Hiker Gregg Hein of Clovis "entertained the idea" of possibly dying in the high Sierra of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks as he lay severely injured for six days.

http://www.fresnobee.com/2014/07/15/4026125/hiker-gregory-hein-of-clovis-talks.html

Pretty impressive. I've hiked there in my younger days; lots of granite, scree, pines ... not a great place to go off-trail and be found; the trails though were decently populated (pass 2-3 groups/day)

He was obviously a very inexperienced hiker and uneducated in preparedness. This is even more disturbing since he graduated from Humbolt. Perhaps there needs to be a mandatory wilderness preparedness course. My niece graduated from there--I will have to ask her if she had any such training there.

"Its the Complications that make a Survival Situation Complicated"

I'm not sure why you think that? While in 20/20 hindsight there were certainly some things he did wrong, but he did many things right.

"Hein left his backpack on the side of Mount Goddard. He grabbed only a few things from the pack: A poncho, pocket knife, cords, whistle and a bivvy sack -- a small, lightweight shelter. He didn't take more because he miscalculated, believing he was closer to Evolution Valley, where he hoped he'd see hikers."

If you know you are going to crawl out, you obviously need to shed any excess weight. What to take and what to leave would be a tough choice. Having a bivvy sack, and taking it was a good move. Not knowing exactly where you are was a big mistake.

"For four days, he lay near the edge of a small glacier, nursing his injury with ice. Hein stabilized his leg with hiking poles, wrapping them with a belt and some cord, and on Wednesday, headed for Davis Lake -- crawling about a mile and dropping about 1,000 feet. He hoped the new location might increase his chance of being found. On Thursday, he saw helicopters -- but they didn't see him. Two flew over him several times, he said. "It was kind of wrenching." "

Splinting his leg and treating it with ice to keep swelling down was smart. This may have saved his leg. Moving to a different location may not have been a good move. Not having a way to attract the helos was also not good.

Real survival situations are graded pass/fail. He survived, and still has his leg, so he gets a passing grade.

Many times on this site there have been stories of people that did just about everything wrong and survived. So, surviving does not mean they are experienced and savvy. Surviving is often due to the help of others or pure chance.

Yes, he did some things right, but what did he do wrong?

Granted, he couldn't carry his backpack in his condition, but he could have dragged it on a cord. Or, at the very least taken the food from the pack (he said he was without food).

He said he had no medical supplies.

He had no method of signaling--no PLB, no mirror, no orange tarp, no smoke flares.

Most experienced and knowledgeable hikers would not go on a multi-day trip without those things. I don't even go on a day hike without them--food, first-aid kit, and signaling device (plus the rest of the ten essentials). If you hike alone and off-trail, these things are even more critical.

darn lucky. I'm glad he made it. :-)

Pete

Treeseeker, we might have to agree to disagree on some of these points. One useful tool in evaluating preps or lack therof is to ask yourself the question "Would this have changed the outcome?" Let's apply this to your points:
I haven't tried it myself, but crawling any distance with a severe leg fracture has to be incredibly exhausting. Even dragging a pack on a cord would likely be too much. Did his lack of food change the outcome? Probabaly not in this case. (Though it might have had the weather been colder or had the rescue taken longer). Interestingly, no one seems to have asked the obvious question, that is should he have tried to move at all? The usual advice is to stay put, but there are exceptions. Not enough info here to decide that. Actually, the article says next time he would take "more medical supplies". In any case he was able to improvise a splint and save his leg. I see no reason to think a bigger FAK would have made any significant difference in the outcome. Interestingly, the most highly trained wilderness first aid practitioners I know tend to carry only a very minimal FAK on their personal back pack trips. They generally only take those items which one can't improvise or substitute for, things like tape, meds etc. Everything else they can improvise from other gear. (This is probably worth its own thread.) I agree with you on this one. This is the one area where additional gear would have made a huge difference. Most people have no idea how hard it is to spot someone from a helicopter. Even having a bright colored jacket could have made a huge difference.

Certainly in 20/20 hindsight there were things he could have done better, but overall I think the guy did OK. I don't agree with your original point that "He was obviously a very inexperienced hiker and uneducated in preparedness."

Like most of us, he made some good choices, some that were bad, and some that were questionable. The thing to avoid is a series of several bad decisions, which can put you into a situation where survival doesn't happen. This person earns a passing grade, and that is really all that matters.

You can drag a backpack (if you are a glutton for punishment)and you don't even need cord or rope. the extra energy required to drag a pack is often excessive. If there is access to water, staying put is usually the best option.

A good FAK is a small, reasonably light package, supplemented by improvised items. A red bandanna is a triangular bandage, as well as a signalling device, snot rag,pot grabber, etc. -Splints are fashioned from hiking poles or backpack stays. I often drilled holes in backpack stays to better suit them for this purpose and it made them lighter, as well.

Knowledge and skills are at least as important as gear.

Signally is the place where he the most room for improvement IMOHO.