CA CA - Stacy Arras, 14, Yosemite National Park, 17 Jul 1981

New Posts

Laughing said:
That terrain tells its own story. Big uphill from that camp to the ridge, big downhill to the lake. That's not a stroll but rather technical hiking.

If the trail was indistinct, and I expect in this part of Yosemite it was, getting back to that camp in the dark would be extremely difficult.

What was this groups' level of experience? Rather limited, I'd say, to let anyone walk away from the group no matter what time of day.
Click to expand...
Apparently she didn't hiked neither to the ridge or down to the lake but went around it, still not a stroll like it sounds from retellings of her story.

At some point I assumed that maybe Sunrise Camp was set somehow closer to the top of that hill next to the lake.
Before that I believed that she never left alone but went to the lake with that older man and never intended to go anywhere and he just waited for her to take pics before coming back together but lost her sight at some point before realizing that she's not coming back from there thus searches begun but apparently it was nothing like that.
 
beubeubeu said:
Apparently she didn't hiked neither to the ridge or down to the lake but went around it, still not a stroll like it sounds from retellings of her story.

At some point I assumed that maybe Sunrise Camp was set somehow closer to the top of that hill next to the lake.
Before that I believed that she never left alone but went to the lake with that older man and never intended to go anywhere and he just waited for her to take pics before coming back together but lost her sight at some point before realizing that she's not coming back from there thus searches begun but apparently it was nothing like that.
Click to expand...

I'll see if I can find some factual information about this case online. There are probably some reputable sources. Some of what has been discussed here has already been proven false, so its probably better to start over on this one.
 
Was the lake where Stacey was last seen nearby ever searched?

Also - if she headed north past the tree line - and I looked at the area on Google Maps - I gotta tell you, that looks like a thickly wooded area to me.

There seems to be a much larger lake located northeast of the lake where Stacey was at - I wonder if that was ever searched for her too? Could she have headed northwest instead and run into another lake? Is that a dry riverbed in that area past the tree line? What are the chances of someone falling into it and being covered with sand, during the hot month of July?

Also - Is it safe to assume she never made it past Sierra High Rte/Pacific Crest Trail? Would anyone hiking that trail have possibly seen her?
 

Attachments

  • TM1.JPG
    TM1.JPG
    155.5 KB · Views: 19
  • TM2.JPG
    TM2.JPG
    120.7 KB · Views: 16
MaryG12 said:
Was the lake where Stacey was last seen nearby ever searched?

Also - if she headed north past the tree line - and I looked at the area on Google Maps - I gotta tell you, that looks like a thickly wooded area to me.

There seems to be a much larger lake located northeast of the lake where Stacey was at - I wonder if that was ever searched for her too? Could she have headed northwest instead and run into another lake? Is that a dry riverbed in that area past the tree line? What are the chances of someone falling into it and being covered with sand, during the hot month of July?

Also - Is it safe to assume she never made it past Sierra High Rte/Pacific Crest Trail? Would anyone hiking that trail have possibly seen her?
Click to expand...

I just read through many of the news articles written during the search. Yes, they searched all of those areas and the lakes. They used a grid pattern. The brought in search dogs, but couldn't find a scent due to weather conditions (it was very dry, which makes it difficult for dogs to pick up a scent). They also did helicopter searches. Most of the areas in their grid were searched twice.
 
MaryG12 said:
Was the lake where Stacey was last seen nearby ever searched?
Click to expand...
Betty P said:
I just read through many of the news articles written during the search. Yes, they searched all of those areas and the lakes. They used a grid pattern. The brought in search dogs, but couldn't find a scent due to weather conditions (it was very dry, which makes it difficult for dogs to pick up a scent). They also did helicopter searches. Most of the areas in their grid were searched twice.
Click to expand...
After reading those articles linked here I would say that the answer as well might be: no.
Yes, there were divers, but searches were called off after 11 days, they weren't there entire time and they weren't diving crews, just "divers". How many of them? How experienced and well prepared they were?
Is it even possible for humans to dive multiple times daily for over a week? How deep are these lakes?

It's wilderness isn't it? Three Sunrise Lakes and Mildred Lakes are not that big but is it possible to thoroughly search even those four, and Tenaya lake which is pretty damn big and quite close to where she went missing.

And did they really brought search dogs?
Like real search dogs, trained, experienced tracking dogs, blood or/and cadaver dogs who proved before to effectively find anybody?
Because they are mentioning dogs but description from one of these articles is about some german shepherd who kinda can track people, but not really, not to follow any specific person scent, just try to find some humans around, and he didn't even had an occasion to show his abilities cause it was too dry for him to pick up a scent.

Helicopter search pretty much useless, if she wore all red or bright orange then maybe... but white sweater, white shirt, blue shorts and sandy blond hair, in area where anything what isn't covered by the trees is white-blue-sandy-green?

They were searching a couple square miles of wilderness, having over 100 people tops, not the entire time, and at least half of them were volunteers who couldn't go into difficult areas I guess.

Sorry but for me to believe that terrain (3,5 square mile or square with 3,5 mile long edge?) was searched "square by square" in 11 days by less than 50 people somehow experienced in searches and 50 volunteers is on the same level of reasonability as bigfoot kidnappings and another dimensions colliding to suck people in.
Call me crazy, I don't disregard the possibility, I just didn't encounter anything what would make me believe that might happened.
 
Any idea where these discrepancies with clothes come from?
Most sources including charleyproject lists blue shorts and white-burgundy hiking boots, "bizarre disappearance" mentions leggins and grey hiking boots.

How reliable is that? There man leaves camp with her and rests relatively close to the camp if they were all able to see him resting and her going further.
But how on Earth they could saw her going towards the lake if as the area explains, they were able only to see her walking away from camp, long and not at all straight walk to the lake was before her.

Does that mean that she might never get close to those lakes?
If that's true then it's not "bizarre" it's insane.
If that 77yo man was so tired that he had to take a rest after taking that small and easiest part of their assumed path he was clearly not in any outstanding shape. He must be unaware of what he's trying to achieve there and assume that lake is much closer than it really is.

That would mean that Stacy might be unaware of it as well.
Was that camera lense even found? Or it's another gossip? If it was, where? Next to the lake or next to the tree line, where she was last seen?
If adults there had no freakin idea where they are and where is the lake then I doubt that she could be the only one aware of that.
If she got confused somewhere near that question mark than all of its bizarriety may be explained by genuine and caring but not as thorough as told search conducted mostly in the wrong area.

upload_2021-5-24_3-14-7.png

"the only thing ever found was the lens cap from Stacey's camera, just inside the tree line from where she walked into the area by the lake"
This contradict itself. If that older man was resting at some place visible from camp, and lost her sight in the tree line then it was at best halfway to the lake, from where lake is likely not visible yet.

Other hikers, mentioned in previously linked articles and on that strangeoutdoors page reportedly went FROM the lake direction - quite significant distance there where anybody walking through won't go unnoticed but they never saw her. If they never saw her and went there not long after she headed there she must mistakenly got wrong direction somewhere near red question mark.

It's also beyong me how missing a boyfriend could cause anyone to intentionaly disappear. If you miss your bf, you are going back home to see him or wait till trip ends to go back home to see him, not disappear wherever to not see him ever again. Was there anything preventing her from seeing him after that trip?
 
MaryG12 said:
An unusual question:

What about the trees in the area where she disappeared? Any possibility she got "hung up" in one of them?
Click to expand...
Not to sound too graphic but where it's hot and dead things appear, there is an unbearable stench, hard to miss if douzens of people hang around, searching the area. And even before that stench would happen, bears would know about it, and they would come to check it out. With so many NPS workers any unusual activity wouldn't go unnoticed I guess... and bears don't care about covering their tracks.
 
Re: caught in the trees. Probably not. On that terrain, the pinus jefferyi is common, and the branches are no reachable by the average human:

stand.jpg


Pinus jeffreyi

RE: divers in the lakes. A mountain lake is a beautiful thing. Most are so clear that you can see the entire bottom, and the cold is indescribable imho. Even if your cousin dares you, bets you, anything, you will not stand in that water very long -- I'm talking seconds. (Not good for divers, either.)

RE: smell of decay. This environment is incredibly dry. The odor of decay might not be obvious or even detectable. Nearly stepped on a deceased elk with that same cousin -- we didn't smell anything.

These areas are beautiful, our national treasure. They are also treacherous if you are not prepared.

jm experience ymmv lrr
 
Laughing said:
Re: caught in the trees. Probably not. On that terrain, the pinus jefferyi is common, and the branches are no reachable by the average human:

stand.jpg


Pinus jeffreyi

RE: divers in the lakes. A mountain lake is a beautiful thing. Most are so clear that you can see the entire bottom, and the cold is indescribable imho. Even if your cousin dares you, bets you, anything, you will not stand in that water very long -- I'm talking seconds. (Not good for divers, either.)

RE: smell of decay. This environment is incredibly dry. The odor of decay might not be obvious or even detectable. Nearly stepped on a deceased elk with that same cousin -- we didn't smell anything.

These areas are beautiful, our national treasure. They are also treacherous if you are not prepared.

jm experience ymmv lrr
Click to expand...
Fair point with smell. But looking at pictures of the area, even so the trees don't appear to be especially thick, these smaller trees (bushes?) and different heights it's hard to imagine that straight line of sight on trail could go very far.
It's 30-35 years later that most of these pics which I saw were taken but unless that area was much more open and tree-free in 1981 neither that older man nor Stacy could walk away from camp while still being seen.
 
beubeubeu said:
Fair point with smell. But looking at pictures of the area, even so the trees don't appear to be especially thick, these smaller trees (bushes?) and different heights it's hard to imagine that straight line of sight on trail could go very far.
It's 30-35 years later that most of these pics which I saw were taken but unless that area was much more open and tree-free in 1981 neither that older man nor Stacy could walk away from camp while still being seen.
Click to expand...

To understand how a girl could have gotten hopelessly lost on that short walk, you have to understand the terrain. Google Earth suggests that the land is relatively flat with sparse vegetation. That is very deceptive.

The terrain there is glaciated granite. The land is very irregular with piles of huge rockets scattered irregularly where they have been dumped by retreating glaciers on top of relatively flat granite sheets that are laced with cracked and fissures that can often be deep and treacherous to someone walking on them who is not paying attention. The trees are scattered. They are not that tall; maybe 20 feet high but they appear thicker at ground level. The rocks and trees would tend to conceal anyone walking through.

Granite does, however, provide very good traction for walking or climbing and one can make pretty good progress on that type of terrain but it would require a very irregular route going around or climbing over obstacles. You can cover a lot of distance in a short time but by constantly changing directions, it is easy to become disoriented and not be walking in the direction you think you are. It is easy to get lost.

The one factor that should have contained her to a limited area was the fact that she could not have walked over a mile without coming to a trail. You would expect a lost hiker who encountered a trial to stay on that trail. Perhaps an inexperienced 14 year old made a bad decision to leave the trail, that would eventually lead to other people, and make a bee line to where she thought the camp was only to lead her into literally hundreds of miles of wilderness. There is also the possibility that the particular stretch of trail she encountered was not well marked and she just missed it.

From all I have read, the area within the surrounding trails was very thoroughly searched but there would have been plenty of nooks and crannies where a cold child might crawl seeking shelter and not be found.

The primary carrion eaters in that country are coyotes and various birds. Coyotes tend to chew up larger bones and scatter smaller ones. Pieces of deer bones are very common there and human bones left by coyotes would no t look much different.
 
beubeubeu said:
Any idea where these discrepancies with clothes come from?
Most sources including charleyproject lists blue shorts and white-burgundy hiking boots, "bizarre disappearance" mentions leggins and grey hiking boots.

How reliable is that? There man leaves camp with her and rests relatively close to the camp if they were all able to see him resting and her going further.
But how on Earth they could saw her going towards the lake if as the area explains, they were able only to see her walking away from camp, long and not at all straight walk to the lake was before her.

Does that mean that she might never get close to those lakes?
If that's true then it's not "bizarre" it's insane.
If that 77yo man was so tired that he had to take a rest after taking that small and easiest part of their assumed path he was clearly not in any outstanding shape. He must be unaware of what he's trying to achieve there and assume that lake is much closer than it really is.

That would mean that Stacy might be unaware of it as well.
Was that camera lense even found? Or it's another gossip? If it was, where? Next to the lake or next to the tree line, where she was last seen?
If adults there had no freakin idea where they are and where is the lake then I doubt that she could be the only one aware of that.
If she got confused somewhere near that question mark than all of its bizarriety may be explained by genuine and caring but not as thorough as told search conducted mostly in the wrong area.

View attachment 298207

"the only thing ever found was the lens cap from Stacey's camera, just inside the tree line from where she walked into the area by the lake"
This contradict itself. If that older man was resting at some place visible from camp, and lost her sight in the tree line then it was at best halfway to the lake, from where lake is likely not visible yet.

Other hikers, mentioned in previously linked articles and on that strangeoutdoors page reportedly went FROM the lake direction - quite significant distance there where anybody walking through won't go unnoticed but they never saw her. If they never saw her and went there not long after she headed there she must mistakenly got wrong direction somewhere near red question mark.

It's also beyong me how missing a boyfriend could cause anyone to intentionaly disappear. If you miss your bf, you are going back home to see him or wait till trip ends to go back home to see him, not disappear wherever to not see him ever again. Was there anything preventing her from seeing him after that trip?
Click to expand...

The search and rescue teams searched the area for several miles in all directions from the camp and lakes. They searched with helicopters, on foot and on horseback. Each grid in the search area was searched twice by volunteers on the ground.

Missing her boyfriend had nothing to do with her getting lost. It's just a minor background detail that reporters and bloggers bring up in order to attract readers, JMO.

She was a 14 yo girl with no experience in rugged back country hiking. She came to the Sunrise Sierra Camp on horseback, with a professional guide leading the group of people. Like the elderly man, she was probably not accustomed to hiking at high altitude.

As an inexperienced hiker, she probably left the trail due to confusion, distraction or darkness. Unless you're a highly experienced and trained hiker with the proper gear, the number one rule in wilderness hiking is do not leave the trail. She probably did and it ended up in unfortunate tragedy.

Charlie Project's description of her clothing is probably in error. As with any event like this, reporters make mistakes and get wrong information from the wrong sources.
 
An article I posted on another thread covered how easy it is to get lost in the woods, even for experienced hikers and people who frequent the woods, like hunters and foresters. One thing of note was it's easy to miss a trail and cross over it to the other side without realizing it's there. Plus, we don't walk in a straight line and often end up going in circles. And we tend to keep walking, instead of staying put and waiting for rescue. It was an interesting article, I will have to go find it.
 
Does anybody know if there is a place in Europe with simmilar environment to that part of Yosemite?
 
kemo said:
The terrain there is glaciated granite. The land is very irregular with piles of huge rockets scattered irregularly where they have been dumped by retreating glaciers on top of relatively flat granite sheets that are laced with cracked and fissures that can often be deep and treacherous to someone walking on them who is not paying attention. The trees are scattered. They are not that tall; maybe 20 feet high but they appear thicker at ground level. The rocks and trees would tend to conceal anyone walking through.
Click to expand...
Yes it is. And that's exactly why it's beyond me how her story might be accurate. It's considerable distance on the map. With pictures, videos and 3d maps from the area it looks virtually impossible to walk very far from the camp in any direction but still be seen from that camp. And what we have?
Supposedly older man was in sight of people in camp and he saw Stacy going into some tree line near the lake.
How was that possible? Were they in some perfect, longest sighting lines possible? Or were they much farther from even a sight of the lake when he lost sight of Stacy?
It was so easy for them to see each other while Stacy's dad let her go there and as they walked but it changed as she went missing?

I can accept the files not being as detailed as it would be with some obviously criminal case happening in the city but to not have it clear:
1. Where exactly was Sunrise Camp set that year? + picture of location
2. Where exactly that older man was resting while he saw her the last time? + picture of the location
3. Where exactly Stacy was where he lost sight of her + picture of the location
seems ridiculous for me.
Not even in a form of dots on a map with clear sight WHERE? With terrain like that douzen yards here or there may cause a huge difference while trying to predict where someone may wander off and where to search. Nobody did that? Was it done but thrown out later, classified as irrelevant? Douzens of proffesionals searching and literally nobody took notes like "day 6: we headed north, divers looked at first lake / day 7: dogs checked out the area again, climbers looked at higher areas / day 8: some people came back home, some others arrived to help"?
If all of that seems reasonable and plausible then let's agree to disagree.

For me these supposed "case files" are not real files or they are lacking all the most important info.
If real case files may look like that and be seen as ok, then for me it's as good as not bother to have any.
Description of her disappearance seems not accurate for me - I can't tell what's wrong or missing but for me something is.
I accept that it's possible to got confused and lost practicaly anywhere, especially in wilderness and that lack of familiarity with the area, limited experience and improper equipment increases the risk of things going terribly wrong but I don't believe that existence of dangerous wilderness is definitely the cause of Stacy's disappearance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 81 more.
Total: 3,455 (members: 82, guests: 3,373)

Online statistics

Members online
82
Guests online
3,373
Total visitors
3,455
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,285
Messages
17,966,687
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top