http://people.com/human-interest/woman-a...e-says-sheriff/



I can understand chewing on pinetree twigs, might get some calories from them. But the part of urine-drinking...? If the trek was so exhausting then taking a handfull of snow now and then to keep hydrated should not be a problem since the body produce plenty of heat because of the exhausting trek through snow.

As I understand it, eating snow should not be done if you are staying put in one place and not moving.

Or am I thinking completly wrong?

I am having trouble thinking of why urine would be a better option than snow. If she was already cold, getting colder would have been an issue which may have been her thinking, but I'm still having trouble with urine being a better option. But I wasn't there and certainly wasn't in her head, so it's hard to judge. One thing to consider though is that she did survive; difficult to judge success too harshly.

Google maps, almost as good as no map at all (but that's just my opinion).

Reminds me of an aircrew whose navigator was using a computer printout in lieu of a real navigational chart. They impacted an island not represented on the chart; that was a long time back, but computers are still leaving stuff out.

Watching too many TV survival shows.

My understanding is that eating snow is unwise in MOST survival situations, but NOT always.
To melt snow needs a lot of heat, and the eating of snow can lower the body temperature to a dangerous degree if it is already cold.

Eating snow is actually advisable if one is becoming too warm. Exertion when dressed for the cold can easily result in overheating and significant sweating, which is most undesirable since it may result in excessive chilling when resting, and also the sweat represents water lost.
Winter clothing should therefore be in adjustable layers.

If one becomes a little too warm when walking or otherwise exerting oneself, then eating a mouthful of snow produces a prompt cooling effect, arguably quicker than by adjusting clothing. Repeat each time you feel even slightly too warm.

I was told this by an army officer experienced in cold weather operations.

If she took a survival course, it either wan't a very good one or she wasn't taking very good notes....

They never should have been stuck in the snowin the first place. North Rim of Grand Canyon is closed at this time of year and the main road was barricaded. How could they have not known?

Drinking urine simply overloads your kidneys - you are consuming more of the waste products your body has excreted and you will lose big time eventually. She survived in spite of drinking urine rather than because of doing so.

Much better to build a fire, melt water, even make a nice cup of tea, and really hydrate. Stay with the vehicle - don't go wandering off into country you don't know.

Evidently these folks were in unfamiliar surroundings and probably had no idea of how isolated one can be in the wild, wild West. I haven't been to the North Rim in a while, but I believe there are signs stating that the NR is closed during the winter. Of course, you must read and comprehend those signs...

Sometimes it is better to be lucky rather than good. They were lucky.

This entire trip should be a case study in what not to do. A college professor no less and had taken a survival course? North Rim access closed due to snow in winter is common knowledge. 10 minutes of trip planning on internet would have solved the issue of even thinking they could get to north rim. She is alive only due to fitness but hiked in wrong direction to get help. Husband goes to nearby high ground and gets phone coverage. This was disaster in the making and only dumb luck pulled them through. Use brain before opening. Past performance is no guarantee of future returns.

SPOT locator, at least a general map of the area, use of compass are all essential in addition to the other survival items. In this case they did not need to walk anywhere. Just stay with car. Oh, there was also a predicted and pending winter weather storm.

Maybe we should change our forum's name to "Just Don't Drink Your Own Pee" in the hope of reaching the public that seems set on urine-drinking immediately upon getting lost in the wild.

Pine twigs and urine sounds like my mother-in-law's cooking. Use the urine to get rid of the turpentine taste.

Once again, distasteful armchair comments written here, really dismay me and and serve as another reminder why this forum is slowly fading to irrelevance.

In a survival situation, there are only 2 possible outcomes; dead or alive.

This women and her family made some mistakes but in the end, they are all alive and that is all that matters.

Quite true and well worth noting. Survival is a pass/fail grading system.

Non the less, it is worth while critiquing these episodes because some classic errors were made -like leaving the vehicle, alone, with clearly no good information as to where to find assistance. This strategy often ends badly.

It very nearly did so in this case, at least is the description of the lady "being too exhausted to light a fire" is correct. If that is your true condition, you can be grateful for the arrival of Coconino County SAR, alerted by a timely phone call.

People in threatening situations who make better decisions just don't make the news because it so much more mundane - stay with the car, snuggle up and keep warm, find a high point and make a call - get assistance. End of story. Better drink urine if you wish to generate headlines.

By the way, Coconino County is one very large county, straddling the Grand Canyon and stretching from just south of Flagstaff to the Utah border, including both desert and high country and a lot of real estate that is hard traveling. When I began my career in the Nation park Service in 1962 at Wupatki national Monument, I was also a SAR volunteer for the county. It seems they are doing a much better job now than what we accomplished then.

It is valid to critique the decisions of people in such situations, that is how we learn to do better. That is a large part of the purpose of this forum.

The article claims that she took survival classes. She either did not learn anything or she did not use the knowledge that she gained. They made many bad decisions and did not seem to be prepared.

The comments about people consuming urine are valid in my opinion. Things appear in some TV shows and then you have reports of people doing it. In this particular case they had other options but chose to do the wrong thing.

Yes survival is a pass/fail situation, but these people were just lucky. It could easily have gone the other way based on their decisions. Last time I was in that area there was no cell phone signal at all, and they had no other method of communicating and did not leave a plan with anyone else. Nobody was looking for them until they did find a signal and made a call.

I believe that when people violate rules or laws, such as trespassing into a closed park, they should be held legally liable. Like those going into off limits areas, knowingly making that decision, they should be prosecuted. Just my opinion. These people endangered their own lives, and the life of their son, deliberately crossing into areas that were clearly marked as off limits.

A simple pocket survival kit with a good fire starter would have made a significant difference. A smokey fire in that area at that time would have brought park rangers to investigate, I am sure. They should have tried the cell phone before she decided to hike out.

This just shows that you can do everything wrong and get lucky. We should learn from this, though most people here already understand these principles.

I would like to know what survival training she received. Whoever taught it should be scrutinized to see what they are actually teaching.

Critical thinking in this forum should not be discouraged. Discussing what they did wrong is important. They came out alive, but only through luck and the efforts of others. We need to learn the correct lessons from such incidents.

Also, humor is a great teaching tool; makes the point and is memorable.

Teacher

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-grand-canyon-rescue-20161227-story.html

Some more details about the recent rescue, The park north rim entrance station was unlocked and stocked with survival essentials. The lady unfortunately was in another cabin close by which was not so equipped. Other stuff as well....

No mention of urine ingestion, but now she is putting some snow in her mouth...???

I wonder at which point in her sojourn she realized she was in a survival situation? At what point did she realize she could die?

No qualms with the above. However when the armchair comments border on ridicule - that is not the purpose of this forum.

I suspect we've been suckered by a sexed-up headline.

I came across several other accounts by accident. No mention of drinking urine, only melted snow.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/las-vegas-woman-who-walked-26-miles-snowy-grand-canyon-n700371

http://www.popularmechanics.com/adventur...e-grand-canyon/

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/12/25/she...as-miracle.html

Does Bear Grylls teach survival classes? That's about the only place I figure she could have picked up those wilderness skills. Abandoning your family and hiking blindly for 30 miles while slogging down urine cocktails doesn't sound like "wilderness skill" to me.

But I wasn't there. Actually, that's the first wilderness survival skill you should probably learn. "Don't be there" (don't get yourself a wilderness survival situation in the first place).

I love the part of the article about "main highway closed due to snow". So they decided it was smart to take "Forest Road 22" instead???

I'm glad the family is OK. But I wish news organizations wouldn't glamorize idiots like this. They're at the same IQ level as those folks you see stranded on top of their cars in flooded intersections on the news casts during heavy rains.

Hi,
Have you heard of Decision fatigue?


When the TV news tries being helpful and "warn" about driving conditions, all you get is vague "be careful" , "slow down", and rarely you even hear the the equally vague "increase stopping distance"

Most people don't know what the stopping distance is supposed to be
they are speeding regularly by 5-10 miles , so slowing down by 5-10 miles on wet roads, they're still going too fast.
And in heavy rain? They're still going over 50mph

Its been a while since I took drivers education and read the DMV handbook, but things like "forest roads" aren't mentioned even in passing.

Its not the IQ, its the training/education.

With all respect, I think that if you had bothered to read the BS-reduced accounts I just posted, you might have aimed more carefully before you fired.

I would only tell you that this "idiot" has been in few jams where (as the old saw goes) I did not rise to the occasion but sunk to my level of training. Still kicking myself -- can't believe I didn't see the obvious. So (in full agreement with EMP_ above) I cut people a fair bit of slack when they are faced with unfamiliar, high stress situations.

That's where IQ comes into play. Those with a low IQ require significantly more training/education, because they don't have the reasoning skills to figure things out themselves. Folks like this family are why we have to put warning labels on drain cleaners that say, "Danger, do not eat!"

Instructions to not drive down a "forest road", in a semi-wilderness area, with no cellphone service, in the dead of winter, in a blizzard, in three feet of snow, when the main roads are closed, with only urine to drink, should NOT require a mention in the DMV manual.


If not for the lack of IQ, training/education wouldn't be so necessary. Granted, not everybody is smart. But news organizations shouldn't prop up the dumb ones by going on about their "wilderness skills and training". Otherwise, more dumb ones will follow suit.

I'm glad there were smart people around who were able to save this dumb family.


I will cut people slack sometimes. but in this case, they really went off and did something stupid. I guess what pisses me off the most, is that they put their rescuers at risk trying to save them. In this particular incident, I didn't see it mentioned that rescuers were in danger. But that does happen. It shouldn't.

I have read your posts twice, but they seem more like angry ranting and insults rather thoughtful analysis. What is your objective in posting this?

As I re-read the posts, I agree, you are correct in your analysis. That was not my intent, but that was the result.

I think I'm just punchy about reading YET ANOTHER article about some family "with outdoors training" getting themselves into a totally avoidable situation. In this case, putting their (apparently unknowing) child in danger in the process. How many times have we seen this identical story - blindly following a GPS, into wilderness areas, getting stuck with no communications? It's not like this is rare. It's reported all the time. Over and over. And the news reports tend towards anointing these people as heroes. I would rather see the news media point out all the idiotic moves that lead up to the situation.

Still, this is not an excuse for a rant, so I apologize for that. It's just frustrating. Don't people ever learn?

Hi,
What is the purpose of this forum?
What are the rules?
Its not something you're supposed to guess at and hope that you're right, right?






If everybody is responsible for their own safety,
this includes the rescuers too, right?

Therefore nobody puts rescuers at risk or in danger, only rescuers do that? Right?

Fair enough. From my perspective, the goal is to encourage people to do better, and I think we add value in that way. Words have the power to tear down or to build up, and I like to think that we in this forum are builders. However, we are in dire need of a facepalm emoticon to cover certain situations ...

I changed the subject line to reflect the latest and probably best information.

The article at "How rescuers found Karen Klein, th...nd Canyon" also indicates she melted snow and there is no mention of urine.

The article caused me to think they may have worked through their options logically. Unlike James Kim & family in Oregon (2006), she left early, rather than wait while her energy reserves were depleted just sitting there. She could have gone the other direction and found cell coverage, but she didn't, that's just the way it is.

There's a mindset that goes with being a triathlete; besides luck, that mental strength to not quit probably played a major role in her not dying in the snow.

So what went wrong? They trusted google maps and otherwise their pre-trip planning was minimal at best. So they got stuck on a backroad in the snow with no cell coverage. How often have we heard that one? This won't be the last time.

There are lots of things we can think of to critique, but bottom line is that with excellent physical conditioning and a bit of luck, she survived. Good on her.

So what went wrong?

They did not do a proper risk assessment, did not understand the environment they were going into. They made bad decisions against all of the existing indicators that they should not go to that area. They did not know the limits of cell phone coverage. They did not know the way back out once they did get stuck. They had no plan for such an eventuality. Overconfidence that was entirely unwarranted in this case.

They were not prepared with the proper equipment to extract their vehicle when it got stuck, and I am sure they were lacking in many other times most of us would consider essential.

They had no alternate means of communications, did not tell anyone where they were going or when to expect them back.

While she did have stamina and perseverance, she had reached the limits of that and was not even able to search the area around her to find the resources necessary to survive. Her physical fitness kept her alive, but it would not have for much longer. She had exhausted the one resource she did have.

What they could have done (other than just not making such a bad decision):

They had shelter (their car) which could have been improved significantly. With a fire they could have stayed warm and had plenty of water; which means they could have survived for up to about 3 weeks. With some food stocks that could have been extended for much longer.

With a fire they could have signaled for help. The Rangers in the parks are always on the lookout for smoke, and under decent weather conditions that smoke could have been seen from a great distance, drawing attention and investigation.

They could (and should) have left a trip plan with someone.

They could have invested in a satellite communications device.

They could (and should) have avoided the off limits areas to begin with.

They could have stayed on a main road which would make it less likely that they get stuck. This would also have eased the walk out for her, and the ability of rescuers to find them.

As in many of our discussions in this forum, there are some basic things that anyone should carry in their car, more for extreme weather conditions and travel in remote areas. We have numerous lists and recommendations that anyone out there can read at no cost. There is little entertainment value to the mundane task of being properly prepared. As Peter Kummerfeldt so accurately describes it: If you are prepared, the situation is an unexpected or unplanned night out and does not become a survival situation.

as has been stated, the simplest good preparation and sound decision making will avoid bad situations to begin with. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, though it is not as exciting.

Just a couple of foot notes to your good analysis:

The family was visiting Las Vegas and lived in Pennsylvania, a vastly different and more settled environment. I am speculating, but I'll wager they had no concept of how sparsely populated the North Rim country can be. While I'm at it, I will further speculate that they conceived of Arizona as a desert, which we all know to be hot, and did not realize that the only thing between the North Rim and the North Pole is a barbed wire fence....

Again I assume they flew to LV; hence they were driving a rental car which wouldn't have had any of the random bits and pieces that can be found in the typical family vehicle, often useful in odd situations. I am confident that my vehicle, parked outside, is better equipped for winter survival than their rental...

I'll bet the concept that a part of a hugely visited NP(6 million visitors in 2016) could be closed was utterly foreign. And, everyone has heard the stories about how hot the Grand Canyon is - you never hear about NR snowdrifts.

The notion that climatic conditions in the intermontane west have more to do with elevation than with latitude is foreign to many folks who have lived elsewhere.

My last trip to the NR was to participate is a "marathon." We were going from the NR to SR via the kaibab and bright Angel trails. We spent the night at the NR in early May, just after the facilities had opened for the season. Beginning our run, we dodged snowdrifts still on the trail. As we descended to phantom Ranch, the temps flirted with 100F..

The Canyon is wild and gorgeous, but it is rugged and wildly variable. If you venture there, you need to be ETS.

I have been in December and in June/July. I was surprised in the Summer how cold it can still get in Flagstaff (below freezing at night). In December there is a great deal of snow at altitude, but down in the canyon it was rather warm. You are right, their expectations and sense of what is "normal" were far from what they actually encountered.

I was just trying to articulate similar thoughts, hikermor.

It's easy to point out the simple things this family could have done better: Our family would likely have been better equipped to hunker down and wait for rescue. We would probably have filed a detailed travel plan with trusted people. We would have checked the weather forecast and asked for local advice, at least from our hotel staff. We probably wouldn't have left the car on foot, except maybe get a cell signal. (It sounds like the father and son walked almost as far as she did looking for that. Frankly, how could they know that in advance?) We would probably have built a fire to melt the frozen bottles of water we brought with us and signal for rescue.

BUT....Even though y'all practically live in my head, I can easily envision our family making similar mistakes and misjudgements to what this family did. We're not idiots but we don't know what we don't know.

We would have flown in and rented a car, and relied on GPS and cell phones. We would have made ourselves ETS being stuck in the desert or a while in a densely populated area. We'd likely give little (if any) thought to being caught in a snow storm in the middle of nowhere unless someone told us.

That's just the perception of the Grand Canyon we Easterners have grown-up with. Until now. Now I know. Hindsight is 20/20. Thank goodness they all survived!

I have seen -40F in Flag and i personally recorded an official -30F reading at Wupatki Nat'l Mon, about 3,000 feet lower than Flag. One Memorial Day weekend it was snowing in Flag and I was thinking "Good grief! I have seasonal rangers reporting for duty in about a week and they will be wearing short sleeve shirts..." Not to worry. Temps were very soon in the 80s and 90s....

It's country and conditions like that the get you in the habit of keeping a sleeping bag and a few other goodiesin the vehicle - always.

This is why everyone needs to do just a little research before they go. A simple search of climate for the area or looking at the NPS web sites will give the temperature ranges you will encounter.

My family has made fun of me in the past for my preparations for trips (not so much anymore - I think they've given up). Their thinking is "What kind of fool packs fire starting and signaling materials for a cross country trip, on the interstate?" We've never needed any of it. But I still make sure it's available every trip.

My thinking is that once you find yourself in a bad situation, you WILL make bad decisions. While we look at people like this family and say, "She shouldn't have left the car", and be perfectly correct in that assessment, I imagine things don't seem so crystal clear when you're actually stuck and worried about your kid. Hopefully, those potential bad decision times are when I would remember to pull out my fire starting, signalling, shelter, cooking, emergency medical, and other "stupid stuff" that I packed and turn things into an impromptu camping trip.

Because it is so ingrained into me to prepare in advance and not rely on emergency decisions in the heat of the moment, this makes me less understanding of people that head out blind and assume "we'll figure it out when it happens". Especially when you read so many news reports of people who went in clueless and came out dead. I can't fathom how people ignore that and continue on in complete ignorance. As I get older, I tend to get mad at them for their stupidity, which I really shouldn't. I'm more accepting of adults who meet their demise due to stupidity, but I'm not as forgiving when they drag their unknowing kids in with them.

Pre-trip planning would also have given them the info that the park was closed.
North Rim Road Conditions

It is not necessarily true that you WILL make bad decisions. Many people will, but it is avoidable and you can train to not make such bad decisions.

A little practice of the right skills will make them salient in your mind and become the default response.

A little thought about your plan, and what is the worst thing that can happen, will help in avoiding such situations and will make sure you think through how to deal with them.

As a Scout Master, along with my military time, means that I think through the plan, and the worst case, almost automatically. I can't help it, it is too ingrained. It does not need to frighten you, just make you think through what could happen and how you can handle it.

Along with the Wilderness Survival merit badge pamphlet I recommended before, get the Emergency Preparedness one and the First Aid one. I like teaching these merit badges close together in time, as they are all connected and mutually supporting. Emergency preparedness will walk them through weighing the possibilities and preparing for them in a practical and logical way. It is suitable for kids, but works for adults as well. They are inexpensive, and I recommend them over many survival books out there. They are also small and easy to have with you. Just the process of stopping and reading them when you find yourself in such a situation will help to calm you and focus your mind. Drink some water, eat a snack to feed the brain, and you will find yourself becoming more calm and rational. Then you camp out unexpectedly, and make it out without too much risk.

Pre-trip planning would also have given them the info that the North Rim was closed.
Park Road Conditions & Closures

The South Rim was open, but that's not where they were. It took all of three minutes to find out that this time of year you had better be going to the South Rim.

"Could have, should have" are all good in hindsight and easy for people on this forum to pick apart. The real bottom line is that unless the person(s) already have a ETS mindset, they are not going to be doing risk assessments nor looking on this forum or any other before they travel. Unfortunately it takes a life in balance survival event such as this before people maybe learn from their mistakes.

My experience is that the overwhelming majority of folks who get into trouble in the wild are naive/inexperienced/ and unaware of the potential hazards nor are they informed as to the most elementary measures useful in forestalling problems. People with even basic knowledge and skills are seldom the focus of SAR operations.

I am fairly sure that most, if not all of us, have blundered at some point in our past and learned therefrom. That is certainly true for me - I am one fortunate dude.

A bit of clarification is probably in order. When the NPS says the North Rim is "CLOSED", I think they mean that facilities are closed and roads are closed to vehicles. I don't believe they will bust you for simply going there, though they might ticket you for driving on a closed road. (hikermor or other please correct me if I'm wrong.)

In fact my understanding is that quite a few backcountry skiers visit the N Rim in winter. Case in point, some years back a friend of mine, a very fit and highly experienced backcountry traveler, skied in solo from where the road was closed to a N Rim trailhead, tied his skies to his pack and changed into hiking boots, and hiked down into the canyon and back up to the S Rim. My recollection is that he said the biggest problem was that the trails just below the rim were quite icy in spots and required careful walking. This is of course very different from inexperienced people driving down from Vegas, probably planning on taking a few selfies and then driving back to the casino.

I think the biggest thing these folks lacked was simple common sense. If the main road is closed for the winter, why in the world would any sane person think that a smaller forest road would be open?

According to the web site, the NR is essentially back county after December 1, when services, both concessionaire and NPS, are terminated. People can use the campground (no running water) and technically you need a back country permit. The roads are not plowed and the entrance station is not staffed. My understanding is that the road fro Jacobs Lake is not plowed at some point, which should be a clue to vehicle users.

I have not ski toured on the NR, but it would be sublime with the usual good snow cover. It really is beautiful country, with access to whole vast vistas of the Canyon which are essentially inaccessible to the South Rim hordes. My visits have been during the time when facilities were open.