46-year-old hiker from Hinesburg dies on Hunger Mountain trail

[dr_wu002]

Here's a happy ending story. A tale of "False Abandonment" from Timmus's final ADK46 peak where we did Big Slide. They missed a junction, I lagged behind and went the right way and...

I was going first, and I missed the junction just below the summit. So John, Brian and I went 300 feet down the trail leading to JBL. It was not fun climbing it up. Gail did the same thing, while Frank took the right way. But Frank didn’t know we were behind him. So he asked to a hiker going up how far he was from us, and when the man said he haven’t seen a group of four, Frank thought he might have fall on his head and been unconscious for a couple of days ! We all regrouped at the Garden parking lot, and thought it was pretty funny.

Having a very slim grasp on reality to begin with, this was a confusing situation. I asked the guy I met several times if he saw my friends etc. First thought was head injury but he verified the time and date so logical conclusion was some unfortunate transfer to a parallel universe or something occurred. I sat for sometime in a hazy state of confusion on "the Brothers" or some ledgy peaks until I met up with Gail, who had made a wrong turn but corrected her mistake. Great, so we were both trapped in a parallel universe. I was seriously freaked out. Eventually the rest showed up and explained their mistake. I literally stopped to take a picture and they got far enough ahead to blow through a junction and me, with no map and no idea where I was except for a trail up Big Slide and an already crumbling psyche to boot.

My point is -- if we all stayed together that day, there would be no cool story to tell afterwards. Most don't end up with death. Most end up with redemption, like this story did!

-Dr. Wu

 

[dr_wu002]

As matter of disclosure, I find this issue to be especially sensitive at this moment in time, having landed in the hospital ER a week-and-a-half ago suffering from congestive heart failure. Symptoms? Intense fatigue and shortness of breath. Hell, I've felt that more than once on hikes over the last 55 years! Doing much better now, supported by supplemental oxygen and some meds to cope with fluid buildup. Underlying cause of this excitement was lung cancer, diagnosed two years ago and which will not go away. My hiking days almost certainly are over and done with. But I am happy my companions last week didn't leave me to catch my breath while they went on with their own things. I never was alone in crisis, and that in itself was of some comfort.

Wow, that's rough stuff... hope you're on the mend.

Look, I would never "go off and do my own thing" in plenty of scenarios. If I was hiking with my mid-60's dad, no matter how much he tells me to go ahead I'm sticking right with him. There's a time and a place for everything.

-Dr. Wu

 

[sardog1]

Some of us were trained in an ethic that says, "Leave no one behind in the mountains." Some like to label that irrationality. I'll leave it to each person to decide who they'd like to hike with.

 

[Maddy]

. But I am happy my companions last week didn't leave me to catch my breath while they went on with their own things. I never was alone in crisis, and that in itself was of some comfort.

G.

Very happy to hear that it worked out well for you and that you are feeling better now.
Take care of yourself.
Sure could do without this "aging" process. Making the most of it is a full time job!
Keep the faith!

 

[David Metsky]

Some of us were trained in an ethic that says, "Leave no one behind in the mountains." Some like to label that irrationality. I'll leave it to each person to decide who they'd like to hike with.

And those of us who split up when the group is in agreement and we feel the situation makes it acceptable are sometimes labeled irrational as well. There's room in this world for all of us to enjoy the out of doors.

Hike your own hike, and/or the hike of your group ethic. It's all good.

 

[sardog1]

And those of us who split up when the group is in agreement and we feel the situation makes it acceptable are sometimes labeled irrational as well. There's room in this world for all of us to enjoy the out of doors.

Hike your own hike, and/or the hike of your group ethic. It's all good.

Just to be clear on what I said. The question is whether to leave a single person behind, not whether to split a group into subgroups. If two or more people want to be left, that's fine with me.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

I am going to be harshly judgmental about this.

This is a prime example of why parties never should leave members -- and particularly single members -- behind, unattended. Never. Start together, stay together, finish together. Period. It is called working as a team.

G.

I'm with Grumpy on this.

 

[David Metsky]

Just to be clear on what I said. The question is whether to leave a single person behind, not whether to split a group into subgroups. If two or more people want to be left, that's fine with me.

Again, people solo hike all the time, so I don't see a single person as being a bright red line in this case. We're not going to agree, but we can disagree agreeably.

 

[sardog1]

It wasn't you that I was thinking of when I referred to a previous reference to irrationality.

 

[mookie]

It is called working as a team.

G.

baseball is a team sport, not hiking (in summer around here anyway).....everyone should be able to take care of themselves....

but,
its unfortunate that stuff happens on the trail and obviously i think if any one of us came across someone in need we would help them without a question.

bigger moountains, winter differnt story, obviously.

i am just curious, do all you "team" players ever hike alone?
probably +/- 30% of my hikes are alone...

 

[sardog1]

i am just curious, do all you "team" players ever hike alone?
probably +/- 30% of my hikes are alone...

99.999% of my hikes are solo. And it's still my opinion that people who agree to hike as a group ought to accept the responsibility for ensuring that all members return to the trailhead. And that someone who wants the group to leave him/her behind alone should be disregarded in that preference.

 

[mookie]

99.999% of my hikes are solo. And it's still my opinion that people who agree to hike as a group ought to accept the responsibility for ensuring that all members return to the trailhead. And that someone who wants the group to leave him/her behind alone should be disregarded in that preference.

i guess i feel that the people i hike with would be fine alone, especially if they told me so themselves.
likewise, i would hope that they would feel confident leaving me alone if i told them to go ahead.

if i was having cardiac issues or broke my leg and they took off on me to go bag a summit i would be pretty pissed off though.

 

[Grumpy]

baseball is a team sport, not hiking (in summer around here anyway).....everyone should be able to take care of themselves....

The concept of "team" transcends the narrow thinking of competitive sports. It means joining together in common effort to achieve common goals. In hiking, the primary team goal proprerly is to get everyone home together.

but,
its unfortunate that stuff happens on the trail and obviously i think if any one of us came across someone in need we would help them without a question.

But that has not been the question here. The question has been the propriety of leaving someone from your party lone, along the trail.

bigger moountains, winter differnt story, obviously.

No. Same story, just circumstances that differ in levels of drama.

i am just curious, do all you "team" players ever hike alone?
probably +/- 30% of my hikes are alone...

As I've noted, my hiking days most likely (most certainly?) are over, for health reasons. But in 55 years of active hiking I commonly went alone, ordinarily because no companions were available on my schedule, or shared my destination interests. I am a firm believer in self reliance. But my upbringing dictates that when hiking with others I have an ethical obligation to be concerned and look out for their welfare in addition to my own.

G.

 

[Snowflea]

If his friends hadn't honored his wishes and continued on, what are the chances the outcome would've been different?

I can see both sides of this debate, but in this case I don't think his friends were in the wrong at all. Unfortunately, people die of heart attacks every day.

Carpe diem!

 

[mookie]

well either way its very unfortunate that the hiker died on the side of the trail. there is a good chance he would have died either way before help arrived (speculation).
These guys also have to live with what happend on hunger that day.

i dont believe any of us were with him on the trail that day so we have no idea how the decision for the party to continue without him came about.
if he told the others he was having trouble breathing and chest pains then yeah, that is horrible that they continued on.
if he told them he was just having a bad day and wasnt feeling the hike then i dont see how we can raise an "ethics" issue.
if an able bodied adult tells you they are fine and just having a bad day then cant we just believe them? i have been that guy a many times when hiking with the faster crew.

 

[Tuco]

If this person asked his friends if they minded he hike ahead and and they all agree (and subsequently he dies) is this any different? I keep reading the phrase "leave behind" like some kind of negative action, or against a person like an abondonement when in most cases its likely an agreement among the group to split up.

I have had many days when I feel poor and ask the group to leave me and usually they don't but I have no issue if I ask them to do so and they did.

I only have an issue when there is 1) no communication, 2) somebody strays from the communicated plan or a person requests that they not hike alone and the group still separates from them........

 

[RollingRock]

It's hard to make any judgements on this incident given we know very little of the facts. The article said he was only 1/2 mile down from the summit at around 3pm. To me that indicates they were descending. The fact that his friends came back and assisted the hikers who found him with CPR indicates they could not have been too far ahead. I'm just reading between the lines given the facts we know but it indicates they probably waited up for him at some point in the trail [as all fast hikers in a group should do] and then went back once he didn't show up.

 

[erugs]

Seems like we're getting twisted around with this thread between judging that particular experience (which we can't, really) and looking at the general concept as a learning experience. Kind of like a dress rehersal. Lot's of thoughtful responses, though, that are helping me understand what I might do and might not do and why.

 

[RoySwkr]

group should set expectations in advance

If I am with friends, I would like for them to go at their own pace and just wait for me at trail junctions, outlooks, or summits. Otherwise, if I felt that I was holding them back, I would actually be less safe because I would try to rush - which could bring on an asthma attack or lead to possible injury.

This is the point that the "stay together" thinkers seem to miss. There can be tremendous pressure on somebody to continue beyond where it is wise for them personally if the only alternative is that everybody turns around. Even if their companions willingly give up their destination, the "quitter" may worry about never getting invited again. It's better for everyone if the person with a blister or sore ankle waits in a good place or starts back alone than if they try to push on and conk out farther from safety.

I would not leave my dog behind. Why would I leave a friend? I honestly cannot wrap my mind around this.

Most people leave their dogs alone when they are at work, in the grocery store, etc just not while hiking. Most people let their teenagers go to school and to the mall alone although there is some risk they will die from a traffic accident etc. A serious medical condition on a hike should be dealt with immediately just as it is elsewhere, but if somebody is more interested in going to the summit and somebody is more interested in taking pictures of flowers, who's to say they have to go on entirely separate hikes instead of walking partway together?

Outward Bound certainly taught us that you don't ever leave someone under any circumstances, unless it's to get help. I paid big bucks for that course so I think I will continue to practice what they preach.

I think you are mixing apples and oranges. Guided trips will get sued if they leave somebody behind (and something bad happens) so they have to stay together, and Outward Bound is as much a group dynamics exercise as outdoor education anyway. Most OB courses do deliberately leave people alone for a solo day under controlled conditions.

99.999% of my hikes are solo. And it's still my opinion that people who agree to hike as a group ought to accept the responsibility for ensuring that all members return to the trailhead. And that someone who wants the group to leave him/her behind alone should be disregarded in that preference.

I agree that people should stick with the expectations they have set - if they agree to stay together they should. But I don't see why a group can't start off together with the expectation that some members will drop out early - I've done that a number of times.

 

[Maddy]

i am just curious, do all you "team" players ever hike alone?
probably +/- 30% of my hikes are alone...

Absolutely. Have been a solo hiker (with dogs) much of my adult life and have done some group hikes. Rough estimate...~30% group. I prefer small groups.
I am older and slower now so I have to pick the areas I hike very carefully. Also both my dogs and I have orthopedic challenges to the point that I have recently done a few hikes without them.
Bernie in rehab!!!