the state’s most serious danger advisory.

“Multiple types of cyanobacteria were detected” in algal mats there, the results state, along with anatoxin-a at 11.8 micrograms per liter.

“No other cyanotoxins were detected (I.e. microcystins, cylindrospermopsin, saxitoxin),” the results posted Wednesday continue.

The sheriff’s office said there was no new information to share Wednesday about the mysterious death case.

A Sierra National Forest spokesperson on Tuesday said just that the hazards are “still under investigation.” The agency has not answered questions about the size of the known harmful algae bloom on the south fork of the Merced River, or if there are others in Sierra National Forest.

The results of toxicology tests for the Mariposa family have not been shared.

In response to a question during last Thursday’s sheriff update, about whether toxicology results were back yet, Briese said, “Some are, yes. But we still do not have an exact cause of death yet.”

In response to another question, Briese said he hadn’t heard of any livestock dying from harmful algae in Mariposa County, but the recent tests from Devil’s Gulch showed that “the levels were high, especially dangerous for animals.”
https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article254080593.html

 

[wary]

I do metres and can’t visualise yards- so 27 metres- it’s twice the length of the hallway in my house (the distance if I got off the couch walked to my daughters bedroom door and back again to the couch)- so really not as far as you think. They absolutely are reasonable explanations going for help, but not the only reasons. I’m also a pacer, so whilst my other half loves to sit and take a rest, I often walk on and back whilst he rests.

Visualize yards as meters—you’ll be a trace off, but fine for visualizing purposes.

 

[wary]

I don't know what the rule is in California, but in the New England mountains, hikers are supposed to go 100 feet from any trail or water source to pee. So that's about the right distance.

But as I understand it, she was just as much on the trail as her husband and baby were—just 30 yards further up the trail.


MOO

 

[carbuff]

But as I understand it, she was just as much on the trail as her husband and baby were—just 30 yards further up the trail.


MOO

My bad. I thought she was 30 yards uphill from the trail. Oops.

 

[Curious_in_NC]

I've been doing some research. It looks like JG had been using AllTrails a good bit earlier in Spring 2021 for logging hikes and scouting trails. I could find no evidence he'd used other apps since. Maybe he was just not recording his/their most recent hikes. But the hikes he recorded until then were mostly 3-5 miles and moderate.

A couple of things of note. The Savage-Lundy Trail isn't even listed in AllTrails. Two closely related entries are the Hite Cove Road and Hites Cove Trail. Both are indicated as moderate trails with moderate elevation changes. What if they thought they were on one of these and never intended to be on the Savage-Lundy trail? After realizing their mistake, they turned around and started back up. Apart from evidence JG had scouted an 8 mile loop by app or a computer, I've not seen confirming evidence like footprints etc.that they actually completed such a distance. In other words, they never intended to be on a trail with a 2900 foot descent and then an equivalent ascent for return. The burned terrain might have made it even harder to realize this mistake.

At AllTrails there seems to be several reviews alluding to this potential for confusion.

Some comments in reviews under Hite Cove Road:
https://www.alltrails.com/explore/recording/hite-cove-road
VS:"Important for hikers to know that depicted hike is from Jerseydale (intersection) to gate at end of dirt road. The depicted route does NOT include the descent to the river. Highly suggest driving up about a mile, park, and start hike. Going down was 7.6 miles round trip and 2900feet elevation gain."

GG: "We went straight past the forest service gate onto Savage Lundy trail instead of turning right when Hite's Cove trail turns right and downhill. Savage Lundy trail drops into the Canyon below, as does Hite's Cove trail."
ETA: I don't think the last part of this comment about Hite's Cove trail was correct

Hites Cove Trail:
https://www.alltrails.com/trail/us/california/hites-cove-trail
Recent commenters were debating if this were the trail the couple was on. It doesn't look like it is. AllTrails says it is 6.5 miles out and back with 950 feet elevation change.

 

[SpideySense]

I'm not living there presently but still have a home in Sonoma County, a high of 95 doesn't last long there, it warms up later in the day and cools down earlier than treeless inland locations.

MOO
I agree with you 100% about it not lasting long, thank god. The mornings and evenings are always cool. And the heat index just isn’t the same as humid places. I wondered if folks were writing from places with different types of heat.

I lived in NY for 20 years and dreaded a 90F day there with high humidity that could send the heat index well over 100F (and that lasted into the night) way more than a 105F day in CA. With dry heat, you can spritz and cool down. With humid heat, you’re already soaked from sweat and nothing evaporates. It’s suffocating and overwhelms people.

MOO

 

[Sunny Day]

MOO
I agree with you 100% about it not lasting long, thank god. The mornings and evenings are always cool. And the heat index just isn’t the same as humid places. I wondered if folks were writing from places with different types of heat.

I lived in NY for 20 years and dreaded a 90F day there with high humidity that could send the heat index well over 100F (and that lasted into the night) way more than a 105F day in CA. With dry heat, you can spritz and cool down. With humid heat, you’re already soaked from sweat and nothing evaporates. It’s suffocating and overwhelms people.

MOO

I agree. I live in the Midwest and a few weeks ago we had a week of 95+ temps with a 60% humidity which sent the heat index up to 105. It was totally unbearable with no relief even at night. Suffocating heat.