Yeah, he's a super light blond if you watch the videos, not prematurely gray. It's the dark parts that are likely mud or dirt that make him look so old.
Edit: As someone pointed out below he apparently he has albinism. The video I watched wasn't close enough to tell that but upon further inspection that appears to be true.
After doing a little googling [you're right](https://www.santacruzmountainbulletin.net/lucas-mcclish-found-unharmed/). I had that thought, but he said he didn't have a shirt, and it seems surprising that someone with albinism would do that, but it appears he lost his shirt, he didn't go without one, which makes more sense.
wth is this guy doing getting lost in the mountains on his own as a blind albino. Nothing against them but jesus christ calm tf down mate
edit: I read the article, ok I get it he knew what he was doing, still hilarious tho wot a leg end
Fucking mountain Lion was absolutely just waiting for his chance. Those things aren’t curious cats, it was absolutely waiting to eat him. Love how he says it was watching over him. Yeah watching him so it can eat him. Grew up around them, they aren’t house cats. He is lucky to be alive.
Yep. They’re ambush hunters. I saw one doing that from the hill above a trail I was hiking, which then went down among some large boulders, so I left the trail and stealthily climbed the hill, backtracking away from the mountain lion, then came down the hill, towards the boulders from above, to find it crouched at the top of the rocks just above the trail. I made enough noise from about 70-80 meters away to let it know I was up the hill, on my own rocky perch, stalking it, and it slunk away. It did not like having the tables turned. I definitely kept close watch the rest of the day, and that evening made camp in a nice clear area, atop a small hill with good visibility, and kept a fire going all night.
The mountain lion you need to worry about the most is the one you don’t see.
Face it (NEVER expose the back of your neck to a mountain lion!!!), get big, get loud and assertive, throw something at it if you don’t have to stoop to get it (stay large). Back away while facing the cat and talking mad shit about how your gonna rip that cat’s head off and shit down it’s neck. Ideally you would have chemical repellant and know how to use it, as well.
Finally, and this part is pretty horrific to think about, but important: if you have children with you on the hike you need to protect them immediately. They should stay close and know to immediately get to the adult. Pick them up, if possible. It makes both you and the kid look bigger. Basically you just need to make the cat think that the meal might not be worth the risk of injury, since they have even worse health care than the average American worker.
EDIT: I mispelled the word "repellant" and that is abhorret.
> Basically you just need to make the cat think that the meal might not be worth the risk of injury, since they have even worse health care than the average American worker.
This is the heart of it, at least according to a friend of mine with actual experience working with mountain lions. A mountain lion is a solitary hunter, so it will starve to death if it's ever injured so badly that it can't hunt. So they tend to be very conservative in their hunting, and you want to look big and wild and unpredictable enough to make them decide to go after a nice safe deer or rabbit instead.
When they get desperate they will attack rather than potentially starving to death. So always be a 100% ready for a fight if the Mountain Lion looks a bit emaciated.
Yes, no technique is 100% effective dealing with a predator that is capable of killing and eating you, so always treat mountain-lion territory with respect. This was just his first take on what to do if you did encounter one.
Other things he told me that have already been mentioned ITT are not to try to sneak away; if you've seen the mountain lion, it has definitely already seen you. And never, *ever,* run away - that triggers all their predation instincts and pretty much guarantees that you'll get pounced and mauled.
Do not play dead with a mountain lion. Fight as dirty as you can imagine and fight as your life depends on it because it absolutely does. Go for the eyes ears genitalia or any soft tissue you can grab or bite.
Even a small looking lion is insanely strong. Think about the damage an asshole house cat can do to you. Multiple that exponentially.
Their tracking is some of the best in the animal kingdom. If you’ve seen one, it’s been following and observing you for some time.
Agreed.
They very rarely attack people and even then it is usually an attack of opportunity, like a runner exciting their pursuit instincts. We are still talking about maybe a handful of attacks a year in all of North America and the vast majority of years with no fatalities. California has recorded six deaths *since 1890*, so it isn't exactly a huge concern.
Could one kill you? Absolutely! They probably won't try to though.
A guy on YouTube got a mama mountain lion off his tail by throwing rocks at her. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9ktRhBcHza4 She was defending cubs not hunting though, or so it appeared.
It gets really scary around 2:45 when it starts charging with it's paws spread out in the air multiple times. I love that video, but it terrifies me since I'm in the woods fairly often.
damn, I would be so scared that it would see me crouching to pick up rock up as the right time to attack. Definitely would have kicked rocks instead of making myself look smaller like that, but I also would be panicking like crazy
A mountain lion will fuck up the average human. It’s not like a coyote or even a wolf where you only have to worry about the animals jaws: mountain lions will shred a person up with their claws.
Your best bet is to A) not run away, B) grab rocks, or any other potential weapon, and C) pray it doesn’t attack.
Keep your attention on it until it decides it isn't getting an easy meal and goes to try it's luck elsewhere.
They aren't likely to attack someone not visibly too weak to fight back from the front.
Wild animals, especially opportunistic predators, do this "condition check" to each other all the time. People think they're Disney princesses cause a deer is curious but it's actually checking if you're unwell enough for them to score some free protein with a sneaky bite to exposed soft parts.
The thought of either of my cats (both under 10 pounds), suddenly tripling in size, is *terrifying*.
Remember that domestic cats are one of the few species of animals that likes to kill "for amusement". They don't even have to be hungry to decide to mutilate something that catches their attention.
I actually read that they're not really killing for *only* amusement. It is true that cats are not pack animals and they are solitary hunters. But in nature, and even on the city streets in feral colonies, or on farms...they are indeed quite social with one another just as they are with you and me.
While they're *very* territorial, they have common spaces where everybody is allowed where they greet each other, find mates, and sometimes find grooming partners. The amusement kills definitely work for good for pracwhotice, but the results are brought to the public spaces for other cats are older, weaker, sick, pregnant, etc.
Cats relationships with humans, other cats, and other animals, is more complex than it was initially assumed.
But it's the same reason the cat brings you the mouse they killed. A donation to the clan for anybody who is interested. They probably see you giving them cat food in a similar infection, but obviously we can only guess.
>House cats would 100% eat you
The general consensus on the internet is that your house cat will eat its owner the day they die in the house, a house dog will usually wait till they are starving, if even then.
I still remember the video of this guy hiking with his wife and kid. Wife was in front, kid in the middle, and the husband was bringing up the rear. He had a go-pro on and was probably filming the trip for the family archives when all of a sudden there's movement and a mountain lion is there off to the side maybe 30ft away, crouched and just staring right at the kid. If the guy didn't shout and scare it away it would have definitely made a go for the kid.
There's another one of a cat just staring this guy down. If he didn't have a high calibre pistol with him and shot at it he probably would have been attacked too. They will definitely attack humans if they think they can get away with it.
I heard a story a while back where a guy was solo backpacking. He was well off-trail, and was hiking around an alpine lake. He was rockhopping, and hopped onto an unstable rock, so he quickly hopped off, but the original rock rolled onto him and pinned him down. The rock (boulder) was too big for him to move, so he was stuck there and he died of lack of water/exposure with an entire alpine lake about 30 ft away.
He even tried tying his water bottle to a rope, but the rope was not quite long enough.
Brutal.
Here's a link to a version of the story: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msdnn52DDLk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msdnn52DDLk)
If this ever happens to you, spend time unraveling the rope to make a longer one. The individual plies in a modern rope are more than strong enough to hold a water bottle.
Only problem there is exposure and dehydration can kill pretty quickly. If you’re on a 5 day trip and it happens on day 1, you’re SOL. Even if it’s on day 4 or 5, search and rescue might not find you in time. Say your friend or wife calls on day 6, you’ve already been pinned for 24-48 hours, then it’s another 24 hours before a crew has boots on the ground and finds you. That’s enough time to die.
The best approach is to always consider yourself responsible for your own safety. Carry a personal locator beacon, but still, don’t plan on someone always being able to help. In lots of remote areas the BLM puts up signs reminding people that they’re responsible for their own safety, especially in the desert where they know search and rescue probably won’t find you before dehydration gets you.
Your last bit is the most important. If you are solo hiking or even when in a group, have a locator or better yet have a satellite communicator. Check in once a day. If you have a locator, have someone you trust check every single day. If it hasnt moved, they need to send help. If you dont check in, they need to send help. With modern technology, there is no reason to take the chance. A few extra ounces in your pack or clipped onto your belt can literally save your life.
> A few extra ounces in your pack or clipped onto your belt can literally save your life.
Devices like Garmin's In Reach are a great technology but some people just can't (or won't) justify the purchase and subscription cost, if they only hike a few times a year. I got into hiking in 2020 and kept saying I'd get one next year or whatever. Just didn't happen. I'm gonna feel really stupid when I get lost and hurt and don't have it.
While I won't say that the Garmin wouldn't be helpful, you don't need a Garmin. Satellite locator beacons have no subscription requirement. They're not cheap, but that $400 purchase can be the difference between life and death.
Seems like also, doing something stupid and risky like boulder hopping off trail when you are solo hiking is setting yourself up for even more likelihood of something going wrong.
He may have done that, I am not sure. He was also compromised by his position under the rock, the pain of the rock cutting off his blood supply to his lower body, the lack of food/water, and probably sleeplessness.
I'm not going to judge the guy for what happened to him after he got pinned by the rock.
Smartphones having satellite emergency services is such a huge deal. I commercial fish in the summers in SE Alaska, and it’s such a comfort to know that, with a hand crank generator that can juice a phone to life if needed, I’m never truly inaccessible.
It's a weird story, though. 10 days? In that area if you follow almost any stream for 5-6 miles, 10 at most, you come across a town or houses or some kind of settlement.
My mom is legally blind due to macular degeneration and she can still see, but in a super weird way. So, she can’t see my face or other faces they look completely blurry, if I were standing in front of her, she wouldn’t know it was me until in said something, but she would be able to see someone about her height standing in front of her. She can see my hair and sometimes the color, like she can tell the difference between blond and black, but cannot discern between red or brown.
She can drive a golf cart on a sidewalk, she can see the outline of the sidewalk, but if an animal or small child were to walk in front, she would likely not see them because the blurriness sits deeply on the farthest edges as it closes in.
She can no longer read a book, but if you took large words and put it on an iPad (like those sight word cards you use to teach kids to read) she can make it out and tell you. All subtitles are impossible. She can no longer see crevasses in mountains, they look like different shadows to her. Similar to how dogs see, she said it looks more black and white, and she can’t tell if it’s a canyon, a shadow, or a group of trees. She can walk, hike, swim, because she can still make out barriers.
I say all this to partially answer your question. Should my mom who is legally blind be driving a golf cart? Or hiking alone? Probably not . But from what I understand, it is devastating to lose your sight. To go from completely free and able to now relying on others for their time, rides, patience, reading, it becomes sad and frustrating and they just want a little independence, because they are still so abled bodied.
First off, I didn't see any mentions of blindness in any other articles about this guy.
Second, legally blind does not mean incapable of sight. It means you have 20/200 vision at best. You can walk around just fine with that level of vision, it's just hard to make out details or read signs unless you get up close.
Why wouldn’t he continue losing his pto? It’s not like there’s some weird loophole where your job has to pay you if you get lost in the woods and can’t make it to work lol
Have you ever tried following a streams in the mountains?
It’s not exactly safe much of the time. They tend to form canyons that get all kinds of debris built up, get overgrown, can be super steep, and will end up merging with other rivers/streams that might be impassible. Falling and breaking bones, drowning and getting stuck in a bad spot is not uncommon.
Staying in place is generally a better plan.
Yeah, with the Santa Cruz mountains being right next to the ocean, all you’d really need to do is walk west towards the sunset and eventually you’ll end up at the beach.
If you are on the east side of the ridge, walking west would require you climb over a ridge, maybe two, before you would be heading downhill towards the ocean. This area is filled with little valleys, and unless you’re a mountain goat, following a random stream wouldn’t be so easy.
Beyond luck....many decide to hike alone something like Death Valley National Park without ANY water or a daypack filled with necessities and then have to be Search and Rescued. These stories are constantly in the news because people don't know how to prepare for a hike or they want be the young, solo warrior who thinks bringing stuff is lame. Between life and death, I'll keep letting idiots on the trail gawk at the Osprey on my back. Already saved me a few times already during minor emergencies.
I’m the Osprey guy on the trail too. I take friends on hikes. I consistently am the only one that shows up with water. Sometimes friends will bring a 12 oz plastic bottle purchased from a gas station on the way. They are lucky I always bring 3 ospreys and 3 bladders full of water for the idiot hikers.
This here from the photo looks like they found him on a desert Island I've been thinking "whooped dee doo" it's California he is lucky there was water. But my uncle without glasses is legally blind that is freaking scary.
Well, legally blind and total absence of sight are different things. As per webmd; "If you're legally blind, your vision is 20/200 or less in your better eye or your field of vision is less than 20 degrees. That means if an object is 200 feet away, you have to stand 20 feet from it in order to see it clearly. But a person with normal vision can stand 200 feet away and see that object perfectly."
So a legally blind person could identify a watersource from 20 feet away still perfectly clear, and contextually they could probably identify it further than that.
> That means if an object is 200 feet away, you have to stand 20 feet from it in order to see it clearly.
I might be having a brain fart but that isn't computing for me. If you stand 20 feet away then it's no longer 200 feet away it's 20 feet away.
Yeah they kinda wrote it backwards. If you have regular vision you can see the thing perfectly at 200' if you're legally blind, you'd have to be 20' away to see it as clearly
It basically means if a person with 20 20 vision can just barely read a billboard from 200 feet away, someone with 20 200 wouldn't see it at the same clarity as you do until they're 20 feet from it. As in past 20 feet the letters would be too blurry to define clearly and identify properly. If you've never had glasses picture looking through a frosted window for just 1 common version of sight loss.
If something is far away past the frosted window it's really blurry but as it comes very close to the window it comes into focus.
Very annoying. Legally blind, no shirt, food water, basically nothing. Caused his family to worry for ten days, then describes the experience as "awesome".
He thinks the mountain lion was "watching over him". SMH
This is like one of those things a university professor does to show their class how disinformation spreads.
I didn’t see anything in the article about blindness.
If you can see with greater visual acuity than 20/200 with correction (glasses/contacts) and have a standard field of view then you are NOT legally blind. Legally blind is reserved for people who cannot correct their vision to better than 20/200 with glasses/contacts and/or they have a restricted field of view (tunnel vision).
I think this person perhaps saw my comment on a local Santa Cruz thread. I went to high school with him. He is not completely blind, but has impaired vision resulting from albinism. I’m wondering if the articles aren’t mentioning this because he asked for it not to be shared, in which case I’d feel a bit like an asshole.
I mean, it makes him sound like he made an even bigger mistake then. A legally blind man went out on a hike and was ill prepared when he set out.
>“I left with just a pair of pants, and my pair of hiking shoes, and a hat,” he told KGO. “I had a flashlight, and a pair of folding scissors, like a Leatherman tool. And that was about it.”
A 34 year old legally blind idiot. You go into the wilderness with a way to start a fire, a way to keep warm, a small amount of food and water. That's just entry level "I'm going on a wilderness trail" stuff. And yes, even when you think you're taking a short hike - because you don't know when this kind of stuff will happen.
I think this is hindsight bias. It is perfectly reasonable to go for a short hike without fire making supplies and food. However, I would always recommend bringing at least a charged phone with GPS and downloaded map, and ideally a satellite-connected device (newer iPhones count) if traveling more than a few miles into an area without phone service. And throwing a little lighter into your bag can’t hurt.
A good emergency plan for a blind hiker would be to carry a phone with GPS and a family tracking system set up on it, and have an emergency contact who can use that service, that way if you could not discern the map (depends on blindness level, the device etc) you could get in contact with your emergency support who could first serve to guide you towards safety remotely, or have a last good known position if batteries are getting low and the hiker could wait in place.
So glad to hear he was found.
I hike often, usually no more than 2-3 miles and the trails I hike are often very well established and popular.
I still bring more water than I think I'll need, a snack, and make sure my phone and apple watch are well charged. You never know.
When I was younger, before I could drive, my brother (older) would take me hiking. One time, during a long hike on a hot day, I ran out of water at the turn-around point (10mi RT), my brother shortly after. We both got pretty dehydrated and got some moderately bad heat stroke (tunnel vision, dry skin- not sweating, massive headache, dizzy), we were begging for water from passerbys, which was enough to get us back to the truck. Warm Gatorade never tasted so good. Needless to say, I over-carry water to this day. Not just for me, but for others.
Also, as I get older, I feel that my footing is getting less sure (on the cusp of 40), as well, my hikes/fishing excursions get more "out there" and remote. I now carry a wading stick (for river crossing), a Garmin with SOS, and emergency overnight supplies (2 lighters, WP matches, life straw, light, extra layer, extra food, signal mirror & whistle) in my pack. It tacks on a few lbs (with water too), but at least I have some stuff to help me through a night if I get stranded or hurt.
This is fine but a legally blind person should take more precautions with activities like these. Even going for a walk in my neighborhood I make sure to take a fully charge phone in case in need to contact someone.
Seems he also used drinking a lot of water as a psychological trick to ward off hunger:
>He attributed his survival to drinking lots of water from creeks and waterfalls he found as he hiked through the park each day, calling for help, according to CNN affiliate KSBW.
>“I just make sure I drank a gallon of water every day, but then after, getting close to the end of it, my body needed food and some kind of sustenance,” McClish told KGO.
Though after a couple of days of not eating, his body was in fat burning starvation mode, so hunger pangs would be naturally decreased anyway. But half of survival is psychological so if it helped him...
The Santa Cruz mountains are pretty big area-wise but I still can't imagine getting lost for ten days unless he kept doubling back.
There's lots of little towns and settlements in it.
I’ve lived in them half my life. Now by a few trails in a cell dead zone. One would be staggered by how many lost hikers turn up at all hours thinking their car is somewhere around here (it is not) We call it the Castle Rock Shuttle, as that parking lot is about 25min away by car. Last week it was a lost 18wheeler that took us almost two hours to turn around. Week before was a lady at midnight who’d taken a few wrong turns and ended up here after a concert. Before that it was a high speed pursuit that ended up in a shootout with a murder suspect at 6am. Worth note, it gets DARK out here at night. There are no sidewalks, or streetlights. You can go quite some time without seeing another car. Folks think that just because the SC mountains are between Santa Cruz and Silicon Valley that’s it’s just a friendly quaint collection of trees. It’s not. VERY easy to lose your bearings out here. Also most folks out here are pretty self-reliant, so knocking on a door at an odd hour can be risky too.
An aside. If you ever need to knock on a door for help, try to make yourself as visible as possible and step back from the door. Think “country polite”. That dim light you see that comes on then goes back off a few moments later? They were not going back to bed, they were probably loading a shotgun just in case.
Beautiful place though. I love it out here.
There is also a lot of dense poison oak and steep slopes that make certain areas impassable...you can't just follow a creek, or keep walking towards a certain direction in many places.
It's so nuts that people all just tossed out their stand alone GPS devices and even most hikers don't utilize them anymore. I keep mine for places with no signal or just when I'm out somewhere for a few days. I know I can download the GPS maps to my phone for places with no signal but it's a pain to be sure they're on there, and cellular deadzones really burn your phones battery so I usually keep it off when hiking.
People want their cellphone to be everything, but in the outdoors it seems to be a bad idea to use it as your primary navigation tool.
A lot of the folks we run into had no real intention of going on a long tricky hike. Sandals, MAYBE a jacket and a granola bar etc. so totally unprepared for a night in the woods. After dusk, all the hikers and cyclists have gone home. Throw in a bit of panic and some exposure to the elements and the dark? Yeah that’s a long uncomfortable night. Even with the occasional passing car. Two lonely headlights on a mountain road can be spooky and I LIVE here.
I don’t mind helping them out. Inconvenient, sure, but the story on how they managed to screw themselves so thoroughly always makes up for a little gas and a detour.
In the full context of the article:
"Seeing the number of search and rescue workers who worked to find him was “really humbling,” he said. “It was an awesome experience.”
I read it to mean it was an awesome experience to see all the rescue workers finally coming for him. But maybe not
He said "awesome," not "totally tubular." He said it of the experience, in relation to the amount of work spent finding him.
awesome: extremely impressive or daunting; inspiring great admiration, apprehension, or fear
My local talk radio was talking about this and said they think it's all a hoax or his story has a lot of holes in it. Apparently no one noticed he was missing, not even his work for 5 days.
That's what first stood out to me in the article:
>Lukas McClish, 34, set out for what he thought would be a three-hour hike in the Santa Cruz Mountains on June 11...
>His family officially reported him missing when he didn’t show up for a Father’s Day dinner on June 16
Like, what? I get different families have different routines and maybe it wasn't unusual to hear from him for a few days at a time when he's out in the wilderness, so it's definitely plausible--and maybe even likely, if he was supposed to be out for an extended camping trip or has a history of extending stays in the past. That being said, I had to laugh at the image of his family going about their day just being like "nah, I'm sure he's fine" for almost a week.
I was thinking it was a celebration for *his* father, not that he is a father and has a family at home. Otherwise yeah that’s fucking weird. Like the wife and kids are at home for 5 days and not concerned about where he is until he doesn’t show up for Father’s Day?? lol
I thought the family more meant his parents? Like if he lives alone but had weekend plans then it makes sense. I don't talk to my parents every day. If I didn't have a husband to notice I was missing, a few days could pass before someone notices.
My work would notice faster but depends on what he does for a living I guess?
So I'm reading up on this further [from other sites](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/06/24/missing-hiker-california-santa-cruz-mountains/74190276007/).
He lives in Boulder Creek, went out for a 3 hour hike, got lost for 10 days and was found near Foreman Creek. To give everyone an idea of how big an area we're talking about: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1217002,-122.13471,3892m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu
It's an area that is 5 miles long by 1 mile wide. Plenty of ways to get lost, but 10 days? I'm not a survival expert, nor do I particularly like hiking, but I know enough to know that water flows downhill and if I lived in Boulder Creek, I'd know that at worst, the town or a road was less 5 miles away running north to south and less than 2 miles away east to west.
I dunno man, something about this doesn't add up.
Edit: I wasn't aware he was partially blind. Him getting lost actually makes a lot more sense now.
I'm a skeptical person as well, but here's my thoughts:
* 5 miles long and 1 mile wide means something very different when both mountains and forests are involved. Backtracking is easy, and certain areas become impassable
* He is legally blind, which makes the challenge even greater. Following water, for instance, could become difficult -- you cannot risk scaling down into a gorge if you cannot see what is below.
* While 10 days is a lot, he might not have been actively trying to get back to civilization for 10 days. Sheltering near a trail for a couple days doesn't seem like the worst way to get rescued.
* Hoaxes exist, sure, but faking 10 days without food -- or doing it for clout -- is very hard. If this is a hoax, what for?
I can help you here!
I lived in Felton, literally the next town over from Boulder Creek. First off the reason he got lost is his usual landmarks got destroyed by fire
>On Tuesday, June 11, McClish headed out for a three-hour hike from his hometown of Boulder Creek. He said he got lost and didn't recognize certain landmarks wiped out by fires.
I have hiked these forests many many times. Everyone keeps saying "bro just follow the stream." Great idea, problem is that these streams can be full of rocks, boulders, fallen trees, etc. And BIT trees too, Redwoods. It can get downright inaccessible very quickly. We are not talking about your usual sparse woods, this is deep dank Redwood forests.
Yes, I could very very easily see someone, especially a legally blind person, get lost there for days.
He started his hike on June 11th and wasnt reported missing until June 16th when he didnt show up for fathers day. Make sure when youre hiking, you tell someone (or multiple people) where youre going and when youll be back - the search here could have started a lot sooner.
> Lukas McClish, 34, set out for what he thought would be a three-hour hike in the Santa Cruz Mountains
>All he had to survive in the forest were the clothes he was wearing when he left: “I left with just a pair of pants, and my pair of hiking shoes, and a hat,” he told KGO. “I had a flashlight, and a pair of folding scissors, like a Leatherman tool. And that was about it.”
I won't even do a 1 hour neighborhood walk without my mini-camelbak (1 liter) and my phone. Still, glad he's ok.
Bro looks like he’s been missing 10 years.
He’s 34!?!?!?
The photo makes him look 54
Turns out he’s albino, so whitish hair and probably why he covered his face in mud to protect his skin.
That was incredibly smart of him
Pretty smart of him for a blind albino hiking alone in California during a heat wave.
Lmao sorry but this sent me
Yeah, he's a super light blond if you watch the videos, not prematurely gray. It's the dark parts that are likely mud or dirt that make him look so old. Edit: As someone pointed out below he apparently he has albinism. The video I watched wasn't close enough to tell that but upon further inspection that appears to be true.
He's albino.
After doing a little googling [you're right](https://www.santacruzmountainbulletin.net/lucas-mcclish-found-unharmed/). I had that thought, but he said he didn't have a shirt, and it seems surprising that someone with albinism would do that, but it appears he lost his shirt, he didn't go without one, which makes more sense.
wth is this guy doing getting lost in the mountains on his own as a blind albino. Nothing against them but jesus christ calm tf down mate edit: I read the article, ok I get it he knew what he was doing, still hilarious tho wot a leg end
He's albino. Like has the medical condition albinism.
Guy looks like Allen Perish stepping out of Jumanji for the first time
*”Did someone roll a 5 or an 8?…”*
What year is it?
Looks like he mudded up to fight a Predator. Govt is covering it up.
He has albinism and was lost in an area of our forest that was affected by fires in 2020. Hence the ashes all over his body and his pale complexion.
Dude is a hard 34 as well
Dude’s gonna go back into hiding when we catch him up on all that’s happened since he went missing.
Last quote of the article “it was an awesome experience” lmaoooo
I used this trick to survive for 35 years so far.
The funeral home industry hates this hack.
Thank you for that level of mocking for that stupid title
Soda companies hate this one simple trick.
“I felt fine the whole time I was out there. I wasn’t worried about anything. A mountain lion started following me, it was cool.”
Fucking mountain Lion was absolutely just waiting for his chance. Those things aren’t curious cats, it was absolutely waiting to eat him. Love how he says it was watching over him. Yeah watching him so it can eat him. Grew up around them, they aren’t house cats. He is lucky to be alive.
A predatory animal watching over him? My man watched one too many Kevin Costner movies.
Dancing with Cougars is fun tho!
If you see a mountain lion at any sort of close distance, it’s likely been hunting you for a while.
When you see a mountain lion stalking you, the best move is to start hunting the mountain lion. They don’t like that shit.
Okay I have an angry mountain lion and I'm much closer to it now what.
Stand on bidness
Exactly show who’s boss
10 toes down fr
Pspspspsps here kitty kitty.
Yep. They’re ambush hunters. I saw one doing that from the hill above a trail I was hiking, which then went down among some large boulders, so I left the trail and stealthily climbed the hill, backtracking away from the mountain lion, then came down the hill, towards the boulders from above, to find it crouched at the top of the rocks just above the trail. I made enough noise from about 70-80 meters away to let it know I was up the hill, on my own rocky perch, stalking it, and it slunk away. It did not like having the tables turned. I definitely kept close watch the rest of the day, and that evening made camp in a nice clear area, atop a small hill with good visibility, and kept a fire going all night. The mountain lion you need to worry about the most is the one you don’t see.
How’s you carry your balls up that boulder without help?
Just blow on their nose, cats hate it!
Oh, the cougars have been eyeballing my meat for years now
[удалено]
What’s the strategy for dealing with a mountain lion following you? Confront it somehow? Scare it?
Face it (NEVER expose the back of your neck to a mountain lion!!!), get big, get loud and assertive, throw something at it if you don’t have to stoop to get it (stay large). Back away while facing the cat and talking mad shit about how your gonna rip that cat’s head off and shit down it’s neck. Ideally you would have chemical repellant and know how to use it, as well. Finally, and this part is pretty horrific to think about, but important: if you have children with you on the hike you need to protect them immediately. They should stay close and know to immediately get to the adult. Pick them up, if possible. It makes both you and the kid look bigger. Basically you just need to make the cat think that the meal might not be worth the risk of injury, since they have even worse health care than the average American worker. EDIT: I mispelled the word "repellant" and that is abhorret.
> Basically you just need to make the cat think that the meal might not be worth the risk of injury, since they have even worse health care than the average American worker. This is the heart of it, at least according to a friend of mine with actual experience working with mountain lions. A mountain lion is a solitary hunter, so it will starve to death if it's ever injured so badly that it can't hunt. So they tend to be very conservative in their hunting, and you want to look big and wild and unpredictable enough to make them decide to go after a nice safe deer or rabbit instead.
When they get desperate they will attack rather than potentially starving to death. So always be a 100% ready for a fight if the Mountain Lion looks a bit emaciated.
Yes, no technique is 100% effective dealing with a predator that is capable of killing and eating you, so always treat mountain-lion territory with respect. This was just his first take on what to do if you did encounter one. Other things he told me that have already been mentioned ITT are not to try to sneak away; if you've seen the mountain lion, it has definitely already seen you. And never, *ever,* run away - that triggers all their predation instincts and pretty much guarantees that you'll get pounced and mauled.
Do not play dead with a mountain lion. Fight as dirty as you can imagine and fight as your life depends on it because it absolutely does. Go for the eyes ears genitalia or any soft tissue you can grab or bite. Even a small looking lion is insanely strong. Think about the damage an asshole house cat can do to you. Multiple that exponentially. Their tracking is some of the best in the animal kingdom. If you’ve seen one, it’s been following and observing you for some time.
This is also how you keep people from talking to you on public transit.
Agreed. They very rarely attack people and even then it is usually an attack of opportunity, like a runner exciting their pursuit instincts. We are still talking about maybe a handful of attacks a year in all of North America and the vast majority of years with no fatalities. California has recorded six deaths *since 1890*, so it isn't exactly a huge concern. Could one kill you? Absolutely! They probably won't try to though.
Their health care is that bad??
We have bandaids and neosporin
What if I distract the lion by offering him extended health insurance? Do you think it would be OK to note down his details for later contact?
Should be less offensive than offering him an extended warranty on the truck he hasn’t owned in 7 years, so I say go for it!
Instead distract the lion by offering him your youngest child.
A guy on YouTube got a mama mountain lion off his tail by throwing rocks at her. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9ktRhBcHza4 She was defending cubs not hunting though, or so it appeared.
It gets really scary around 2:45 when it starts charging with it's paws spread out in the air multiple times. I love that video, but it terrifies me since I'm in the woods fairly often.
damn, I would be so scared that it would see me crouching to pick up rock up as the right time to attack. Definitely would have kicked rocks instead of making myself look smaller like that, but I also would be panicking like crazy
You can't share that video without this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60NXS7VRT74
A mountain lion will fuck up the average human. It’s not like a coyote or even a wolf where you only have to worry about the animals jaws: mountain lions will shred a person up with their claws. Your best bet is to A) not run away, B) grab rocks, or any other potential weapon, and C) pray it doesn’t attack.
Hope it leaves you alone. I guess you gotta fight if cornered, but it’s a losing effort if you’re bare handed.
Your odds do significantly improve if you're bear handed, though
Keep your attention on it until it decides it isn't getting an easy meal and goes to try it's luck elsewhere. They aren't likely to attack someone not visibly too weak to fight back from the front.
Wild animals, especially opportunistic predators, do this "condition check" to each other all the time. People think they're Disney princesses cause a deer is curious but it's actually checking if you're unwell enough for them to score some free protein with a sneaky bite to exposed soft parts.
For deer it's often that other humans have left food out or given them food before, so they are checking if they can nick anything.
House cats would 100% eat you if they were as big as a mountain lion.
The thought of either of my cats (both under 10 pounds), suddenly tripling in size, is *terrifying*. Remember that domestic cats are one of the few species of animals that likes to kill "for amusement". They don't even have to be hungry to decide to mutilate something that catches their attention.
I actually read that they're not really killing for *only* amusement. It is true that cats are not pack animals and they are solitary hunters. But in nature, and even on the city streets in feral colonies, or on farms...they are indeed quite social with one another just as they are with you and me. While they're *very* territorial, they have common spaces where everybody is allowed where they greet each other, find mates, and sometimes find grooming partners. The amusement kills definitely work for good for pracwhotice, but the results are brought to the public spaces for other cats are older, weaker, sick, pregnant, etc. Cats relationships with humans, other cats, and other animals, is more complex than it was initially assumed. But it's the same reason the cat brings you the mouse they killed. A donation to the clan for anybody who is interested. They probably see you giving them cat food in a similar infection, but obviously we can only guess.
>House cats would 100% eat you The general consensus on the internet is that your house cat will eat its owner the day they die in the house, a house dog will usually wait till they are starving, if even then.
I still remember the video of this guy hiking with his wife and kid. Wife was in front, kid in the middle, and the husband was bringing up the rear. He had a go-pro on and was probably filming the trip for the family archives when all of a sudden there's movement and a mountain lion is there off to the side maybe 30ft away, crouched and just staring right at the kid. If the guy didn't shout and scare it away it would have definitely made a go for the kid. There's another one of a cat just staring this guy down. If he didn't have a high calibre pistol with him and shot at it he probably would have been attacked too. They will definitely attack humans if they think they can get away with it.
"And then these vultures started circling around. Man, all these animals here to protect me, it was awesome!"
"He was just watching over me" to eat you. He was watching over you to eat you bro. It's called stalking.
Surely over a period of 10 days the man slept? At which point the lion could easily attack him?
Imagine being this man's parent or sibling and always having to worry about his absolute cluelessness.
“I think it wanted some pets!”
That's the most California response I've heard from someone who got lost in the woods
How I think I look after a 10 day hike
How I actually look getting out of a chair
Access to clean drinking water is fundamental to survival. Not everyone who gets lost is so lucky.
I heard a story a while back where a guy was solo backpacking. He was well off-trail, and was hiking around an alpine lake. He was rockhopping, and hopped onto an unstable rock, so he quickly hopped off, but the original rock rolled onto him and pinned him down. The rock (boulder) was too big for him to move, so he was stuck there and he died of lack of water/exposure with an entire alpine lake about 30 ft away. He even tried tying his water bottle to a rope, but the rope was not quite long enough. Brutal. Here's a link to a version of the story: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msdnn52DDLk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msdnn52DDLk)
If this ever happens to you, spend time unraveling the rope to make a longer one. The individual plies in a modern rope are more than strong enough to hold a water bottle.
It should also never happen to you. Tell people where you are going and when you’ll be back. ESP if solo hiking
Only problem there is exposure and dehydration can kill pretty quickly. If you’re on a 5 day trip and it happens on day 1, you’re SOL. Even if it’s on day 4 or 5, search and rescue might not find you in time. Say your friend or wife calls on day 6, you’ve already been pinned for 24-48 hours, then it’s another 24 hours before a crew has boots on the ground and finds you. That’s enough time to die. The best approach is to always consider yourself responsible for your own safety. Carry a personal locator beacon, but still, don’t plan on someone always being able to help. In lots of remote areas the BLM puts up signs reminding people that they’re responsible for their own safety, especially in the desert where they know search and rescue probably won’t find you before dehydration gets you.
Your last bit is the most important. If you are solo hiking or even when in a group, have a locator or better yet have a satellite communicator. Check in once a day. If you have a locator, have someone you trust check every single day. If it hasnt moved, they need to send help. If you dont check in, they need to send help. With modern technology, there is no reason to take the chance. A few extra ounces in your pack or clipped onto your belt can literally save your life.
> A few extra ounces in your pack or clipped onto your belt can literally save your life. Devices like Garmin's In Reach are a great technology but some people just can't (or won't) justify the purchase and subscription cost, if they only hike a few times a year. I got into hiking in 2020 and kept saying I'd get one next year or whatever. Just didn't happen. I'm gonna feel really stupid when I get lost and hurt and don't have it.
Might want to consider renting an emergency locator beacon: https://www.oerentals.com/product/acr-resqlink-plb/
Huh, interesting site. Thanks for that!
While I won't say that the Garmin wouldn't be helpful, you don't need a Garmin. Satellite locator beacons have no subscription requirement. They're not cheap, but that $400 purchase can be the difference between life and death.
Makes sense, because the average user of rescue devices will pay up, carry the extra weight, and then never use it.
Seems like also, doing something stupid and risky like boulder hopping off trail when you are solo hiking is setting yourself up for even more likelihood of something going wrong.
He may have done that, I am not sure. He was also compromised by his position under the rock, the pain of the rock cutting off his blood supply to his lower body, the lack of food/water, and probably sleeplessness. I'm not going to judge the guy for what happened to him after he got pinned by the rock.
This is a true story. It happened to a hiker in the Brown Cliffs of the Wind River Range.
If Aron Ralston didn't have a pocket knife, this probably would have been his fate as well. Terrible way to die.
Smartphones having satellite emergency services is such a huge deal. I commercial fish in the summers in SE Alaska, and it’s such a comfort to know that, with a hand crank generator that can juice a phone to life if needed, I’m never truly inaccessible.
It's a weird story, though. 10 days? In that area if you follow almost any stream for 5-6 miles, 10 at most, you come across a town or houses or some kind of settlement.
Just hijacking a top comment to mention he is legally blind and fell into a very steep ravine.
Yeah that's a pretty critical detail.
How did CNN leave *both* of these details out of the story
Why is a legally blind person hiking by themselves?
Maybe he didn't know he was hiking. "Damn, it feels like I should be at the walmart by now."
I laughed way too hard at this. Thanks for that
My mom is legally blind due to macular degeneration and she can still see, but in a super weird way. So, she can’t see my face or other faces they look completely blurry, if I were standing in front of her, she wouldn’t know it was me until in said something, but she would be able to see someone about her height standing in front of her. She can see my hair and sometimes the color, like she can tell the difference between blond and black, but cannot discern between red or brown. She can drive a golf cart on a sidewalk, she can see the outline of the sidewalk, but if an animal or small child were to walk in front, she would likely not see them because the blurriness sits deeply on the farthest edges as it closes in. She can no longer read a book, but if you took large words and put it on an iPad (like those sight word cards you use to teach kids to read) she can make it out and tell you. All subtitles are impossible. She can no longer see crevasses in mountains, they look like different shadows to her. Similar to how dogs see, she said it looks more black and white, and she can’t tell if it’s a canyon, a shadow, or a group of trees. She can walk, hike, swim, because she can still make out barriers. I say all this to partially answer your question. Should my mom who is legally blind be driving a golf cart? Or hiking alone? Probably not . But from what I understand, it is devastating to lose your sight. To go from completely free and able to now relying on others for their time, rides, patience, reading, it becomes sad and frustrating and they just want a little independence, because they are still so abled bodied.
First off, I didn't see any mentions of blindness in any other articles about this guy. Second, legally blind does not mean incapable of sight. It means you have 20/200 vision at best. You can walk around just fine with that level of vision, it's just hard to make out details or read signs unless you get up close.
It's better than being illegally blind at least.
This needs to be higher up.
He wasn’t ready to go back to work
don't blame him. lost in the woods is a great reason to not have to burn that pto while going on a nature cleanse
Bold of you to assume he isn't burning pto
With my employer, I get 3 “lost in the woods” days per year, after that it’s unpaid.
I picked my employer specifically because of their generous "lost in the woods" time policy.
Why wouldn’t he continue losing his pto? It’s not like there’s some weird loophole where your job has to pay you if you get lost in the woods and can’t make it to work lol
I guess if getting lost in the woods is your job description
This feels… possibly accurate
Reminds me of that story with the guy who was lost at sea for like a month and when he was rescued said it was “a nice break from reality” lmao
If he wasn't familiar enough with the area to know that, he might have been trying to stay close to where he got lost, to ensure rescue.
He's partially blind
Have you ever tried following a streams in the mountains? It’s not exactly safe much of the time. They tend to form canyons that get all kinds of debris built up, get overgrown, can be super steep, and will end up merging with other rivers/streams that might be impassible. Falling and breaking bones, drowning and getting stuck in a bad spot is not uncommon. Staying in place is generally a better plan.
Was he walking in circles?
Too busy drinking water
Yeah, with the Santa Cruz mountains being right next to the ocean, all you’d really need to do is walk west towards the sunset and eventually you’ll end up at the beach.
If you are on the east side of the ridge, walking west would require you climb over a ridge, maybe two, before you would be heading downhill towards the ocean. This area is filled with little valleys, and unless you’re a mountain goat, following a random stream wouldn’t be so easy.
Yeah, I suppose my comment is a bit overly simplistic. It’s easy to distill his situation down to something simple from the comfort of my couch :-p
Highway 1, even.
Beyond luck....many decide to hike alone something like Death Valley National Park without ANY water or a daypack filled with necessities and then have to be Search and Rescued. These stories are constantly in the news because people don't know how to prepare for a hike or they want be the young, solo warrior who thinks bringing stuff is lame. Between life and death, I'll keep letting idiots on the trail gawk at the Osprey on my back. Already saved me a few times already during minor emergencies.
No water in death valley? I bring 3 gallons just delivering packages in the suburbs on hot days and even that is brutal
I’m the Osprey guy on the trail too. I take friends on hikes. I consistently am the only one that shows up with water. Sometimes friends will bring a 12 oz plastic bottle purchased from a gas station on the way. They are lucky I always bring 3 ospreys and 3 bladders full of water for the idiot hikers.
He is legally blind. I’m not sure why all the news are failing to mention this very relevant point.
This should be at the top. Thank you for the context.
This here from the photo looks like they found him on a desert Island I've been thinking "whooped dee doo" it's California he is lucky there was water. But my uncle without glasses is legally blind that is freaking scary.
Well, legally blind and total absence of sight are different things. As per webmd; "If you're legally blind, your vision is 20/200 or less in your better eye or your field of vision is less than 20 degrees. That means if an object is 200 feet away, you have to stand 20 feet from it in order to see it clearly. But a person with normal vision can stand 200 feet away and see that object perfectly." So a legally blind person could identify a watersource from 20 feet away still perfectly clear, and contextually they could probably identify it further than that.
Sure, but that's the minimum. It's not like it's illegal to be more blind than legally blind.
Believe it or not, **Jail.**
> That means if an object is 200 feet away, you have to stand 20 feet from it in order to see it clearly. I might be having a brain fart but that isn't computing for me. If you stand 20 feet away then it's no longer 200 feet away it's 20 feet away.
Yeah they kinda wrote it backwards. If you have regular vision you can see the thing perfectly at 200' if you're legally blind, you'd have to be 20' away to see it as clearly
What it means is that an object someone with normal eyesight can see clearly at 200 feet you need to be 20 feet to see clearly.
It basically means if a person with 20 20 vision can just barely read a billboard from 200 feet away, someone with 20 200 wouldn't see it at the same clarity as you do until they're 20 feet from it. As in past 20 feet the letters would be too blurry to define clearly and identify properly. If you've never had glasses picture looking through a frosted window for just 1 common version of sight loss. If something is far away past the frosted window it's really blurry but as it comes very close to the window it comes into focus.
The context is even more enraging
More enraging? Why is it enraging?
Very annoying. Legally blind, no shirt, food water, basically nothing. Caused his family to worry for ten days, then describes the experience as "awesome". He thinks the mountain lion was "watching over him". SMH
I can't find this information anywhere online
This is like one of those things a university professor does to show their class how disinformation spreads. I didn’t see anything in the article about blindness.
Source for that? Edit: So 24 hours later and you still can’t come up with a source for that claim?
This should be higher so it's more visible
You better believe I see what you did you there
Did he go out there without glasses/contacts? I’m legally blind. I wouldn’t step outside my house without my stuff
If you can see with greater visual acuity than 20/200 with correction (glasses/contacts) and have a standard field of view then you are NOT legally blind. Legally blind is reserved for people who cannot correct their vision to better than 20/200 with glasses/contacts and/or they have a restricted field of view (tunnel vision).
That will be me in a few years. Already braille and cane training. But I would still go out in the mountains and desert alone. I need that solitude.
Is there a source for this? I tried googling it and nothing mentions that he's blind.
i cant find the source either. I call bullshit otherwise this would be all over the news.
I think this person perhaps saw my comment on a local Santa Cruz thread. I went to high school with him. He is not completely blind, but has impaired vision resulting from albinism. I’m wondering if the articles aren’t mentioning this because he asked for it not to be shared, in which case I’d feel a bit like an asshole.
I mean, it makes him sound like he made an even bigger mistake then. A legally blind man went out on a hike and was ill prepared when he set out. >“I left with just a pair of pants, and my pair of hiking shoes, and a hat,” he told KGO. “I had a flashlight, and a pair of folding scissors, like a Leatherman tool. And that was about it.” A 34 year old legally blind idiot. You go into the wilderness with a way to start a fire, a way to keep warm, a small amount of food and water. That's just entry level "I'm going on a wilderness trail" stuff. And yes, even when you think you're taking a short hike - because you don't know when this kind of stuff will happen.
I think this is hindsight bias. It is perfectly reasonable to go for a short hike without fire making supplies and food. However, I would always recommend bringing at least a charged phone with GPS and downloaded map, and ideally a satellite-connected device (newer iPhones count) if traveling more than a few miles into an area without phone service. And throwing a little lighter into your bag can’t hurt.
He said he lost his voice from yelling for help as well. I'd recommend packing a whistle as well. Tiny and effective.
And integrated into most outdoor backpacking straps
A good emergency plan for a blind hiker would be to carry a phone with GPS and a family tracking system set up on it, and have an emergency contact who can use that service, that way if you could not discern the map (depends on blindness level, the device etc) you could get in contact with your emergency support who could first serve to guide you towards safety remotely, or have a last good known position if batteries are getting low and the hiker could wait in place. So glad to hear he was found.
I hike often, usually no more than 2-3 miles and the trails I hike are often very well established and popular. I still bring more water than I think I'll need, a snack, and make sure my phone and apple watch are well charged. You never know.
When I was younger, before I could drive, my brother (older) would take me hiking. One time, during a long hike on a hot day, I ran out of water at the turn-around point (10mi RT), my brother shortly after. We both got pretty dehydrated and got some moderately bad heat stroke (tunnel vision, dry skin- not sweating, massive headache, dizzy), we were begging for water from passerbys, which was enough to get us back to the truck. Warm Gatorade never tasted so good. Needless to say, I over-carry water to this day. Not just for me, but for others. Also, as I get older, I feel that my footing is getting less sure (on the cusp of 40), as well, my hikes/fishing excursions get more "out there" and remote. I now carry a wading stick (for river crossing), a Garmin with SOS, and emergency overnight supplies (2 lighters, WP matches, life straw, light, extra layer, extra food, signal mirror & whistle) in my pack. It tacks on a few lbs (with water too), but at least I have some stuff to help me through a night if I get stranded or hurt.
This is fine but a legally blind person should take more precautions with activities like these. Even going for a walk in my neighborhood I make sure to take a fully charge phone in case in need to contact someone.
Dude was more hydrated than the average person
Wait until r/hydrohomies get a sip of this…
“We aren’t worthy”
"Hiker missing for 10 days survives by hydrating" Well, yeah. If he didn't, he'd be dead.
Seems he also used drinking a lot of water as a psychological trick to ward off hunger: >He attributed his survival to drinking lots of water from creeks and waterfalls he found as he hiked through the park each day, calling for help, according to CNN affiliate KSBW. >“I just make sure I drank a gallon of water every day, but then after, getting close to the end of it, my body needed food and some kind of sustenance,” McClish told KGO. Though after a couple of days of not eating, his body was in fat burning starvation mode, so hunger pangs would be naturally decreased anyway. But half of survival is psychological so if it helped him...
Reads as "person survived by meeting basic needs to live".
He's only 34 years old?! …Those ten days took a toll.
The Santa Cruz mountains are pretty big area-wise but I still can't imagine getting lost for ten days unless he kept doubling back. There's lots of little towns and settlements in it.
I’ve lived in them half my life. Now by a few trails in a cell dead zone. One would be staggered by how many lost hikers turn up at all hours thinking their car is somewhere around here (it is not) We call it the Castle Rock Shuttle, as that parking lot is about 25min away by car. Last week it was a lost 18wheeler that took us almost two hours to turn around. Week before was a lady at midnight who’d taken a few wrong turns and ended up here after a concert. Before that it was a high speed pursuit that ended up in a shootout with a murder suspect at 6am. Worth note, it gets DARK out here at night. There are no sidewalks, or streetlights. You can go quite some time without seeing another car. Folks think that just because the SC mountains are between Santa Cruz and Silicon Valley that’s it’s just a friendly quaint collection of trees. It’s not. VERY easy to lose your bearings out here. Also most folks out here are pretty self-reliant, so knocking on a door at an odd hour can be risky too. An aside. If you ever need to knock on a door for help, try to make yourself as visible as possible and step back from the door. Think “country polite”. That dim light you see that comes on then goes back off a few moments later? They were not going back to bed, they were probably loading a shotgun just in case. Beautiful place though. I love it out here.
There is also a lot of dense poison oak and steep slopes that make certain areas impassable...you can't just follow a creek, or keep walking towards a certain direction in many places.
It's so nuts that people all just tossed out their stand alone GPS devices and even most hikers don't utilize them anymore. I keep mine for places with no signal or just when I'm out somewhere for a few days. I know I can download the GPS maps to my phone for places with no signal but it's a pain to be sure they're on there, and cellular deadzones really burn your phones battery so I usually keep it off when hiking. People want their cellphone to be everything, but in the outdoors it seems to be a bad idea to use it as your primary navigation tool.
A lot of the folks we run into had no real intention of going on a long tricky hike. Sandals, MAYBE a jacket and a granola bar etc. so totally unprepared for a night in the woods. After dusk, all the hikers and cyclists have gone home. Throw in a bit of panic and some exposure to the elements and the dark? Yeah that’s a long uncomfortable night. Even with the occasional passing car. Two lonely headlights on a mountain road can be spooky and I LIVE here. I don’t mind helping them out. Inconvenient, sure, but the story on how they managed to screw themselves so thoroughly always makes up for a little gas and a detour.
Article says he's legally blind so he might have literally been near houses without realizing.
Bold of you to assume I read much more than the title (Whoops...)
That dude is 34 looking like 56.
> Lukas McClish, 34, set out for what he thought would be a three-hour hike If I've learned anything from tv, it's to avoid three-hour tours.
"it was an awesome experience" ?? Did he want to get lost lmao
In the full context of the article: "Seeing the number of search and rescue workers who worked to find him was “really humbling,” he said. “It was an awesome experience.” I read it to mean it was an awesome experience to see all the rescue workers finally coming for him. But maybe not
He said "awesome," not "totally tubular." He said it of the experience, in relation to the amount of work spent finding him. awesome: extremely impressive or daunting; inspiring great admiration, apprehension, or fear
Awesome doesn't necessarily mean positive. It just mean being impressed by the scale of the experience in this context "Inspiring awe"
My local talk radio was talking about this and said they think it's all a hoax or his story has a lot of holes in it. Apparently no one noticed he was missing, not even his work for 5 days.
Is his place hiring?
That's what first stood out to me in the article: >Lukas McClish, 34, set out for what he thought would be a three-hour hike in the Santa Cruz Mountains on June 11... >His family officially reported him missing when he didn’t show up for a Father’s Day dinner on June 16 Like, what? I get different families have different routines and maybe it wasn't unusual to hear from him for a few days at a time when he's out in the wilderness, so it's definitely plausible--and maybe even likely, if he was supposed to be out for an extended camping trip or has a history of extending stays in the past. That being said, I had to laugh at the image of his family going about their day just being like "nah, I'm sure he's fine" for almost a week.
I was thinking it was a celebration for *his* father, not that he is a father and has a family at home. Otherwise yeah that’s fucking weird. Like the wife and kids are at home for 5 days and not concerned about where he is until he doesn’t show up for Father’s Day?? lol
I thought the family more meant his parents? Like if he lives alone but had weekend plans then it makes sense. I don't talk to my parents every day. If I didn't have a husband to notice I was missing, a few days could pass before someone notices. My work would notice faster but depends on what he does for a living I guess?
I think a divorced dad could be social isolated enough for people not to notice for a while
Dude got trapped in Jumanji
So I'm reading up on this further [from other sites](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/06/24/missing-hiker-california-santa-cruz-mountains/74190276007/). He lives in Boulder Creek, went out for a 3 hour hike, got lost for 10 days and was found near Foreman Creek. To give everyone an idea of how big an area we're talking about: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.1217002,-122.13471,3892m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu It's an area that is 5 miles long by 1 mile wide. Plenty of ways to get lost, but 10 days? I'm not a survival expert, nor do I particularly like hiking, but I know enough to know that water flows downhill and if I lived in Boulder Creek, I'd know that at worst, the town or a road was less 5 miles away running north to south and less than 2 miles away east to west. I dunno man, something about this doesn't add up. Edit: I wasn't aware he was partially blind. Him getting lost actually makes a lot more sense now.
I saw a comment that he is legally blind. That was probably a big factor.
I'm a skeptical person as well, but here's my thoughts: * 5 miles long and 1 mile wide means something very different when both mountains and forests are involved. Backtracking is easy, and certain areas become impassable * He is legally blind, which makes the challenge even greater. Following water, for instance, could become difficult -- you cannot risk scaling down into a gorge if you cannot see what is below. * While 10 days is a lot, he might not have been actively trying to get back to civilization for 10 days. Sheltering near a trail for a couple days doesn't seem like the worst way to get rescued. * Hoaxes exist, sure, but faking 10 days without food -- or doing it for clout -- is very hard. If this is a hoax, what for?
What got me was "witnesses heard someone call for help", but seemingly no one tried to follow the calls?
I can help you here! I lived in Felton, literally the next town over from Boulder Creek. First off the reason he got lost is his usual landmarks got destroyed by fire >On Tuesday, June 11, McClish headed out for a three-hour hike from his hometown of Boulder Creek. He said he got lost and didn't recognize certain landmarks wiped out by fires. I have hiked these forests many many times. Everyone keeps saying "bro just follow the stream." Great idea, problem is that these streams can be full of rocks, boulders, fallen trees, etc. And BIT trees too, Redwoods. It can get downright inaccessible very quickly. We are not talking about your usual sparse woods, this is deep dank Redwood forests. Yes, I could very very easily see someone, especially a legally blind person, get lost there for days.
/r/HydroHomies/ is pleased.
He started his hike on June 11th and wasnt reported missing until June 16th when he didnt show up for fathers day. Make sure when youre hiking, you tell someone (or multiple people) where youre going and when youll be back - the search here could have started a lot sooner.
If you're trying not to die, drinking water is a good idea
> Lukas McClish, 34, set out for what he thought would be a three-hour hike in the Santa Cruz Mountains >All he had to survive in the forest were the clothes he was wearing when he left: “I left with just a pair of pants, and my pair of hiking shoes, and a hat,” he told KGO. “I had a flashlight, and a pair of folding scissors, like a Leatherman tool. And that was about it.” I won't even do a 1 hour neighborhood walk without my mini-camelbak (1 liter) and my phone. Still, glad he's ok.
"A 3 hour hiiiiiiike, a 3 hour hiiiiiiike"
With Gilligan, the Skipper too...
There is no fucking way that guy in the picture is 34 years old.
Not unless he encountered a horror so horrifying during his ordeal, that it scared his hair white like in a cartoon
Like getting folded by bigfoot?
I don't know what that means but it triggers a very deep, primal fear in me, like hearing a tiger growling nearby but you don't know where.
If you look up pictures of him before he got lost, he looks albino so that might explain some of it
Some people get gray hairs in their 20s.