Re: Two Swept Away on Yosemite Footbridge

Quote
Ohnivy-Drak
According to another article, the bridge was partially submerged. One man slipped/fell into the river, and his companion tried to rescue him.

http://www.news10.net/news/local/article/143909/2/2-Southern-California-men-killed-in-Yosemite-River

Quote
rightstar76
Time for a lawsuit. The trail should have been closed. Or at least a sign put up saying to wait until 10 am when there was less water flowing. They only had 2.5 miles left to the parking lot. The alternative route would have taken days and there would have been water crossings there as well. The NPS is trying to shift the blame to these men so they can get out of this.

Quote
eat.sleep.hike

Quote
rightstar76
Time for a lawsuit. The trail should have been closed. Or at least a sign put up saying to wait until 10 am when there was less water flowing. They only had 2.5 miles left to the parking lot. The alternative route would have taken days and there would have been water crossings there as well. The NPS is trying to shift the blame to these men so they can get out of this.

I don't know how I feel about a lawsuit, but the idea that these people could have gone around the bridge by adding "a few miles" to their hike - as was suggested by Kari Cobb, the Park spokeswoman in the SF Chronicle - is ludicrous. As has been pointed out, the bridge is 2 1/2 miles from the trailhead and the alternative route is probably close to 20 miles with many stream crossings and probably snow as well! It's a terrible tragedy and the remarks of Ms. Cobb are incredibly insensitive. These were two young men in their 20s. We do understand that we take risks going into the wilderness and I don't necessarily blame the park, but neither do I think it fair to imply that these two young men were careless or made a bad decision.

Quote

The bridge had a lot of water on it," Cobb said. "Here at the park, the way it works, you are responsible for taking your own risk and making your own decisions on safety.

Quote
rightstar76
There are signs on Half Dome warning people about lightning. There should have been signs up warning people about flooding on the bridge. I've done my share of risky things in the backcountry like cross raging creeks on logs. When I did that it was a no brainer that if I fell in I'd be gone. A warning sign wasn't necessary. This situation was different. It probably looked safe enough to walk across the bridge. I too might have walked across it thinking it was safe. It was not obvious that it would be lethal. The NPS should have done more to warn people of the danger. That is why I think a lawsuit is warranted.

Quote
rightstar76
I watched the videos and the bridge isn't covered in them. If it was only a few inches when the two men tried crossing it probably didn't look that dangerous.

Quote
rightstar76
There should have been signs up warning people about flooding on the bridge.

Quote
wherever

This bridge has railings. Does anyone know if the victims slipped and went under them, or was the water so high that they were blown over them. How did the rest of the party get across? Were they wearing sneakers or hiking boots

Quote
plawrence

Quote
wherever

This bridge has railings. Does anyone know if the victims slipped and went under them, or was the water so high that they were blown over them. How did the rest of the party get across? Were they wearing sneakers or hiking boots

My assumption (based on no direct evidence - just speculation) is that the initial person probably got swept away not on the bridge itself but on the rocky trail path right before or after the bridges where there is no railing.

Again, just speculation on my part.

Quote
eat.sleep.hike

These were two young men in their 20s. We do understand that we take risks going into the wilderness and I don't necessarily blame the park, but neither do I think it fair to imply that these two young men were careless or made a bad decision.

Quote
plawrence
The men were in their 50's and familiar with Yosemite.

Quote
rightstar76
The park should have done more to alert people to the danger

Quote
rightstar76
The park should have done more to alert people to the danger.

Quote
rightstar76
The park should have done more to alert people to the danger. This was not an accident that happened deep in the backcountry on a log over an unnamed stream. It was on a major trail and close to the parking lot. I wouldn't be surprised if lawsuits are filed. I feel sorry for these two men and their families and friends.

Quote
wherever
What the lady actually said was probably more respectful and more accurate than what ended up in the paper. She almost certainly knew that it was a lot more than a few miles by alternate trails. The 'few' word may have been just the reporter's understanding....
Don't imply something, and then accuse someone else of doing so.

Quote
eat.sleep.hike
Unless you were present when this woman was speaking, don't present your own opinions as more correct than someone else's when you have no more facts than they do.

Quote
oakroscoe

These men tragically died trying to do something they shouldn't.

Quote
rightstar76
I'm disappointed with the lack of compassion shown by some of the other posters here.

Quote
rightstar76
I think NPS should have put up signs and that a lawsuit may guarantee that NPS will do that in the future.

Quote
rightstar76
The NPS should have put up signs before this tragedy happened when the bridge was dry. Unfortunately, because NPS didn't, there very well may be a lawsuit.

Quote
itchbay

Is this the first time something like this has happened? Have there been stories of backpackers who approached the bridge under similar circumstances and decided to go around or wait? Or did other backpackers make it across prior to this?

Quote
itchbay

I don't think a lawsuit will be successful in this case. But if the park service wanted to put up a sign, I wouldn't be unhappy about it.

Quote
rightstar76
Eeek, we clearly disagree on what NPS policy should be. That makes sense since this forum contains a variety of opinions and not everyone is going to agree. My opinion is that this trail while not the Half Dome Trail is heavily used enough that there should be signs warning hikers. If this had happened near Flora Lake, for example, I would not expect NPS to put up signs. After all, if you're going cross country you should know what you're doing. However, this was a major trail with a newly rebuilt bridge near a trailhead. I think NPS should have put up signs and that a lawsuit may guarantee that NPS will do that in the future. That's why I mentioned it.

Quote
rightstar76
Eeek, we clearly disagree on what NPS policy should be. That makes sense since this forum contains a variety of opinions and not everyone is going to agree. My opinion is that this trail while not the Half Dome Trail is heavily used enough that there should be signs warning hikers. If this had happened near Flora Lake, for example, I would not expect NPS to put up signs. After all, if you're going cross country you should know what you're doing. However, this was a major trail with a newly rebuilt bridge near a trailhead. I think NPS should have put up signs and that a lawsuit may guarantee that NPS will do that in the future. That's why I mentioned it.

Quote
rightstar76

I'm disappointed with the lack of compassion shown by some of the other posters here. Mr. Fox and Mr. Meyer both had kids and now they will grow up without a father. Their wives are now widows and their friends, colleagues, and patients are grieving as well. Is self-sufficiency such a holy cow that not even the deaths of two people returning from a backpacking trip warrant any empathy? For some here, yes, and that is unfortunate. A temporary sign warning of the danger might have made a difference. There are signs on Half Dome warning people about lightning. A few signs by the falls might have convinced these two men not to cross and saved their lives.

Quote
tyler4588
Signs on Half Dome about lightning are different, I think, than signs at Wapama Falls. Lightning is not something someone sees until it has struck, and if you don't spend time in the mountains, you don't necessarily know how serious a danger lightning really is. This waterfall, when standing in front of the bridge at this time of the year, is clearly hazardous. It doesn't take an experienced hiker to see that it can sweep you away. I don't think anyone has shown a lack of compassion, and in fact most people have expressed sympathy and condolences in this thread. But sympathy for the hikers does not necessarily equate to blame on the national park service. It isn't their job to point out every hazard of the wilderness.
On another note, I was talking to a person who had left Rancheria Falls camp the day after me, and he said that they had closed the bridge. This would have been 6/23. Has anyone heard about that? Is there a reason they reopened it?

Quote
mstag
In regard to the Park Service's limited responsibility: Last Monday I crossed the bridge below vernal and began the climb up to the falls. This was my first trip up. Soon the dirt trail turned into a rock ledge on the side of the cliff face. A short way up this portion the ledge is no wider than 3', has no railing and everything is wet from the mist; we were already soaked. Now I realize that this trail must seem to the experienced climber like some sort of freeway, but to this novice I was staggered by the lack of railing. The trail is rock; worn, wet and slippery and since I'm inexperienced, I coudn't figure out what would keep me from flying off the ledge and straight down into the Merced if say someone slipped and bumped into me (the trail was packed with people going up and down). I didn't feel comfortable continuing so I turned around to go back down and realized I couldn't hug the cliff on the descent because those coming up had that position. So I had to go around them meaning I had about eighteen inches of wet rock ledge between them and the drop off to walk on. It became real apparent that death was a simple single mistep away. It's not like you can grab someone and there is no cable fixed to the wall.
The park service advertises the mist trail as one of the most popular trails in the park. On the Yosemitehikes.com site it states that more people die in Yosemite on the mist trail than anywhere else in the park; reason given is that they underestimate the power of the river and don't exercise enough caution.
Now I understand that you hike at your own risk. And that you have to assess each situation and know your limitations. I did and didn't continue. But should the NPS have an obligation when one of their most popular trails goes from benign to risky (I can't remember any signage at that point).

Quote
szalkowski

Quote
mstag
In regard to the Park Service's limited responsibility: Last Monday I crossed the bridge below vernal and began the climb up to the falls. This was my first trip up. Soon the dirt trail turned into a rock ledge on the side of the cliff face. A short way up this portion the ledge is no wider than 3', has no railing and everything is wet from the mist; we were already soaked. Now I realize that this trail must seem to the experienced climber like some sort of freeway, but to this novice I was staggered by the lack of railing. The trail is rock; worn, wet and slippery and since I'm inexperienced, I coudn't figure out what would keep me from flying off the ledge and straight down into the Merced if say someone slipped and bumped into me (the trail was packed with people going up and down). I didn't feel comfortable continuing so I turned around to go back down and realized I couldn't hug the cliff on the descent because those coming up had that position. So I had to go around them meaning I had about eighteen inches of wet rock ledge between them and the drop off to walk on. It became real apparent that death was a simple single mistep away. It's not like you can grab someone and there is no cable fixed to the wall.
The park service advertises the mist trail as one of the most popular trails in the park. On the Yosemitehikes.com site it states that more people die in Yosemite on the mist trail than anywhere else in the park; reason given is that they underestimate the power of the river and don't exercise enough caution.
Now I understand that you hike at your own risk. And that you have to assess each situation and know your limitations. I did and didn't continue. But should the NPS have an obligation when one of their most popular trails goes from benign to risky (I can't remember any signage at that point).

Similar to the case of vehicles, standard trail etiquette requires that the person travelling downhill yield the right-of-way to the person travelling uphill.
The downhill traveller should stand motionless on the upslope side of the trail and assist the uphill traveller, as necessary or expedient, when he passes (i.e., grab ahold of him to prevent him from falling downslope should he slip).

Quote
ab2ski
RE: Trail etiquette, I just took my very "green" mother, sister and her husband and their daughter, to Yosemite. In preparing them for hiking the trail, I told them about trail etiquette and to always (1) yield to uphill hikers and (2) backpackers and/or stock always have the right of way unless your position puts you in such an aspect as to where you must proceed first. All of this made sense to them and they observed those practices very well. I have hiked in this manner for years, and I honestly am not sure where/how I picked this up.

Quote
szalkowski
A couple additional comments about encountering stock animals:
When you stop to let them pass, (1) step a reasonable distance off of the trail (I like to give them 10 ft. clearance if possible) but remain where the animals can see you, (2) remain still and quiet (I don't take any photos if they are within 50 ft., both before and after they pass), and (3) follow any instructions given by the riders or wranglers (they know their animals much better than you). If there is a choice between up-slope or down-slope, go down-slope: you will less likely be perceived as a possible predator when downhill and, also, spooked animals supposedly prefer/tend to escape uphill.

Quote
szalkowski
A couple additional comments about encountering stock animals:
When you stop to let them pass, (1) step a reasonable distance off of the trail (I like to give them 10 ft. clearance if possible) but remain where the animals can see you, (2) remain still and quiet (I don't take any photos if they are within 50 ft., both before and after they pass), and (3) follow any instructions given by the riders or wranglers (they know their animals much better than you). If there is a choice between up-slope or down-slope, go down-slope: you will less likely be perceived as a possible predator when downhill and, also, spooked animals supposedly prefer/tend to escape uphill.

Quote

MULES HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY.

Several recent encounters between hikers and mules resulted in injuries to packers and the death of some mules. To ensure safety for yourself, other trail users, and mule riders, when encountering mules on the trails:

• Step off the trail on the uphill side away from the edge.
• Follow the direction of the wrangler. Remain completely quiet and stand perfectly still.
• Do not return to the trail until the last mule is 50 feet (15 meters) past your position.

Quote
ab2ski
yield to uphill hikers/quote]

I just yield to everyone. (Gives me a rest stop )

Quote
DantheMan
I think a sign would've helped in having some doubt creep in the mind of anyone wanting to cross the bridge with those conditions. If I put myself in the hikers shoes, considering the alternative routes out, I think I may have been inclined to make the same call. A sign though, would perhaps help me listen to my rational side. I saw this first hand last week at lower yosemite falls. I hadn't been to the bridge at LYF in years. I remember the last time I was there, there were hoards of people climbing the rocks on the east side of the falls. This year I didn't see anybody on those same rocks. There was a big sign saying those rocks were hazardous for anyone climbing them. I strongly believe the sign made it harder for many to make the decision to go further. A warning sign at Wapama Falls may have saved some lives.

Edit: I didn't read Parklover's post about LYF. My experience was different. Maybe a sign wouldn't have helped but it wouldn't have hurt either. Trajic story nonetheless!