What happened to this California family?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would a little baby ever need to be on a hike like this? It doesn’t make sense. Even without the baby, hikes can easily be dangerous. Snakes, heat, bug bites, dehydration, getting lost, flash storms/floods, falls, twisted and sprained ankles (very common!). Why ever chance that with a little baby?

Especially in a hot, dry, remote area during the middle of summer? So sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel that 25 miles is a good indication against lightening. Plus, lightening leaves marks.

What 25 miles are you referencing here?

The only recorded lightning strikes off the day were 25 miles away from where the family was found

Oh I see. Yeah that wouldn’t seem to be a factor then most likely.

Actually I just read that lightning in ground current can travel up to 60 feet.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/06/27/how-lightning-kills-and-injures-victims/

Look, I'm from Florida and as paranoid about lightning as anyone (if I hear even the faintest rumble, I make the kids come inside). But would the dad still be in a seated position after a lightning strike? That seems unlikely.

Yeah. It is clear that they were all overcome by something. What gets me is that it got the dog too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if they accidentally went on the wrong trail. It was cruel and reckless to take a baby and dog on this trek. Period. They aren't idiots; he's a tech millionaire and she wasn't some dumb foreign babe in the woods, she was born in the U.S. and graduated from Berkeley. So spare me they didn't know how hot it was going to be. You do not take a baby and dog on a 85 or 95 or 110 degree hike. Clearly mentally ill thrill seekers.

If they were responsible for what happened (I don't know enough about the case), the worst possible consequence has already happened. How does posting stuff like this help? Why not focus on reminding people about the importance of preventing heatstroke and making safe choices when outdoors?

No one is suggesting the first bolded claim, and it's weird that you come up with that specific description. Also, if the second bolded statement is true, we may not be able to blame them for what happened, depending on the circumstances.

*came up

It is weird they brought that up! I am an average hiker. I do some hard trails but do easy trails every weekend. Where I live we do 80s and 90s hikes often, especially last year we would go to shaded trails often with kids. This trail was shaded except for the last part. I think with the day's progression the sudden spike in temp and full sun coupled with inexperience baby wearing in high temps hurt them. I still think it was something more toxic but I remember the first time being out in 90s temps baby wearing around town and as if a switch went off, baby and I got incredibly hot. I went into a hotel lobby to cool us down after barely getting out for the day.

The trail was not shaded at all. All the trees were destroyed by the wildfires a couple years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if they accidentally went on the wrong trail. It was cruel and reckless to take a baby and dog on this trek. Period. They aren't idiots; he's a tech millionaire and she wasn't some dumb foreign babe in the woods, she was born in the U.S. and graduated from Berkeley. So spare me they didn't know how hot it was going to be. You do not take a baby and dog on a 85 or 95 or 110 degree hike. Clearly mentally ill thrill seekers.

If they were responsible for what happened (I don't know enough about the case), the worst possible consequence has already happened. How does posting stuff like this help? Why not focus on reminding people about the importance of preventing heatstroke and making safe choices when outdoors?

No one is suggesting the first bolded claim, and it's weird that you come up with that specific description. Also, if the second bolded statement is true, we may not be able to blame them for what happened, depending on the circumstances.

*came up

It is weird they brought that up! I am an average hiker. I do some hard trails but do easy trails every weekend. Where I live we do 80s and 90s hikes often, especially last year we would go to shaded trails often with kids. This trail was shaded except for the last part. I think with the day's progression the sudden spike in temp and full sun coupled with inexperience baby wearing in high temps hurt them. I still think it was something more toxic but I remember the first time being out in 90s temps baby wearing around town and as if a switch went off, baby and I got incredibly hot. I went into a hotel lobby to cool us down after barely getting out for the day.

The trail was not shaded at all. All the trees were destroyed by the wildfires a couple years ago.

Yeah, and I think the PP is underestimating the difficultly of this trail. It is noted to be the most difficult trail in the area, and this an area with a lot of difficult trails.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if they accidentally went on the wrong trail. It was cruel and reckless to take a baby and dog on this trek. Period. They aren't idiots; he's a tech millionaire and she wasn't some dumb foreign babe in the woods, she was born in the U.S. and graduated from Berkeley. So spare me they didn't know how hot it was going to be. You do not take a baby and dog on a 85 or 95 or 110 degree hike. Clearly mentally ill thrill seekers.

Ah yes the superior intellectual prowess given to those >>Booorn in the U-S-A…<<

The husband was not born in the US. He is British, thus a foreigner. PP only brings up that the wife is US born because she is of Korean heritage. Like the folks born there are not educated and smart?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if they accidentally went on the wrong trail. It was cruel and reckless to take a baby and dog on this trek. Period. They aren't idiots; he's a tech millionaire and she wasn't some dumb foreign babe in the woods, she was born in the U.S. and graduated from Berkeley. So spare me they didn't know how hot it was going to be. You do not take a baby and dog on a 85 or 95 or 110 degree hike. Clearly mentally ill thrill seekers.

Ah yes the superior intellectual prowess given to those >>Booorn in the U-S-A…<<

Agreed. PP is showing her ugliness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if they accidentally went on the wrong trail. It was cruel and reckless to take a baby and dog on this trek. Period. They aren't idiots; he's a tech millionaire and she wasn't some dumb foreign babe in the woods, she was born in the U.S. and graduated from Berkeley. So spare me they didn't know how hot it was going to be. You do not take a baby and dog on a 85 or 95 or 110 degree hike. Clearly mentally ill thrill seekers.

Ah yes the superior intellectual prowess given to those >>Booorn in the U-S-A…<<

Agreed. PP is showing her ugliness.

British husband is not “foreign” because he is white, but US born Asian wife needs clarification because she is not white. PP needs to clarify Ellen is not a “dumb foreign born babe”. Husband who is actually foreign born needs no clarification because he’s white. OK.

[Anonymous]

Latest report is toxic algae was found in the river near the trail. . Google it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care if they accidentally went on the wrong trail. It was cruel and reckless to take a baby and dog on this trek. Period. They aren't idiots; he's a tech millionaire and she wasn't some dumb foreign babe in the woods, she was born in the U.S. and graduated from Berkeley. So spare me they didn't know how hot it was going to be. You do not take a baby and dog on a 85 or 95 or 110 degree hike. Clearly mentally ill thrill seekers.

If they were responsible for what happened (I don't know enough about the case), the worst possible consequence has already happened. How does posting stuff like this help? Why not focus on reminding people about the importance of preventing heatstroke and making safe choices when outdoors?

No one is suggesting the first bolded claim, and it's weird that you come up with that specific description. Also, if the second bolded statement is true, we may not be able to blame them for what happened, depending on the circumstances.

*came up

It is weird they brought that up! I am an average hiker. I do some hard trails but do easy trails every weekend. Where I live we do 80s and 90s hikes often, especially last year we would go to shaded trails often with kids. This trail was shaded except for the last part. I think with the day's progression the sudden spike in temp and full sun coupled with inexperience baby wearing in high temps hurt them. I still think it was something more toxic but I remember the first time being out in 90s temps baby wearing around town and as if a switch went off, baby and I got incredibly hot. I went into a hotel lobby to cool us down after barely getting out for the day.

The trail was not shaded at all. All the trees were destroyed by the wildfires a couple years ago.

Yeah, and I think the PP is underestimating the difficultly of this trail. It is noted to be the most difficult trail in the area, and this an area with a lot of difficult trails.

yep. people who have never hiked in the Sierras don’t really get it.

[Anonymous]

I'm sure Ellen was smart since she went to Berkeley.

I think they might have intended to go on the shorter trail, not realizing the longer way was way worse.

Just because there was toxic algae, doesn't mean that caused their deaths.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Latest report is toxic algae was found in the river near the trail. . Google it.

We covered this about five pages ago when the sherrif’s Facebook conference aired. No human has died from toxic algae bloom. Also, the amount of toxic algae bloom needed to kill a toddler and a 6’2” man would be so different.

[Anonymous]

Still, perhaps the signs about toxic algae made them reluctant to cool off in the river.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Still, perhaps the signs about toxic algae made them reluctant to cool off in the river.

So it's toxic algae even if it isn't toxic algae?

[Anonymous]

years ago (pre smart phones) I decided to do a short day hike in point reyes . It was early feb, mid week, and I was alone. I somehow missed the trail back to my car. when I figured it out via the grubby trail map I had printed out, it was already getting dark. I doubled back but didn't make it back to my car before complete nightfall and saw no one else on the trail. I knew enough not to try to make my way in the dark (narrow trails, cliffs, etc) and spent a chilly, and eventually very rainy night out in the cold, moving around to stay warm and building a semi shelter with tree branches. By dawn I found my way to my car--I was probably only 1/2 mile away! Since then I've always tried to prepare for the 'what its' even on day hikes...flashlight, waterproof jacket, food, cell phone, and leave my eta with someone and tell them if I'm not back by X time and not answering a text to get worried---stuff happens, even to experienced hikers. I don't know what happened to this family, but it was a hard long hike on a super hot day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel that 25 miles is a good indication against lightening. Plus, lightening leaves marks.

What 25 miles are you referencing here?

The only recorded lightning strikes off the day were 25 miles away from where the family was found

Oh I see. Yeah that wouldn’t seem to be a factor then most likely.

Actually I just read that lightning in ground current can travel up to 60 feet.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/06/27/how-lightning-kills-and-injures-victims/

Look, I'm from Florida and as paranoid about lightning as anyone (if I hear even the faintest rumble, I make the kids come inside). But would the dad still be in a seated position after a lightning strike? That seems unlikely.

Haha, another Floridian here and my California-born spouse always annoyed at my “get inside” “get out of the shower” when thunder rolls