• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Yuba County Five: 'An American Dyatlov Pass' Incident (1978)

I've recently discovered something that might help explain how / why the boys got lost that night.

It turns out that the region in which they were traveling (the Central Valley of California) is subject to significantly foggy conditions during the winter months. This is known as the Tule fog:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tule_fog

I don't recall (and my notes don't reflect ... ) any mention of fog (or lack thereof) on the 'fatal' night.

I'd love to know whether there were Tule fog conditions in effect the night they disappeared. It wouldn't take much fog to explain taking a wrong turn. Because the fog occurs in the lower elevations, they could have finally emerged from it only to find themselves on an unfamiliar road, heading up into the mountains, and suddenly surrounded by snow.
 
To be fair, we're not talking about a whole crew of military 'grunts' here. I would be cautious to generalise. While the reports of the day use what we see nowadays as archaic and grotesquely simplistic terms I would be reluctant to write off any of these guys purely because a reporter labelled them all as as 'mentally retarded'. In the 70s we still very much allowed folks to write-off anybody with Autism, Aspergers, Dyslexia, Downes and a dozen other conditions as somehow being the self-same thing. They'd just get labelled as 'retards' and that was that.

Actually "grunts" is army slang for ordinary servicemen. As for their particular mental complaint, what is the actual evidence for their conditions? They may well have actually been retarded after all. People with an IQ measured below 70 are classed as retarded. Do we have any info on them at all?

Which is utter bollocks really. Having worked in offices with with people who are autistic, and one guy with Aspergers, to say that even those two conditions are the same simply isn't true. People on the Autistic spectrum can be incredibly smart. They can have very high IQs. They can be very pragmatic. Where they have difficulty is in reading social situations, and interpersonal relationships. That might not impede them any more than any average guy would be, if placed in a survival situation.

I agree that they may have quite high IQ, but you don't get diagnosed as a retard if you do. That is basically the assessment criterion.

To assume that these guys were just a bunch of dumbasses would be a pretty sweeping (not to mention relatively unfounded) assumption.

Well, please be equally careful that you are not the one making assumptions here. IQ was used in the 1970s, and Aspergers had been a valid diagnosis since 1944.

For the record, I too suspect that they ended up in this area because Matthias' had requested that they drive him to Forebestown, where he could meet a contact of his, and having got lost either on the way or on the way back.

That is the main mystery here. Again, I think that gold watch of unknown provenance is important.
 
... Again, I think that gold watch of unknown provenance is important.

It there were some specific linkage between the watch and (e.g.) Weiher I'd agree. However ...

The watch was found inside the bunkhouse / trailer, located next to the bunk where Weiher's body lay. According to the Washington Post article cited earlier:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...a76a4fb/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.300da00bfe07

It was a Waltham brand, it was 'gold' (perhaps gold plated?), it was missing its crystal, and none of the 5 mens' families recognized it as belonging to any of the missing guys.

To the best of my knowledge that's all that's ever been mentioned about the watch.
 
My guess about the watch was that it was left in the cabin by a forestry worker long before the lost men ever got there, and has nothing to do with the case.
 
My guess about the watch was that it was left in the cabin by a forestry worker long before the lost men ever got there, and has nothing to do with the case.

That's always been my default presumption. The campground location of the bunkhouse / trailer was used by the forestry / ranger folks.

Another angle that occurred to me was that it may have been a 'lost and found' item that no one had claimed.

I'm not even sure the watch worked. The accounts that mention it state it was missing its crystal. I don't recall any of them stating whether it could be wound up and / or would run.

The watch was found next to a partially melted candle. I like to think that whoever swaddled Weiher and left set up the candle and a ticking watch to calm him and lead him off to sleep - a thoughtful little kindness in a desperately dangerous situation.
 
That's always been my default presumption. The campground location of the bunkhouse / trailer was used by the forestry / ranger folks.
Another angle that occurred to me was that it may have been a 'lost and found' item that no one had claimed. I'm not even sure the watch worked. The accounts that mention it state it was missing its crystal. I don't recall any of them stating whether it could be wound up and / or would run.

The watch was found next to a partially melted candle. I like to think that whoever swaddled Weiher and left set up the candle and a ticking watch to calm him and lead him off to sleep - a thoughtful little kindness in a desperately dangerous situation.

My thought was that a worker has possibly broken the watch crystal while working, making it impractical to wear, but kept the watch at the cabin as a "clock", and it could've been there for years, serving that function.

That does bring up the most intriguing point in the whole episode for me. Who swaddled Weiher, and still had the strength to leave the cabin? Weiher starved for up to 13 weeks, and was found with his face covered, indicating he was dead when whoever wrapped him left the cabin! I would assume that whoever was with him must've been starving as well? Otherwise the food stores would've been disturbed.

The other man (Huett, I think) who was found closest to the cabin. I thought his body was in decent condition, possibly indicating he never made it to the cabin. Or, if he did make it to the cabin, he didn't stay there for long enough to be starving. Was he found to be near starvation? I thought all those found outside had died of exposure or undetermined causes? Also, wasn't Huett the most impaired of the bunch? Would he have known how to wind a shroud? But if he wound the shroud, then he would've been at the cabin much longer, until Weiher had died.

That means that Gary Mathias was at the cabin, and didn't get dropped off at his contacts location, and was with the group. But, that means he was with Weiher until the end, possibly almost 2 weeks before rescue. How did he have the strength to leave? And how did he get far enough to not be found?

So many questions!
 
My thought was that a worker has possibly broken the watch crystal while working, making it impractical to wear, but kept the watch at the cabin as a "clock", and it could've been there for years, serving that function.

Agreed ... That's a reasonable explanation for the watch being in the bunkhouse / trailer. Unfortunately, I'm not aware anyone ever verified whether the watch was known to have already been there.


That does bring up the most intriguing point in the whole episode for me. Who swaddled Weiher, and still had the strength to leave the cabin? Weiher starved for up to 13 weeks, and was found with his face covered, indicating he was dead when whoever wrapped him left the cabin! I would assume that whoever was with him must've been starving as well? Otherwise the food stores would've been disturbed.

I'm the one who recurrently uses the term 'swaddle' to describe Weiher's state, and it may overstate the case. The actual reports only state that the covering items were tucked in around / underneath his body in such a way the authorities concluded he couldn't have tucked himself in all by himself. That's the extent of what the documentation provides. I've never seen any photograph(s), diagram(s), or detailed textual explanations for the manner in which he was covered.

I'm not confident the alleged face covering demonstrates Weiher was already dead when finally tucked in. He was found on the lower bunk in the bunkbed nearest to the broken window presumed to have been the means for gaining access to the bunkhouse / trailer. Given the weather conditions, covering his face may have represented an attempt to protect him from the elements (alive) rather than respectfully obscuring a corpse's face.

I don't believe Weiher lasted anywhere close to the 13 weeks that elapsed between the fatal night and the time his body was discovered. I also suspect a portion of the unusually high weight loss claimed for his body may have been the result of desiccation rather than starvation.

NOTE: It still bothers me that he ended up in what should have obviously been the worst available bunk - low and next to the broken window. I can't help but wonder if it's significant, but I've never made sense of it.


The other man (Huett, I think) who was found closest to the cabin. I thought his body was in decent condition, possibly indicating he never made it to the cabin. Or, if he did make it to the cabin, he didn't stay there for long enough to be starving. Was he found to be near starvation? I thought all those found outside had died of exposure or undetermined causes? Also, wasn't Huett the most impaired of the bunch? Would he have known how to wind a shroud? But if he wound the shroud, then he would've been at the cabin much longer, until Weiher had died.

The remains of Madruga, Sterling, and Huett were all found between the car abandonment site and the bunkhouse / trailer site (roughly 1/2 to 2/3 of the way along the probable route* from the former to the latter).

* See my comments elsewhere concerning the probable route (following the Sno-Cat tracks) that would have been much shorter than the commonly-quoted 19 - 20 miles' distance from Madruga's car to the bunkhouse campsite.

Madruga's and Sterling's bodies were found in close proximity to each other off one side of the road leading to the trailer. These two were claimed to be close buddies who tended to stay together as a pair, so it's not surprising their remains were found close together. Huett's remains were found not very far away (let's say a mile or less) off the opposite side of the road.

All 3 bodies had been scavenged by animals. Madruga's body was the least 'violated'. Sterling's body was in much worse condition (pretty much skeletal).

Huett's remains consisted solely of scattered bones, and his were the last remains to be discovered. Huett was Weiher's close buddy and sidekick.

Some accounts (FWIW) claim one of the guys was the most impaired or dependent on others. It was either Sterling or Huett, but I don't recall which one it was.

Since Huett was Weiher's closest pal among the 5, he (Huett) would be the one most likely to have doggedly stuck with Weiher to the bunkhouse / trailer if he could.

There are no tangible clues concerning whether these three died going toward the bunkhouse or possibly backtracking from it. As noted elsewhere, three blankets and one or more flashlights were found abandoned a short distance from the bunkhouse, and these may be evidence of an attempt to return from the bunkhouse.

Neither are there any tangible clues as to whether these 3 were hiking together in one or both directions.


That means that Gary Mathias was at the cabin, and didn't get dropped off at his contacts location, and was with the group. But, that means he was with Weiher until the end, possibly almost 2 weeks before rescue. How did he have the strength to leave? And how did he get far enough to not be found?

I'm not sure Mathias was at the cabin at all. The only clue suggesting he was there were his sneakers (found on Weiher's frostbitten feet instead of Weiher's own leather shoes or boots).*

A few cans of food had been opened, but none had been touched.

There's no decisive evidence that anyone (other than Weiher) spent much time at the bunkhouse / trailer.

My working hypothesis is that Weiher never moved from the bunk once he was in it and covered.

* Furthermore, there's only one bit of evidence (the store clerk's report, given days or weeks after the fatal night) indicating Mathias was with the other 4 in Chico that night. The clerk claimed to remember the 'boys' because they entered the store just as the clerk was starting to close down for the night (an annoyance that luckily made the encounter stick in memory). The clerk was reported as claiming all 5 came into the store ...

... but the cash register record (tape?) demonstrated they bought only 4 drinks (2 sodas; 1 pint of milk; 1 quart of milk) and 4 snacks.


So many questions!

Indeed!
 
That's always been my default presumption. The campground location of the bunkhouse / trailer was used by the forestry / ranger folks. Another angle that occurred to me was that it may have been a 'lost and found' item that no one had claimed.

That may be the default position, but if the entire excursion into the mountains had been to return a lost watch for a reward, and it all went horribly wrong, then it is not impossible that the watch was left there in the cabin for safe keeping while the second last survivor left to go on his final errand.

I'm not even sure the watch worked. The accounts that mention it state it was missing its crystal. I don't recall any of them stating whether it could be wound up and / or would run.
The watch was found next to a partially melted candle. I like to think that whoever swaddled Weiher and left set up the candle and a ticking watch to calm him and lead him off to sleep - a thoughtful little kindness in a desperately dangerous situation.

Sweet perhaps, but wildly impractical. The broken window was left uncovered to let the blizzard in, and they failed to find the years' supply of food in the shed. There wasn't even a fire, despite the means to make one. I am amazed that Weiher failed to make any of those basic survival improvements despite taking weeks to die. He was neither locked in, nor bound. He was probably in pain, and not very bright, however.
 
Actually "grunts" is army slang for ordinary servicemen.


Yes. But that's my point. They weren't all military servicemen. The majority of the group weren't.


As for their particular mental complaint, what is the actual evidence for their conditions? They may well have actually been retarded after all. People with an IQ measured below 70 are classed as retarded. Do we have any info on them at all?

I agree that they may have quite high IQ, but you don't get diagnosed as a retard if you do. That is basically the assessment criterion.


Back in the 60s and 70s though assessment was far less accurate. Not every kid would have had their IQ tested. Assessment criteria was far less accurate and informed. The medical profession itself understood conditions such as Autism, ADHD, Aspergers and others far less than they do today.

The very term 'retarded' is a very lazy (not to mention actively hateful) catch-all term, which once given writes off so many other conditions. It is not truly a diagnosis in itself by modern standards. A child raised 40-50 years ago would not have been tested separately for multiple conditions. In many cases the diagnosis could simply be 'Well, I think he might be a little slow, to my mind. Better mark him up as Retarded'. No further exploration given.

We can only go off what the families of each of the Boys used in terms of description. Some of which (like laying out clothes for future days) could just as easily be a symptom of obsessive compulsive disorder. Something else which would have been classified as 'retarded' behavior back in the 60s and 70s.


Well, please be equally careful that you are not the one making assumptions here. IQ was used in the 1970s, and Aspergers had been a valid diagnosis since 1944.


To the former, not in all cases (and also not necessarily considering how other diagnosed and/or undiagnosed conditions may have tainted the testing). To the latter, of course it has. But that's not to say that every doctor who ever diagnosed a patient as 'retarded' was aware of the differences between Aspergers and say Autism, or ADHD, or OCD...

Seriously, Mental Health is an arena which we still don't take as seriously or sensitively in the modern as as it both needs to be and deserves to be taken. It certainly wasn't 40 years ago.


That is the main mystery here. Again, I think that gold watch of unknown provenance is important.

Honestly think that one is a bit of a red herring. As others have also said, the watch could have been in the Forestry Ranger Station. I don't think it implies anything more significant than that.
 
Yes. But that's my point. They weren't all military servicemen. The majority of the group weren't.

2 of 5 had military experience. That's 40% of a small group.

Back in the 60s and 70s though assessment was far less accurate. Not every kid would have had their IQ tested. Assessment criteria was far less accurate and informed. The medical profession itself understood conditions such as Autism, ADHD, Aspergers and others far less than they do today.

Unlikely. No doctor offers a diagnosis without evidence. Every doctor can be held accountable for their diagnoses in a court, and without supporting evidence they are in trouble. Now in a case such as Downs Syndrome, where there is obvious deformity, the physical symptoms are obvious. In a case where an individual has no obvious physical symptoms, but apparently has some form of cognitive impairment, it would have been irresponsible to diagnose without performing some measure of testing, or at least corroborating evidence from an institution.

The very term 'retarded' is a very lazy (not to mention actively hateful) catch-all term, which once given writes off so many other conditions. It is not truly a diagnosis in itself by modern standards. A child raised 40-50 years ago would not have been tested separately for multiple conditions. In many cases the diagnosis could simply be 'Well, I think he might be a little slow, to my mind. Better mark him up as Retarded'. No further exploration given.

Retard simply means "slow". It has become hateful because bullying children made it so, but it is not implicitly cruel. As to it being a diagnosis, it isn't now, but it certainly used to be in the 1970s. Today we say "Intellectual Disability".
As to the scale of diagnosis for Mental Retardation, no, there was a scale of IQ that was used by medical professionals to measure the level of the condition and required care. Anyone under IQ 70 was considered retarded.

We can only go off what the families of each of the Boys used in terms of description. Some of which (like laying out clothes for future days) could just as easily be a symptom of obsessive compulsive disorder. Something else which would have been classified as 'retarded' behavior back in the 60s and 70s.

Even in the 1970s doctors were aware of the difference between ODC and Mental Retardation (Intellectual Disability). It wasn't always quite as medieval as you suggest.

To the former, not in all cases (and also not necessarily considering how other diagnosed and/or undiagnosed conditions may have tainted the testing). To the latter, of course it has. But that's not to say that every doctor who ever diagnosed a patient as 'retarded' was aware of the differences between Aspergers and say Autism, or ADHD, or OCD...

There was no diagnosis for ADHD back in the 1970s, DSM2 only listed hyperkinetic disorder in 1968. Aspergers diagnoses were rare, and the condition wasn't well understood, but high functioning people with Aspergers were known by another name; "engineers". You are correct about the misdiagnosis of patients with Autism as being retarded though, that was definitely a problem back then, and many people with Autism were misdiagnosed because the usual testing couldn't differentiate them from the severely retarded.

Seriously, Mental Health is an arena which we still don't take as seriously or sensitively in the modern as as it both needs to be and deserves to be taken. It certainly wasn't 40 years ago.

True to a degree. There was certainly a lot more stigma, and there weren't nearly as many treatment options. A diagnosis of mental illness of any kind often meant a great deal of trouble getting employment.

Honestly think that one is a bit of a red herring. As others have also said, the watch could have been in the Forestry Ranger Station. I don't think it implies anything more significant than that.

Reconsider. It is the only point of physical evidence that remains notably unaccounted for. It is an item that is out of place in a case that has attracted a lot of attention, and yet has gone unsolved. Apparently nobody has done much looking into the gold watch and its origins, and cases have turned on smaller pieces of evidence than that. If the police couldn't account for its presence, then it should have been given intense scrutiny, but it never gained any traction. That is called a loose end, and in an unsolved case, it is the loose ends that are important.
 
There are some very interesting points brought up in the comments of this video, by a couple of people who claim to be related/know of these people, and they have some interesting thoughts on the subject. The comments are replies to the top comment. Have a look...

 
There's an incongruity regarding Mathias' medications. He was diagnosed as schizophrenic, and he was prescribed:

- Stelazine* (Trifluoperazine) for the schizophrenia *(sometimes cited as Stellazine)
- Cogentin (Benzatropine) as a precaution against the motor side effects (tremors, odd movements, etc.) that could be caused by the Trifluoperazine

According to the accounts mentioning details of Mathias' medications he was taking these drugs weekly, and he had taken doses earlier on Friday (the day they drove to the basketball game in Chico). One account (I forget which one ...) cited Mathias' stepfather as saying Gary had taken his doses that morning.

Now here's the odd bit ...

According to online drug reference sites, both Stelazine and Cogentin are taken daily - sometimes multiple times per day. Benzatropine has a pharmacological half-life of 12 - 24 hours; Trifluoperazine has a half-life of 10 - 20 hours.

My point is that if Gary Mathias had taken his meds no later than midday Friday, one would think they were wearing off by midnight. If nothing else, the exertion and time expended in hiking another 19 miles in snow should have left him with little of the drugs in his system. In any case, he was missing for more than a week, so he was eventually overdue for his meds no matter how one interprets his requirements.

You are correct. Both Stelazine and Cogentin would be taken once or twice a day. As far as I'm aware Stelazine did not come in a long-lasting injectable, only as a when necessary injection every 6 hours. So it would have definitely been oral medication. The Cogentin was used to reduce the unwanted effects of Stelazine namely Parkinson-like movement disorders. It would have been given at the same time as the Stelazine.

People with a diagnosis of Schizophrenia can function adequately for weeks if not months. It's likely though that his behavior and self-cares would start to become erratic pretty quickly.
 
I like the thinking here, but is it possible that dose and regimen have changed since the 70s?

It has with other medicines.

Nah it's not changed. Stelazine isn't used much these days because it's old 1st gen and considered a bit dirty, (too many side effects).
 
I'm wondering if Mathias simply asked to be dropped off to his friend Forbestown to score? Many people with Schizophrenia self-medicate with Cannabis and the strains back in the 70's would not have been as strong as they are today. He may have been able to keep it hidden from his family?

Maybe his local dealer couldn't sort supply him so he needed to go further afield? Do we know how much money he is thought to have taken?

Forbestown seems to play a part in this as it is in the direction the car was found.


Also being off his medication would have probably made Mathias feel more alert and lively as Stelazine is very sedating and can make people feel very foggy.
 
My initial take is that Mathias asked to be taken to Forbestown. He explains the route to Madruga and at some point falls asleep and Madruga misses the turn and they get onto the mountain road.

One of the boys gets out to relieve himself and gets lost. Or one or more has a panicky episode or they have an argument as they were going to be very late home and ran off. The others, (all deeply caring guys by the accounts), go looking for him. The get lost too. On finding the snow plow tracks the follow them hoping it will lead to safety. They get split up and only Weiher and Mathias make it to the trailer.

After sometime Mathias knowing that his friend is dying sets out to find help and dies in the wilderness. Weiher dies in the trailer.
 
I've recently discovered something that might help explain how / why the boys got lost that night.

It turns out that the region in which they were traveling (the Central Valley of California) is subject to significantly foggy conditions during the winter months. This is known as the Tule fog:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tule_fog

I don't recall (and my notes don't reflect ... ) any mention of fog (or lack thereof) on the 'fatal' night.

I'd love to know whether there were Tule fog conditions in effect the night they disappeared. It wouldn't take much fog to explain taking a wrong turn. Because the fog occurs in the lower elevations, they could have finally emerged from it only to find themselves on an unfamiliar road, heading up into the mountains, and suddenly surrounded by snow.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2019-04-24 at 12.55.53 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2019-04-24 at 12.55.53 PM.png
    76.5 KB · Views: 75
Out-STAND-ing! Thanks for looking into the issue and posting some illuminating info about that night.
 
Wow! That's very interesting. I'm surprised that wasn't mentioned in any of the stories about that night. Seems like a pretty important bit of information. Snowcat tracks would be among the few things they could see.
 
Good work EnolaGaia and exp2019. While the Tule Fog wouldn't allow much light to be shed on anything at the time, it sure sheds light on the case after the fact.
 
This case is covered in two parts in the latest podcast The Unexplained by Richard McLean Smith, although it's just a basic overview, he never really gets into theories of what might have actually happened in the cases he covers.
 
If that was level of fog coverage it's absolutely understandable as to how a number of wrong turns might have occurred, or how the group might have gotten lost in the wilderness. As others have said, it's very surprising that this detail hasn't been mentioned before.
 
David Paulides of Missing: 411 and bigfoot studies fame delivers his take on the Yuba County Five.

Skip to 4:50.
 
Don't tell me, David Paulides will hint at it being ... Something. Something weird, that is. Though something weird probably isn't necessary in this case? I will have a try nevertheless.
I listened to this a while ago and thought it was good (the channel has a religious slant, but it doesn't really affect how the case is handled here):
 
Last edited:
I dont think there is anything mysterious beyond we dont know what happened.
I kind of agree with you, if I reinterpret your comment as

'I don't think there is anything woo, but it's still fascinating because we don't know what happened'

No offence, but 'not knowing what happened' is almost the definition of mystery. It's why we are still fascinated by Amelia Earhart and Jack the Ripper, neither of which mystery (except for those totally hatstand) has anything supernatural or extra-terrestial about them.
 
Back
Top