I see they called off the search for the hiker in Maine.

[HikerMom58]

This is the most mystifying event. And troubling in many ways, esp for us women who want to pursue our dream and go solo. Now this dark cloud hangs over things. I wish at least there was some kind of evidence. A piece of gear. Clothing. anything. I just don't understand how there isn't anything found in the woods anywhere. She most definitely is NOT on the AT. Which means she got off the AT herself. That was probably her choice, wheter to find a road or having gotten lost. If it were a major fall, there would be evidence. SOmething comes off a pack. The dogs would pick up a scent. What the outcome was of that decision and where she ended up, obviously not good. Very hard.

I know what you mean Blissful!! You are a ridgerunner so you are very aware of all the "dangers" out there on the trail. This one has us all taken back a bit....

[turtle fast]

A SPOT locator, or even keeping the cell phone on are reasonable location assisting devices. But, the use of them is voluntary and remember that they too can run counter to the hiking philosophy of many. It was said that our lost hiker here did not sign in at trail registers or shelters. That at least would of assisted searchers a bit more and in reading the registers is loaded with valuable information about the trail, services, and the like. I hope she is found.

[MuddyWaters]

When you get lost you have two priorities to get found.

1) get to high ground to catch a cell signal. The highest ground you can see.

2) build a fire, a big one. A forest fire if have too. Wet wood burns, and its smokes too once a fire is going.

Lack of either of those things happening, pretty much indicates to me the chances are slim she was simply lost, but healthy.

There are other possibilities for the authorities to run down. As Sherlock Holmes would say, "Once you eliminate what is not possible, you are left with the truth"

[Lemni Skate]

Why don't you ask some of the scholars who have studied and written books on apologetics, or better yet read one of their books? Because you don't want answers. You want a fight.

[Jack Tarlin]

I know of at least one case in the White Mountains where two hikers, in worsening weather conditions, went uphill by 1,000 feet or so, in an attempt to get better phone reception. In the process, they insured that rescuers were looking for them in the wrong place. They also almost got themselves killed. If they had gone DOWN the Trail they were on, they'd have gotten below treeline in short order, and continuing, would have soon found themselves at a clearly marked trail crossing which would have directed them to safety. In short, advising people to get to "the highest ground they can see" is not only NOT a priority when one is lost. It is instead poor and dangerous advice that could get you dead. There is no guarantee of better phone reception/service by going higher up, and in poor or deteriorating weather conditions, this is an extraordinarily risky thing to do.

[RCBear]

What's the point of this thread? Isn't there another one running concurrently about the same thing that was started first. No one here is going to have a real answer before the authorities do anyway. And if you think you do, then that's who you should be communicating with.

[MuddyWaters]

I know of at least one case in the White Mountains where two hikers, in worsening weather conditions, went uphill by 1,000 feet or so, in an attempt to get better phone reception. In the process, they insured that rescuers were looking for them in the wrong place. They also almost got themselves killed. If they had gone DOWN the Trail they were on, they'd have gotten below treeline in short order, and continuing, would have soon found themselves at a clearly marked trail crossing which would have directed them to safety. In short, advising people to get to "the highest ground they can see" is not only NOT a priority when one is lost. It is instead poor and dangerous advice that could get you dead. There is no guarantee of better phone reception/service by going higher up, and in poor or deteriorating weather conditions, this is an extraordinarily risky thing to do.

obviously every situation is different. We are not talking about being on a trail either.
As long as you are on a trail, you should not be lost.
If you dont know enough to stay low and sheltered in bad weather, you dont belong out there to start with
I can find you plenty of cases where people that thought they were doing the right thing, going downhill, following water, etc, ended up lost even worse

The reccommendation is always to stay where you are, to give searchers the best chance of finding you. Because you are likely going to move farther from their search area if wander.

You have enough time on the AT to know that if you want a cell signal, you will probably get it on top of a mountain, and not much elsewhere. No its not a guarantee. But you also can see from there, you can see roads, you can see towns, you can see mountain peaks, rivers and lakes.

You can figure out where you are if you dont know.

Just because you go up to do that, doesnt mean you stay there if the weather is bad. Also assuming you are not wandering 15 miles to a distant mountain.

Sheesh.

For a map and compass to be useful, you need to know where you are on it.
Shooting a couple of bearings off of landmarks, gives you that.
You cant see down low in the trees


We are purporting two different philosophies, one of someone that is prepared to handle themselves in the woods,

and another of someone that advises you to depend on someone else to save you.

We arent cub scouts. Someone isnt going to come looking for us if we are missing 2 hrs. In most peoples cases it may be at minimum several days. For some, it might be weeks. Ability to help yourself, would be a good idea.

[MuddyWaters]

Why don't you ask some of the scholars who have studied and written books on apologetics, or better yet read one of their books? Because you don't want answers. You want a fight.

hardly

you need to look in the mirror, you are the one making a confrontational post.

[surfnturk]

This is very confusin. I thought it was totally safe for women to hike the AT alone? According to some of the regulars anyway. In fact many encourage it.There's one in particular i remember being very open about it, even encouraging his own daughter.
Lets hear from you guys.

[hikerboy57]

This is very confusin. I thought it was totally safe for women to hike the AT alone? According to some of the regulars anyway. In fact many encourage it.There's one in particular i remember being very open about it, even encouraging his own daughter.
Lets hear from you guys.

it could have just as easy been a guy we still don't know exactly what happened to her

[JustaTouron]

This is very confusin. I thought it was totally safe for women to hike the AT alone? According to some of the regulars anyway. In fact many encourage it.There's one in particular i remember being very open about it, even encouraging his own daughter.
Lets hear from you guys.

I don't recall anyone saying "totally safe". I do recall pointing out it's relative safety compared to other activities. Without question the most dangerous aspect of hiking the AT is catching a hitchhike with someone who has been drinking or riding in the back of someone's pickup bed.

I for one don't think it is a particularly bright idea to hike solo regardless of your gender and if you do you ought carry a SPOT.

The biggest reason why gender plays a role in the overall safety of hikers is that females tend to travel further from the trail for the purposes of bladder voiding increasing their risk of getting lost, this counter balanced to a great deal by the fact they are less likely to engage in stupid reckless behavior that males frequently engage in.

[Pedaling Fool]

This is very confusin. I thought it was totally safe for women to hike the AT alone? According to some of the regulars anyway. In fact many encourage it.There's one in particular i remember being very open about it, even encouraging his own daughter.
Lets hear from you guys.

I do recall people saying "totally safe". However, so what? You really can't believe anywhere on earth is 100% safe. So this story doesn't change my opinion one bit on the safety of hiking the trail, be it male or female. Just because someone has said it's "totally safe" means nothing to me, you gotta look into the issue more indepth for your self and not rely on others opinions, which really are like ....


P.S. And I agree this could just have easily been a guy and we still do NOT know what's happened, gotta keep an open mind.

[Marta]

This is very confusin. I thought it was totally safe for women to hike the AT alone? According to some of the regulars anyway. In fact many encourage it.There's one in particular i remember being very open about it, even encouraging his own daughter.
Lets hear from you guys.

I believe there's currently a search for a young guy missing from the PCT. When I saw the notice he hadn't been seen for 20 days.

[Del Q]

I have hesitated to comment on this one, but........

For a few years I served on a SAR team. If you look into "Lost Person Behavior", although there are not a LOT of data sets, people do respond somewhat predicatbly. Example, Alzheimer's patients are typically found close to the point last seen, confused, dehydrated, get stuck in sticker bushes, etc.

In this case, experienced outdoors-people also act somewhat predictably. Sadly, this seems like more of a recovery, crime related (??).........things just don't add up on this one.

The SAR effort was impressive, A+++ resources on this search. Sadly, after X hours or days the end of the story is often well down the line time-wise. Am guessing that the police, warden's, etc are on this case and looking at every angle.

If I had the time or lived closer I would have vounteered to help out. Again, things just don't add up on this one.

Just stinks...............