HikeArizona.COM

Pamela Salant fell off a 50 foot cliff, broke her leg, and survived for three days off of berries, bugs, and creek water. She also was able to tend to her injuries and slept under moss to keep warm. It's great that she was able to keep it together while stranded off trail. She was very lucky that rescuers were able to narrow their search down and track her. Kudos to them.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/03/wo ... ess-cliff/

Great outcome! She didn't even have to cut anything off.

Great outcome. The biggest key to survival is the will to live. Accidents can happen.

So 50 feet is pretty high, but it could be a slight exaggeration, and did she fall into brush or on soft ground, or what? Also, her leg was written as being broken in two places, but what kind of break? That matters a lot. My assumption is that they were not very bad, she is probably in very good shape and so has a dense skeleton.

Seems like the most important parts of the article are summed up in a few short sentences and the rest of it is about the search and rescue, and reuniting and it feels so good.

^^^ and seriously what kind of caterpillars were they? We need to know that. Maybe they were just the tasty ones.
I'm joking ;)
But seriously maybe it was just her small leg bones.
Ok, again not serious, just caffeine fueled.
Good ending = Good story

I felt the article was poorly written and concentrated on irrelevant stuff, and not the actual details of the fall and injury which prevented her from self rescue. Big difference between 50 feet onto rocks, or 50 feet onto moss and soft vines. Drinking creek water, eating berries and insect larvae! Oh NO! It was written for an average Portlander who never leaves the coffee shop, so I should just do what everyone else does in situations like this. :SB: Since the title is about the fall and survival, I think more pertinent details would be in order.

Jim_H wrote:So 50 feet is pretty high, but it could be a slight exaggeration, and did she fall into brush or on soft ground, or what?

I figured it wasn't a straight drop, but more likely a few bounces on the way down.

big_load wrote:

Jim_H wrote:So 50 feet is pretty high, but it could be a slight exaggeration, and did she fall into brush or on soft ground, or what?

I figured it wasn't a straight drop, but more likely a few bounces on the way down.

Details!! We need the details!!

Jim_H wrote:Details!! We need the details!!

It would be interesting to have a job reporting on outdoor incidents, so you could ask all the questions that really matter. Some kids got pawed by a bear yesterday near home. Did they have food in the tent? That possibility wasn't even mentioned in the first few stories that came out. Later ones said that food was kept in a locker a good distance away, but I still wonder if they held onto a little snack.

I feel the same way about reporting on science and engineering. So often it seems like the writer didn't get the point.

The story's author made it not about the what caused her to fall, the details of the fall, the true extent of her injuries (though privacy issues can come into play there) or anything someone like me cares about it. It was just another human interest fluff piece. Sure, it's great she lived, but....

@Jim_H I'm especially jaded on that point. Journalists who write these stories treat the mishap itself as expected; something that we should think would happen to anybody who dares venture off the pavement. Maybe not every single time, but often enough that merely leaving the sidewalk is a life-threatening risk. Unfortunately, I learned that people are not comforted when I tell them that I'm much more likely to die from slipping and falling six feet than from 60 or 600.

big_load wrote: Journalists who write these stories treat the mishap itself as expected; something that we should think would happen to anybody who dares venture off the pavement.

That's because, for most of those journalists, that's exactly what would happen if they did venture off the pavement...

Journalism is a lost art. There's virtually no such thing as a journalist anymore. I'd even hesitate to use the word reporter, except that they report exactly what they're fed. And it gets worse everyday.

That's cause it used to be an art with coveted awards and respect, now it's a busine$$. Add in... twenty years ago when something happened to you and newscasters started questioning you got all excited and babbled until you were blue. Welcome to 2011, now you shut up, get a lawyer to bargain the best $$ deal on Dateline, 20/20 or whatever floats these days.

Searching her name didn't yield anything much other than repetitive copies of the story. Perhaps local reporters just haven't been able to glean any real info too. Perhaps it's tougher to get through barriers than it was twenty years ago to?

joe bartels wrote: Perhaps local reporters just haven't been able to glean any real info too. Perhaps it's tougher to get through barriers than it was twenty years ago to?

Maybe she's on the far side of a grassy median. It could be hiding some of those non-rattling rattlesnakes.

Falling from six feet or 6,000 feet never hurt anybody. Stopping can be a real biatch.

She fell "halfway down a rocky hill" according to a local Oregon paper. She broke her left leg, at least two bones in her back, and had serious lacerations.

ouch

joe bartels wrote:ouch

That's why I never go hiking without Percocet.

If I am remembered for nothing else, I want to be remembered for something my father always said
It's better to be lucky than good.
There are good hikers who are dead, there are no lucky hikers dead. I pray for the ones we have lost.

She must have had some training to know to use moss as a blanket. And she put herself in a position to be seen by the helicopter. Don't go vertical by jumping up and down, you are harder to see from the air. Make it easy for the pilots to find you. Protect the head and keep the survival spirit.