[pct-l] Hiker rescued near Snow Creek/Fuller Ridge was

[Ate Tuna]

My wild guess is that he was already in a bad state when he left the Fuller
Ridge area.  That bad state could be many things, like not having a water
report, lack of trail experience, injury, illness, or maybe something else.
 In any case, it takes much more time to fully recover from dehydration than
a long drink from a drinking fountain.  Getting off the trail for a little
while is probably the best bet because if he could dehydrate where he did,
then he would have been in a far worse situation on the stretch to Mission
Creek. Hopefully he gets healthy and takes the precautions necessary to
avoid having this happen again.

Sir Mix-a-lot

On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Ground Pounder <
groundpounderbill22 at verizon.net> wrote:

> "How's Your Trail?"  Just in at 8:25 this morning 5-15-2011 from
> www.swrnn.com   south west riverside county news a hiker was resqued at
> snow
> creek of dehydration. This guy was from a Scandinavian country, so maybe he
> passed the fountain on the trail at the bottom or is it still there? This
> sounds crazy, check out the story and please your expert opinion and
> Remember "Be Prepared" Ground Pounder Bill  "Semper Fi"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net]
> On Behalf Of greg mushial
> Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2011 10:44 AM
> To: pct-l at backcountry.net
> Subject: Re: [pct-l] Hiker rescued near Snow Creek/Fuller Ridge was
>
> > Message: 12
> > Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 15:19:17 -0700
> > From: "Bob Bankhead" <wandering_bob at comcast.net>
> > Subject: Re: [pct-l] Hiker rescued near Snow Creek/Fuller Ridge was
> > NOT dehydrated
> > To: "'Guthrie Nutter'" <guthrie.nutter at gmail.com>, "'Melissa
> > Rexilius'" <melissa.rexilius at hotmail.com>
> > Cc: pct-l at backcountry.net
> > Message-ID: <001901cc1284$f7594eb0$e60bec10$@comcast.net>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >
> > Let's be SURE it was food poisoning and doubly SURE that the alleged
> > Mexican
> > place was the source before we start calling them out in public. Libel
> > laws
> > apply to email too.
>
> If the standard in this country for either libel or slander is "reckless
> disregard for the truth," one might be guilty of spewing garbage about an
> eating establishment, recounting an incident that is not representative, or
> turning an establishment against hiker-trash that was previously willing to
> help...  but neither libel nor slander (by the standard of the law) has
> occurred by naming said establishment. Saying that if you eat at X you will
> get sick and will feel like dying (without any knowledge of such) - that's
> libel; but to say that I ate at X and the best I can tell it was what I ate
> there that caused me to get sick and require a rescue - that's not. The
> question then becomes: is it more important/a higher value to warn other
> hikers of a possible problem, or, to possibly defame an establishment that
> might have been previously helpful, with the expectation they will ceasing
> being such?
> TheDuck
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
>



-- 
Sir Mix-a-lot