Main text

Major renovations were completed in November 2017 but I expect that warts remain.
Thanks for your patience. Allan

In Defence of Arthur Moffatt.

Overview.

In 1955, Arthur Moffatt set out to document, by film, photos and writings (his journal and those of his companions), the barrenlands of northern Canada. I emphasise that this was a documentary trip; I should welcome being corrected, but I believe the Moffatt trip to have been the first such in the barrenlands. It was decidedly not a recreational trip like that perhaps taken by most readers.
Perhaps because documentation was readily available, Moffatt chose to repeat the central portion of the 1893 Tyrrell-Tyrrell (Joseph Burr and James Williams) expedition of the Geological Survey of Canada; this was the reach from Black Lake (on the Fond du Lac River) to Baker Lake (on the Thelon River).
To guide him, Moffatt possessed four JBT items:
his journal, his book, his annotated maps, plus personal correspondence of 1954 and 1955.
Throughout the previous 11 weeks of the trip, Moffatt had followed J B Tyrrell’s advice, in particular that regarding rapids. That advice had proved worthy of Moffatt’s trust, as evinced by the fact that he followed it on 14 September 1955. In support, I point out that the only two dumps of the entire trip occurred in the rapids where he died.
But Tyrrell’s advice failed Moffatt that day. The evidence (I refrained from providing either analysis or comment) regarding his death is provided in Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.

The accusations and the evidence.
Accusations regarding the cause/s of Moffatt’s death appeared first in 1959 and continued until 2014 (and counting). Over those 55 years, the cause was asserted (no supporting evidence was ever provided) to be one or more of the following.
The Moffatt party lost sense of reality.
Reference. Appendix 1. Reality.
It took too many holidays early, forcing it to take chances later in order to escape the onset of winter.
Reference. Appendix 3. Equipment.
It lacked experience.
Reference. Appendix 4. Experience.
The early pace was plodding, forcing the party to take chances later in order to escape the onset of winter.
Reference. Appendix 5. Pace and Weather.
It lacked (sic) food.
Reference. Appendix 6. Food.
It lacked a schedule.
Reference. Appendix 7. Schedule.
The fatal rapids were run in desperate haste in order to escape the onset of winter. Moffatt took the ultimate chance by running them without a scout.
References.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

Summary.
In the afternoon of 14 September 1955, Moffatt led the party downstream toward Marjorie Lake on the Dubawnt River. Only when it was too late to bail out and head for shore did he realise that the advice of J B Tyrrell, which had proved worthy of his trust for the previous 11 weeks, had failed him that day; he could only tough it out. His canoe (and another) capsized and he died of hypothermia about an hour later.
Reference. Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

Conclusions.
In Ancillary 1. Accusations, the many accusations made of Moffatt are confronted by the evidence of participants Franck, Grinnell, Lanouette, LeFavour, Pessl and Moffatt himself.
Every accusation, save one, made of Moffatt and the party as a whole fails to survive the test of that evidence. The exception is that the party did not carry a radio; but a radio would not have prevented the tragedy, and Moffatt’s request for permission to carry a radio was denied.
And so it follows that Arthur Moffatt was falsely accused for 55 years.

Acknowledgments.

I am profoundly grateful to trip participants Fred “Skip” Pessl, Ed “Joe” Lanouette and Bruce LeFavour for their generous and extensive assistance with my research. They kindly and most patiently informed me, without guiding me, as I stumbled along the path to understand the tragedy. They supplied copies of much of the source material cited in my bibliography; I would have had considerable difficulty otherwise. In fact, I would not have so much as known of the existence of some material.
In more detail:
Pessl provided excerpts from Moffatt’s journal.
Lanouette provided his full journal for 14 September (only a condensation was provided in the SI article of 1959).
LeFavour provided the third of his four newspaper articles.
All three (especially Pessl) corresponded privately as well.
I hope that I have honoured the trust that they placed in me.
But responsibility for all errors, especially those of judgment, belongs to me alone.

Thanks also to the following.
George Luste provided keen insights into the tragedy, this early in my research; I much regret that I did not speak more with him while still I could.
Bruce Buttimore assisted in setting up the blog and suggested an important clarification.
Mike Gray loaned his two books regarding the Moffatt expedition.
Elizabeth Emge provided excerpts from the journal of participant Lanouette (her father).
Mathieu Sabourin (Library and Archives, Canada) provided a highly informative response to my request for information regarding the alleged inquest into Moffatt’s death.
The staff of the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library (University of Toronto) made extraordinary efforts to help me access Tyrrell material.
Michael Pitt provided correspondence regarding the fatal rapids.
George Grinnell (participant) corresponded frankly regarding the Epilogue of the Sports Illustrated article; he responded also at the blog.
David DeMello corresponded regarding the Moffatt route from Wharton Lake to Marjorie Lake, and he posted information at Canadian Canoe Routes regarding the Marjorie-Aberdeen portage.
Les Wilcox suggested an important clarification and provided correspondence regarding the Tyrrell-Moffatt route from Wharton Lake to Marjorie Lake.
Ken McGoogan suggested a more effective introduction to the evidence of Appendix 9.
CCR’s recped pointed out an incorrect URL.

Timeline of the primary Moffatt literature.

The following provides the timeline for the publications of the trip participants, plus the publications of Moffatt’s primary accusers.
I include also two personal items (a reference to my first attempt to address the accusations, plus the announcement of the opening of the blog to public view).
Items of what I call the secondary accusatory literature are listed in the corresponding part of the Bibliography.
The accusations themselves are addressed in Ancillary 1. Accusations.

1955.
Publication of participant Bruce LeFavour’s four articles in the Evening Recorder, Amsterdam NY, 27 through 30 December (1955).
The articles are not accessible to the public. Thanks to LeFavour, I possess the third, which provides important evidence regarding the fatal rapids.
If the reader will excuse a comment. As best I know, no Moffatt accuser was aware of these articles.

1959.
Publication of the Sports Illustrated article.
Part 1, 9 March. Man against the Barren Grounds. [pp 68-76].
Part 2, 16 March. Danger and Sacrifice. [pp 80-88].
Reader responses to both parts were posted at
http://www.si.com/vault/1959/04/06/604104/19th-hole-the-readers-take-over
The editor had full access to Moffatt’s journal, selections from which comprise the bulk of the article.
Other contents include Moffatt’s prospectus for the trip, photographs, a map of the route, thumbnails of the participants, a New York Times article regarding arrival in Baker Lake, a condensation of Lanouette’s journal for the day of the tragedy, and an Epilogue.

1978.
Publication of the book of Alex Inglis.
Northern Vagabond. The Life and Career of J B Tyrrell – the Man Who Conquered the Canadian North. McClelland and Stewart. (1978).
If the reader will excuse a comment, the book went unnoticed in the accusatory literature.

1988.
Publication of participant Grinnell’s article.
Canoe. July 1988, pp 18-21 and 56.

Undated assertions made prior to 1996.
The only known source regarding the assertions is George Luste’s comments in Grinnell’s book [pp 293&294].
If the reader will excuse two comments.
I possess no information regarding when the assertions were made, or their authors, or their source/s.
I possess no evidence that the assertions influenced the later Moffatt literature.

1996.
Publication of participant Grinnell’s book.
Grinnell, George J. A Death on the Barrens. A True Story.
Recently, I purchased the 2010 edition; I have not looked at the 2005 edition.
If the reader will excuse two comments.
I agree with Pessl [private correspondence] that the 2010 edition differs significantly from that of 1996.
As best I know, the Moffatt literature is based entirely on the 1996 edition, and so all my comments in the following are based on it alone.

1996.
Publication of reviews of Grinnell’s book by James Murphy and Andrew MacDonald.
Che-Mun Canoelit section. Moffatt, Myth & Mysticism. Spring 1996, pp 5 & 11.

2000.
Publication of two short articles regarding the Moffatt trip.
Peake, Michael.
Che-Mun, Outfit 99, Winter 2000.
1. 1955: A Tale of Two Trips. p 4.
http://www.canoe.ca/che-mun/99two.html
2. The Tragic Trips…1955 – The Moffat Dubawnt River trip. pp 5&6.

2005.
Publication of the two Mahler-Thum articles, identical at first glance.
1. Che-Mun. Outfit 122, Autumn 2005, starting on page 4.
http://www.ottertooth.com/che-mun/122/chemun122.pdf
2. Feature Story in the Advanced Paddler section at canoeing.com.
http://www.canoeing.com/advanced/feature/deadmansriver.htm

2012.
1. Publication of Kesselheim’s article in Canoe&Kayak, with comments by participant Pessl. Follow-up material was published in the issues of July 2012 (p 14) and August 2012 (p 12).
2. Publication of Kingsley’s first online article.
In a most dreadful sort of paradise. Up Here. May 2012; pp 88, 90 & 91.
http://www.jenniferkingsley.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/looking-back-May-2012-Moffatt-pdf-.pdf

2013.
1. Publication of Kingsley’s second online article.
Back and Beyond. Lake. Issue 6 (2013); pp 12-14.
http://www.jenniferkingsley.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Lake_Back-and-Beyond_2011pdf.pdf
2. Publication of participant Pessl’s article in Nastawgan.
The Fateful 1955 Dubawnt River Trip. Nastawgan. Summer 2013. Vol 70, No 2.
http://www.myccr.com/sites/default/files/storage/CCR%20pdf/Nastawgan/summer_13.pdf

2014.
1. Publication of Kingsley’s book.
Paddle North. Adventure, Resilience and Renewal in the Arctic Wild. Greystone Books, Vancouver/Berkeley (2014).
Moffatt material is confined to pages 185-189 and 220.
2. Publication of Pessl’s book.
Barren Grounds. The Story of the Tragic Moffatt Canoe Trip. Dartmouth College Press, Hanover, NH (2014).
Pessl provides copious amounts of new evidence, notes on trip planning, excerpts from his journal and that of fellow participant Peter Franck, a comparison with the progress of the Tyrrell-Tyrrell trip of 1893, an Epilogue and a list of nontravel days.
3. Pessl’s talk (the Second Annual Luste Lecture, 13 November; unpublished) at the Canadian Canoe Museum.
http://www.canoemuseum.ca/blog/2014/11/13/highlights-of-the-2014-luste-lecture
4. Publication of my Nastawgan article (Winter issue, 2014, pp 16-19). It contains a review of Pessl’s talk, plus related material.
http://www.myccr.com/sites/default/files/storage/CCR%20pdf/Nastawgan/winter_2014.pdf

Interjection.
If the reader will excuse a comment. The evidence suggests that neither Kingsley nor Pessl was aware of the other’s articles and books of 2012, 2013 and 2014.

2015 and 2016.
Failed attempt on my part to publish the first version of In Defence of Arthur Moffatt.
April 2015.
After consultation with the editor of Canoe&Kayak, I submitted the following items: Main text (both print and digital editions), Bibliography and five Appendices. This version, which omitted accusers’ names, was accepted for publication.
Later, at the request of the editor, I added accusers’ names and I provided ~eight of Pessl’s photos.
June 2015.
What was to have been the print edition of the Main text was posted online
http://www.canoekayak.com/canoe/in-defense-of-arthur-moffatt/#5UIXv2RETJtWMQwt.97 ,
as was the digital edition of the Main text

In Defense of Arthur Moffatt (Unabridged Version)


The subtitle of both: Allan Jacobs on why the conventional wisdom about Arthur Moffatt is wrong.
Comment. It did not do so in the beginning, but the software occasionally displays material from these two URLs; if it continues to do so, I might mangle them.
October 2015.
All eight items were submitted in final form; no response was received.
June 2016.
Given
that I had waited for months for a reply to my enquiry regarding the publication status of the remaining items, and
that the Bibliography and the five Appendices had not been published in any form,
I withdrew all items.
Neither did I receive a response to my withdrawal notice.
Summary. Allan whines again.

19 September 2016.
Announcement at Canadian Canoe Routes
http://www.myccr.com/phpbbforum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=45362
of the opening of my blog In defence of Arthur Moffatt to public view.
A few days earlier, I had informed several interested parties that the blog was open.

The evidentiary basis of the accusatory literature.

Given that Pessl’s articles and his book (the latter contains also evidence of participant Franck) appeared too late to influence that literature, and
that participant LeFavour’s third article became available to me only recently (and is still not available to the public, as are the other three),
one sees that the evidentiary basis of the entire accusatory literature consists of only three items.
1. The Sports Illustrated article.
Issues of 9 March 1959 Man against the barrens grounds (pp 68-76) and 16 March 1959 Danger and Sacrifice (pp 80-88).
The evidentiary material is provided in selections from Moffatt’s journal (in cases edited) and a condensation (I believe it to be a faithful one) of Lanouette’s journal for 14 September 1955.
2. Grinnell’s article Art Moffatt’s Wilderness Way to Enlightenment.
Canoe, July 1988, pp 18-21 & 56.
3. Grinnell’s book A Death on the Barrens. A True Story. (1996)
Comment.
I emphasise that these three items were the only primary sources (defined as those with an immediate basis in the evidence of trip participants) that were available to Moffatt’s accusers. I note that much of the accusatory literature consists is based not on these primary sources, but rather on previous items of that literature.
The next three paragraphs examine the evidentiary basis of those three primary sources.

The evidentiary basis of Sports Illustrated article.
This is the second most influential item of the accusatory literature; only Grinnell’s book (1996) surpasses it in this respect. The Sports Illustrated editor, who had full access to Moffatt’s journal, made the assertions listed below.

Some assertions made by the Sports Illustrated editor, and my responses.
Assertion 1.
Food was becoming the question now. [top left of p 76, date 8/9 August].
Assertion 2.
game grows scarce. [bottom right of p 76, for the period after 16/17 August].
Responses to Assertions 1 and 2.
The first caribou was shot on 5 August, at most 4 days before the date of Assertion 1.
But nowhere in the entire article did the SI editor mention that event.
As well, Moffatt’s journal (possessed in full by the editor) documents that caribou were shot on 5 August, 11 August, 20 August, 26 August and 5 September, for a total of five; the editor mentioned only the shooting of that on 11 August.
And many ptarmigan were killed. And a plethora of other food (three species of fish, blueberries and mushrooms) was obtained from the land. But the editor omitted mention of any of this evidence.
Reference for Assertions 1 and 2. Appendix 6. Food.
Assertion 3.
The Moffatt party was nine days behind schedule. [bottom right of p 76; appearing between the Moffatt journal entries for 15 and 16 August].
Response.
The Moffatt party had no day-by-day schedule. As anyone who has paddled in the barrens knows full well, no recreational party have such a schedule in the barrenlands; the vagaries of the weather, especially the wind, forbid such. Even the Tyrrell-Tyrrell party of 1893 was unable to travel some days.
Reference. Appendix 7. Schedule.
Assertion 4.
provisions dwindle. [bottom right of p 76, for the period after 16/17 August].
Response.
Yes, provisions dwindle as they are consumed. But the SI editor omitted mention here that a massive resupply of provisions was obtained from the cache, this on 7 September. [SI article, beginning at the bottom of the left column on p 82].
Reference. Appendix 6. Food.
Assertion 5, part 1.
The Moffatt party races against winter on the Barren Grounds… In desperate haste, they take an ultimate chance. [bottom right of p 76, for the period after 16/17 August].
Assertion 5, part 2.
Increasingly, the men were taking chances. They now shot down churning chutes of white water which, a month earlier, they would have scrutinized with a doubtful eye. [top right of p 82, 7/8 September].
Response to both parts of Assertion 5. Neither part is supported by any evidence known to me.
References.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

The redaction made by the Sports Illustrated editor.
Worthy of special note is that the editor redacted the phrase Following Tyrrell’s route from Moffatt’s last journal entry, that for 13 September.
The interpretation of the phrase is uncertain, as I discuss elsewhere. But it certainly evinces
first that Moffatt had obtained route advice from J B Tyrrell and
second that Moffatt was following Tyrrell’s advice.
Reference. Particulars 2 and 3 of Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Opinion.
I request the reader’s indulgence.
Given that the editor redacted possibly important evidence, I conclude that I am unable to trust any content of the Sports Illustrated article that is not supported by evidence from a credible source.

The evidentiary basis of participant Grinnell’s article.
Art Moffatt’s Wilderness Way to Enlightenment.
Canoe, July 1988, pp 18-21 & 56.
1. The article is the source of the accusation that the Moffatt party had lost sense of reality early and so later had to race down the river to catchup on time.
Reference. Appendix 1. Reality.
2. Together with his book, Grinnell’s article is the source of accusations that the Moffatt party had taken an excessive number of holidays early and so later had to race down the river…
Reference. Appendix 2. Holidays.
4. I refer the reader to Ancillary 1. Accusations for my discussion of these accusations.
Opinion.
I request the reader’s indulgence.
I trust no content of Grinnell’s article that is not supported by independent evidence.

The evidentiary basis of participant Grinnell’s book.
This is the most influential item of all the accusatory literature.
This paragraph would grow to unreasonable length were I to document all my objections to the contents of the book. Let me content myself to provide here only some material regarding Moffatt’s death.
1. Lanouette’s full journal for the day of the tragedy is provided in Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
2. The rapids part of that journal for 14 September is provided in Particular 4 of Appendix 9 (The fatal rapids); the URL is provided below.
3. The Sports Illustrated article provided what I consider to be a faithful condensation of that article [SI article, p 85].
The rapids part of the SI condensation is provided in Particular 5 of Appendix 9.
4. On page 202 of his book (1996 edition), Grinnell provided a version of the SI condensation. The rapids part is provided in Particular 6 of Appendix 9.
5. On comparing the original version (Particular 5) of the condensation with Grinnell’s version of it (Particular 6) one sees that the two are identical but for one difference.
The sole difference is that Grinnell redacted (and replaced with an ellipsis) the three-sentence passage This surprised us. Art had figured we had already shot the last two rapids before Marjorie Lake. Actually, what we had gone down were only riffles, and what lay ahead was the real beginning of the first rapids from the condensation of Lanouette’s journal [Sports Illustrated, p 85, middle of right column].
What conclusion can be drawn from that passage but that Moffatt had reason to believe that there were no rapids worthy of the name in the reach where he died, the reach between the portage (that completed in the morning of 14 September) and Marjorie Lake?
Given that the remainder of the passage is provided faithfully, exists there a rational mind that believes that redaction to have been an accident, a slip of the pen?
Reference. Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Comment. I express my concern
first that both the SI and Grinnell redacted what I consider to be important evidence regarding the events of 14 September,
second that they had corresponded (at least) as evinced by the Appendix An Epilogue to Tragedy, which provides comments of Grinnell, for example those concerning death from hypothermia.
That matter aside, I provide the following
Opinion.
Given that Grinnell redacted this evidence, I am unable to trust any content of his book that is not supported by evidence from a credible source.

Conclusions regarding the evidentiary basis of the accusatory literature.

I repeat that the only sources for the entire accusatory literature (primary and secondary alike) with primary basis in the writings of trip participants are the following three items.
1. The Sports Illustrated article, which contains both excerpts from Moffatt’s journal and a faithful condensation of Lanouette’s journal for 14 September (1959),
2. Grinnell’s article (1988), and
3. Grinnell’s book (1996).
The evidence regarding these three items is provided in the above three paragraphs The evidentiary basis…, and also in Ancillary 1. Accusations
Conclusion 1. The evidence leads me to conclude that I trust no content of the Sports Illustrated article, in the first instance.
Conclusion 2. The evidence leads me to conclude that I trust no content of Grinnell’s article, in the first instance.
Conclusion 3. The evidence leads me to conclude that I trust no content of Grinnell’s book, in the first instance.
Conclusion 4.
Given that the evidentiary basis of the entire accusatory literature (primary and secondary alike) consists of only these three publications, and
given that I trust no content of any of the three in the first instance,
it follows that I trust no content of the entire accusatory literature, in the first instance.
Opinion.
Given that the entire accusatory literature (primary and secondary alike) has its sole evidentiary basis in the SI article, Grinnell’s article and Grinnell’s book, and
given that I have learned not to trust, in the first instance, any content of those three publications,
it follows that, to me, the entire accusatory literature has no more substance than a house of cards.

The accusations and the evidence.

Preliminaries.
When the current round of renovations is complete, the nine Appendices (Internal URLs are provided below) will hold all evidence related to the corresponding primary accusations, plus some of my responses to them.
The bulk of my responses, and some of the evidence, will be filed in Ancillary 1. Accusations.

The running of the fatal rapids.
Because of the overriding importance of the matter, I address here (though only briefly) the primary accusations regarding the running of the fatal rapids.
Primary accusation 1.
Increasingly, the men were taking chances. They now shot down churning chutes of white water which, a month earlier, they would have scrutinized with a doubtful eye. [Sports Illustrated, top of right column, p 82]
Primary accusation 2.
Already nine days behind schedule, the Moffatt party races against winter on the Barren Grounds. The days grow colder, provisions dwindle, game grows scarce. In desperate haste, they take an ultimate chance. [Sports Illustrated, bottom of right column, p 76]
Comments.
No evidence was ever presented in support of any of these accusations, and so the paddling community could easily have rejected them out-of-hand. Unfortunately, the very opposite occurred; the accusations were accepted in toto (as best I know without dissent until Pessl’s article of 2013).
The secondary accusations
are believed to be inspired by those of the Sports Illustrated editor.
1. …Moffatt died of exposure after they dumped in a large rapid they did not scout. [Che-Mun, Outfit 99, Winter 2000].
2. The men talked less and took more risks. On September 14th,… all three boats plunged over two sets of waterfalls the paddlers hadn’t bothered to scout…. [Kingsley book, top of p 189, 2014]
Response.
I expect that most river paddlers have run rapids without scouting them. In fact, that act is so common that it has acquired a title, namely making a blind probe. Countless parties have made blind probes and have dumped as a result. Indeed, two Moffatt primary accusers (Murphy and Thum) had the courage and the integrity to state that they had done so. And so, if dumping in a blind probe is proof of incompetence, then Murphy and Thum are incompetent, as are perhaps many reading this.
But Moffatt did not make a blind probe!
As I discuss below (in the paragraph The cause of Moffatt’s death) Moffatt had been informed by a reliable source (J B Tyrrell) that there were no significant rapids in the reach remaining above Marjorie Lake, and so he led the way down them, without a scout, to his death.
(a) Evidence that Moffatt that had been incorrectly advised by Tyrrell was provided in the very first publication of the accusatory literature, namely the Sports Illustrated article; I refer here to the condensation of Lanouette’s journal, pp 85-87.
Not one accuser in the matter of Moffatt’s death mentioned that evidence of Lanouette, although most are known to have had access to the Sports Illustrated article.
Deserving of explicit mention here is the SI editor her/himself.
(b) Evidence that Moffatt that had been incorrectly advised by Tyrrell was provided also by Luste, who wrote the following: Art Moffatt, following Tyrrell’s notes, was not expecting the rapid in which he swamped and then died. [Grinnell book, p 284].
Not one accuser in the matter of Moffatt’s death mentioned this evidence of Luste, even though most of them used material in Grinnell’s book in making their accusations of Moffatt. Worthy of explicit mention here are Grinnell himself and James Murphy (in his review of Grinnell’s book)
(c) Moffatt’s accusers in the matter of the fatal rapids were likely misled by the redactions of evidence made by the Sports Illustrated editor and by Grinnell (in his book).

The information possessed by Moffatt regarding the rapids where he died, and the cause of the tragedy.
Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources
documents that Moffatt had possessed J B Tyrrell’s maps, his book and his journal; I possess only the first two of these items. It documents also that Moffatt and JBT had corresponded; I possess only Moffatt’s part of the correspondence.
J B Tyrrell’s map
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-6-1893
for the reach where Moffatt died does not show the fatal rapids.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt provides the complete text of J B Tyrrell’s book for the relevant reach above Marjorie Lake. No mention is made there of the fatal rapids.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt
provides the complete (uncondensed) journal entry of Lanouette for 14 September. It evinces the surprise of Lanouette and Moffatt at the sudden appearance of the fatal rapids.
These three evidences lead me to conclude that Moffatt chose to run the fatal rapids because he had been told implicitly by J B Tyrrell that were no rapids of significance in that reach.
Conclusions.
The primary accusations made of Moffatt are exposed to the light of the evidence in the Appendices and in Ancillary 1. Not one of them survives confrontation with the evidence.
In particular, Arthur Moffatt (the most vilified person in the entire paddling literature) is innocent of all accusations regarding the running of the fatal rapids.
Reference.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

Some comments regarding the accusatory literature.

0. Again, the sole primary sources of the accusatory literature were
edited (in cases severely so) excerpts from Moffatt’s journal, as provided in the Sports illustrated article,
Grinnell’s article (1988), and
Grinnell’s book (1996).
1. For 55 years, from its beginning in 1959 to and including 2014, the accusatory literature consists of little but assertions, opinion pieces and rehashed versions of previous accusations. I don’t recall that one source for an accusation was identified explicitly; some sources are obvious, but most are not.
2. Little if any evidence was provided in support of the accusations. In fact, some accusations appear to have basis only in the imaginations of Moffatt’s accusers.
3. The little red fruit was picked by especially by two accusers,
4. The schedule-related accusations of two accusers are refuted by the evidence of their only source, here Grinnell’s book. There, Grinnell asserts first that there was a prescriptive schedule, then that there was only a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake, finally that there was again a prescriptive schedule. But Grinnell repeatedly and consistently stated that there was a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake.
Nevertheless, the two accusers (in their reviews of Grinnell’s book, no less) in the matter of the schedule asserted that lack of schedule of any kind was responsible in part for Moffatt’s death.
5. Several persons asserted/suggested that a lack/shortage of food in the seven weeks before the tragedy was partly responsible for Moffatt’s death.
(a) One accuser asserted game grows scarce, this made in full possession of Moffatt’s journal, which documents that five caribou were shot, the last on 5 September.
More generally, participant LeFavour documents that, on 14 September, the party had so much caribou meat on board that it had no need to hunt again; and, that day, the party added 20 lb of trout to the food supply.
(b) The assertion Lack of food… contributed to his [Moffatt’s] demise was made in a review of Grinnell’s book (the accuser’s only source). But that book documents that the seven weeks before 14 September saw an abundance of food from the land (most notably the shooting of five caribou) and also a resupply of provisions from the cache.
6. Exculpatory evidence regarding some accusations was in plain sight but went unmentioned by Moffatt’s accusers. The prime example is Lanouette’s journal for 14 September (faithfully condensed and published in the Sports Illustrated article) regarding the running of the fatal rapids without a scout.
7. Evidence was even redacted. I refer here to the actions of the Sports Illustrated editor (with respect to Moffatt’s last journal entry) and those of Grinnell (with respect to Lanouette’s journal for 14 September).
8. Assertions were unthinkingly accepted and promulgated, occasionally in embellished form.
The prime example of embellishment. The SI editor’s game grows scarce became The caribou were long gone. But that accuser’s primary source provides the following: Over the ensuing weeks… we killed our third, fourth and fifth caribous… [Grinnell book, p 156].
Comment. The last caribou was shot on 5 September. At lunch on 14 September, the party had so much caribou meat on board that it had no more need to hunt; and it caught a 20 lb lake trout at that time. [LeFavour]

The cause of Moffatt’s death

was none of those alleged by so many over 55 years.
1. The cause was not that the party had lost…sense of reality.
Appendix 1. Reality
2. The cause was not that the party took too many holidays early in the trip and so had to race later.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
4. The cause was not that the party was inexperienced.
Appendix 4. Experience.
5. The cause was not that the early pace was too slow and so that the party had to race later in order to escape the onset of winter.
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.
6. The cause was not lack of food or even a shortage thereof; in particular, the caribou were not long gone.
Appendix 6. Food.
7. The cause was not that the party lacked a schedule.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
8. The cause was not that the fatal rapids were run in desperate haste. And Moffatt did not take the ultimate chance in running them.
The cause of Moffatt’s death is documented rather in the following.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

The only true accusation
made over those 55 years (three generations) is that the Moffatt party did not carry a radio.
But the lack of a radio played no role in the tragedy; the presence of one (assumed to have survived the dump) might have served only to get the survivors more easily to Baker Lake.
A precaution. Lest it be asserted that Moffatt was negligent in not taking a radio, Appendix 3. Equipment evinces that his request to carry a radio was denied.

Summary.

1. I presented every known primary accusation made over all those years, then exposed each to the light of the evidence provided by the participants, as follows.
(a) Excerpts from Moffatt’s journal, as kindly provided by Pessl (ever helpful).
(b) Excerpts from Moffatt’s journal, as provided in the Sports Illustrated article (1959). I caution that the article is not to be trusted on the whole.
(c) LeFavour’s article (1955).
(d) Grinnell’s article (1988). I caution that the article is not to be trusted on the whole.
(e) Grinnell’s book (1996). I caution that the book is not to be trusted on the whole.
(f) Pessl’s book (2014), which contains also excerpts from Franck’s journal.
(g) Private correspondence with participants Pessl, Lanouette and LeFavour (2014-2017).
2. I concluded that not one primary accusation is encumbered by a basis in the evidence known to me.
Reference. Ancillary 1. Accusations.
3. By the standards of a civilised and intelligent society, Moffatt is therefore innocent, and so I say
Moffatt’s incompetence is nothing but a myth.
And a myth, even one presented as fact by so many and over so many years as to become generally perceived as fact, no matter how frequently it is stated, no matter who states it, remains nothing but a myth.
More specifically, the myth of Moffatt’s incompetence is a conglomerate of the submyths addressed in the Appendices 1 through 9.
4. How did it go so terribly wrong, that Moffatt was falsely accused for 55 years?
Opinion.
Assertions were accepted as evidence. Accusations were passed on, indeed embellished, without thought to whether they had a basis in evidence, even to whether they were credible. The rumour mill ground away. Gossip and gullibility reigned supreme.
Evidence refuting accusations was repeatedly ignored.
And, not least, alternative facts made a significant contribution.
5. Over those 55 years, not one accuser accepted the responsibility to examine the evidence before joining the assault on a defenceless person.
Did a dead person, a fellow paddler, not deserve better?

Assessment of the evidence.
Given that (as best I know) the evidence of Pessl (and so that of Franck) was published too late to influence the Moffatt literature, it follows that the only primary evidence (that of the trip participants) available to those who published on the Moffatt trip and his death consisted of four items.
Item 1
is the SI condensation of Lanouette’s journal for the day of the tragedy. [SI article, pp 85&86, 1959].
Assessment.
The evidence convinces me that the condensation is a faithful one.
Reference. Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
But the Moffatt literature that followed publication of the SI article makes no mention of the full condensation. Only Grinnell’s edited version (provided in Item 4) of the condensation is mentioned in that literature.
Item 2.
Excerpts from Moffatt journal. [Sports Illustrated article (1959)].
Assessment.
Given first that the SI editor redacted the phrase Following Tyrrell’s route from Moffatt’s last journal entry (that of 13 September), and second that I lack full access to Moffatt’s journal,
I decided that I am unable to trust any content of SI article unless it is confirmed by a trustworthy source.
Items 3 and 4
are Grinnell’s article in Canoe&Kayak, pp 18-21&56 (1988),
and his book A Death on the Barrens, Northern Books (1996). The editions of 2005 and 2010 appear not to figure in the literature.
Assessment.
Given especially that Grinnell (in his book) redacted the passage
This surprised us. Art had figured we had already shot the last two rapids into Marjorie Lake. Actually, what we had gone down were only riffles, and what lay ahead was the real beginning of the first rapids from his otherwise complete version of the SI condensation of Lanouette’s journal for 14 September, I decided that I am unable to trust any content of either his article or his book.
Reference for all four items.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Sources considered to be reliable
include the publications of the Tyrrell brothers, J B Tyrrell’s maps, Moffatt’s letters to J B Tyrrell, excerpts from Moffatt’s journal (but only as provided by Pessl, explicitly not those provided in the SI article), and Pessl’s book (which contains also the evidence of Franck).
Conclusion.
Given that the only primary sources used in all the Moffatt literature were the SI article, Grinnell’s article and Grinnell’s book, and
given that the evidence convinces me that none of those three sources is reliable, in the first instance,
it is perhaps reasonable for me to conclude the entire accusatory part of the Moffatt literature has no more substance than a house of cards, in the first instance.

Closing comments.
For 55 years, every Moffatt accuser asserted the cause of his death to be one or more of those discussed in the Appendices.
Not one accuser provided evidence in support of her/his assertion; it seems necessary to point out that an assertion by a previous accuser is not evidence, to most of us anyway.
Few of those accusations possessed any support in evidence when they were made. Many of them fly in the face of easily available contrary evidence to the contrary. And every one of them is refuted by the evidence in toto, save only that the Moffatt party did not carry a radio (because it was forbidden to do so).
Over those 55 years, every person (perhaps a score of them) who wrote about the tragedy got wrong the cause of Moffatt’s death.

Personal reflections.
Moffatt did not paddle the Dubawnt in order to build his self-esteem by proving himself to himself or to anyone else. A volunteer pacifist who served in the war for years as an ambulance driver at the very front of the battles has no need to prove anything to anyone.
Moffatt set out to document the barrenlands by means of film, photos and journals. Perhaps he took the trip also to experience the barrens, to immerse himself in it, to understand it at least in part, to appreciate it. Perhaps he had hoped to establish himself as a wilderness writer. Perhaps he already had the idea of protecting the barrens. Perhaps he took the trip in part out of respect for the wilderness.
Moffatt was the very antithesis of the conquer-the-wilderness types, the ego-trippers, the self-promoters, the peak-baggers, the river-baggers, in short all those go into the wild with something to prove. [Grinnell article, p 20, left column; Grinnell book, pp 18-19].
And so Moffatt was the very antithesis of the Dubawnt paddler of 1966, who made that trip solely in order to show up a dead man, as evinced by his Moffatt is precisely why we took the trip…I thought experienced trippers could cover Tyrrell’s route safely and skillfully, which we did.
Such courage, such grace!
Summary.
I suggest that Moffatt deserves our respect. Most certainly he and his family did not deserve the false, often abusive, assertions made over so many years by so many.

Suggestions.
1. Those wishing to learn more about the trip and the tragedy might begin with Pessl’s book.
Pessl, Fred (Skip). Barren Grounds. The Story of the Tragic Moffatt Canoe Trip. Dartmouth College Press (2014).
2. With all primary accusations shown to have no basis in any evidence, the way is clear for a new chapter in the Moffatt literature, namely an extended appreciation of him. Such would be rather late (he died sixty years ago), but perhaps someone will take on the job.
3. Perhaps multiple retractions are in order.

A little about Arthur Moffatt, the person.
The evidence convinces me that Moffatt was the very opposite of the bungling, incompetent fool that his many accusers so successfully portrayed him to be for 55 years.
From the little that I know of him, he was a thoughtful, decent, responsible, indeed admirable, being.
(a) Arthur Moffatt was born in 1919, the son of a stable worker on a Long Island estate. At 17, he’d paddled the Albany River in Northern Ontario alone, 500 miles from Sioux Lookout to Hudson’s Bay. He attended Dartmouth College—his father’s employer paid his tuition—and immediately after graduating in 1941 (Grinnell’s article gives 1939), he joined the American Field Service, a volunteer ambulance corps attached to the British Eighth Army. A committed pacifist, Moffatt witnessed some of the bloodiest campaigns of World War II, but never carried a weapon. [Pessl, as reported by Kesselheim, Alan. Canoe & Kayak, May 2012, starting on p 46.]
(b) … he joined the British Eighth Army in Africa, which is notable for two reasons: one, Moffatt was an American not British, and, two, he was a pacifist. For six years, he carried dead and wounded back from the front. On both adventures (the first was his solo trip on the Albany River in 1938) he said he had been scared to death, but after the war he had only felt the stupidity of it all. [Grinnell article, p 18]
(c) During the Second World War, as a professed pacifist from America and a volunteer with the American Field Service, a Quaker organization, Art had been allowed by the British High Command to carry no weapons, just the wounded and dying soldiers back from the front… [Grinnell book, p 15].
(d) He was a quietly principled man who from an early age lived as best he could, consistent with his principles. … He was a pacifist and volunteered for the American Field service as an ambulance driver, serving in Africa and Italy during World War II. [Pessl book, p 165]
Why did he choose the Dubawnt River?
He had …the grand concept of retracing J. B. Tyrrell’s epic 1893 journey down the Dubawnt River, creating a film documentary about the journey and sharing that experience in print with the wilderness adventure community. [Pessl, p 165]

In what respects are we the poorer for Moffatt’s passing?
An appreciation of Arthur Moffatt.
Even after these many years, I grieve Art Moffatt’s death. He was more than my mentor; he was perhaps a second father even though he was only fourteen years older than I. His pacifism, his principled lifestyle, and his view of the world, natural and international, opened my mind, challenged my thoughts, and gave me insight and courage to pursue my own dreams.
I wonder what would have been the future had he survived the Dubawnt and fully developed professionally as an outdoor writer and voice for wild spaces, indigenous peoples, habitat protection, and restraint in Arctic resources development. I believe his impact on our awareness and understanding of the Barrens would have been profound. How might we have better valued the vastness and uniqueness of that ecosystem? How different our understanding and vision of the far north might be today had our Dubawnt adventure ended in celebration instead of tragedy?
Certainly, we would be better informed, perhaps more compassionate in causes of peace, and probably more courageous in advocating to protect and conserve our northern heritage.
[Pessl, p 178].

Comments.
The Moffatt family lost a husband and a father.
The survivors lost their leader, their mentor, their companion, their friend.
The false, abusive accusations of the 55 years that followed likely inflicted much pain on both family and survivors, all of whom no doubt already suffered considerably from the loss. I express one last time my thanks to Pessl, Lanouette and LeFavour.

Opinions.
The Moffatt story is a candidate for the most shameful chapter in the entire outdoor literature. Even John Hornby (Thelon River, 1927) was treated mildly in comparison with Moffatt.
That matter aside: Of such scholarship, diligence, thought, integrity, common humanity, caution, charity, courage, compassion and above all commitment to evidence, is destroyed the reputations of the defenceless innocent; and here it was a fellow paddler.

The last word.
George Luste and I were professional colleagues for forty years. I regarded him as a friend.
He got me started with serious tripping. He provided much valuable advice. He recommended the upper Thelon for my first barrenlands trip; as a result, I got hooked on travel there.
I helped him with the Wilderness and Canoeing Symposium for several years.
He wrote the following regarding some Moffatt accusers pre-1996. I believe that he would have written more scathingly of those who followed.
Let him have the last word.
It seems as if a liberal amount of imagination has been invoked by these writers to change the facts so they fit their preoccupations and desires for culpability. [Grinnell book, 1996, p 294]

Internal URLs.

Foreword and Forum.
Main text.
Appendix 1. Reality.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Ancillary 4. Distances.
Ancillary 5. Loose ends and the future.
Ancillary 6. Addenda.
Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.
Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.
Bibliography.

Notice.
With the exception of quoted material, copyright to the above belongs to Allan Jacobs.

Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.

Major renovations were completed in early November 2017 but I expect that warts remain.
Thanks for your patience. Allan

Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.

Introduction.
This Ancillary provides all known evidence related to the death of Arthur Moffatt.
So that the reader may assess that evidence unencumbered by my interpretations of it,
I refrain from making comments except as deemed necessary for clarity.
Consequences:
no quotes of accusations, no references to them, no responses to them;
no mention of redactions, no references to them, no responses to them.
The reader will find the omitted items in the Appendices and in the other Ancillaries; the corresponding Internal URLs are provided at the end of this document.

List of Moffatt’s sources.
1. The book of James W Tyrrell.
2. The book of Joseph B Tyrrell.
3. The journal/report of J B Tyrrell.
4. Correspondence with J B Tyrrell.
Reference for these four items. Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.
5. The maps of J B Tyrrell.
Reference. The Appendix provided at the end of this document.

The book of James W Tyrrell.
Moffatt had accessed J W Tyrrell’s book Across the Sub-Arctics of Canada (Toronto, 1908).
With the help of the kind and patient staff at the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library (University of Toronto), I obtained a copy of every page for the entire reach from Black Lake to Baker Lake to Chesterfield Inlet.
The book makes little mention of rapids in general, and none of rapids in the reach where Moffatt died.
This Ancillary makes no further mention of it.

The book of Joseph B Tyrrell.
As evinced for example by Moffatt’s Prospectus on page 71 of the Sports Illustrated article, Moffatt had accessed J B Tyrrell’s book of the 1893 expedition.
Report on the Doobaunt, Kazan and Ferguson Rivers and the north-west coast of Hudson Bay and on two overland routes from Hudson Bay to Lake Winnipeg. S E Dawson, Ottawa (1897).
With the help of the kind and patient staff at the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library (University of Toronto), I obtained a copy of every page for the entire reach from Black Lake to Chesterfield Inlet. If I may be indulged a comment, the remainder is harrowing reading.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt provides the complete excerpt for the reach (Wharton Lake to Marjorie Lake) where Moffatt died.

The journal/report of Joseph B Tyrrell.
Moffatt had also obtained access to J B Tyrrell’s journal (aka his report) for the 1893 expedition. I was unable to access JBT’s journal; I note though that excerpts from the journals of Moffatt and Pessl document that it contains material not mentioned elsewhere.

The Moffatt – J B Tyrrell correspondence.
Thanks to Pessl, I have copies of Moffatt’s letters of 18 December 1954 and 14 January 1955 to J B Tyrrell.
A thorough search at the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library (University of Toronto) failed to find JBT’s reply to the first, known to have been made. I possess no evidence that JBT replied to the second.
Reference. Sub-Appendix 1. Tyrrell sources of Appendix 9.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

J B Tyrrell’s book, for the reach from Wharton Lake to Marjorie Lake.
The following provides the text (deletions are marked by ellipses) for the entire reach from Wharton Lake to Marjorie Lake; Moffatt died in rapids not far above the latter.
Below Wharton Lake the river flows at first eastward, and then southward, for four miles to a small lake, in which distance it rushes down two rapids with descents respectively of 15 and 6 feet.
The small lake seems to be everywhere shallow, though the water is very clear. On its south side is a sand ridge or (esker
[character apparently an italic l, which makes no sense to me]) about 300 feet high, trending east-and-west, on the side of which the three terraces seen at the quartzite hill are well shown. Towards the west end of the ridge are scarped banks of sand almost eighty feet high. On the north side of the lake is a cluster of low islands, composed of boulders of red gneiss, covered with moss and grass. Low hills of boulders continue eastward, along the course of the river, for the next five miles. The stream has no well-defined channel, but flows around and between these hills with a current of from five to eight miles an hour. Five miles below the small lake is a rapid with a descent of twenty feet, past the lower part of which a portage 400 yards long was made over a hill of boulders, and we embarked from a sheet of ice that, on the 23rd of August, was still frozen to the bank. Above the rapid a gravel plain extends a long distance back from the river. At the foot of this rapid the river turns at right angles and flows northward for seven miles as a wide shallow rapid stream, through low country, composed of small morainic or drumlin-like hills of boulders of light-gray well foliated gneiss.
Lady Marjorie Lake, so named as a mark of respect… , was entered at the south end, …

Noteworthy items.
1. two rapids with descents respectively of 15 and 6 feet.
2. the small lake below these rapids.
3. Five miles below the small lake is a rapid with a descent of twenty feet, past the lower part of which a portage 400 yards long was made,
4. At the foot of this rapid the river turns at right angles and flows northward for seven miles to what is now called Marjorie Lake.
5. No rapids are mentioned in the northward reach to Marjorie Lake. Moffatt died in rapids in this reach, not far upstream from Marjorie Lake.

Comparison of the evidences of J B Tyrrell’s book and that of his map, for the Wharton-Marjorie reach.
I compare, in downstream order, the features described in JBT’s book with those provided on his map at https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-6-1893 .
Item 1.
Book. two rapids with descents respectively of 15 and 6 feet.
Map. Two Rapids.
Item 2.
Book. small lake.
Map. A small unnamed lake.
Item 3.
Book. A rapid with a descent of twenty feet, with a portage of length 400 yards around the lower part.
Map. A Rapid with a Por. 18c around it.
Comment. 18 chains = 400 yards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_(unit) .
Item 4.
Book. the river turns at right angles and flows northward for seven miles to Lady Marjorie Lake.
Map. A sharp turn to the north.
Conclusion.
J B Tyrrell’s book and his map agree completely regarding the essentials of the features between Wharton Lake and what is now called Marjorie Lake. The book provides more detail, but the map is clearer.
Again, Moffatt possessed both the book and the map.

The evidence of Moffatt’s journal for 13 September.
The following is the complete text of Moffatt’s last journal entry, that for the day before the tragedy, as kindly supplied by Pessl (with (?) indicating faint, uncertain words on my copy.
Off at 10:15 across outlet bay (of Wharton Lake), Skip caught 3 trout, then down 15 foot very swift rapids, no rocks but very rough. Took water, had to bail. Following Tyrrell’s route, down 6’ rapid, back in (?) map, lunch 2 fish chowder, 2 hardtack. Then along island, water in channels, very fast, no looking it over, about 5 miles of it. Sun out more than for 6 days, but spotty. Pulled into bay by esker, I found good dry portage while canoes unloaded above last very rough + rocky part of rapid. I carried canoe across to little valley below bay, where we camped. Others portaged while I cooked huge glop, fish and bully, pudding + tea. Then, in darkness, I made last portage trip for load of wood, (?), 2 poles. Thought of wolves. Saw none!
Good distance today, Marjorie Lake tomorrow.

Comment. This was Moffatt’s last journal entry.
Noteworthy items.
1. The phrase Following Tyrrell’s route.
This phrase was redacted by the Sports Illustrated editor.
2. The references to the 15 ft and 6 ft rapids.
These were run without incident on 13 September.
3. The portage made around the last very rough + rocky part of rapid. This is the Rapid with a Por. 18c around it, aka the rapid with a descent of twenty feet. The portage was begun on 13 September and completed in the morning of 14 September.
Summary.
All features (the 15 ft and 6 ft rapids, and the portage) were found to be as described by Tyrrell.

The evidence of participant Lanouette for the afternoon of 14 September.
His journal is not published and so I express my gratitude to Lanouette (Moffatt’s bowperson) for providing it; I hope that the padding community as a whole is similarly grateful for this contribution to our understanding to the events of 14 September 1955.
Lanouette’s full journal for 14 September is provided in Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
After completing the portage in the morning of 14 September, the party continued downstream, then stopped for lunch.
We had a rather satisfying lunch of chowder and three hardtacks (or ‘tacks) apiece and were ready to shove on again around 2:30 or 3:00. The weather was still dismal, although the wind had dropped (I think) almost to a complete calm.
The river flowed on rather swiftly and it was but a few minutes before we heard and saw another rapids on the horizon. (Notes – at this time, Art figured we had shot the last 2 rapids into Lady Marjorie and so we were not anticipating anything more along this line – actually, what we had taken for rapids were only riffles and what lay ahead was the real beginning of the first rapids). At the top, these rapids looked as though they would be very easy going – a few small waves, rocks … nothing serious – so much so that we didn’t even haul over to shore to look it over before proceeding as was customary. The river at this point was straight and we could see both the top and foot of the rapids quite clearly – however, although we didn’t realize it, we couldn’t see the middle, even though we thought we could – at any rate we barrelled happily along. We bounced over a couple of fair-sized waves and took in a couple of splashes but I didn’t mind, as I had made an apron of my poncho and remained dry enough. I, as was my habit, was looking a few feet in front of the canoe, looking for submerged rocks – suddenly, Art shouted “Paddle” – I responded and took up the beat, at the same time looking farther ahead to see what it was we were trying to avoid – to my complete surprise, what I saw were two lines of white, parallel to one another and coming closer with every passing instant – I looked at them in helpless fascination, not altering my stroke any. The lines of white were the crests of two huge waves formed by the water as it crashed over 2, 3 or 4’ ledges or falls). Note: it was too late to pull for shore – all we could was to pick what seemed to be the least turbulent spots and head for them.

The evidence of participant LeFavour.
Thanks to LeFavour for providing the following.
…As we sped through Wharton Lake only the occasional snow flurry fell, an incentive not a deterrent. Up to that point we had shot five caribou and by doing so had saved enough meat to see us through. Now it was not even necessary to spend time hunting. We traveled, and traveled hard.
The river between Wharton and Marjorie Lakes split up into three channels. The longest of these
[the east/rightmost] had been traveled by Tyrrell in his trip 60 years before and was described in his journal: there were five rapids, the first two rough but shootable, the third long and heavy requiring a portage of a mile [“400 yards” in Tyrrell’s book] and the last two apparently easy for they were mentioned only as “rapids”. Because this route was described we took it, being careful to look over the first two which were indeed rough. Hurrying as we were, no foolish chances were taken.
Please note that LeFavour mentions all features encountered on both 13 and 14 September by the Moffatt party.
13 September.
The first two rapids, those rough but shootable, are the 15 ft and 6 ft rapids run by the Moffatt party that day, when it began the portage.
Comment. Tyrrell’s remarks and those of LeFavour agree regarding these two rapids and the portage, except that LeFavour gives a greater length for the portage.
14 September.
The Moffatt party completed the portage in the morning of that day and continued downstream, stopping for lunch. Some time later, it encountered the last two apparently easy for they were mentioned only as “rapids” mentioned above.
Excerpt from LeFavour’s article for the afternoon of 14 September.
At 3 p.m. we were again on the river. Gone was the wind, and we hoped to get a good way up Marjorie Lake in the calm before dark. A mile downriver the roar of the next rapid reached our ears, a roar which had become familiar and comforting in this quiet land, a roar which in the past had promised excitement. As we coasted into the top of it all appeared to be well. You could see the bottom, the water, though white, was apparently shootable. Tyrrell had indicated by his neglect that the rapid was an easy one, and it seemed to be just that.
A flock of ptarmigan on the shore caught my eye, but soon we were past them and out in midstream. It was then that Skip and I noticed that Art and Joe in the lead canoe were having trouble. They were over! We saw the two huge waves, walls of white water which seemed almost five feet high. Pete and George had made the one, were heading for the second, and then we saw nothing but the unavoidable waves. We were into it!

Source. Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Analysis.
I remind the reader that Tyrrell’s book (possessed by Moffatt) makes no mention of these rapids
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
and also that they are not marked on Tyrrell’s map (also possessed by Moffatt).
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-6-1893
The source for this additional information can be only Tyrrell’s journal/report or the Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence, neither of which I have been unable to access.
References. http://defence-arthurmoffatt.ca/2017/06/02/ancillary-7-the-moffatt-tyrrell-correspondence/
Private correspondence from LeFavour.
His [Tyrrell’s] journal had been accurate to that point, namely lunch time on 14 September, prior to the running of the fatal rapids. [2015].

The evidence of participant Pessl.
Passage 1.
After completing a short portage, loaded the canoes and continued our dash down the river. It was cold and windy, the sky was overcast and we stopped at frequent intervals to warm our feet and legs.
[We] approached what we thought must be the last rapids with confidence and impatience. Art stood up … looked ahead, and … drove his canoe for the middle of the flow. … The next thing I saw as we shot around the bend was a white wall of huge waves. … Beyond the thundering waves, the yellow camera box and Art’s gray canoe bobbed crazily in the rapids below.
[Canoe&Kayak, May 2012 issue, p 48, right column].
Comment. The short portage is the 400-yarder completed in the morning of 14 September.
Passage 2.
That’s the other lesson I learned, says Pessl. To be patient. If we had just been patient and confident, if we hadn’t been in such a headlong rush that we didn’t stop to scout the rapid, we would have been fine. It’s very hard to do that, in the grip of panic, but it would have made all the difference. Art would have been with us, his life …. Pessl pauses. When it comes down to it, even with everything that happened, we were so close. [Canoe&Kayak, May 2012 issue, p 102?, left column].
Passage 3.
The tragedy of September 14, when Art Moffatt died, occurred, in my opinion, … , because Art and I tried to concurrently accomplish two mutually exclusive objectives: canoe travel and documentary filming of that journey. The demands of these opposing goals delayed and distracted our commitment to river miles. Art and I remained tragically stubborn in our commitment to filming the journey, even in the face of serious and obvious deterioration of the weather. [Nastawgan, Summer issue, 2013, p 5].
Passage 4.
The weather grew harsh. Freezing temperatures, wind-driven snow, dwindling food supplies, and deteriorating equipment pushed us hard to travel faster and more efficiently, and ultimately we made a fatal mistake. We approached the rapids entering Marjorie Lake with caution, but without an onshore look. Standing up in our canoes as we floated toward the rapids, we saw a modest current sweeping toward a right-hand bend and drove our canoes into that initial current V. [Pessl book, p XVII.]
Passage 5.
The tragedy of September 14 occurred, in my opinion, not because of Art’s alleged mental instability or some sort of Zen nonsense, but because Art and I failed to accurately translate our collective Albany River experiences to northern big-river conditions, especially into late-season, freezing conditions, and because we tried to concurrently accomplish two mutually exclusive objectives: travel and film. …we did not differentiate between what worked on the Albany River and what would not work in late season on the Dubawnt.
The deteriorating weather…changed our modus operandi from cautious land-based scouting of rapids to a floating assessment as we were sucked into the headwater Vs of each successive rapid. It worked for several days and many rapids, except for one.
Somewhere between the robotic distance grinds of… and the tragic disregard for time, distance, and season of the Moffatt leadership (and I include myself I that category), there must be a reasonable balance for wilderness canoeists on long journeys…
[Pessl book, pp 172&173].
Passage 6.
Pessl (kindly and most frankly, both as ever) responded as follows regarding an email message of mine.
I understand the confusion, contradiction that the two quotes may create. The quote attributed to me [Excerpt 2] is accurate and comes from a conversation I had with Al Kesselheim when he was preparing to write his C&K article on the Moffatt Dubawnt journey (May 2012). It was a very emotional interview for me; the first time in many years that I shared some of my feelings about Dubawnt ’55. The quote expresses my remorse over Art’s death and my belief, in retrospect, that we should have scouted the Marjorie rapids. My use of the term “panic” was inaccurate, too strong and I regret that. Bruce’s phrase is much more accurate.
But our individual and collective state of mind during those early September days is pretty much conjecture and perhaps mostly semantic after so many years. The much more important question, clearly answered by your detailed research, is WHY we didn’t scout the rapids? And the answer: because we were following Tyrrell’s journal description of the river conditions approaching Marjorie Lake. Tyrrell’s river descriptions had proven dependable previously and indicated benign conditions entering Marjorie Lake following the last portage.
[Pessl, private correspondence].

The evidence of George Luste.
I mention that Luste identified no source for either item.
Item 1.
Art Moffatt, following Tyrrell’s notes, was not expecting the rapid in which he swamped and then died.
Source. Page 284 of Grinnell’s book (1996).
Item 2.
Over the years, a number of unfounded versions or representations of the Moffatt accident have made their way into the canoeing literature. I’ve read statements like
“After some discussion there came a momentous decision. To save time the party would run any rapid which looked safe from the top.” and
“Everyone was rescued quickly so there should have been no problems.” or
“Increasing desperation made them run rapids without careful checking,” or
“…to speed progress they would run any rapid that looked passable from the top…” and
“On Moffatt’s trip, the canoeists surviving the mid-September swamping first picked up all the packs, then the swamped members, a fatal mistake.”

Source. Pages 293 and 294 of Grinnell’s book (1996).

Summary.
Given my introductory remark I refrain from…for clarity, it would be inappropriate to provide a summary.

Appendix. The maps of Joseph B Tyrrell.
At the Thomas Fisher library, I found the URLs (provided below) for his maps for the 1893 expedition, for the reach from Black Lake to the mouth of the Churchill River on Hudson Bay.
The evidence convinces me that Moffatt had obtained copies of these maps. Of special interest is the map (number 6) for the reach from Wharton Lake to what is now called Marjorie Lake, for it was in this reach that Moffatt died. I provide above a full discussion of its contents.
J B Tyrrell’s annotated maps.
Black Lake to south of Selwyn Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-1-1893
Continuation to past Wholdiah/Daly Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-2-1893
Continuation to past Boyd Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-3-1893
Continuation to the middle of Nicholson Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-4-1893
Continuation to the middle of Grant Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-5-1893
Continuation to past Aberdeen Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-6-1893
Continuation to Baker Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-7-1893
Continuations to the mouth of the Churchill River.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-8-1893
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-9-1893
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-10-1893
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-11-1893
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-12-1893
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-13-1893
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/content/zone-14-1893

Internal URLs.

Foreword and Forum.
Main text.
Appendix 1. Reality.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Ancillary 4. Distances.
Ancillary 5. Loose ends and the future.
Ancillary 6. Addenda.
Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.
Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.
Bibliography.

Notice.
With the exception of quoted material, copyright to the above belongs to Allan Jacobs.

Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.

Major renovations were completed in early November 2017 but I expect that warts remain.
Thanks for your patience. Allan

Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.

Introduction.

The Moffatt trip of 1955 retraced the central portion of the Tyrrell-Tyrrell exploratory trip of 1893, specifically the reach from Black Lake on the Fond du Lac River to Baker Lake on the Thelon River.
The books of both Tyrrell brothers (Joseph Burr and James Williams) are available, and I have obtained copies thereof for the reach from Black Lake to Chesterfield Inlet (the mouth of the Thelon River on Hudson Bay). Moffatt is known to have accessed both books.
Given that both brothers wrote books, both must have kept journals, but neither journal is publicly available to my knowledge. It is known that Moffatt had obtained access to JBT’s journal, aka his report. I possess no evidence that he accessed JWT’s.

The evidence of James Williams Tyrrell.
0. I possess no evidence that Moffatt had corresponded with JWT.
1. Across the Sub-Arctics of Canada (Toronto, 1908).
Not accessed by me. Thought to be identical to the following.
2. Through the Barren Lands: An Exploration Line of 3,200 Miles. Geological Survey of Canada (1896).
Thanks to the kind and excessively helpful staff at the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library at the University of Toronto, I was able to obtain a copy for the entire reach from Black Lake to Chesterfield Inlet.
Little mention is made of river features; in particular, this book does not help us to understand the tragedy.
3. In Moffatt’s first letter to J B Tyrrell, he refers to the information provided in your report and in the book by your brother. And so Moffatt had obtained access to the book of J W Tyrrell, but I don’t know to which of the items 1 and 2, if indeed they differ.

The evidence of Joseph Burr Tyrrell.
1. Geographical Journal, v 4, no 5, Nov 1894.
Not known to have been accessed by Moffatt. Not accessed by me.
2. Report on the Doobaunt, Kazan and Ferguson Rivers and the north-west coast of Hudson Bay and on two overland routes from Hudson Bay to Lake Winnipeg. S E Dawson, Ottawa (1897).
The book is known to have been accessed by Moffatt, as evinced by the following passage.
Moffatt “…became fascinated with the forbidding wilderness still further north and determined to go there after reading Report on the Dubawnt, Kazan and Ferguson Rivers, written in 1896 by a Canadian geological surveyor, Dr. J. B. Tyrrell…” [Sports Illustrated, p 71, filed under Art Moffatt’s Prospectus]
Thanks to the kind and excessively helpful staff at the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library at the University of Toronto, I was able to obtain a copy for the entire reach from Black Lake to Chesterfield Inlet.
It is far from beside the point that J B Tyrrell provides the following passage regarding the reach between Wharton Lake and Marjorie Lake.
Below Wharton Lake the river flows at first eastward, and then southward, for four miles to a small lake, in which distance it rushes down two rapids with descents respectively of 15 and 6 feet. …Five miles below the small lake is a rapid with a descent of twenty feet, past the lower part of which a portage 400 yards long was made … At the foot of this rapid the river turns at right angles and flows northward for seven miles as a wide shallow rapid stream …Lady Marjorie Lake…was entered at the south end…
The complete passage from J B Tyrrell’s book is provided in Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Like the Tyrrell party of 1893, the Moffatt party of 1955 ran the rapids with descents of 15 and 6 feet, this on 13 September 1955, when it began the portage of 400 yards around the rapid with a descent of twenty feet. That portage was completed in the morning of 14 September.
Moffatt died later that same day, in the apparently featureless wide shallow rapid stream in the reach the sharp turn to the north and Marjorie Lake. Of course, my point is that J B Tyrrell made no mention of rapids in the reach where Moffatt died.
3. As I document below, Moffatt had obtained further information from J B Tyrrell, specifically
JBT’s journal (Moffatt calls it his report) for the 1893 trip,
JBT’s maps for the 1893 trip, and
correspondence with JBT.

The evidence of the Sports Illustrated article.
With respect to the upstream reach from Black Lake to the basin of the Dubawnt River, the SI editor wrote the following.
In the days that immediately followed, the expedition made good time despite erratic winds and rain, the back-stiffening portages and missed routes. The maps the party used – they were the only ones in existence – were never precise enough, and there were many times when, after long wearying hours of working up a stream, the canoeists would have to admit their mistake and painfully retreat. [SI article, bottom of right column, p 73]
Response.
The maps could be
either the government-issue maps of the time (not available to me)
or (more likely?) J B Tyrrell’s maps; those for the reach from Black Lake to Selwyn Lake are the following.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=1
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=2

The journal of J B Tyrrell.
JBT’s journal (sometimes Moffatt calls it his report) is not publicly available; it is known to differ substantially from JBT’s book. Unfortunately, my best efforts failed to access it; but Moffatt was more successful.
Evidence 1.
Tyrrell…had constant rain and cold, also patches of old snow everywhere. But for us it has been very pleasant… [Moffatt, 16 August, top left of p 80 of the SI article].
Evidence 2.
Throughout Tyrrell’s journal, he speaks of seeing patches of snow well to the south and he suffered his first snow storm on August 10. [Pessl book, 28 August, bottom of p 107].
Evidence 3.
Following Tyrrell’s route… [Moffatt journal for 13 September, as provided by Pessl.
Evidence 4.
… I have spent considerable time reviewing the various pertinent journals and following the maps with the journal descriptions … [Moffatt journal, pp 140-141; passage kindly provided by Pessl].
Response. The phrase the various pertinent journals is unclear. One journal was certainly that of JBT. But Moffatt’s use of the plural suggests he possessed also the journal of JWT. Adding to the confusion (at least in my mind) is that Moffatt possessed the books of both brothers.
Aside. The reference to maps is likely to both the 8 mi. to the inch maps and JBT’s maps; Moffatt had access to both.
Evidence 5.
His [Tyrrell’s] journal had been accurate to that point, namely lunch time on 14 September, just prior to the running of the fatal rapids. [LeFavour, private correspondence, 2015].
Evidence 6.
…he [Pessl] and Art had studied them carefully before setting out and notations from the journals had been made on Art’s maps. [Lanouette, private correspondence, 17 January 2015].

The maps of J B Tyrrell.
I note that the Moffatt party possessed government-issue 8 mi. to the inch maps [18 July. Franck, in Pessl, p 44]). I made no attempt to access such maps available in 1955.
But the party possessed also maps from another source.

Passage 1. 10 August. The maps are very inaccurate in placing the rapids for the most part. [Franck, in Pessl, p 78]
Response. The reference was perhaps to the government-issue maps. Let me drop the matter.

Passage 2. 13 August. …went on down to where the 15-ft. falls is marked on the map. Actually this is an error. There was nothing there but a very easy rapid. [Franck, in Pessl, p 85]
Aside. Franck and Pessl agree on the date, namely 13 August.
Response.
The key item is the reference to the 15-ft. falls, for falls of that same height are shown on J B Tyrrell’s map 4.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=4
Those falls lie between Carey Lake (Franck’s POND ABOVE MARKHAM LAKE. [Pessl, p 85]) and Markham Lake.
And so the location of those falls, as given by Franck, agrees with that given by Tyrrell’s map 4.
Conclusion.
On both counts, namely the height of the falls and their location, the evidence of participant Franck and the evidence of Tyrrell’s map 4 are in complete agreement.
The obvious conclusion is that Moffatt had obtained access to at least one of JBT’s maps, namely number 4.
The obvious implication is that Moffatt had obtained access to all of JBT’s maps.
Especially important for our understanding of the tragedy is the map
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=6 .
That map shows no rapids in the northward reach between the portage (Por. 18 c completed in the morning of 14 September) and Marjorie Lake. It was in these unmarked rapids that Moffatt died later that very day.
And I suggest it not beside the point that neither does J B Tyrrell’s book mention those same rapids.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.

Passage 3. For completeness only, I provide the following.
16 August. After dinner, Art got out the maps and looked over our situation. [Franck, in Pessl, p 91].
Comment. My far than thorough search found no more references to maps in Pessl’s book.

Intermediate summary.
I have documented that Moffatt had accessed
J W Tyrrell’s book,
J B Tyrrell’s book,
J B Tyrrell’s journal, and
J B Tyrrell’s maps.
But Moffatt had also corresponded with J B Tyrrell, as I now document.

Moffatt’s correspondence with J B Tyrrell.
Moffatt wrote twice to J B Tyrrell, who replied to the first; but my best efforts failed to find that reply. I possess no evidence that JBT replied to the second.

Moffatt’s letter of 18 December 1954 to J B Tyrrell.
Comment. Copy provided by Pessl; address information deleted.
Dear Dr. Tyrrell:
At the suggestion of Dr. Lincoln Washburn, Professor of Geology at Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, I am writing to tell you of my plans to follow your route from Stony Rapids on Lake Athabaska via the Dubawnt River to Chesterfield Inlet this coming summer.
Since your exploration of that route in 1893 no other canoe parties seem to have made the trip, and if we did not have your excellent report to guide us, I doubt that we should attempt it. My purpose in going is to make a film in color, for lecture purposes—and I believe that with luck we shall have something unlike anything that has been done before.
You may wonder what my qualifications for making such a trip are; I list them briefly: In 1937 I paddled alone from Sioux Lookout, Ontario, to the Albany River and down it to James Bay. Since 1950 I have led parties of five young men of college age down the Albany every summer. In 1952 and ’53 I made a 3000 ft color film of the Albany trip, with which I have been lecturing, and it now seems to be time to attempt a more difficult trip—your route down the Dubawnt.
I plan to use two 18 foot Chestnut Prospector canoes, one paddled by Skip Pessl, a young man who has made the Albany trip with me twice and who is this year a senior at Dartmouth College; and the other paddled by myself. We have not yet selected our two bow paddlers, and in this connection Dr. Washburn thought you might like to send along someone from your mining company to look the country over once again.
We expect to leave from here as close to June 13 as we can, and to remain on the Dubawnt until about September 1. We anticipate several difficulties we have never encountered along the Albany, first the absence of fuel and second, the difficulty of crossing the frozen expanse of Dubawnt Lake—if you are able to give us any advice on coping with these two problems we shall certainly appreciate it.
Of great importance also is the fact that we must carry sufficient supplies for the entire trip—the administration of the Northwest Territories will allow us to carry a rifle, but it is only to be used if we are in danger of starvation—which we feel is rather late in the game to begin living off the country. Nevertheless, we are prepared to travel under these conditions.
To revert briefly to the matter of fuel: Stefansson, in his Arctic Manual, indicates that most Arctic rivers are lined with willows and alders; but in your report and in the book by your brother, I find small mention of such a source of wood for fires. Were they indeed absent along the Dubawnt, or were they too green to burn—or is the country too generally soaked with rain to use them?
I hope you will find it interesting that we will be travelling the Dubawnt this summer, and I also hope that you can give us some advice to help us complete the journey successfully. In any case, I hope that I may have the pleasure of hearing from you.
Sincerely, Arthur R. Moffatt

Comment.
Please note the passage if we did not have your excellent report to guide us, I doubt that we should attempt it. I interpret the reference to the report to be to J B Tyrrell’s journal.

J B Tyrrell’s response to Moffatt’s letter of 18 December 1954.
As evinced by the passage (quoted below), it is known JBT had replied, but my search at the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library (University of Toronto) failed, as I describe below. With respect to the date of the response, I know only that it lay between 18 December and 14 January.
Lacking an alternative explanation for the following passage, I suggest that some of its contents are provided in Art Moffatt’s Prospectus, published on page 71 of the Sports Illustrated article.
…In our journey north we will pass into the hunting and trapping grounds of the Chipewyan Indians and out into the Barren Grounds, beyond the northern limit of the trees. This is the summer range of the vast herds of caribou. The lakes and streams are reported to be full of trout up to 25 pounds in weight.

Two of the major problems we shall face are food and fire. The greater part of the route is through the treeless tundra, and what fuel there is often too green or wet to burn. We will not be able to pack enough gas to cook two meals a day.
Food may be even more acute. I have a letter from Dr. Tyrrell…He writes: “You will need to have a couple of high-powered rifles so that you can shoot game at long range, otherwise starvation is likely to threaten from early in the trip…”

Moffatt’s letter of 14 January 1955.
Copy provided by Pessl. Address information deleted.
Dear Dr. Tyrrell:
Thank you very much for your kind reply to my letter of December 18, in which I asked you several questions about the Dubawnt River.
I have tried without success to obtain copies of your report from Mr. Amtmann and from Dora Hood, but Mr. Amtmann referred me to Miss Wills, Librarian of the Geological Survey, who was kind enough to send me, on loan until September 30, 1955, a copy of your report.
I have written Miss Wills of the possible damage that may be done to the report on a trip by canoe down the Dubawnt, and I am waiting now to see is she really means that I should take it with me to the Barrens. I certainly hope that she does—after all, it will be our only guide.
Your suggestion that we will face starvation unless we have good rifles is certainly to the point, and I wish the Administration of the Northwest Territories realised that in forbidding us to use rifles until we are in imminent danger of death they are putting us in a very difficult position. However, if those are the terms on which we may enter the country, we will have to face them or stay home. I believe that by restricting our diet to oatmeal, hardtack, bully beef, dried potatoes and macaroni, we ought to be able to feed four men well enough for the three months we expect to be on the barrens. I’ve eaten worse food longer and survived.
Our search for two bow paddlers is not yet over, and in asking you whether your mining company might not like to send a geologist with us who could also pull his weight in a canoe and on the portages, I was acting at the suggestion of Dr. Washburn, who thought your company might find it to its advantage to do some prospecting along the Dubawnt.
You may be interested to hear that I showed your report to Dr. Vilhjalmur Stefansson, who immediately asked if he might have the letter for his library, which is now a part of the Dartmouth College Library at Hanover, New Hampshire.
I want to thank you again for your interest in my proposed trip, and I wish you a very Happy New Year.
Sincerely, Arthur R. Moffatt

Assumption.
JBT’s report is what I call also his journal.

The evidence of the participants regarding the fatal rapids.
Introduction.
The only possible sources for the following evidences regarding the fatal rapids are J B Tyrrell’s journal (aka his report), his maps, and his correspondence with Moffatt. I say this because neither book of the Tyrrell brothers mentions those rapids.
The evidence available to me has it that J B Tyrrell’s rapids advice had proved accurate for the previous 11 weeks or so of the trip. I refer in particular to the three candidates for the Sports illustrated editor’s churning chutes of white water [SI article, top of right column on p 82], namely the rapids immediately below Nicholson Lake, those immediately below Dubawnt Lake, and those immediately above Wharton Lake.
Argument. Had JBT’s rapids advice proved inaccurate even once in the previous 11 weeks, surely Moffatt would not have followed it in the afternoon of 14 September 1955.
The evidence of Lanouette.
Referring to the rapids where Moffatt died, his bow person wrote the following: This surprised us. Art had figured we had already shot the last two rapids into Marjorie Lake. Actually, what we had gone down were only riffles, and what lay ahead was the real beginning of the first rapids. [Sports Illustrated (1959), p 85]
The evidence of LeFavour.
Referring to the rapids between Wharton Lake and Marjorie Lake, he wrote the following: … there were five rapids, the first two rough but shootable, the third long and heavy requiring a portage of a mile [“400 yards” in Tyrrell’s book] and the last two apparently easy for they were mentioned only as “rapids”. Because this route was described we took it, being careful to look over the first two which were indeed rough. Hurrying as we were, no foolish chances were taken. [Evening Recorder, 29 December 1955, Amsterdam NY]
The evidence of Pessl.
…we were following Tyrrell’s journal description of the river conditions approaching Marjorie Lake. Tyrrell’s river descriptions had proven dependable previously and indicated benign conditions entering Marjorie Lake following the last portage. [private correspondence]
Analysis.
Perhaps the key passage is LeFavour’s …the last two apparently easy for they were mentioned only as “rapids”, for it was in these rapids that Moffatt died.

The evidence of John Lentz regarding the Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence.
The following was kindly supplied by Pessl [private correspondence, May 2017].
Begin Pessl material.
Through Bush and Barrens. North, May-June, 1970, p.22-29.
p.22. He (Moffatt) wrote to Tyrrell who replied that the river, “is a succession of lakes separated by wild rivers.” The old man warned of hazards of these rapids, and suggested the following equipment, “high powered rifles so that you can shoot game at long range, otherwise starvation is likely to threaten very early in your journey.”
This quote attributed by Lentz: “Tyrrell’s letter courtesy Rare Books Department, University of Toronto Library.”
Perhaps there is additional reference in John’s papers/correspondence, maybe available at CCM or the Lentz estate.
End Pessl material.
My comments.
0. I failed to find online access to the North article.
1. Lentz had obtained access to the Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence.
2. I failed to find the Tyrrell’s letter at the Thomas Fisher Rare Books Library of the University of Toronto.
3. I note that the rifles part of Lentz’s quote duplicates material provided in Moffatt’s Prospectus [Sports Illustrated article, p 71].

The evidence of Fred Gaskin regarding the Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence.
The following was kindly supplied by Pessl (private correspondence, May 2017).
Begin Pessl material.
Retracing Tyrrell’s journey into the Barren Lands. Canadian Geographical Journal, v.93, n.3, Dec. 1976/Jan. 1977, p. 46-53.
p.50: “When preparing for his trip, Moffatt had corresponded in 1953 with J.B. Tyrrell who was then 95 years old and living in Toronto. The old man warned Moffatt of the dangers of the rapids and the risks of starvation.”
End Pessl material.
My comments.
0. I failed to find online access to Gaskin’s article.
1. Given that Moffatt’s letter of 18 December 1954 was clearly his first contact with J B Tyrrell, Gaskin’s date of 1953 must be incorrect.
2. I don’t know Gaskin’s source for this material, which differs little from that provided by Lentz.

Summary.
The evidence of Moffatt’s journal.
My best efforts failed to obtain full access to that journal, which would almost certainly provide important evidence regarding rapids in general. With regard to the rapids where he died, I possess only the phrase Following Tyrrell’s route… of his last journal entry, that for 13 September.
The evidence of James Williams Tyrrell.
Moffatt had accessed JWT’s book, which provides little information regarding rapids in general, nothing regarding the rapids where Moffatt died in particular.
I possess no evidence that Moffatt had corresponded with JWT.
The evidence of Joseph Burr Tyrrell.
Moffatt’s sources are known to have been the following four items.
1. JBT’s maps. I have provided URLs for the entire reach covered by the Moffatt party. The map for the reach where Moffatt died shows no rapids.
Reference. https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=6
2. JBT’s book. I possess a copy for the entire reach (Black Lake to Baker Lake) covered by the Moffatt party. The book describes the three candidates that I identified for the SI editor’s churning chutes (namely the rapids below Nicholson Lake, those below immediately below Dubawnt Lake, and those immediately above Wharton Lake), but it makes no mention of the rapids where Moffatt died.
Reference. Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
3. JBT’s journal (aka his report). I was unable to access it and so am unable to comment on its contents.
4. Moffatt’s correspondence with JBT. Thanks to Pessl, I was able to provide copies of Moffatt’s two letters to JBT. I was unable to document JBT’s reply (known to have made) to the first. I possess no evidence that JBT had replied to the second.

Conclusions.
1. All known sources state, implicitly, that there were no rapids of significance in the reach where Moffatt died.
2. In particular, Moffatt had good reason to trust JBT’s advice, for Tyrrell’s river descriptions had proven dependable previously and indicated benign conditions entering Marjorie Lake. [Pessl]
3. But J B Tyrrell’s advice failed Moffatt in the afternoon of 14 September 1955.

Appendix. Tyrrell items at the University of Toronto Library.
All known items are held at the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, located on the second floor of the Robarts Library, at the corner of St George and Harbord. Access is by permission only; I had a U of T library card, but I believe that a driver’s licence will suffice.
Thanks to the kind, helpful and excessively patient staff at the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library of the University of Toronto for their assistance throughout my visits.

Item 1. Joseph B Tyrrell’s book.
Report on the Doobaunt, Kazan and Ferguson Rivers and the north-west coast of Hudson Bay and on two overland routes from Hudson Bay to Lake Winnipeg. S E Dawson, Ottawa (1897).
I possess copies of all pages for the entire reach from Baker Lake to Chesterfield Inlet.

Item 2. Joseph B Tyrrell’s correspondence
is divided, but only roughly, into professional and personal items.
The largely professional items of interest are provided in two boxes, one for 1951-1953 and one for 1954-1955. I read all material for 1953, 1954 and 1955 but found nothing referring to Moffatt. I did not find the 1953 letter mentioned by Lentz (I believe that he got the date incorrectly).
The largely personal items are provided in a single box. I found nothing referring to Moffatt.
Perhaps I should add that another box contains items related to Tyrrell’s apple orchard in what is now the Toronto suburb of Agincourt.

Item 3. J B Tyrrell, Explorer and Adventurer. The Geological Survey Years 1881-1898.
A Catalogue prepared by Katherine Martyn.
The Catalogue was prepared for an exhibition at the library (3 April to 30 July 1993). The 1893 trip is described in Across the Barren Lands: 1893. [pp 23-30]. Two photos are provided, plus maps for the 1893 Dubawnt and 1894 Kazan trips, the former as described in item 4.
https://fisher.library.utoronto.ca/tyrrell-explorer-and-adventurer
http://link.library.utoronto.ca/Tyrrell/overview.cfm?ID=1893

Item 4. Joseph B Tyrrell’s maps for the reach from Black Lake to Chesterfield Inlet and beyond.
His maps for the 1893 expedition show features (rapids, falls, portages, etc), for the following reaches.
Black Lake to south of Selwyn Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=1
Continuation to past Wholdiah/Daly Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=2
Continuation to past Boyd Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=3
Continuation to the middle of Nicholson Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=4
Continuation to the middle of Grant Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=5
Continuation to past Aberdeen Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=6
Continuation to Baker Lake.
https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=7
etc.
Discussion.
Moffatt certainly possessed map 4, and so almost certainly all maps, especially the vitally important map 6. The Rapid shown shortly below Wharton Lake on that map is the one portaged on 13 and 14 September by the Moffatt party. The important point is that map 6 shows no rapid/s from the end of that portage all the way downstream to Marjorie Lake.
Conclusion.
The rapids where Moffatt died are not shown on J B Tyrrell’s maps.

Item 5. James W Tyrrell’s book/s.
Through the Barren Lands: An Exploration Line of 3,200 Miles. Geological Survey of Canada (1896). Not accessed; believed identical to the following.
Across the Sub-Arctics of Canada (Toronto, 1908).
Comments.
I possess copies of all pages for the entire reach from Baker Lake to Chesterfield Inlet.
The material (especially that regarding ethnography) provided by JWT is fascinating (to me) but it sheds no light on the conditions that led to Moffatt’s death.

Internal URLs.

Foreword and Forum.
Main text.
Appendix 1. Reality.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Ancillary 4. Distances.
Ancillary 5. Loose ends and the future.
Ancillary 6. Addenda.
Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.
Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.
Bibliography.

Notice.
With the exception of quoted material, copyright to the above belongs to Allan Jacobs.

Appendix 9. Cause of the tragedy.

Major renovations were completed in early November 2017 but I expect that warts remain.
Thanks for your patience. Allan

Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

Foreword.
Some overlap of material presented here is unavoidable with that presented in Appendix 8. Rapids in general.

Background.
0. Moffatt had obtained a copy of J W Tyrrell’s book, which provides no material regarding the fatal rapids.
1. Moffatt had obtained a copy of J B Tyrrell’s report, which I believe to be identical to his journal; I have been unable to access it.
2. Moffatt had accessed JBT’s book, which makes no mention of the rapids (those between Wharton Lake and Marjorie Lake) where Moffatt died.
Reference. Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
3. Moffatt had accessed JBT’s maps for the entire 1893 trip. The one for the reach where Moffatt died does not show the fatal rapids.
Reference. https://barrenlands.library.utoronto.ca/zone.cfm?ID=1893&zone=6 .
4. As well, Moffatt had corresponded with JBT; only a little information (kindly provided by participants) from these exchanges is available. It is clear, however, that Tyrrell had provided Moffatt with rapids information significantly beyond that given in JBT’s book. Sub-Appendix 1. Tyrrell sources provides background for the interested reader.
Reference. Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.

The reliability of JBT’s advice to Moffatt.
As I document below and elsewhere, Moffatt followed closely Tyrrell’s advice regarding rapids on the Dubawnt, most importantly his advice regarding the fatal rapids.
A particular.
His [Tyrrell’s] journal had been accurate to that point, namely lunch time on 14 September, immediately prior to the running of the fatal rapids. [LeFavour, private correspondence, 2015]. LeFavour refers here to the entire 10 or so weeks prior to that point. I assume that by Tyrrell’s journal, LeFavour includes the advice provided in the correspondence.
Initial summary.
Moffatt possessed detailed information from J B Tyrrell regarding Dubawnt rapids. That information had proved accurate for something like 11 weeks previously.
Given the nature of the accusatory literature, I find it necessary to state the obvious:
1. In the 11 weeks prior to his death, had there existed even one significant difference between the three JBT sources (his journal, his correspondence and his maps), Moffatt would have surely have noticed it and would have scouted the rapids where he died.
2. In particular, on 13 and 14 September, the Moffatt party portaged the rapids immediately above those where he died.
The questions.
1. Are we to believe (as the Sports Illustrated editor evidently expects us to do) that, having that very morning completed a portage made in part to protect the film and cameras (the very purposes of the trip), Moffatt changed his mind and, a few hours later, decided to risk the loss of both film and cameras?
2. More importantly, are we to believe (as the SI editor evidently expects us to do), that, a few hours after completing that portage, Moffatt decided to risk the lives of all members of the party and so took the the ultimate chance in running those rapids in desperate haste as the party raced against winter?

START AGAIN HERE
The evidence for 13 and 14 September.
13 September. .
On the day before Moffatt died, the Moffatt party ran two rough rapids, then camped after portaging some gear around a third, a much more serious one. These are the drops of 15 and 6 feet and the portage of 400 yards mentioned in Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
14 September.
The party completed the portage of 400 yards and resumed paddling. At the lunch stop that day, the party added 20 lb of lake trout to the food supply, which was already sufficient that the party had no need to hunt caribou again. Reference. Appendix 6. Food.
Trusting Tyrrell’s advice, which had proved accurate for the previous 10 weeks or so, Moffatt led the way downstream without scouting the rapids below the portage. Only when it was too late to bail out and head for shore did Moffatt see major rapids ahead and so realise that Tyrrell had failed him that day. He could only shout “Paddle!” to his bowperson Lanouette and try to tough it out. His canoe and a second overturned in a pair of rapids not mentioned by Tyrrell, spilling the paddlers into the cold waters. Moffatt died of hypothermia about an hour later.
A request.
I ask that the reader compare the above description of events (which is based on the journals of the trip participants) that lead to Moffatt’s death with the following assertion of the Sports Illustrated editor.
…the Moffatt party races against winter… In desperate haste, they take an ultimate chance.

The redactions.
Over the 55 years from 1959 to 2014, every accuser got wrong the cause of Moffatt’s death.
I believe that they did so largely because both the Sports Illustrated editor and Grinnell redacted evidence that Moffatt had been advised by J B Tyrrell that there existed no rapids of any significance in that reach.
Particular 1.
Points 1 and 2 (below) compare Moffatt’s journal entry (his last) for 13 September with the Sports Illustrated editor’s version of it [SI article, lower right column on p 82].
One sees that the SI editor redacted the phrase Following Tyrrell’s route from Moffatt’s journal entry for 13 September. That phrase shows first that Moffatt had obtained Tyrrell’s advice for that reach, second that he was following it.
Should this redaction be believed to have been accidental, I point out that it falsifies the editor’s assertion …the Moffatt party races against winter on the Barren Grounds. … In desperate haste, they take an ultimate chance. [bottom right of p 76, for the period after 16/17 August].
Particular 2.
Points 5 and 6 (below) compare the SI condensation (a faithful one) of Lanouette’s journal for the day of the tragedy with Grinnell’s version of it [Grinnell book, p 202].
One sees that Grinnell redacted, and replaced by an ellipsis, the passage This surprised us. Art had figured we had already shot the last two rapids into Marjorie Lake. Actually, what we had gone down were only riffles, and what lay ahead was the real beginning of the first rapids.
Does anyone believe this redaction to have been accidental?
Comment.
And so, as I remark several times in this manuscript, it then concerns me that the Sports Illustrated and Grinnell had certainly corresponded [SI article, p 88].

Comments regarding the accusations.
On the basis of no evidence known to me (and none was provided), every defamer who wrote about the tragedy asserted the cause of Moffatt’s death to be rather one or more of those discussed in Appendices 1 through 8. It seems necessary to state that an assertion by a previous defamer is not evidence.
Few of those eight accusations had any support in evidence when they were made. Many of them fly in the face of easily available contrary evidence to the contrary. And every such accusation is falsified by the evidence in toto.
The prime example is James Murphy’s Lack of food, proper equipment and most importantly, lack of a planned itinerary, contributed to his demise. [Che-Mun, Canoelit section. Moffatt, Myth & Mysticism. Spring 1996, pp 5 and 11].
I find it worthy of explicit mention that this accusation was made in Murphy’s review of Grinnell’s book.
1. In that book, Grinnell documents a plethora of food from the land and also from the cache in the six weeks before the tragedy. Reference. Appendix 6. Food.
That is, there was no lack of food. In fact, there was not even a shortage of food on the whole; the truth is rather that the party was hungry at times, gorged at others.
2. I believe that George Luste would have been much angered to learn that his recommendations for gear appropriate for paddlers circa 1996 had been used to defame Moffatt, who died in 1955. Reference. Appendix 3. Equipment.
3. The evidence regarding the schedule (Murphy’s planned itinerary) is contradictory, as I document in Appendix 7. Schedule.
Summary. In constructing his case against Moffatt, Murphy ignored evidence that falsifies his accusations.

The evidence regarding the fatal rapids.

Outline.
I repeat that Tyrrell’s book makes no mention of the fatal rapids below the portage, which was completed in the morning of 14 September. Reference. Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Outline. I provide the following paragraphs.
1. Moffatt’s journal entry for 13 September.
2. The Sports Illustrated editor’s version of Moffatt’s entry for that same day.
3. The assertions of the Sports Illustrated editor.
4. Participant Lanouette’s full journal entry for 14 September.
5. The SI condensation of Lanouette’s journal entry for that day.
6. Participant Grinnell’s version of that condensation.
7. Private correspondence from Lanouette.
8. The evidence of participant LeFavour.
9. The evidence of participant Pessl.
10. A comment of Luste.
11. Analysis.
12. Additional evidence.
13. Summary.

1. Moffatt’s journal entry for 13 September.
Note. I lack access to Moffatt’s journal entries for 11 and 12 September, but I have no reason to believe that they contain anything relevant to the tragedy.
Moffatt’s journal for 13 September.
The following is the complete text of Moffatt’s journal entry for the day before the tragedy, as kindly supplied by Pessl (with (?) indicating faint, uncertain words on my copy).
Off at 10:15 across outlet bay [of Wharton Lake], Skip caught 3 trout, then down 15 foot very swift rapids, no rocks but very rough. Took water, had to bail. Following Tyrrell’s route, down 6’ rapid, back in (?) map, lunch 2 fish chowder, 2 hardtack. Then along island, water in channels, very fast, no looking it over, about 5 miles of it. Sun out more than for 6 days, but spotty. Pulled into bay by esker, I found good dry portage while canoes unloaded above last very rough + rocky part of rapid. I carried canoe across to little valley below bay, where we camped. Others portaged while I cooked huge glop, fish and bully, pudding + tea. Then, in darkness, I made last portage trip for load of wood, (?), 2 poles. Thought of wolves. Saw none!
Good distance today, Marjorie Lake tomorrow.

Comments regarding this last entry made by Moffatt in his journal.
1. Please note in particular the phrase Following Tyrrell’s route.
2. The 15’ and 6’ rapids are documented in J B Tyrrell’s book, as is the portage (of 400 yards).
3. But please note that JBT’s book makes no mention of the rapids below the portage; it was in these rapids that Moffatt died. Reference. Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
4. The portage was completed in the morning of 14 September; after a break for lunch (at which time the party added 20 lb of trout to the already considerable food supply), the party continued downstream toward Marjorie Lake.
5. I ask that the reader compare the above with the following.

2. The Sports Illustrated version of Moffatt’s journal entry for 13 September.
The following is the complete relevant text on page 82 (lower right column) of the Sports Illustrated article.
[On September 11, the Moffatt party, having traveled with snow squalls and wind in their faces all day, reached Wharton Lake. The following morning the weather was better than it had been for a week, although the skies were spotted with clouds. After a portage around rapids, Art Moffatt wrote “I cooked fish and bully, pudding and tea. Then, in darkness, I made the last portage trip for a load of wood, my packsack and two poles. I thought of wolves on the way but saw none. Good distance today. Marjorie Lake tomorrow.” And this was the last entry Art Moffatt was to make in his diary.]
The redaction.
One sees that the SI editor redacted the phrase Following Tyrrell’s route.
To me, that phrase is the key to understanding the tragedy, for it shows that Moffatt was only following Tyrrell’s guide when he chose to run the fatal rapids without a scout.
I suggest that only the most credulous could believe that redaction to have been an accident, a slip of the pen.
And I suggest it to be no coincidence that the redacted passage falsifies both Assertion 1 and Assertion 2 (below) of the editor.

3. The assertions of the Sports Illustrated editor.
I ask that the reader reflect on the relevance of the phrase Following Tyrrell’s route to the following assertions (the parts regarding rapids) of the Sports Illustrated editor.

Assertion 1.
Increasingly, the men were taking chances. They now shot down churning chutes of white water, which, a month earlier, they would have scrutinized with a doubtful eye. [top of right column, p 82].

Already nine days behind schedule, the Moffatt party races against winter on the Barren Grounds. The days grow colder, provisions dwindle, game grows scarce. In desperate haste, they take an ultimate chance. [bottom right of p 76, for the period after 16/17 August].

Responses to the rapids parts of Assertions 1 and 2.
As they apply to rapids above those where Moffatt died, both assertions are falsified by the evidence provided in Appendix 8. Other rapids.
With respect to the fatal rapids, both assertions are falsified by the evidence that Moffatt was only following J B Tyrrell’s advice when he ran the fatal rapids without a scout.
And so I suggest it to be no accident, no slip of the pen, that the editor redacted the passage Following Tyrrell’s route… from Moffatt’s journal entry for 13 September.
And, given that Lanouette’s evidence (provided below) falsifies all of the editor’s Assertion 1 and much of her/his Assertion 2, perhaps the editor failed to read that evidence.
I refer the reader to Ancillary 1. Accusations for a fuller discussion of the accusations regarding the fatal rapids.

Response to the food part of Assertion 2.
The statement game grows scarce is falsified by the evidence of Moffatt’s journal, which documents the shooting of five caribou in the six weeks before the tragedy, the last on 5 September.
It bears mention that Moffatt’s journal documents also the shooting of many ptarmigan, the catching of many fish (three species), and the harvesting of blueberries and mushrooms, all in those six weeks. Reference. Appendix 6. Food.

4. Lanouette’s full journal for 14 September..
The passage that follows (the one relevant to the onset of the fatal rapids) is excerpted from his journal for 14 September, as provided in Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
The journal itself is not publicly available and so I express my gratitude to Lanouette (Moffatt’s bowperson) for making it available to me; I hope that the padding community as a whole is similarly grateful for his generosity.
We had a rather satisfying lunch of chowder and three hardtacks (or ‘tacks) apiece and were ready to shove on again around 2:30 or 3:00. The weather was still dismal, although the wind had dropped (I think) almost to a complete calm.
The river flowed on rather swiftly and it was but a few minutes before we heard and saw another rapids on the horizon. (Notes – at this time, Art figured we had shot the last 2 rapids into Lady Marjorie and so we were not anticipating anything more along this line – actually, what we had taken for rapids were only riffles and what lay ahead was the real beginning of the first rapids). At the top, these rapids looked as though they would be very easy going – a few small waves, rocks … nothing serious – so much so that we didn’t even haul over to shore to look it over before proceeding as was customary. The river at this point was straight and we could see both the top and foot of the rapids quite clearly – however, although we didn’t realize it, we couldn’t see the middle, even though we thought we could – at any rate we barrelled happily along. We bounced over a couple of fair-sized waves and took in a couple of splashes but I didn’t mind, as I had made an apron of my poncho and remained dry enough. I, as was my habit, was looking a few feet in front of the canoe, looking for submerged rocks – suddenly, Art shouted “Paddle” – I responded and took up the beat, at the same time looking farther ahead to see what it was we were trying to avoid – to my complete surprise, what I saw were two lines of white, parallel to one another and coming closer with every passing instant – I looked at them in helpless fascination, not altering my stroke any. The lines of white were the crests of two huge waves formed by the water as it crashed over 2, 3 or 4’ ledges or falls). Note: it was too late to pull for shore – all we could was to pick what seemed to be the least turbulent spots and head for them.

Comments.
Lanouette was surprised because J B Tyrrell had advised the party that there existed no rapids of consequence between the portage (the one completed in the morning of 14 September) and Marjorie Lake.
As I document in Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt, J B Tyrrell’s book makes no mention of the fatal rapids. Those rapids are mentioned in the Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence, which suggests however that they are a matter of no concern. I refer the reader to the evidence of LaFavour, as provided in Item 7 below: …the last two apparently easy for they were mentioned only as “rapids”. That correspondence is clearly an item to be pursued; I hope to find the opportunity to do so.
Summary.
Following Tyrrell’s advice, which had proved reliable for many weeks previously, Moffatt continued downstream without a scout, to his death.

5. The Sports Illustrated condensation of Lanouette’s journal for 14 September.
A condensation of Lanouette’s journal entry for 14 September was reported in the SI article of 1959 (the very first publication regarding the tragedy). The following is excerpted from page 85.
After a fine lunch of fish chowder, we shoved off again at around 2:30. The weather was still dismal, although the wind had dropped. In a few minutes we heard and saw rapids on the horizon. This surprised us. Art had figured we had already shot the last two rapids before Marjorie Lake. Actually, what we had gone down were only riffles, and what lay ahead was the real beginning of the first rapids.
At the top, the rapids looked as though they would be easy going, a few small waves, rocks—nothing serious. We didn’t even haul to shore to have a look, as we usually did. The river was straight and we could see both the top and foot of the rough water quite clearly, or we thought we could. We barreled happily along. We bounced over a couple of fair-sized waves and took in a couple of splashes, but I didn’t mind as I had made an apron of my poncho and remained dry enough. I was looking a few feet in front of the canoe for submerged rocks when Art suddenly shouted “Paddle.”

1. The interested reader will verify that the above is a faithful condensation of Lanouette’s journal, as provided in Item 4.
2. The interpretation of the passage is clear to me:
Moffatt had possessed prior information regarding the fatal rapids. From that information (which came from J B Tyrrell), he concluded that the rapids were of no concern, and so he ran them without a scout. Unfortunately, Tyrrell’s information was incorrect.
3. Many of Moffatt’s defamers in the matter of the fatal rapids are known to have possessed the SI article (this from the content of their accusations, some regarding other matters), but not one of them mentioned Lanouette’s exculpatory text, which lay in plain sight in the SI article.
4. Worthy of special mention in this respect is the Sports Illustrated editor her/himself, who not only omitted mention of the passage, but also made accusations falsified by it. Yet worse, the editor redacted the exculpatory passage Following Tyrrell’s route from Moffatt’s journal for 13 September.
5. Summary.
The evidence of Lanouette, as published in the Sports Illustrated condensation of his journal, demonstrates that Moffatt had full reason to believe that the coast was clear to continue downriver without a scout.
But not one defamer in this matter mentioned the exculpatory evidence of Lanouette’s journal, which lay in plain view in the SI article (which was used by them to make other accusations). Did they not act in unseemly haste?

6. Grinnell’s version of the condensation of Lanouette’s journal.
Grinnell provided the following version of Item 5.
In a few minutes we heard and saw rapids on the horizon… [paragraph break]
At the top, the rapids looked as though they would be easy going, a few small waves, rocks—nothing serious.
[Grinnell book, 1996 edition, p 202]
One sees that Grinnell redacted the exculpatory passage
This surprised us. Art had figured we had already shot the last two rapids before Marjorie Lake. Actually, what we had gone down were only riffles, and what lay ahead was the real beginning of the first rapids from the condensation of Lanouette’s journal [Sports Illustrated, p 85, middle of right column] and replaced it with an ellipsis.
This passage tells me that Moffatt (and so Lanouette) had been told by J B Tyrrell there were no more significant rapids above Marjorie Lake.
Hypothesis.
Grinnell redacted the key passage This surprised us…first rapid because it showed that Moffatt had been misled by Tyrrell’s advice.
Follow-up material.
1. Several accusers are known to have been misled by Grinnell’s redaction.
2. The same three exculpatory sentences were redacted also in the 2010 edition of Grinnell’s book [p 207].
3. Pessl disputes many remarks in Grinnell’s book. Especially noteworthy here is Grinnell’s thinly veiled suggestion that Moffatt was suicidal, this with reference in particular to the running of the fatal rapids without a scout.
4. As I documented above, the Sports Illustrated editor also redacted exculpatory evidence regarding Moffatt’s decision to run the fatal rapids without a scout. And so it concerns me that the two had certainly corresponded (perhaps met in person) before the publication of the SI article in 1959; I refer here to page 88 of that article.

7. Private correspondence from Lanouette.
Comment. Thanks to Lanouette for these email messages and for permission to publish them.
1. …he [Pessl] and Art had studied them [J B Tyrrell’s journals] carefully before setting out and notations from the journals had been made on Art’s maps. [17 January , 2015].
2. I can assure you that, at the time of the accident, there was no sense of panic. But after recovering from that experience, we certainly focussed in getting as much mileage behind us each day. [17 January, 2015].
3. Certainly there was no panicky, helter-skelter paddling down the river to reach Baker Lake. [20 March, 2015].
Comment. I am uncertain regarding the times to which the remarks no sense of panic and no panicky…paddling are intended to apply.

8. The evidence of LeFavour’s article.
For completeness, I quote again LeFavour’s comment His [Tyrrell’s] journal had been accurate to that point, namely the start of the fatal rapids. [Private correspondence, 2015]

The source for the following is LeFavour’s article in the Evening Recorder, Amsterdam NY. Part 3, page 8, 29 December (1955)].

13 September.
…As we sped through Wharton Lake only the occasional snow flurry fell, an incentive not a deterrent. Up to that point we had shot five caribou and by doing so had saved enough meat to see us through. Now it was not even necessary to spend time hunting. We traveled, and traveled hard.
The river between Wharton and Marjorie Lakes split up into three channels. The longest of these
[the rightmost] had been traveled by Tyrrell in his trip 60 years before and was described in his journal: there were five rapids, the first two rough but shootable, the third long and heavy requiring a portage of a mile [”400 yards” in Tyrrell’s book] and the last two apparently easy for they were mentioned only as “rapids”. Because this route was described we took it, being careful to look over the first two which were indeed rough. Hurrying as we were, no foolish chances were taken.
Analysis.
1. Tyrrell’s remarks regarding the first two rapids and the portage square with those of participant LeFavour.
2. The first key passage is the last two apparently easy for they were mentioned only as “rapids”. I say that this passage is key because these are the rapids where Moffatt died. I should mention that this advice came from the Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence, rather from Tyrrell’s journal/book (which makes no mention of them).
3. The second key passage is Hurrying as we were, no foolish chances were taken.
I ask that the reader compare this with the Sports Illustrated editor’s assertion
…the Moffatt party races against winter on the Barren Grounds… In desperate haste, they take an ultimate chance. [SI article, bottom right of p 76]

14 September.
A cold breeze blew the morning of the 14th. Thankful for the chance to keep warm by walking we completed the portage around the third rapid and at noon, under the watchful eye of four wolves lounging on a nearby ridge we set off downriver. By two we had stopped to eat a lunch which included hot soup cooked on a sweet smelling dwarf birch fire. Gas was precious, and the constant gathering required to keep the fire going helped to warm our cold feet. Here too, we fished, and after 20 pounds of trout were caught we gave up for the water was freezing in the eyes of the rod. It was cold, there was no doubt about that.
At 3 p.m. we were again on the river. Gone was the wind, and we hoped to get a good way up Marjorie
Lake in the calm before dark. A mile downriver the roar of the next rapid reached our ears, a roar which had become familiar and comforting in this quiet land, a roar which in the past had promised excitement. As we coasted into the top of it all appeared to be well. You could see the bottom, the water, though white, was apparently shootable. Tyrrell had indicated by his neglect that the rapid was an easy one, and it seemed to be just that.
A flock of ptarmigan on the shore caught my eye, but soon we were past them and out in midstream. It was then that Skip and I noticed that Art and Joe in the lead canoe were having trouble. They were over! We saw the two huge waves, walls of white water which seemed almost five feet high. Pete and George had made the one, were heading for the second, and then we saw nothing but the unavoidable waves. We were into it!

Comment.
The objective having been accomplished (namely to document how the tragedy came to pass), more out of respect for the participants, I terminate LeFavour’s account here.

Analysis.
The key passage is … Tyrrell had indicated by his neglect that the rapid was an easy one, and it seemed to be just that. In full agreement with the evidence from other sources (in particular, the condensed version of Lanouette’s journal (SI article, pp 85-87), this passage evinces that, in choosing to run the fatal rapids without a scout, Moffatt had only followed J B Tyrrell’s advice. Given that Tyrrell’s journal makes no mention of these rapids, LeFavour must refer here to the Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence.

A minor point.
Sub-Appendix 2. The Tyrrell-Moffatt route between Wharton Lake and Marjorie Lake discusses the passage The river between Wharton and Marjorie Lakes split up into three channels. The longest of these had been traveled by Tyrrell in his trip 60 years before.

Closing comments.
1. Although Moffatt’s defamers could not have been expected to know of the Evening Recorder article, it does falsify their accusations.
2. I thank LeFavour for providing it and for permission to reproduce it.

9. The evidence of Pessl.

Passage 1.
After completing a short portage, loaded the canoes and continued our dash down the river. It was cold and windy, the sky was overcast and we stopped at frequent intervals to warm our feet and legs.
[We] approached what we thought must be the last rapids with confidence and impatience. Art stood up … looked ahead, and … drove his canoe for the middle of the flow. … The next thing I saw as we shot around the bend was a white wall of huge waves. … Beyond the thundering waves, the yellow camera box and Art’s gray canoe bobbed crazily in the rapids below.
[Canoe&Kayak, May 2012 issue, p 48, right column].

Passage 2.
That’s the other lesson I learned, says Pessl. To be patient. If we had just been patient and confident, if we hadn’t been in such a headlong rush that we didn’t stop to scout the rapid, we would have been fine. It’s very hard to do that, in the grip of panic, but it would have made all the difference. Art would have been with us, his life …. Pessl pauses. When it comes down to it, even with everything that happened, we were so close. [Canoe&Kayak, May 2012 issue, p 102?, left column].

Passage 3.
The tragedy of September 14, when Art Moffatt died, occurred, in my opinion, … , because Art and I tried to concurrently accomplish two mutually exclusive objectives: canoe travel and documentary filming of that journey. The demands of these opposing goals delayed and distracted our commitment to river miles. Art and I remained tragically stubborn in our commitment to filming the journey, even in the face of serious and obvious deterioration of the weather. [Nastawgan, Summer issue, 2013, p 5].

Passage 4.
The weather grew harsh. Freezing temperatures, wind-driven snow, dwindling food supplies, and deteriorating equipment pushed us hard to travel faster and more efficiently, and ultimately we made a fatal mistake. We approached the rapids entering Marjorie Lake with caution, but without an onshore look. Standing up in our canoes as we floated toward the rapids, we saw a modest current sweeping toward a right-hand bend and drove our canoes into that initial current V. [Pessl book, p XVII.]

Passage 5.
The tragedy of September 14 occurred, in my opinion, not because of Art’s alleged mental instability or some sort of Zen nonsense, but because Art and I failed to accurately translate our collective Albany River experiences to northern big-river conditions, especially into late-season, freezing conditions, and because we tried to concurrently accomplish two mutually exclusive objectives: travel and film. …we did not differentiate between what worked on the Albany River and what would not work in late season on the Dubawnt.
The deteriorating weather…changed our modus operandi from cautious land-based scouting of rapids to a floating assessment as we were sucked into the headwater Vs of each successive rapid. It worked for several days and many rapids, except for one.
Somewhere between the robotic distance grinds of… and the tragic disregard for time, distance, and season of the Moffatt leadership (and I include myself I that category), there must be a reasonable balance for wilderness canoeists on long journeys…
[Pessl book, pp 172&173].

Comment regarding passages 2 through 5.
To me, Pessl’s remarks are those of an introspective person still trying, after 59 years, to come to terms with the tragedy; for publishing those remarks, I suggest that he deserves our deep respect.

Passage 6.
Pessl (kindly and most frankly, both as ever) responded as follows regarding an email message of mine.
I understand the confusion, contradiction that the two quotes may create. The quote attributed to me [Excerpt 2] is accurate and comes from a conversation I had with Al Kesselheim when he was preparing to write his C&K article on the Moffatt Dubawnt journey (May 2012). It was a very emotional interview for me; the first time in many years that I shared some of my feelings about Dubawnt ’55. The quote expresses my remorse over Art’s death and my belief, in retrospect, that we should have scouted the Marjorie rapids. My use of the term “panic” was inaccurate, too strong and I regret that. Bruce’s phrase is much more accurate.
But our individual and collective state of mind during those early September days is pretty much conjecture and perhaps mostly semantic after so many years. The much more important question, clearly answered by your detailed research, is WHY we didn’t scout the rapids? And the answer: because we were following Tyrrell’s journal description of the river conditions approaching Marjorie Lake. Tyrrell’s river descriptions had proven dependable previously and indicated benign conditions entering Marjorie Lake following the last portage.
[Pessl, private correspondence].
Opinion.
The passage we were following Tyrrell’s journal description of the river conditions approaching Marjorie Lake, alone and itself, falsifies every accusation made by every Moffatt defamer regarding the running of the fatal rapids.

10. A comment of Luste.
Art Moffatt, following Tyrrell’s notes, was not expecting the rapid in which he swamped and then died. [Luste, in Grinnell’s book, p 284].
Please note the phrase following Tyrrell’s notes. That is, Luste knew (by means unknown) and confirms that Moffatt
had obtained rapids advice from Tyrrell,
was following that advice, and
had been misled by that advice.
Unfortunately, not one defamer mentioned Luste’s exculpatory comment, which appears (it need be repeated) in Grinnell’s book, a prime source for accusations of o’erhasty running of the fatal rapid.
In particular, Grinnell himself (in his own book) had the opportunity to mention Luste’s comment, but failed to do so.

11. Analysis.
1. The Moffatt party possessed information, not provided in Tyrrell’s book, regarding the rapids below the portage. The source for that additional information can be only the Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence, which is known to have occurred but is not publicly available.
2. Those rapids were apparently easy for they were mentioned only as “rapids”. [LeFavour, Ibid.]
3. By the time that Moffatt realized the gravity of the situation, it was too late to bail out and head for shore; they had to tough it out. The rapids grew ever wilder, and despite Moffatt’s considerable experience in running white water, his boat and another capsized, spilling all four into the ice-cold river. The paddlers (one of them later fell into the water) in the third boat were able to rescue the other four, but Moffatt died of hypothermia about an hour later. Luste commented as follows. …one is struck by how close all six came to perishing in the cold water. [Grinnell book, pp 294 & 295].

12. Additional evidence.
1. Referring to food and running rapids, Pessl commented as follows. The protection of our supplies dictates our caution. [Pessl, p 90, 16 August]
2. Moffatt took major precautions to protect also the film and the photographs; after all, these were the main purposes for the trip! Indeed, Moffatt portaged parts of some rapids run by the other two canoes. [Pessl, pp 122 & 124 (search incomplete)].
3. Moffatt’s …decided to portage last 100 yds. of rapid, partly to get warm, also to avoid risk of wetting or hurting film & cameras… as quoted in private correspondence from Pessl; I refer the reader to Appendix 8. Rapids in general.

13. Summary.
Moffatt’s sources regarding the fatal rapids were J B Tyrrell’s book and correspondence with him.
The evidence of Tyrrell’s book (for the reach between Wharton Lake and Marjorie Lake) is provided in Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt..
The full Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence is presently unavailable, only excerpts.
On 14 September 1955, Moffatt ran the fatal rapids (those below the lunch stop) without a scout because J B Tyrrell had informed him, implicitly, that they were not dangerous.
The evidence of trip participants Moffatt (I refer here to his journal entry for 13 September), Lanouette, LeFavour and Pessl attests that Tyrrell’s rapids information, which had proved reliable for the previous ten weeks, failed Moffatt on 14 September.
The efforts of the Sports Illustrated editor and of Grinnell were outstandingly successful, for their redactions misled the paddling community as a whole, including many prominent members of it, for 55 years regarding the cause of Moffatt’s death.
Every author of every accusation regarding the cause of Moffatt’s death got it wrong. They asserted (only) that the cause was one or more of those discussed in Appendices 1 through 8.
What an ugly chapter in the paddling literature are the accusations regarding the fatal rapids.
Sadly, the eight other chapters of the accusatory literature differ but little.
Even John Hornby (Thelon River, 1927) was treated mildly in comparison.
Reference. Ancillary 1. Accusations.

Sub-Appendix 1. Tyrrell sources.

The expedition of 1893 was led by Joseph Burr Tyrrell (1858-1957) and his brother James Williams (1863-1945).
J W Tyrrell’s book.
Assumed to be a full transcription of JWT’s journal, it is available at the University of Toronto library, in microfiche form. I viewed perhaps 20 pages, but in cursory fashion only. I made no copies. I recall much detail regarding ethnography. I found nothing of interest regarding the scene of the tragedy; and I found no mention of weather as severe as that encountered by the Moffatt party.
I did not pursue the matter because I knew that Moffatt’s primary source for Dubawnt information had been rather J B Tyrrell; in fact, as best I know, Moffatt made no use of this item.
J B Tyrrell’s book.
I assume JBT’s book to be a full transcription of his journal; the latter is not publicly available; it might be held at the Thomas Fisher library at the University of Toronto, but I’ll not pursue the matter.
I assume also that, in the following passage, by report Moffatt means JBT’s book.
…who was kind enough to send, on loan until September 30, 1955, a copy of your report. [Moffatt letter to J B Tyrrell, 14 January 1955].
JBT’s book is held at the University of Toronto library. The kind, helpful staff there generously provided me with copies of page 56 F (upstream of “Doobaunt” Lake) to page 70 F (downstream from Aberdeen Lake).
In Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt, I provide the full text of JBT’s journal for the reach between Wharton Lake and Marjorie Lake. The interested reader will verify that Tyrrell makes no reference to rapids below the portage 400 yards long. It was in those unmentioned rapids that Moffatt died.
The Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence.
The following items evince that Moffatt had corresponded with J B Tyrrell regarding the Dubawnt River, in particular its rapids.
1. Moffatt’s letters of 18 December 1954 and 14 January 1955 to J B Tyrrell, (copies kindly provided by Pessl; not available to the general public). In the latter, Moffatt thanks Tyrrell for his response to the first.
2. LeFavour’s newspaper article of 1955.
3. The Sports Illustrated article of 1959 [Art Moffatt’s Prospectus, p 71].
4. Pessl’s Nastawgan article of 2013 [p 3].
5. Pessl’s book of 2014 [pp 10&176].
Comment. The Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence itself is not publicly available, only references to some of its contents, and a few excerpts. This is an important matter to be pursued, for we would then learn in detail what Tyrrell told Moffatt regarding the fatal rapids in particular. I believe the correspondence to be held at the Thomas Fisher library at the University of Toronto; if so, I hope to access it, one fine day.

Sub-Appendix 2. The Tyrrell-Moffatt route between Wharton Lake and Marjorie Lake.

The Dubawnt River exits Wharton Lake by two channels, but some waters of the leftmost channel flow into the rightmost, as one sees easily at Toporama and mytopo. BTW, this is the reason for the <em<three in LeFavour’s passage The river between Wharton and Marjorie Lakes split up into three channels. The longest of these had been traveled by Tyrrell in his trip 60 years before.
The topos identify the rightmost as the Dubawnt River.
Moffatt followed Tyrrell’s route, namely the rightmost channel. The corresponding evidence is provided in Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Comment 1. Bill Layman and Lynda Holland chose the leftmost channel in 2001, I don’t know why.
http://www.out-there.com/bill-jl9.htm#Monday July 30
I note that Layman incorrectly identified the leftmost channel as the one where Moffatt died.
Comment 2. After the tragedy, the Moffatt party portaged from Marjorie Lake to Aberdeen Lake, I assume because the rapids below Marjorie are particularly difficult, as described in another publication by Layman (2002)
http://www.out-there.com/bil-riv.htm
Thanks to Les Wilcox for informing me of the latter.

Internal URLs.

Foreword and Forum.
Main text.
Appendix 1. Reality.
Appendix 2. Holidays.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 5. Pace.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Ancillary 4. Distances.
Ancillary 5. Loose ends and the future.
Ancillary 6. Addenda.
Ancillary 7. The Moffatt-Tyrrell correspondence.
Bibliography.

Appendix 7. Schedule

Major renovations were completed in early November 2017 but I expect that warts remain.
Thanks for your patience. Allan

Appendix 7. Schedule.

Timeline of the schedule-related Moffatt literature.

1959.
Publication of the Sports Illustrated articles. Issues of
9 March 1959 Man against the Barren Grounds (pp 68-76) and
16 March 1959 Danger and Sacrifice (pp 80-88).
Reader responses were posted at
http://www.si.com/vault/1959/04/06/604104/19th-hole-the-readers-take-over
Contents include the New York Times article, mentioned below, of 24 September 1955.
1988.
Publication of Grinnell’s article.
Grinnell, George J. Art Moffatt’s Wilderness Way to Enlightenment. Canoe, July 1988, pp 18-21 & 56.
1996.
Publication of Grinnell’s book (first edition).
Grinnell, George. A Death on the Barrens. A true story. Northern Books, Toronto (1996). The editions of 2005 and 2010 are believed not to have been used in the Moffatt literature.
1996.
1. Murphy, James.
Che-Mun, Canoelit section. Moffatt, Myth & Mysticism. Spring 1996, pp 5 & 11.
Online version. http://www.canoe.ca/AllAboutCanoes/book_deathbarrens.html
2. MacDonald, Andrew.
Che-Mun, Canoelit section. Moffatt, Myth & Mysticism. Spring 1996, pp 5 & 11.
2000.
3. The Tragic Trips…1955 – The Moffat Dubawnt River trip..
Che-Mun, Outfit 99, Winter 2000, pp 5&6.
2005.
Publication of two articles (identical at first glance) by Charlie Mahler. Contents include comments of Bob Thum and others.
Article 1. Down a Dead Man’s River, Che-Mun. Outfit 122, Autumn 2005, starting on page 4.
http://www.ottertooth.com/che-mun/122/chemun122.pdf
Article 2. Feature Story in the Advanced Paddler section at canoeing.com.
The formerly active URL.
http://www.canoeing.com/advanced/feature/deadmansriver.htm

Paddling in the barrenlands.

1. The purpose of the Tyrrell party (1893) was to explore lands never before seen by those of European descent.
2. The purpose of most recreational parties is to experience the barrenlands. But some who paddle there do so rather in order to prove something, an act that those who respect the barrenlands find distasteful; I provide an example later.
3. The purpose of the Moffatt party (1955) was none of these. Moffatt went there in order to document the barrenlands, by film, photos and journals. And so the party ad-libed, stopping to photograph the caribou and the artifacts left by the native people, to film the running of rapids, etc, as the occasion arose. But Moffatt was fully aware of the need to exit the barrenlands before the onset of winter, as evinced by his arrangements with the RCMP detachment at Baker Lake, the terminus of the trip.
4. With respect to the schedule, Moffatt had none but an arrival date in Baker Lake. That date was 15 September, with a grace period of seven days before the air search was started (indeed, it began on 22 September). And he had not one waypoint to be reached by a particular date.
5. The barrenlands are not Algonquin or Temagami or the BWCAW, for example, where a day-by-day schedule verges on being mandatory. No party paddling in the barrenlands ever had or could have had anything as detailed as a day-by-day schedule. Even the Tyrrell party of 1893 could not paddle every day; inclement weather forced even it to lay over on occasion.
When the wind is up, everyone stays in camp, especially tourists like us.
I challenge any reader to provide evidence
first that any recreational party ever to paddle in the barrens had a day-by-day schedule,
second that it stuck to that schedule for weeks.
And so I ask that the reader reflect on the assertions (documented later) of Murphy and MacDonald that Moffatt died because of lack of schedule.
6. The Moffatt party had no day-by day schedule, nor could it have had one. But it did have the essential ingredient, namely a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake, as evinced by the following eleven independent sources.
The New York Times, the Manchester Ledger, the Boston Sunday Advertiser, the Winnipeg Tribune, the RCAF, the RCMP, the Baker Lake detachment of the RCMP, the Moffatt family (especially his wife Carol), participant Grinnell (in his book), participant Lanouette, and participant Pessl.
A request.
I ask that the reader assess the assertions that Moffatt died due to lack of schedule in the light of the evidence presented above.

Moffatt’s preparations.
Again, Moffatt had told the RCMP representative in Baker Lake to expect the party on 15 September.
I possess no evidence regarding what, if anything, Moffatt had obtained from the RCMP there.
Moffatt possessed the books of both Joseph B Tyrrell and James W Tyrrell, and
he had obtained copies of JBT’s maps (which show many features, including many rapids and falls), and
he had corresponded with JBT, and
he had JBT’s journal (which differs from his book).
I conclude that Moffatt was well prepared in general, in particular the weather to be expected in mid-September.

Some dates for the Tyrrell and Moffatt parties.
1. Entry-exit dates for Dubawnt Lake.
Tyrrell. 7-17 August, 1893
Moffatt. 21-27 August, 1955.
Reference. Pessl’s book, as documented in Sub-Appendix 1.
2. Arrival dates at Baker Lake.
The Tyrrell party reached Baker Lake on 2 September 1893 [Robertson, p 162], continued to the coast of Hudson Bay (at Chesterfield Inlet), then went down it to Churchill (the last part by sled) and beyond. Aside. Pessl [private communication] suggested this to be the source for Grinnell’s erroneous assertion that the Moffatt party was scheduled to arrive there on 2 September.
As noted above, Moffatt’s arrival was scheduled for 15 September,

Paddling the barrenlands and proving something.
1. Let the reader decide whether Moffatt had anything to prove.
He was an American pacifist (a Quaker) who volunteered pre December 1941 to serve in the British army as an ambulance driver. Under enemy fire in both Africa and Italy, literally for years, he took the wounded and the dying from the front of the battles to the aid stations.
2. Let Thum describe the mission of his 1966 party.
Moffatt is precisely why we took the trip… I thought experienced trippers could cover Tyrrell’s route safely and skillfully, which we did… Those guys had no business being up there… [Thum, in Che-Mun, Outfit 122, Autumn 2005]
To me, it is no great reach to suggest that the mission of the Thum party was to show up a dead man. And with respect to Thum’s safely and skillfully, which we did, it is perhaps not beside the point that Thum possessed information not available to Moffatt, in particular that the rapids (those where Moffatt died) above Marjorie Lake are dangerous in the extreme.

Summary of the evidence available to Moffatt’s accusers in the matter of the schedule.

Of particular interest to our understanding of the Murphy-MacDonald accusations that Moffatt died due to lack of schedule is
first that a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake was documented in all four of the earliest publications regarding the tragedy, and
second that all four publications were easily available to every accuser in the matter.
1. The Sports Illustrated article (1959) contains the two passages
a week behind…schedule [SI article, upper right column on page 76; dated 8 August] and nine days behind schedule [SI article, lower right column on p 76; dated between 15 and 18 August].
2. That same SI article contains the following passage from the New York Times, dated 24 September 1955. Planes flew over the tundra…looking for a trace of a six-man expedition. The group was a week overdue… [SI article, top left of p 71]
3. Grinnell’s Canoe article (1988) contains the passage late in the season and behind schedule. The passage is likely an editorial comment, but it nevertheless appears in the Moffatt literature.
4. Especially important is the evidence provided in Grinnell’s book (1966), for the first schedule-related accusations were published in the Murphy-MacDonald reviews of that book.
There, Grinnell oscillates between assertions
that there was only a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake and
that there was a schedule more prescriptive than an arrival date (say a date for exiting Dubawnt Lake, not that the Moffatt part had such).
But Grinnell always insists that the party had a date for arrival in Baker Lake; indeed, he gave the date for that arrival. I challenge the reader to find a contrary remark in his book.
Nevertheless, in their reviews of Grinnell’s book, James Murphy and Andrew MacDonald asserted that Arthur Moffatt died due to lack of schedule. Unfortunately for the reputation of a person unable to respond, their assertions were accepted, indeed promulgated, in the accusatory literature that followed.
5. The following items provide details of the evidence in those four publications.

The evidence of the New York Times article.
The following is the full text; only a summary was provided above.
On Sept. 24, 1955, the following dispatch appeared in “The New York Times”:
“PRINCE ALBERT, SASK. Planes flew over the tundra of the Arctic region today looking for a trace of a six-man expedition. The group was a week overdue on a 900-mile canoe trip.
Led by a veteran woodsman, Arthur Moffatt, 36, of Norwich, Vt., the explorers had provisions for 80 days. They have been gone 85 days, but officials said there were deer and elk in the area that the men could shoot for food.
The group left Stony Rapids, Sask., en route to Baker Lake, 150 miles south of the Arctic Circle.
[Sports Illustrated article of 1959, top of p 71]
Analysis.
What interpretation of the passage The group was a week overdue… is possible but that the Moffatt party had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake, but was a week overdue?
Conclusion.
The evidence of the New York Times article, alone and in itself, refutes every accusation that the Moffatt party had no schedule for arrival in Baker Lake. In particular, it refutes the assertions of Murphy and MacDonald (Moffatt’s initial accusers in the matter), who made no mention of this evidence. Neither did any later accuser in the matter mention this evidence.
Lesser matters.
1. 24 September is the publication date of the NYT article, not necessarily the date when it was written. By chance, it is also the date when the survivors reached Baker Lake.
2. Arrival in Baker Lake was scheduled for 15 September, with a grace period of a week before an air search was begun. Indeed, that search was begun on 22 September.
3. A minor point regarding the trip distance (the 900 miles).
Before the trip started (but after writing his Prospectus, provided on page 71 of the SI article), Moffatt decided to exit at Baker Lake (rather than continue to Chesterfield Inlet), thereby shortening the trip by ~200 miles (~300 km). That is, the figure of 900 miles for the distance between Black Lake and Baker Lake (given in the NYT article and elsewhere in the Moffatt literature) is incorrect.
Reference. Ancillary 4. Distances.
4. An even lesser point: deer means caribou; elk is risible.

FIX following

With one exception (Grinnell, need it be said?, who insists on 2 September), all sources agree that the arrival date was 15 September, with a grace period of a week before the air search would start (as mentioned in several of them). In fact, the air search began on 22 September.

The accusations of the Sports Illustrated editor.

Introduction.
Comment 1. Nowhere in Moffatt’s journal (possessed in full by the Sports Illustrated editor) exists there a reference to a day-by-day schedule.
Comment 2. Nowhere in Moffatt’s journal (possessed in full by the Sports Illustrated editor) exists there a reference to a waypoint to be reached by some date, even an approximate one. The fact is rather that the Moffatt party had only endpoints, namely Black Lake and Baker Lake.
Comment 3. Contrary to what one might gather from the two assertions of the editor, the Moffatt party was not following the schedule of the Tyrrell party.
(a) Barrenlands weather forbids a day-by-day schedule. Even the Tyrrell party of 1893 had no such schedule; even it had to stay in camp on occasion.
(b) Given its mission to document the barrenlands, the Moffatt party paused in order to photograph the caribou and the items left by the native people, to film the running of rapids, etc.
Comment 4. But, as documented by the 11 sources provided above, Moffatt had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake. Noteworthy among these is the New York Times, published in that same Sports Illustrated article.
Comment 5.
A major difference is that the Tyrrell party continued on the Dubawnt-Thelon to Chesterfield Inlet, whereas Moffatt had planned from the beginning of the trip to exit at Baker Lake, 300 km upstream from the inlet.

Assertion 1 of the Sports Illustrated editor.

He [Moffatt] was a week behind Tyrrell’s schedule. [SI article, upper right column on p 76, 8 August].
What interpretation of this passage is possible but that Moffatt was following the schedule of the Tyrrell party of 1893, and that he was seven days or so behind it?
A request.
I ask that the reader assess, in the light of this evidence, the later assertions of Murphy and MacDonald that Moffatt died due to lack of schedule.

Assertion 2 of the Sports Illustrated editor.

Already nine days behind schedule, the Moffatt party races against winter on the Barren Grounds. The days grow colder, provisions dwindle, game grows scarce. In desperate haste, they take an ultimate chance. [SI article; bottom right of page 76, appearing between the Moffatt journal entries for 15 and 18 August].
Comment 1.
I agree that the days were growing colder (on average), and also that the Moffatt party was travelling in the barrenlands.
Comment 2.
The items provisions dwindle and game grows scarce are addressed in
Appendix 6. Food.
Comment 3.
The items races against winter, desperate haste and ultimate chance are addressed in the following.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
And so we are left with the nine days behind schedule part of the assertion.
What is to be understood from this phrase but
first that the Moffatt party had scheduled a date to reach an unidentified waypoint by 15-18 August,
second that it was nine days behind schedule for arrival at that point?
Response.
The evidence known to me has it rather that the Moffatt party had no such detailed schedule, that it had not one waypoint, that it had only a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake.
Request.
I ask that the reader assess, in the light of this evidence, the later assertions of Murphy and MacDonald that Moffatt died due to lack of schedule.
Summary regarding the schedule part of Assertion 1.
The SI editor represented the record of Moffatt party (1955) to be that of the Tyrrell party (1893).
But the Moffatt party had no day-by-day schedule. Neither could it have had one, for even the Tyrrell party of 1893 was forced to lay over on occasion.
In this connection, I suggest it not beside the point that theSI editor redacted the phrase Following Tyrrell’s route from Moffatt’s journal entry for 13 September. [Sports Illustrated, page 82, lower right column].

The accusations of Murphy and MacDonald.

Comment. These accusations were made in what were billed as reviews of Grinnell’s book (1996).

Preliminary comments regarding Grinnell’s publications and the matter of a schedule.

1. For reasons that are convincing to me, I trust nothing written by Grinnell unless it is confirmed by sources that I believe reliable.
2. And I have learned to trust no other publication of the Moffatt literature except
Moffatt’s journal itself (explicitly not the edited versions provided in the SI article; I refer the reader to the redaction mentioned in the previous item), and the writings of participants Franck, Lanouette, LeFavour and Pessl.
3. As best I can tell (he is remarkably uninformative regarding the matter), Grinnell uses the term schedule in four senses:
(a) a date only for arrival in Baker Lake,
(a) an arrival date plus something more prescriptive (say even as little as a date to exit Dubawnt Lake),
(c) the record of the Tyrrell-Tyrrell trip of 1893, and
(d) participant Franck’s registration date.
But he fails to distinguish between them.
4. Grinnell, like Murphy and MacDonald who wrote later, failed to explain what he meant by the term schedule. And that failure matters, for schedule could have several interpretations, as discussed above.
But Grinnell’s comments (as recorded below) make no sense if he meant by that term only a date for arrival in Baker Lake. He certainly had in mind (at least at times) something more prescriptive.
5. Grinnell’s article and his book (much more the latter) were the only primary sources (the writing of participants) available to the general public for accusations regarding the schedule.
6. I exclude Moffatt’s journal
first because the full item is not publicly available,
second because the evidence suggests that the excerpts provided in the Sports Illustrated article were selected to make points detrimental to Moffatt.
Worse, some of those excerpts were severely edited; the prime example (mentioned above) is Moffatt’s last journal entry, that for 13 September.
7. Some Grinnell remarks appear to have been misrepresented. And it appears that selective use was made of Grinnell’s evidence, to Moffatt’s detriment. And some accusers in the matter added material with no basis in evidence known to me.

The evidence of Grinnell’s Canoe article (1988).

Grinnell, George J.
Art Moffatt’s Wilderness Way to Enlightenment. Canoe, July 1988, pp 18-21 & 56.
Excerpt 1. An editorial (not a Grinnell) comment.
…late in the season and behind schedule, they met disaster. [p 18]
Response.
Excerpt 1 comes from the Canoe editor’s Introduction, which mentions the Sports Illustrated article. The unidentified source for the behind schedule part of the assertion can have been only the SI editor’s nine days behind schedule, which I discuss above. That is, the Canoe editor was familiar with the contents of the SI article, but s/he made no mention of its contents as they affect those of Grinnell’s article.
Excerpt 2.
We demanded a schedule. Moffatt’s idea of learning to live with nature meant traveling at a rather leisurely pace, but on July 18th, we bowmen…threatened to go on strike if we weren’t provided with a schedule. Moffatt replied that the wind did not blow on schedule. [p 20, top right].
Response 1.
Upstream travel on the Chipman River was brutal and so the suggestion that the pace was leisurely on that leg is, I gotta say it, absurd. And how could any party, ever, have had a schedule for that leg?
Response 2.
Given that the height of land was crossed only on 17 July [Pessl, p 43], Grinnell’s assertion that, on the very next day (18 July), the bowmen…threatened to go on strike if we weren’t provided with a schedule is well beyond strange, to me.
Again, how was a detailed schedule possible for that reach?
How could the party have gone much faster in the difficult, trying circumstances up to and including 17 July?
Response 3.
Thereafter (until 3 August, when the group held a meeting and decided unanimously to increase the pace), the pace was not leisurely, so that Moffatt could learn to live with nature, as Grinnell asserted.
Rather, travel was slow in this leg largely so that Moffatt and Pessl could film and photograph; these were the very purposes of the trip!
And it is not beside the point that, on 3 August, the party decided unanimously to increase the pace.
Reference. Appendix 5. Pace.
Response 4.
Moffatt’s remark about the wind is addressed below.
Excerpt 3..
… we had one last dispute over the schedule…. [p 21, middle of the left column].
Summary.
Excerpt 1 (an editorial insertion) asserts that there was a schedule
Excerpt 2, due to Grinnell, asserts that there was no schedule.
Excerpt 3, due to Grinnell, is ambiguous.
Conclusion.
Grinnell’s article itself provides what I assess to be weak evidence that there was no schedule.
But it provides also the editorial assertion that there was a schedule.

The evidence of Grinnell’s book (1996).

Comment 1.
Again, the term schedule is far too vague, for it could mean only a date for arrival in Baker Lake, or a day-by-day schedule, or anything between those extremes.
But the distinction is vitally important for an informed discussion
both of the evidence of Grinnell’s book
and of the accusations made by Murphy and MacDonald in their reviews of that book.
I use the term arrival schedule for a date to arrive in Baker Lake, nothing more.
And I use the term prescriptive schedule for a plan that includes something in addition to an arrival date, be it ever so humble (say only a date for exiting Dubawnt Lake, not that the Moffatt party had any such date).
In both his article and his book, Grinnell unnecessarily contributed to the confusion by failing to distinguish possible interpretations of the term schedule. Murphy and MacDonald continued in the tradition established by Grinnell.
Comment 2.
I had thought that everyone who had paddled in the barrenlands (as had one of Moffatt’s accusers in the matter) knew that the wind forbids the extreme case of a prescriptive schedule, namely a day-by-day schedule. Even the Tyrrell party of 1893 was forced to stay in camp on several occasions.
Caution.
In the writings of the other participants, I found no confirmation of the following 11 comments of Grinnell. Again, I have learned to place no confidence in anything he writes unless it is confirmed by reliable sources. But, although I distrust all Grinnell statements that follow, I must provide them because were the only items (I hesitate to call them evidence) used by Murphy and MacDonald.
Item 1.
Although we were far behind schedule right from the beginning… [Grinnell book, p 17].
And so there was a prescriptive schedule right from the beginning of the trip.
But what then is one to make of Grinnell’s We demanded a schedule. [Grinnell article, p 20, top right]?
Does the evidence of Grinnell’s book then not refute the assertions of his own article?
Item 2.
(a) …what are your thoughts about Art’s schedule? [Grinnell book, p 57, LeFavour speaking].
(b) What schedule! [Lanouette’s reply].
Interpretation.
LeFavour suggested that there existed a prescriptive schedule, but the party was not sticking to it; Lanouette was being sarcastic.
Item 3.
I wanted the assurance that we would eventually reach … Baker Lake on September 2nd, as planned, and a schedule seemed to me to be the best way of guaranteeing that. [p 58].
(a) Grinnell has changed his tune. Now there was no schedule, only a planned date for arrival in Baker Lake. That is, Grinnell wanted some more prescriptive.
Aside. 2 September is wrong by 13 days.
(b) Pessl’s question Is it just a coincidence that Tyrrell arrived Baker Lake on Sept. 2? [private correspondence] alerted me to the possibility that Grinnell had confused (in his writing) dates for the Tyrrell trip with dates for the Moffatt trip; I now believe such to be the case. But I insist that the Moffatt party had a date for arrival in Baker Lake, namely 15 September, as I describe below, in detail.
And so Grinnell’s remark I wanted the assurance that we would eventually reach … Baker Lake on September 2nd, as planned,… has no relevance to the Moffatt trip.
And so I am baffled as to why it was made.
Item 4.
…we bowmen…would go on strike if we were not given a schedule. [p 62].
Interpretation. No prescriptive schedule.
Item 5.
We bowmen were tired of being governed by the anarchy of wind and rain… [p 62].
This is a side issue, but what is going on here?
What can one do about the wind, in particular, except hunker down and wait it out?
That is exactly what Moffatt meant by his remark …the wind did not blow on schedule…; everyone who has paddled in the barrens (as had at least one accuser in the matter of the schedule) knows that fact and its consequence: When the wind is up, you stay in camp.
And so I fail to understand why Grinnell made this remark.
Item 6.
This remark, which has no relevance to the Moffatt trip, is included only for completeness.
On Art’s previous Albany trips, things had been run on schedule. [p 68].
Comment. I know of no evidence that supports this assertion of Grinnell. But if one accepts it, then
Moffatt had used a something like a prescriptive schedule previously.
Again, Moffatt could not possibly have had such a schedule for the Dubawnt trip; barrenlands trips differ considerably from those farther south (like the Albany), because no trees means no shelter from the wind.
Item 7.
Skip…seemed to have desired a more civilized schedule, something along the lines of shift work at General Motors…but Art only smiled sweetly and sipped his tea. [p 146].
Interpretation. Pessl wanted a more prescriptive schedule but Moffatt did not have one.
Item 8.
In the last two months, we had fallen about a month behind schedule. [p 162, ~29 August].
Grinnell changed his tune again. Now there was again a prescriptive schedule, for the party had fallen…behind schedule..
The reference is likely to the remark in item 3 above [p 17; 18 July], but I fail to understand why it was made on ~29 August. To put the matter another way, how are Grinnell’s remarks of ~six weeks earlier relevant on ~29 August?
A relatively minor point. The month estimate is far outside any constraint imposed by reality. Even with time lost due to the tragedy and to the weather, the party arrived in Baker Lake on 24 September, 9 days later than scheduled (two days after the end of the grace period), somewhat less than the month claimed by Grinnell.
Item 9.
…in the early days of the trip, when it first became apparent that we were falling behind schedule… [p 163].
Again. There was a prescriptive schedule from the very beginning of the trip.
Item 10.
On p 166, Grinnell again mentions (indirectly, again incorrectly) an arrival date of 2 September.
Item 11.
…the impending disaster which Art and the rest of us were so obviously courting. [p 167].
Comments.
There was nothing obvious about the tragedy, even afterward. The tragedy was not caused by falling behind schedule as Grinnell suggests. The cause was rather incorrect information provided by J B Tyrrell. It is perhaps then not beside the point that, as I describe elsewhere in this document, Grinnell redacted evidence in his version of the Sports Illustrated condensation of Lanouette’s journal for 14 September. [Grinnell book, 1966, p 202]
Conclusion. This accusation made of Moffatt has no basis in any evidence known to me.
Reference. The assertions of James Murphy and Andrew MacDonald.

http://www.canoe.ca/AllAboutCanoes/book_deathbarrens.html

Summary of the schedule-related evidence available to Murphy and MacDonald.
Given that I document fully that evidence in the above, perhaps I may be excused if I provide here only a summary.
1.
The Sports Illustrated article of 1959 provides the passages
He [Moffatt] was a week behind Tyrrell’s schedule [SI article, upper right column on page 76, 8 August] and
Already nine days behind schedule [SI article, bottom right column on p 76, 15-18 August].
What interpretation of these passages is possible but that Moffatt party had a day-by-day schedule?
2.
The New York Times article of 24 September 1955 provides the passage Planes flew over the tundra…looking for a trace of a six-man expedition. The group was a week overdue on a 900-mile canoe trip.
What interpretation of this passage is possible but that the Moffatt party had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake?
3.
Grinnell’s Canoe article (1988) itself provides weak evidence that there was no schedule.
But it provides also the editorial assertion behind schedule, which evinces that there was a prescriptive schedule of some sort.
4.
In his book, Grinnell asserted
first there was a prescriptive schedule (something in addition to an arrival date in Baker Lake),
then there was only a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake,
and finally there was again a prescriptive schedule.
But Grinnell never deviated from his assertion that the Moffatt party had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake.
A request.
I ask that the reader keep these evidences in mind as I discuss the assertions of Murphy and MacDonald.

The assertions of James Murphy and Andrew MacDonald

were made in what were billed as reviews of the book Grinnell, George. A Death on the Barrens. A true story. Northern Books, Toronto (1996).
Perhaps I should mention that my use of the term billed is conscious.
Let me begin with the terms a planned itinerary and a pragmatic plan of travel used by Murphy and MacDonald respectively. Later, their editor explained their editor that they meant by these terms they meant what the rest of us would call a schedule.
So far so good, but what did Murphy and MacDonald mean by a scheduledo?
They failed to inform us, and that failure matters.

Comments.
1. In this context, schedule could mean
as much as a day-by-day schedule, or
or as little as a date for arrival in Baker Lake, or
anything between those two extremes.
2. Given that Moffatt was unable to respond, did not common decency demand that Murphy and MacDonald explain what they meant when they asserted that he died because of lack of schedule?
3. By denying that the Moffatt party lacked a schedule, did not Murphy and MacDonald suggest that Moffatt’s schedule amounted to something like “we’ll arrive in Baker Lake when we get there”?
4. But surely an essential ingredient of a schedule is a date for arrival in Baker Lake.
By asserting that the Moffatt party lacked schedule, do not Murphy and MacDonald then deny that the Moffatt party lacked a schedule for arrival there?
The eleven sources provided above beg leave to differ.

The schedule-related evidence of Grinnell.
If I may, I remind the reader
first that the articles of Murphy and MacDonald were billed as reviews of Grinnell’s book,
second that Grinnell asserted repeatedly and consistently there that the Moffatt party had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake, although he gave the date incorrectly, for reason known only to him.
Conclusion.
The evidence of Grinnell’s book, the only source used by Murphy and MacDonald, alone and in itself, refutes their assertion that the Moffatt party lacked a schedule.
And so Murphy and MacDonald failed Moffatt in particular, and the paddling community as a whole.

The assertions of James Murphy.
Lack of food, proper equipment and most importantly, lack of a planned itinerary, contributed to his [Moffatt’s] demise. [Che-Mun, Canoelit section. Moffatt, Myth & Mysticism. Spring 1996, pp 5 & 11.
1. I call these assertions because Murphy provided no evidence in support of them.
2. In passing, I note that Murphy devoted much of a paragraph to a discussion of whether Moffatt was a bodhisatva. At best, Moffatt was a cracked bodhisatva, a partially enlightened being with a fatal flaw. One who is doomed to repeat his mistakes in an endless cycle….
Opinion.
Murphy could have made better use of that space by providing evidence in support of his assertions.

Murphy assertion 1. Lack of food.
Murphy provided no evidence in support of the lack of food assertion provided above.
In rebuttal, I point out that Grinnell’s book (Murphy’s only source) documents an abundance of food in the seven weeks before Moffatt’s death.
Food from the land consisted of five caribou, many fish (three species), many ptarmigan, plus mushrooms and blueberries (the latter two obtained only earlier in the period).
Grinnell book documents also that, in those seven weeks,
the Moffatt party had provisions remaining from the initial supply, and
it acquired a massive resupply of provisions from the cache, this on 7 September.
Perhaps the stuffed evidence of Pessl’s book is relevant here.
22 August. I was not feeling too well today, probably from eating too much caribou yesterday, … [Franck, in Pessl, p 99].
28 August. We … were so full we could hardly move. [Franck, in Pessl, p 108]
30 August. …I had prepared such a huge breakfast that none of us could have moved much further than the tents anyway. I felt as if I would have crashed right through the bottom of the canoe and sunk like a stone if we would have been loading. [Pessl, p 110]
This not known to Murphy: On 14 September, the day that Moffatt died, the party had so much caribou meat on board that it had no need to hunt again; and to that supply it added 20 lb of lake trout caught at lunch. [LeFavour]
A request.
I ask that the reader assess Murphy’s assertion that lack of food contributed to Moffatt’s death in the light of the evidence provided in
Appendix 6. Food.

Murphy assertion 2. Lack of proper equipment.
Murphy provided no evidence in support of his assertion that lack of proper equipment contributed to his
[Moffatt’s] demise.
I believe that George Luste, a professional colleague for four decades and a friend who helped me get started in paddling, would have been much angered to learn that his equipment recommendations for paddlers circa 1996 had been used to defame Moffatt, who died in 1955.
A request.
I ask that the reader assess Murphy’s assertion that lack of proper equipment contributed to Moffatt’s death in the light of the evidence provided in Appendix 3. Equipment.

Murphy assertion 3. Lack of a planned itinerary.
Demystification. Later, Murphy’s editor explained implicitly that by a planned itinerary, Murphy meant what most of us would call a schedule: Their lack of schedule meant they took risks to catchup on time… [Che-Mun, Outfit 99, Winter 2000, pp 5&6].
Murphy provided no evidence in support of his assertion …lack of a planned itinerary, contributed to his [Moffatt’s] demise.
A request.
I ask that the reader assess Murphy’s assertion that lack of a schedule was partially responsible for Moffatt’s death in the light of
1. The evidences of the Sports Illustrated article, namely the two phrases a week behind Tyrrell’s schedule and Already nine days behind schedule.
2. The evidence of the New York Times article, namely that the Moffatt party was a week overdue.
3. The evidence of Grinnell’s Canoe article, namely the editorial comment that the party was behind schedule.
4. And most importantly of all, the evidence of Grinnell’s book (the very subject of Murphy’s review), namely Grinnell’s many statements that the Moffatt party had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake.

The assertions of Andrew MacDonald.
I call these assertions because MacDonald provided no evidence in support of them.

MacDonald assertion 1.
As the summer-length trip wore on, and the progress of their three Chestnut canoes lapsed further and further behind schedule… [Che-Mun, Canoelit section. Moffatt, Myth & Mysticism. Spring 1996, bottom of p 5.]
MacDonald’s unidentified sources for the phrase behind schedule were likely the following passages.
1. Although we were far behind schedule right from the beginning… [Grinnell book, p 17].
2. In the last two months, we had fallen about a month behind schedule. [Grinnell book, p 162, ~29 August].
Interpretation.
The Moffatt party had a schedule more prescriptive than a date for arrival in Baker Lake, but it was behind that schedule.

MacDonald assertion 2.
One of the implications of a quasi-religious resistance to a pragmatic plan of travel was the death of Arthur Moffat. [Che-Mun, Canoelit section. Moffatt, Myth & Mysticism. Spring 1996, last paragraph on p 11.]
Comments.
1. On comparing the two assertions, one sees that MacDonald explained (as did later his editor explicitly), that a pragmatic plan of travel means what most of us would call a schedule.
2. I am still trying to decide whether the two assertions are compatible.
3. As a service to the reader, I decided not to repeat the evidence provided above in refutation of the corresponding assertion of Murphy; I request only that the reader skim that evidence.
4. But I must state that, like Murphy’s article, MacDonald’s article was billed as a review of Grinnell’s book.
A request.
I ask that the reader assess MacDonald’s assertion that lack of a schedule was partially responsible for Moffatt’s death in the light of
1. The evidences of the Sports Illustrated article, namely the two phrases a week behind Tyrrell’s schedule and Already nine days behind schedule.
2. The evidence of the New York Times article, namely that the Moffatt party was a week overdue.
3. The evidence of Grinnell’s Canoe article, namely the editorial comment that the party was behind schedule.
4. And most importantly of all, the evidence of Grinnell’s book (the very subject of MacDonald’s review), namely the many statements that the Moffatt party had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake.

Discussion.

The evidence relevant to Murphy’s assertion
Lack of food…contributed to his [Moffatt’s] demise
is provided in Appendix 6. Food.
The evidence relevant to Murphy’s assertion
Lack of…proper equipment…contributed to his [Moffatt’s] demise
is provided in Appendix 3. Equipment.
That leaves the assertions of Murphy and MacDonald that Moffatt died because of lack of schedule, and variants thereof.
1.
Murphy and MacDonald used the term schedule vaguely, loosely and inconsistently, failing to distinguish possibilities such as
(a) Something like we’ll arrive in Baker Lake when we get there.
(b) Only a date for arrival for arrival in Baker Lake.
(c) A day-by-day schedule such as many parties use in Algonquin, Temagami, the BWCAW and the like.
(d) Something between the extremes of items (b) and (c), perhaps a week-by-week schedule, or a date to enter Dubawnt Lake.
(e) Or whatever else that was in their minds (they declined to be specific).
With respect to item (c), I decided it necessary to point yet again that no party (recreational or professional or whatever), ever had or could have had a day-by-day schedule for travel in the barrenlands. The vagaries of the weather, especially the wind, forbid any such schedule. Even the Tyrrell party of 1893 was weather-bound on occasion.
The reader might reflect on the fact that one of Murphy and MacDonald had paddled the Morse River (a tributary of the Back River) and so was no stranger to the barrenlands and its winds.
Additional material is provided in Sub-Appendix 3. Barrenlands paddling in general and the Moffatt party’s response to the wind.
With respect to the more important item (b) regarding of a date for arrival in Baker Lake, I point out again that neither Murphy nor MacDonald mentioned any of the evidences available to them, namely
(i) the two evidences of the Sports Illustrated article, or
(ii) the evidence of the New York Times article, or
(iii) the evidence of Grinnell’s Canoe article, or
(iv) most importantly of all, the evidence of Grinnell’s book.
Every one of those sources attests that there existed, at the very least, a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake.
Perhaps their failure to mention the evidences of items (i) through (iii) speaks to their failure to search the literature available to them at the time. And so perhaps it speaks to their diligence, to their strength of character, to their commitment to get the facts straight before making accusations of someone, indeed a fellow paddler, unable to respond.
With respect to item (iv), namely the evidence of Grinnell’s book, I ask that the reader reflect on the evidence provided there for the existence of a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake, and so the implications of that evidence for the Murphy-MacDonald assertions that Moffatt died due to lack of schedule.
2.
More generally, what did Murphy and MacDonald mean (they did not explain) when they asserted that Moffatt died because of lack of schedule?
(a) Were they asserting that the party had no prescriptive schedule (the extreme case is a day-by-day one) and that the lack thereof was responsible for Moffatt’s death?
If so, they are quite wrong, for the second part is false. Moffatt died solely because he had been misled by the advice of J B Tyrrell.
Reference. Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
(b) Or were they asserting that the party had no schedule for arrival in Baker Lake, and that the lack thereof was responsible for Moffatt’s death?
If so, they are quite wrong, for the first part is false (as evinced by the two items in the Sports Illustrated article, the item in the New York Times article, the item in Grinnell’s Canoe article, and most importantly of all the multiple evidences of Grinnell’s book, the very subject of their reviews).
And so the second part is also false.
(c) Or did they prefer to make vague, unsubstantiated accusations that lack of planning was responsible for Moffatt’s death? Only Murphy and MacDonald can inform us of their intentions. They didn’t do so at the time and they are unlikely to help us now.

Summary.
1. The articles of Murphy and MacDonald were billed as reviews of Grinnell’s book (1996). I use the term billed because both authors went well beyond writing reviews, in that they asserted (they provided no evidence) that Moffatt died in part because of lack of schedule.
2. No party ever had, no party could ever have had, a highly prescriptive schedule for travel in the barrens. Even the Tyrrell party of 1893 had no such schedule; even it was sidelined on occasion.
From the extensive paddling literature available in 1996, Murphy and MacDonald should have known that a prescriptive schedule is not possible in the barrens. Moreover, one of them had paddled at least once in the barrenlands and so must have known that a day-by-day schedule is not possible there.
3. What evidence did Murphy and MacDonald provide to substantiate their claims that Moffatt died because the party lacked a planned itinerary or a pragmatic plan of travel or a schedule?
The answer: None. Murphy and MacDonald provided only assertions.
And so I ask: Did Moffatt, a fellow paddler and one unable to defend himself, not deserve that evidence of his guilt be presented?
4. An essential ingredient of a schedule is surely an arrival date; that is, how can one have a schedule but not have an arrival date? As evinced by the multiple sources documented above (most importantly Grinnell’s book, the very subject of their reviews), Moffatt had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake, but neither Murphy nor McDonald mentioned any of this evidence.
And so the schedule-related assertions of Murphy and MacDonald are refuted by the evidence of their only source, Grinnell’s book!
5. The cause of Moffatt’s death had nothing to do with those asserted by Murphy and MacDonald. To be explicit, Arthur Moffatt did not die because the party lacked food, or proper equipment, or a schedule (aka a planned itinerary and a pragmatic plan of travel).
Reference. Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

An unfortunate consequence.
Murphy and MacDonald misled their own editor to assert the following:
Moffat, a seasoned traveller, took a group of young men on a slow and undisciplined trip down the Dubawnt. Their lack of schedule meant they took risks to catchup on time and Moffatt died of exposure after they dumped in a large rapid they did not scout. [Che-Mun, Outfit 99, Winter 2000, pp 5&6].
The tragedy is mentioned also on p 4, but with a slip of the pen.
The fact of the matter, not known to the editor, is rather that Moffatt had been misled by the advice of J B Tyrrell, advice that had proved accurate for eleven weeks previously; otherwise, Moffatt would not have trusted it in the afternoon of 14 September 1955.
Reference. Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

The schedule-related assertions of Murphy and Macdonald, confronted by the evidence of Grinnell’s book.
Reminder. Grinnell’s book was the sole source used by both Murphy and MacDonald.
Reminder. Murphy’s assertions that lack of food and lack of proper equipment were also responsible for Moffatt’s death are addressed in the following.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Summary of the schedule-related evidence of Grinnell’s book.
As I document in the paragraph The evidence of Grinnell’s book (1996) (above),
Grinnell asserted
first that there was a prescriptive schedule (something in addition to an arrival date in Baker Lake),
then that there was only a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake,
finally that there was again a prescriptive schedule.
And so the evidence of Grinnell’s book is garbled, indeed self-contradictory, regarding the existence of a prescriptive schedule.
But Grinnell never wavered in one respect. Grinnell repeatedly and consistently asserted that was a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake.
Nevertheless, in their reviews of that very book, Murphy and MacDonald asserted (provided no evidence) that Moffatt’s death was due to lack of schedule.

Summary of the accusations made by Murphy and MacDonald.
The unstated but clear substance of the schedule-related accusations (I omit discussion here of Murphy’s accusations regarding food and equipment, equally valid) is that the Moffatt party wasted time early in the trip, and so later it dashed down the river, so pressed to reach Baker Lake before freeze-up that Moffatt could not afford the time to scout the rapids where he died.
Did a dead person, being unable to respond to them, not deserve that these accusations be evinced, rather than merely asserted?
Murphy
denied that the Moffatt party had a schedule, one must assume by default a schedule of any kind, specifically an arrival date.
Murphy suggested that Moffatt was responsible for his own death. The accusation is refuted by the evidence (provided above) of Grinnell’s book, Murphy’s only source.
More generally, who is Murphy that he assume the right so to judge Moffatt?
MacDonald’s assertions are equally valid.
Both Murphy and MacDonald
suggested that Moffatt realised only very late that the party had get out fast in order to escape freeze-up, and so he threw caution to the winds, being unable to afford time to scout the rapids where he died.
Their accusations are refuted by the evidence of their only source, Grinnell’s book. Even today, twenty years after the publication of the Murphy-MacDonald articles, no evidence (as distinct from assertions) has surfaced that the Moffatt party took risks to catchup on time because of a lack of schedule.
Opinion.
In their reviews of Grinnell’s book, both Murphy and MacDonald ignored evidence (presented there) that refutes their assertions.
Comment.
Their accusations are known to have led at least one later person to make an incorrect statement.

Conclusions.
Eleven sources attest that the Moffatt party had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake. I refer the reader to the paragraph The Moffatt party had no schedule for arrival in Baker Lake? below.
In particular, in his book (the sole source used by Murphy and MacDonald), Grinnell asserts repeatedly that the Moffatt party had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake. As well, he asserts several times that the party had a schedule more prescriptive than an arrival date.
Nevertheless, Murphy and MacDonald (in their reviews of that very book), denied that the party had a schedule of any kind, one gathers even so much as an arrival date.
The Moffatt party did not take risks to catchup on time because of a lack of schedule as asserted by Murphy and MacDonald. In particular, the Moffatt party did not panic and so run the fatal rapids without a scout. Indeed, as I remark also elsewhere, the only two dumps of the entire trip occurred in the fatal rapids. And, on the very day that he died, the party completed the portage around the entire rapids immediately above the fatal rapids. Do Murphy and MacDonald (and many others) really expect us to believe that, a few hours later, Moffatt suddenly realised that winter was fast approaching and so decided to forgo a scout?
The cause of Moffatt’s death was not lack of a planned itinerary, or lack of a pragmatic plan of travel, or lack of schedule, as alleged by Murphy and MacDonald. For that matter, neither was the cause lack of food or lack of proper equipment as alleged also by Murphy.
The evidence is rather that Moffatt party exercised due caution at all times, for example in the rapids below Nicholson Lake, those immediately below Dubawnt Lake, those immediately above Wharton Lake, and in particular those between Wharton Lake and Marjorie Lake.
The evidence is rather that the fatal rapids were run without a scout for one reason and one reason only. It is that J B Tyrrell had advised Moffatt that the fatal rapids were of no concern. And I suggest it not beside the point that that rapids advice of Tyrrell had proved reliable for eleven weeks previously. But JBT’s advice failed Moffatt on 14 September 1995.
Reference. Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

Lesser items.
MacDonald reproduced two passages from Grinnell’s book; I thought that both deserve replies.
Passage 1.
This sense of humour is exhibited in a comment on Art Moffatt’s abdication of leadership, whose apparent quest for inner peace paralyzed the pace of the trip, and left a void unfilled: “Skip found himself in the difficult position of having become second-in-command to a cup of tea.” [Grinnell book, top of p 146]
Response.
Pessl’s book documents that Moffatt did not abdicate leadership at any time.
Passage 2.
Our only hope of survival lay in living off the land. If we were lucky to run across a herd of caribou, we would probably survive. If not, we should expect the same fate as Hornby, Adlard and Christian, death by starvation. [Grinnell book, top of p 91; the date (not provided) must have before 4 August, when the first caribou was sighted].
Response.
MacDonald’s quote Our only hope of survival…by starvation. is entirely accurate as it stands.
But Grinnell’s book (MacDonald’s only source) documents the contrary.
The context of Grinnell’s book: In the six weeks before Moffatt died, the party obtained a bountiful supply of food from the land: five caribou, many fish (three species), many ptarmigan, blueberries and mushrooms (the latter two only earlier in the period). As well, the party had provisions remaining from the initial supply, and it augmented that supply from the cache, on 7 September.
This evidence of Grinnell is confirmed by that of Pessl.
More generally, at no time was the party anywhere close to death by starvation, before or even after the tragedy (when most food was lost). At times, the party was hungry, especially before the shooting of the first caribou, even occasionally afterward. More importantly, at times before the tragedy, the party was gorged on food. In fact, on 14 September, the party had so much caribou meat on board that it had no more need to hunt. And it caught 20 lb of lake trout at lunch that same day.
Reference. Appendix 6. Food.

Review of the Murphy-MacDonald assertions regarding the schedule.
The Che-Mun articles (1966) of Murphy and MacDonald were billed to be reviews of Grinnell’s book of that year. But I suggest that those articles are rather distant from reviews, for they contain accusatory material that is unsubstantiated, in fact called into question, by the evidence of Grinnell’s book.
The assertions in question are the following.
Murphy. Lack of food, proper equipment and most importantly, lack of a planned itinerary, contributed to his [Moffatt’s] demise.
MacDonald 1. As the summer-length trip wore on, and the progress of their three Chestnut canoes lapsed further and further behind schedule…
MacDonald 2. One of the implications of a quasi-religious resistance to a pragmatic plan of travel was the death of Arthur Moffatt.
MacDonald 3. Moffatt’s abdication of leadership of the party.
Murphy and MacDonald suggest that, due to lack of schedule, Moffatt realised only very late in the game that he had to get off the river pdq, and so he threw caution to the winds and ran the fatal rapids in desperate haste without scouting them.
The evidence of Grinnell (as provided particularly in his book), and that of the other participants, begs leave to differ.
Comment.
I find it a considerable temptation, but assess it to be an excerise in futility, to speculate how the Murphy-MacDonald reviews of Grinnell’s book might have differed had either consulted any of the previous literature, namely
the 1959 Sports IllustratedNew York Times article (with its reference to the start of the air search on 22 September), and
Grinnell’s 1988 Canoe article (which contains the passage late in the season and behind schedule).
On the other hand, perhaps we need not speculate, perhaps the answer is provided already in how Murphy and MacDonald treated the evidence of their only source, namely Grinnell’s book.
References to the cause.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

Summary.
Contrary to the assertions of Murphy and MacDonald, Moffatt had scheduled a date (it was 15 September) for arrival in Baker Lake, as evinced by the eleven sources listed in my paragraph The Moffatt party had no schedule for arrival in Baker Lake? Included in that list is Grinnell’s book, the only source used by Murphy and MacDonald.
The Moffatt trip was not of the irresponsible We’ll-arrive-in-Baker-Lake-when-we-get-there variety, as Murphy and MacDonald suggest.
Given both the vagaries of the weather and the very purpose of the trip (namely to document the barrenlands), Moffatt could not have had, and did not have, a highly prescriptive schedule.
The cause of Moffatt’s death was not lack of schedule as asserted by Murphy and MacDonald. The cause was rather incorrect information provided by J B Tyrrell; his advice had proved correct for something like eleven weeks previously and so Moffatt followed it in the afternoon of 14 September.
Murphy and MacDonald failed Moffatt and the paddling community as a whole, for they made no mention of the contrary evidence (of both the New York Times article and the Sports Illustrated article) that Moffatt had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake.
General comments.
1. Are we are to believe that Moffatt left his wife Carol and their two children for months without telling her when he planned to arrive in Baker Lake? Of course he told her. [Carol Moffatt’s telegram to Peter Franck’s father. Pessl, p 141]
2. Are we are to believe that Moffatt did not tell the RCMP of his plan. Of course he told the RCMP. Why else was the search was started on 22 September? [New York Times article. Sports Illustrated, p 71]
3. Assertions (in particular those made by Murphy and MacDonald) that there existed no schedule for arrival in Baker Lake are refuted by multiple, independent sources. And I suggest it not beside the point that assertions of Murphy and MacDonald were made in reviews of Grinnell’s book, which evidence refutes those assertions.
4. More generally, eleven independent sources evince that there was a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake; all but Grinnell (need it be said) agree that the date was 15 September, with a week’s grace period.
5. Those Moffatt accusers (one such was the SI who knew the evidence omitted to mention that the Moffatt party had portaged the rapids immediately above the fatal ones.
Is anyone so credulous as to believe that, having that very morning completed a portage, only a few hours later Moffatt was in such desperate haste to reach Baker Lake before freeze-up that he chose to run the fatal rapids without a scout, thereby risking the film, photos and camera, not to mention the lives of all six participants?

References.
Appendix 8. Other rapids.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

The matter of the schedule and Moffatt’s death.

Introduction.
Every accuser (some only implicitly) in the matter of the schedule agrees with the assertion Their lack of schedule meant they took risks to catchup on time….
Interpretation. Moffatt was in such a hurry (indeed, desperate haste according to the Sports Illustrated editor) to reach Baker Lake before the weather closed in that he chose to run the fatal rapids without a scout.
The evidence begs leave to differ.
1. Throughout the trip, Moffatt exercised great care in running rapids, not least to protect the film and cameras. Indeed, he portaged at least one set of rapids (those above Grant Lake) run by the others in order to protect those two items, for which the very trip was undertaken.
2. That care is demonstrated elsewhere, for example in his caution regarding the rapids below Nicholson Lake, the gorge below Dubawnt Lake, and the falls above Wharton Lake.
3. The only two dumps of the entire trip occurred in the fatal rapids.
4. More importantly, in the very morning of the day that Moffatt died, the party completed the portage around the rapids immediately above those where he died.
Do Murphy, MacDonald and others really expect us to believe that, no more than a few hours later, Moffatt suddenly realised that the party had get out ASAP, that he panicked and so decided to risk everything, lives included, by running those rapids without a scout, in desperate haste, taking the the ultimate chance in so doing?
The fatal rapids were run without a scout for one reason and one reason only: J B Tyrrell had advised Moffatt that they were of no concern.
Reference. Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

Summary.
The schedule-related accusations of Murphy and MacDonald have no basis in evidence, as evinced by their only source: in his book, Grinnell asserted repeatedly and consistently that the Moffatt party had a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake, as indeed it did. Nevertheless, Murphy and McDonald asserted that Moffatt died from lack of schedule.
Murphy and MacDonald made no mention of the Sports Illustrated editor’s nine days behind schedule, a remark that appears to refute their assertion that the Moffatt party had no schedule. Neither was that passage mentioned elsewhere in the accusatory literature.
But wait! The SI editor’s nine days behind schedule has no basis in evidence. Anyone who has paddled in the barrenlands (one of M&M had done so) knows full well that the weather (especially the wind) forbids a day-by-day schedule. Even the Tyrrell-Tyrrell party of 1893 had to wait out the weather on occasion.
Reference. Appendix 5. Pace and weather.

Conclusion.
So is destroyed the reputations of the defenceless innocent.
On the other hand, perhaps I am being overly judgemental here. Rather, perhaps we have the ingredients for an opera buffa.

The accusations of Mahler and Thum.< The Mahler-Thum publications,
identical at first glance.
1. Che-Mun. Outfit 122, Autumn 2005, starting on page 4.
http://www.ottertooth.com/che-mun/122/chemun122.pdf
2. Feature Story in the Advanced Paddler section at canoeing.com.
http://www.canoeing.com/advanced/feature/deadmansriver.htm

Charlie Mahler’s introduction.
Because of Moffatt’s ordeal, not it spite of it, the “Voyageurs Canadiens” chose the Dubawnt for their crowning trip.
Comment 1. The members of the Thum trip dubbed themselves such.
Comment 2. A discussion of the passage Because of Moffatt’s ordeal is provided in Ancillary 1. Accusations.

Bob Thum’s text.
Moffatt is precisely why we took the trip…I thought experienced trippers could cover Tyrrell’s route safely and skillfully, which we did…Those guys had no business being up there…They were a bunch of guys who didn’t know what they were doing and led by a guy with poor leadership skills. They fooled around and did a lot of crap and it finally came back to bite them. This was simply a group of novices led by someone more interested in film than travel, which squandered its time and resources and then made some tragic mistakes…We wanted to avoid the situation that Moffatt got himself in where he had some experience, but not much. And he went with a bunch of guys that had very little experience. I think he’d gone down the Albany maybe two or three times. That’s a nice river, but not a terribly difficult trip…We didn’t take a lot of chances…There’s lots of opportunities to screw up there, and when you screw up like Moffatt did…
Comment. I interpret Thum’s fooled around to be a reference to schedule. I see no need to burden the reader by repeating the schedule-related analysis provided above.
Aside. Thum’s unidentified sources for the above were likely the publications of the SI editor, Murphy and MacDonald. Perhaps a lawyer might have been expected to provide such information.
References.
1. leadership, novices and experience.
Appendix 4. Experience.
2. tragic mistakes and screw up.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
3. The remainder of Thum’s text.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Comment.
From Thum’s Moffatt is precisely why we took the trip…I thought experienced trippers could cover Tyrrell’s route safely and skillfully, which we did…,
some might conclude that the sole purpose of his trip was to show up a dead man.
That matter aside, the barrenlands appear to have been merely a tool to boost Thum’s self-esteem.
References.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids

Summary.

The Moffatt party had no schedule for arrival in Baker Lake?
Response.
The New York Times,
the Manchester Ledger,
the Boston Sunday Advertiser,
the Winnipeg Tribune,
the RCAF,
the RCMP,
the Baker Lake detachment of the RCMP,
the Moffatt family (especially his wife Carol),
participant Grinnell,
participant Lanouette, and
participant Pessl,
all eleven of them, respectfully request permission to disagree.

The Sports Illustrated editor.
Item 1.
The schedule evidence of the New York Times article was published in the Sports Illustrated article itself. Some may find it amusing that the SI editor made no mention of that item.
Item 2.
Let me remind the reader of the editor’s assertions
a week behind…schedule [SI article, upper right column on page 76; dated 8 August] and nine days behind schedule [SI article, lower right column on p 76; dated between 15 and 18 August].
Given that there exists no evidence that the Moffatt party had no day-by-day, the only possible explanation of these assertions is that the Sports Illustrated editor represented the record of Moffatt party (1955) to be the schedule of the Tyrrell party (1893).
The evidence begs leave to differ.
1. The Moffatt party was not following the day-by-day record of the Tyrrell party (1893).
2. As is obvious from even a cursory reading of the evidence (I recommend that of Pessl’s book), the Moffatt party had no day-by-day schedule.
3. Indeed, no barrenlands party, ever, had a day-by day schedule. Even the Tyrrell party was sidelined on occasion.

Murphy and MacDonald.
Murphy’s assertion Lack … of a planned itinerary, contributed to his demise, this made in a review of Grinnell’s book, is refuted by the evidence of Grinnell’s book.
MacDonald’s assertion One of the implications of a quasi-religious resistance to a pragmatic plan of travel was the death of Arthur Moffatt, this made in a review of Grinnell’s book, is refuted by the evidence of Grinnell’s book.

Thum.
Thum’s assertion This was simply a group of novices led by someone more interested in film than travel, which squandered its time and resources and then made some tragic mistakes is refuted by the evidence of Grinnell’s book.

The cause of Moffatt’s death.
Over the course of those 55 years from 1959 to 2014, every defamer (here those who asserted that Moffatt died because of lack of schedule) got it completely wrong.
Reference. Sub-Appendix 1. Dates for the Tyrrell and Moffatt parties.

At the tops of his pages 17, 41, 69, 129 and 144, Pessl provides the following
Black Lake. 7 July (Tyrrell); 2 July (Moffatt).
Selwyn Lake. 16 July; 12-16 July.
Wholdaia Lake. 20 July; 17-25 July.
Hinde Lake. 22-26 July; 28 July.
Boyd Lake. 27 July; 1-3 August.
Carey Lake. 29 July-2 August; 7-8 August.
Dubawnt Lake. 7-17 August; 21-27 August.
Wharton Lake. 22 August; 8 September.
Schultz Lake. 29 August; 22 September.

Sub-Appendix 2. 2 September vs 15 September for arrival in Baker Lake.

1. I cannot understand why Grinnell does not state 15 September to be the planned arrival date in Baker Lake, as given by ten other sources, why instead he insists the arrival date to be 2 September (likely not coincidentally the date that the Tyrrell party arrived in Baker Lake [Pessl, private correspondence]). But why?
2. As I document below, Moffatt provided the date of 15 September to his wife, to the other five participants (including Grinnell!) and to the RCMP.
3. Certainly Kingsley was misled by Grinnell’s date of 2 September.
By August 29, three days before they’d planned to complete the trip, they’d travelled half the distance. [Kingsley book, middle of p 188; also Kingsley Up Here article, lower right column on p 90].
Responses.
(a) At the campsite on 29 August, the Moffatt party was 15 miles (25 km) upstream from the end of Dubawnt Lake. On 30 August, it re-entered the river and continued downstream for an unknown distance before camping again. [Pessl, p 111].
(b) Kingsley was misled also by multiple incorrect statement that the Moffatt trip was 900 miles long. The distance along the route (Black Lake to Baker Lake) is ~1095 km or ~680 miles, and
the distance from the end of Dubawnt Lake to Baker Lake is ~375 km, or ~233 miles.
Reference for points (i) and (ii).
Ancillary 4. Distances.
The distance from the campsite on 29 August to Baker Lake is then ~250 miles; of course, my point is that 250 miles is much less than half of 900 miles.
Summary. Due to incorrect information provided by others, Kingsley’s statement is incorrect with respect to both time and distance.
4. Sept. 2 certainly had no relevance in terms of expedition planning or announced Baker Lake arrival expectations. [Pessl, private correspondence].
5. Further confusing the issue, in Grinnell’s book only of course, is that 2 September was important for Franck’s registration at Harvard [Grinnell, p 162; Pessl, p 105]. I find Grinnell a bit unclear here: Because Peter had planned to enter his sophomore year at Harvard that Autumn, the September 2nd date was particularly important to him. He would have to travel to Cambridge, Massachusetts and register for classes within a few days of our return.
6. I ‘fess up. I am unable to understand why Grinnell insists that the scheduled arrival date was 2 September rather than 15 September, as given by ten other sources.
7. The only possibility that occurs to me, strange as it may seem.
Was Grinnell being mischievous here, trying to see how many people he could fool,
just as perhaps he was in providing the yes/no/yes evidence regarding a prescriptive schedule,
just as I believe he was just as he was when he claimed I was not the least experienced canoeist, but the most experienced.
I suggest that this possibility not be rejected outright.

Sub-Appendix 3. The Moffatt party’s response to the wind.

1. Moffatt replied that the wind did not blow on schedule [Grinnell article, p 20, top right]. I believe that every recreational paddler with experience on the barrens will agree with Moffatt.
When the wind is up on the barrens, we recreational paddlers stay put, for there are no trees to provide shelter. Bring reading material and hiking boots, spend the day cleaning up, repairing gear, resting, telling stories, in short do anything but try to paddle. Of course one can have a week-by-week schedule, or something even less prescriptive. But a day-by-day schedule for travel in the barrenlands is impossible for anyone.
Even the Tyrrell party of 1893 was unable to travel some days. On my to-do list is an examination of the Tyrrell journals, in an attempt to estimate the fraction of days that they did not travel.
2. Lanouette speaks to the matter. Of course we had no day to day plan. Weather played a crucial role in our travels and made such planning impossible. [Private correspondence].
3. The Moffatt party adjusted to the wind by getting up early, especially on Dubawnt Lake, as Pessl and Franck describe in the following passages.
(a) 23 August (on Dubawnt Lake). …we have once again decided on emergency scheduling and will get up at 4 AM if the wind is down, paddle until 8 or so, have breakfast and continue paddling until the wind stops us again. It is interesting to note that these measures initially come from one of the gang, seldom from Art. In any case, I am confident that we will arrive in Baker Lake with plenty of meat on our bones. [Pessl, p 101]
(b) 24 August. Heavy frost … as we shivered out of the sack at 4 A.M. … paddling the entire day with a break at 9 AM for breakfast and another at 2 PM for lunch. Now at 6 PM we have made camp. [Pessl, p 101]
(c) 26 August. Left camp at 5 AM after breakfast… [Pessl, p 103]
(d) 27 August. Questionable winds and general early morning reluctance combined to form another beautiful day in camp. [Pessl, p 104]
(e) 27 August. Another good day, but still a breeze from the south. We could have travelled, but Art declared a day of rest because he wanted to go over to the mainland and see what it was like; what animals he could get pictures of… [Franck, in Pessl, p 105]
(f) 28 August. A fine breakfast … an open water journey … The wind freshened at noon…wait for the wind to lessen… We paddled continuously until 9 PM. [Pessl, p 107]
(g) 29 August. …another “day off” [Pessl, p 108]
(h) 29 August. Windy this morning, so we stayed put. [Franck, in Pessl, p 108]
(i) 30 August. Heavy wind and rain squalls chased us back into the tents this morning… After lunch, skies cleared and we enjoyed one more rare “shirts off” day as we padded the remaining 15 miles across the bay to the outlet of the lake… We are back on the river now… [Pessl, pp 110&111]

Sub-Appendix 4. Evidences regarding the existence of a schedule for arrival in Baker Lake.
Comment. The complete list of evidences is provided above, in the paragraph The Moffatt party had no schedule for arrival in Baker Lake? I provide here comments and text for some items.
Source 1. The New York Times article.
As I discussed above, the NYT article evinces that the party was scheduled to arrive in Baker Lake on 15 September, with a grace period of seven days.
Source 2. The Manchester Ledger.
Article of 23 September 1955.
Six Explorers Missing in Northwest Territory.
Dartmouth college said today six men are more than a week overdue on a 900-mile canoe trip to the barren wastelands of the Canadian North. … Concern was expressed for their safety when they did not check in September 15 as scheduled at a lonely outpost of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. A search was organized.
Comment. Thanks to Lanouette for a copy of the article.
Source 3. Boston Sunday Advertiser.
Article of 25 September 1955.
Six Canoeists Safe in Wilds.
Six canoeists, objects of a wide air search in Canada’s barren eastern Northwest Territories, turned up yesterday in good health at the destination they announced when they set out three months ago on their adventurous journey.
The canoeists…arrived at Baker Lake…yesterday afternoon, the Royal Canadian Air Force announced.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police and RCAF had undertaken search flights along the 700-mile route mapped out by the canoeists at the outset of their journey.
The canoeists left Stony Rapids, Saskatchewan, June 29, … They had expected to reach Baker Lake by Sept. 15.
Moffatt had left a note with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police at Stony Rapids in northern Saskatchewan, giving the party’s projected route. Since then the only clue to the whereabouts was the discovery of a supply cache half way along the proposed route at Dubawnt Lake. The RCMP at Prince Albert, Sask., were notified of the find Friday.
… Details of the canoeists’ adventures and the cause of their being almost 10 days overdue at their destination were not immediately available.

Comment 1. We all wish that the title had been accurate.
Comment 2. Thanks to Lanouette for a copy of the article.
Source 4. Carol Moffatt’s telegram.
Sent on 22 September to Thomas Franck (Peter’s father).
MOFFATT EXPEDITION HOPED TO REACH BAKER SEPT 15. … [Pessl, p 141].
Comment. That the telegram was sent seven days after 15 September suggests that Moffatt told her to be concerned only if she had not heard from him by a week later. The suggestion that Moffatt had arranged a grace period of seven days is confirmed by other sources.
Source 5. Lanouette, private correspondence.
Our ETA Baker Lake: Sept. 15. This in July 1 letter to Carol Moffatt and also verbal to RCMP officer in Stony Rapids.
Winnipeg Tribune of Sat. Sept. 24 headlines missing canoeists. Same paper Monday Sept. 26 says canoeists found; 1 dead, 5 okay. I assume Skip, Bruce or George have actual arrival dates.
Carol M. notified RCMP after we were overdue by several days. Also Lowell Thomas, the most distinguished news commentator of his time, broadcast our tardiness.
At no time in our journey did we hear search planes, but evidently, according to the Winnipeg Tribune, at least one float plane was sent out from Stony Rapids around Sept 23 or 24.
[Lanouette, private correspondence].
Comment. Pessl confirmed that date, also in private correspondence.
Source 6. Grinnell’s book.
As I describe above, Grinnell agrees that there was a planned arrival date, but he gives 2 September instead. His book was available to Moffatt’s accusers; all three quoted above overlooked his evidence. Opinion. That Grinnell’s date is incorrect is a small matter compared to the assertions made by Murphy and MacDonald that there existed no schedule at all.
Source 7. Pessl’s book.
(a) His …about 25 days left gives 17 September or so (in agreement with 15 September) for the intended arrival date [p 100, 23 August].
(b) On the party’s arrival in Baker lake on 24 September, We were met by Corporal Clair Dent of the RCMP … and were quickly informed that the Air Force and local authorities were to have started a search for us this very day. [p 144].
Comment. Given that the RCMP and the RCAF had already started searches, Dent’s local authorities must refer to an initiative of the RCMP detachment at Baker Lake.

Sub-Appendix 5. Arrival in Baker Lake by the due date?
The evidence suggests to me that, in late August, the Moffatt party was on track to reach Baker Lake within the grace period arranged by Moffatt with the RCMP (that is by 22 September), perhaps even by the planned and announced date of 15 September.
The evidence, part 1.
On 29 August, the party reached Outlet Bay of Dubawnt Lake [Pessl, p 108; also Franck in Pessl, p 109]
To arrive early on the scheduled date of 15 September, the party would have had to travel the remaining 255 miles or so in 16 days; the average of 16 miles (30 km) per day is not such a demanding pace. In fairness though, the party should have expected conditions to deteriorate. In fact, it was weather-bound on 1, 2 and 3 September, and again on 7 and 8 September. On the other hand, it certainly had no reason to expect anything like the storm of 9 September; according to the Sports Illustrated article [p 82, top of right column] (far from the most reliable of sources) hurricane-force winds were recorded in Churchill.
The evidence, part 2.
Even with three travelling days lost due to the foul weather of 1-3 September, three lost due to the storm of 7-9 September and two lost due to the tragedy, the party arrived on 24 September, two days after the expiry of the grace period.
And so I think it likely that, in the morning of 14 September, the party could have reasonably expected to reach Baker Lake within the grace period, that is by 22 September, while at the same time exercising due caution.
A question.
Barrenlands paddlers know now (I believe) to exit well before mid-September.
Should the Moffatt party have expected foul weather in early September? Apart from the storm of 9 September, I believe the answer to be yes, as I document in
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.

Internal URLs.

Foreword and Forum.
Main text.
Appendix 1. Reality.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Ancillary 4. Distances.
Ancillary 5. Loose ends and the future.
Ancillary 6. Addenda.
Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.
Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.
Bibliography.

Notice.
With the exception of quoted material, copyright to the above belongs to Allan Jacobs.

Appendix 2. Holidays.

Major renovations were completed in early November 2017 but I expect that warts remain.
Thanks for your patience. Allan

Appendix 2. Holidays and Inquest.

Summary.
1. Contrary to assertions, Arthur Moffatt did not die because the party had taken too many holidays and so later had to take risks to catchup on time….
2. Contrary to assertions, no inquest was held into Moffatt’s death.

Holidays.

The assertion.

For half of August, they voted to take “holidays” and went nowhere.
Source. Kingsley. Up Here (2012), p 90, bottom of the right column); also book (2014), middle of p 188); not mentioned in Lake (2013).
From the content of the assertion, I identified the source to be both Grinnell’s article (1988) and his book (1996).

Holidays on paddling trips.

In neither his article nor his book did Grinnell explain what he meant by holiday.
Neither did Kingsley explain what was meant by the term.
And so I ask. What is a reasonable definition of a holiday on a paddling trip?
My attempt at such a definition. We have no reason not to paddle but we stay in camp anyway; to be judgmental, we are plain lazy.
If one accepts this definition, it follows that
The Moffatt party took not a single holiday on the entire trip.
That is, every layover/nonpaddling day had a cause/reason… .
The reader who does not accept this definition is invited to devise another and to report her/his analysis of the evidence.

Grinnell’s article (1988) and his assertions regarding holidays.

Grinnell article, assertion 1.
On July 16 Moffatt called another of many holidays. [p 20, left column]
Responses.
1. Camp was near the north end of Selwyn Lake; the portage from there crossed the height of land to the basin of the Dubawnt River. [Pessl, 14 July, p 38]
2. The corresponding Pessl comment: Spent the day in camp… [15 July, p 39].
Aside. The difference in dates 16 July [Grinnell] vs 15 July [Pessl] is inconsequential, except for the suggestion (confirmed by other evidence) that Grinnell did not keep a journal. The evidence suggests, to put the matter as gently as possible, that Grinnell’s memory failed him very badly on multiple occasions, that his imagination often took control of his pen.
3. Pessl lists this as a rest day. By this, I believe that he means a recovery day, largely forced, after completion of the brutal trip up the Chipman River. [Pessl, p 181].
4. Conjecture. Perhaps there was also an element of celebration, for it was downstream all the way from there.
Summary.
I see no justification to call 15/16 July a holiday in any responsible use of the term.

Grinnell article, passage 2.
In the last days of August, now that we [the alleged United Bowman’s Association] were in command, we took more holidays than Moffatt had ever contemplated, averaging one every other day. When we reached the end of Dubawnt lake, we took another holiday to celebrate. [Grinnell article, p 21, left column].
Pessl’s response. I have no idea what he was imagining. [Pessl, p 168]
As well, Pessl presents evidence that the UBA never existed [Pessl, p 168]
Summary.
The holiday/s parts of the passage are refuted by the evidence (presented below) of Pessl.

Grinnell article, passage 3.
It snowed during the first four days of September, and we took holidays on all four of them. [Grinnell article, p 21, right column].
Relevant passages from Pessl’s book.
1 September. … driving rain, joining the cold, windy day… Rain stopped and after running like crazy…to get warm, … [Pessl, p 115]
2 September. Another bitch of a day, worse than yesterday by a long shot. Wind, rain, cold from dawn to darkness with very few intervals of relative calm … terrific gale hit…the canoes were lifted off the ground. … It remained clear until we were ready to eat our fish pot soup for dinner and then it came down again…“piss pot”! [Pessl, pp 115&116]
3 September. Another day of the same hellish weather… Returned to camp as another shower dampened dinner. [Pessl, pp 117&118]
Comment. Part of the day was spent scouting the gorge above Grant Lake.
4 September. … After breakfast, we loaded in the snow, shot one rapid in the midst of a heavy flurry and then unloaded for the long portage [around the gorge]. [Pessl, p 119]
Summary.
I see no justification to call any of these four days a holiday.
In particular, 4 September was a travel day.
And so I consider Grinnell’s statement to be untrue as applied to any of those four days.

Grinnell article, passage 4.
At the inquest held by the mounties, it was disclosed that we had taken holidays on more than half the days of the trip. [Grinnell article, p 56, right column].
Comment. I address below the statement that the RCMP had held an inquest into Moffatt’s death. Here, I deal only with the holidays part.
Who disclosed that we had taken holidays on more than half the days of the trip?
The RCMP certainly didn’t.
And no survivor, including Grinnell, records providing such information.
And I think it most unlikely that the RCMP went through the party’s journals; indeed, no survivor records providing his journal.
And if it had gone through the journals, the RCMP would have discovered that more than half of anything is untrue.
Summary.
Grinnell’s we had taken holidays on more than half the days of the trip has no basis in evidence known to me. Moreover, the accusation is refuted by the evidence (provided below) of Pessl.

Grinnell’s book (1996) and his assertions regarding holidays.

Some passages.
1. … we all voted to take a holiday to kill another [caribou]. [p 115].
2. … we voted for the holiday because we were out of meat. [p 134].
Comment. The day was spent hunting, fishing and foraging.
3. … yet another Holy Day, and another, and another … . [p 147].
4. … we took more and more holidays … . [p 158].
Comment 1. Should these four quotes not suffice, I record that my less-than-thorough search found a total of 19 pages with instances of holiday and variants, as follows:
pp 17, 41, 115, 117, 127, 134, 144, 147, 158, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 171, 173 and 244.
Comment 2. Grinnell includes, as holidays, days when the party stopped to replenish food supplies (pages 115 and 134, for example).

The evidence of Pessl.
Sources.
Pessl’s book Barren Grounds … and correspondence with him.
Background.
The trip lasted 87 days (30 June to 24 September, inclusive); I note though that the party began paddling only on 3 July.
Nontravel days.
Pessl lists 33 nontravel days: one in June, 12 in July, 11 in August and 9 in September.
Comment. That figure of 33 includes three days not listed with the other 30 on pages 181 and 182, as follows: 15 and 16 September were recovery days immediately following the tragedy [Pessl, p 133]. The layover on 21 September was weather-induced [Pessl, p 139].
Pessl distinguishes between forced and voluntary nontravel days.
Forced nontravel days.
Example 1. Nicholson Rapids were scouted on 16 and 18 August; nothing could be done on 17 August but hunker down and wait out the weather. The cost was three days.
Example 2. Due to severe weather, the party was tent-bound on 1, 2 and 3 September, above Grant Lake.
Example 3. No paddler on earth, ever, could have travelled in the winds of 9 September (recorded as hurricane-force in Churchill, according to Grinnell).
Example 4. 15 and 16 September were recovery days after the tragedy.
Other nontravel days were imposed by adverse weather conditions (mostly wind and/or rain, including storms) and by the necessity to scout rapids. In no sense were any of these optional stopovers.
Voluntary nontravel days.
Only four nontravel days were voluntary. They were imposed for reasons of fatigue or other activities, hunting and photography for example. [Pessl, private correspondence]
Pessl’s list of the four voluntary nontravel days.
Day 1. 8 July.
After 5 days of walking and carrying with incidental puddle-hopping in the canoe, we took a welcome day off… [Pessl, p 32]
We decided to have a day of rest today. [Franck, in Pessl, p 32]
Comment. The five days 3 through 7 July required strenuous portaging.
Day 2. 15 July.
Spent the day in camp and enjoyed the idleness of reading, loafing unsuccessful fishing, canoe patching and very peaceful dozing outside. [Pessl, p 39]
Comment. That day saw the party enter the basin of the Dubawnt River, and so there was perhaps an element of celebration, for it was downstream for the rest of the trip. I note that Pessl records a shortage of food.
Day 3. 27 August.
Questionable winds and general early morning reluctance combined to form another beautiful day in camp. [Pessl, pp 104&105]
Another good day, but still a breeze from the south. We could have traveled, but Art declared a day of rest because he wanted to go over to the mainland and see what it is like; what animals he could get pictures of. [Franck, in Pessl, p 105]
Comment. And so the day was spent in an attempt to document the barrenlands; the result was not recorded.
Day 4. 29 August (Outlet Bay of Dubawnt Lake).
The leisurely breakfast of another “day off” saw us on our way to a prominent hill… We built a pretty big cairn atop the hill… Caught a few ”lakers” for tomorrow’s breakfast and enjoyed a good portion of fried roe for lunch. [Pessl, p 109]
Bruce and I cut up the caribou meat and cooked dinner for Art as he was still out with his camera. [Franck, in Pessl, p 110]

The difference between Grinnell’s count of holidays and Pessl’s.
Reminder.
Pessl gives not one holiday (by the too-lazy-to-paddle definition) for the entire trip, whereas Grinnell claims 44 or so holidays (by his unknown definition).
Investigation of a possibility. Perhaps Grinnell defined any nontravel day to be a holiday? Well, the numbers are well off, even by this unusual, indeed misleading, definition. Pessl documents a total of 33 nontravel days, whereas Grinnell claims at least 44 holidays.
Conclusion. There is no way to reconcile Grinnell’s assertion with Pessl’s record.
I prefer Pessl’s figure for three reasons:
(a) As I document both in the above and elsewhere, the evidence is that Grinnell did not keep a journal; that is, it appears that his figure is a ballpark estimate.
(b) A related comment. Only Pessl’s figure is documented.
(c) Grinnell’s evidence in other matters is seriously flawed, in part as documented above. In fact, I have learned to trust nothing written by him unless it is verified by a trustworthy source.

Summary.
Grinnell’s statement that we had taken holidays on more than half the days of the trip (and the like) is refutied by the evidence of Pessl.
Kingsley was misled by Grinnell.

Comment regarding weather-induced delays in September.

The statement
…the weather changed overnight, and the men were trapped on the land [Kingsley book, p 188] is by no means an accusation, but I decided to record the evidence.
Due to weather, the party was unable to travel on 1, 2, 3, 8, 9 and 10 September [Pessl, p 182] and also on 21 September [Pessl, p 139].

The evidence.
Pessl’s evidence for 1, 2 and 3 September is provided above.
The party travelled from 4 through 7 September inclusive [Pessl, pp 119-127], but was weather-bound again on 8 September. A severe storm (hurricane-force winds were recorded in Churchill, according to the Sports Illustrated article, not the most reliable source) struck on 9 September, and the party was unable to travel again also on 10 September. [Pessl, p 182].
The party travelled from 11 through 14 September inclusive.
15 and 16 September were recovery days after the tragedy [Pessl, p 133] and so the weather on those days is immaterial.
Fortunately, the weather changed shortly after the tragedy; that change perhaps saved the lives of all five.
Ever since we dragged each other out of that miserable tent on the cloudy morning of the 15th, we have been blessed with warm, sunny weather with a continual south wind to dry us, warm us, and, above all, renew our confidence in our chances for survival. [Pessl, pp 136&137].
The party was weather-bound for the last time on 21 September. [Pessl, p 139]

Summary.
Non-travel days induced by the weather totaled seven of the 24 days in September; two of these (9 and 10 September) were occasioned by a storm the likes of which are not recorded in either J B Tyrrell’s or J W Tyrrell’s accounts of the 1893 trip.
The matter of the storm aside, on the whole the weather encountered by the Moffatt party was milder than in 1893.
Reference. Appendix 5. Pace and weather.

Conclusions and comments.

1. Grinnell’s use of the term holiday is misleading in even the most generous interpretation of the term.
2. Both Grinnell assertions
(a) …last days of August…averaging one every other day, and
(b) we had taken holidays on more than half the days of the trip.
are refuted by the evidence of Pessl.
3. I don’t understand how anyone could take either assertion literally, for the evidence of Grinnell’s book itself (Kingsley’s primary source) shows that the party was well aware of the distance yet to be covered.
4. A possibility worth considering? Was Grinnell being mischievous in his claims regarding holidays, just as he was (I believe) when he claimed I was not the least experienced canoeist, but the most experienced, as noted in Appendix 4. Experience?
I suggest that this possibility not be rejected out of hand.
5. More importantly, Grinnell’s accusations (and so those of Kingsley, who was misled) are irrelevant to the tragedy, which had quite another cause.
Reference. Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

The Inquest.

The alleged inquest into Moffatt’s death.
Reference. At the inquest held by the mounties… [Grinnell article, p 56, right column].
Response 1.
The four governments (more properly the coroner’s office or equivalent) of Canada, Nunavut, Northwest Territories and Manitoba (four survivors were interviewed in Churchill) were unable to help me in my search for a record of an inquest into Moffatt’s death. Indeed, none confirmed even that such an inquest had been held.
In particular, Mathieu Sabourin (Library and Archives, Canada) kindly responded as follows (in part).
Based on the information provided in your request, I would imagine that if an investigation in the death of Arthur Moffatt did happen, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police would have been involved. Therefore, I concentrated my research in the RCMP archival fonds (RG18).
Two series in that fonds might be of interest for your research. The first would be the “Criminal Investigation Branch” (RG18-F-2) and the other would be the “G Division” (R196-124-3). The latter refer to the RCMP Branch division associated to the Northwest Territories during the period you are researching. Here are the links to the two series:
Criminal Investigation Branch:
http://collectionscanada.gc.ca/ourl/res.php?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_tim=2016-06-17T17%3A12%3A02Z&url_ctx_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Actx&rft_dat=134177&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fcollectionscanada.gc.ca%3Apam&lang=eng
G Division:
http://collectionscanada.gc.ca/ourl/res.php?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_tim=2016-06-17T17%3A11%3A45Z&url_ctx_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Actx&rft_dat=158663&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fcollectionscanada.gc.ca%3Apam&lang=eng
It is important to note that I did not locate any specific file related to Mr. Moffatt in either series.

Response 2.
My limited understanding of inquests has it that they are highly formal affairs. And so I expect that the person in charge would not have accepted (as evidence) transcripts of interviews with the survivors; surely s/he would have required the survivors to attend in person. But no survivor (including Grinnell) records attendance at such an inquest.
I note though that his assertion regarding the inquest had no known effect on the later literature.
A request.

I ask that the reader assess Grinnell’s assertion regarding the inquest in the light of the evidence presented above.

Internal URLs.

Foreword and Forum.
Main text.
Appendix 1. Reality.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Ancillary 4. Distances.
Ancillary 5. Loose ends and the future.
Ancillary 6. Addenda.
Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.
Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.
Bibliography.

Notice.
With the exception of quoted material, copyright to the above belongs to Allan Jacobs.

Appendix 1. Reality

Major renovations were completed in late October 2017 but I expect that warts remain.
Thanks for your patience. Allan

Appendix 1. Reality.

Introduction.
Arthur Moffatt did not die because the party had lost sense of reality.
The cause of his death is documented in Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

The accusation,
an implicit one, was made in the following one-sentence paragraph.
When the five young men stumbled into Baker Lake, an RCMP officer made a quick assessment: “So, ‘he said’ you lost your sense of reality.” [Kingsley, Up Here, bottom of p 91; also Kingsley book, bottom of p 189]
As I document in the next paragraph, the unspecified source for the passage was Grinnell’s book.
Caution. I have learned to trust nothing written by Grinnell unless it is supported by evidence from a reliable, independent source.

The source of the passage.
0. All five survivors were interviewed by the RCMP, Pessl in Baker Lake, the others in Churchill MB.
1. The text of the accusation matches poorly with the following.
One Mountie commented that we had “lost sense of reality”. Actually, we thought of it differently. We felt that we had discovered reality. Something had transformed us as Moffatt knew it would: we had begun to feel an inner peace, that sense of gratitude not only for the gifts of the caribou, which had died for us, the mushrooms, the fish, the berries, but also a sense of gratitude toward one another, our little group of kind friends across the abyss, and gratitude for the awesome harmony, the beauty and the terror that we had discovered on that inward voyage across the “Barrenlands”. [Grinnell article (1988), p 56]
2. The text agrees well with the following.
The Mounties divided us up into separate rooms and asked us to tell of the events which had led to the death of our leader, Arthur Moffatt. The Mountie who interviewed me was friendly and encouraging as I spoke. At the end, he concluded: “So you lost your sense of reality.”
I stared at him in uncomprehending disbelief. Perhaps it is true that back in June, when I had first joined the others at Stony Rapids, a Hudson’s Bay post on Lake Athabaska, I had not had a very profound appreciation of reality. I had had visions of heroic deeds and epic accomplishments. I had been on my best behavior. But the luxury of my youthful illusions had been stripped from me soon enough.
[Grinnell book (1996), p 2]
3. The text agrees very well also with the passages
(a) The Mountie stared at me, as if waiting for an answer. “… so you lost your sense of reality.” I stared back. [Grinnell book, p 44]
(b) “So you lost your sense of reality”, the young RCMP officer had said. It had not seemed like a loss to me at the time. The reality I had discovered was the reality of the Garden of Eden, the most beautiful reality I have ever experienced. [Grinnell book, p 156].
4. Conclusion. Kingsley’s source was Grinnell’s book.
5. Another Grinnell assertion.
Perhaps, during the course of my tale, he [the RCMP officer who interviewed Grinnell] had developed a certain amount of sympathy for me and was hinting that a plea of insanity, or a “loss of a sense of reality,” might not be viewed unfavorably by the civilized authorities. [Grinnell book, p 4]
Response.
Grinnell appears to suggest that the RCMP was considering laying a charge of criminal negligence, perhaps even murder, against one or more of the survivors.
No evidence is known to me that such was the case. Certainly Grinnell provided no evidence in support, nothing comparable is provided in Pessl’s book, and I found none elsewhere in the Moffatt literature.

Comment.
The accuser, whose source was Grinnell’s book, thereby had access to the expository material I stared at him in uncomprehending disbelief … the civilized authorities that starts near the top of page 2 and continues to near the bottom of page 4. That passage is a mini essay, Grinnell’s musings on the meaning of reality in the context of Moffatt’s death, nothing more. But the accuser made no mention of this passage.
There exists no evidence that Grinnell was even so much as hinting that loss of sense of reality, whatever the interpretation of that phrase, was responsible for the tragedy.

Summary.
1. It misrepresented the evidence to quote out of context the remark “So, ‘he said’ you lost your sense of reality.”
The same conclusion would apply had the source been Grinnell’s article, for there also the phrase lost sense of reality was an introduction to a discussion of the meaning of reality in the context of Moffatt’s death.
2. Grinnell’s statement Perhaps, during the course of my tale, he [the RCMP officer who interviewed Grinnell] had developed a certain amount of sympathy for me and was hinting that a plea of insanity, or a “loss of a sense of reality,” might not be viewed unfavorably by the civilized authorities [Grinnell book, p 4] has no known basis in truth.
3. If anyone lost sense of reality, it was no member of the Moffatt party. It was rather James Murphy, who wrote the following of Moffatt.
Slightly giddy from lack of food, a profound quietude and serenity has settled on your spirit. Logically you know you shouldn’t tarry but you linger there for weeks, entranced, as if moving would break some spell, disturbing your reverie. Danger lurks, yet you can’t seem to focus on it.
[James Murphy; Che-Mun, Canoelit section. Moffatt, Myth & Mysticism. Spring 1996, pp 5 and 11].
http://www.canoe.ca/AllAboutCanoes/book_deathbarrens.html

Internal URLs.

Foreword and Forum.
Main text.
Appendix 1. Reality.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Ancillary 4. Distances.
Ancillary 5. Loose ends and the future.
Ancillary 6. Addenda.
Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.
Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.
Bibliography.

Notice.
With the exception of quoted material, copyright to the above belongs to Allan Jacobs.

Foreword and Forum.

Major renovations were completed in early November 2017 but I expect that warts remain.
Thanks for your patience. Allan

Foreword and Forum.

Welcome! I hope that you will consider your time here to have been well spent.
The blog is intended to provide
both evidence and analysis regarding the Moffatt trip and the tragedy,
and also a forum for discussion of both items.

Evidence and analysis.
The evidence and my analysis of it are provided in the Internal URLs listed below.
I continue to tweak the contents; major changes are noted in Ancillary 6. Addenda.

Forum.
I am open to suggestions, comments, questions, etc, regarding the content.
Contributions will be welcomed. Perhaps it is reasonable that evidence already provided be considered.
In a discussion, please address the question, rather than another contributor.

Canadian Canoe Routes.
If you wish, you may post comments at http://www.myccr.com/phpbbforum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=45362 ,
but you must first become a member (no cost).

Yours in paddling, Allan

Internal URLs.

Foreword and Forum.
Main text.
Appendix 1. Reality.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Ancillary 4. Distances.
Ancillary 5. Loose ends and the future.
Ancillary 6. Addenda.
Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.
Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.
Bibliography.

Notice.
With the exception of quoted material, copyright to the above belongs to Allan Jacobs.

Appendix 3. Equipment.

Major renovations were completed in early November 2017 but I expect that warts remain.
Thanks for your patience. Allan

Appendix 3. Equipment.

Arthur Moffatt did not die due to lack of…proper equipment.
The cause of his death is documented in Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

The assertion.

Lack of…proper equipment…contributed to his [Moffatt’s] demise.
Source. James Murphy’s review of Grinnell’s book (1996).
Che-Mun, Canoelit section. Moffatt, Myth & Mysticism. Spring 1996, pp 5 & 11.
Online version. http://www.canoe.ca/AllAboutCanoes/book_deathbarrens.html ]

Response.
Murphy provided no source, no evidence, no anything in support of the accusation; that is why I call it an assertion.
Given that the assertion appears in a review of Grinnell’s book, and that I found no alternative, I conclude that Murphy refers to George Luste’s recommendations in Grinnell’s book [pp 297&298].

Luste’s preface.
We can try to be better prepared to deal with a similar situation. My short list would be as follows.
Please note that Luste is recommending equipment for paddlers circa 1996.
In particular, he is not suggesting that the Moffatt party of 1955 should have been so equipped.

Luste’s recommendation 1.
… use a water-tight snap on canoe cover …
Comment 1. Spray covers, let alone the snap-on variety, were not in general use by recreational paddlers in 1955. Luste, writing 41 years later, certainly knew this. The thread
http://www.myccr.com/phpbbforum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=44587
at Canadian Canoe Routes is not so informative in this respect.
Comment 2. Thum’s Dubawnt party of 1966 knew about spray decking but chose not to use same.
Che-Mun, Autumn 2005; p 18, bottom of the middle column.
http://www.canoeing.com/advanced/feature/deadmansriver.htm
Comment 3. …I made a very primitive nylon decking for part of my canoe for the 1969 trip… It was a crude affair and only partially effective. [Luste, in Grinnell, 1996]

Luste’s recommendation 2.
… have a very long rope, 100 feet or more, on at least one end of every canoe.
Comment 1. I don’t know whether the Moffatt party carried such long ropes; neither, I submit, does the defamer Murphy.
Comment 2. I know neither whether other canoe parties carried such ropes in the 50s; neither, I submit, does the defamer Murphy.
Comment 3. Had such long ropes had been available, it is unclear that they would have helped in the difficult circumstances of 14 September 1955.

Luste’s recommendation 3.
… always carry a gas stove, and an emergency supply of fuel in reserve for such an accident above the tree line …
Comment. The Moffatt party carried a stove and it survived the accident, as did the supply of wood: Peter’s bag of dry wood enabled them to provide some hot food. [Luste, in Grinnell, p 295]

Luste’s recommendation 4.
… carry an emergency EPIRB…
Comment 1. EPIRBs (or equivalent) were not available in 1955.
Comment 2. The Moffatt party was refused permission to carry a radio, as I document below.

Comment regarding floatation devices.
Luste did not mention pfds, I expect because they were in common use well before 1996. But it seems necessary to state that no suitable floatation device was available in 1955, as discussed in my Nastawgan article.
http://www.myccr.com/sites/default/files/storage/CCR%20pdf/Nastawgan/winter_2014.pdf
Briefly, life preservers were available in 1955 (of course), but they hinder swimming; as well, they can jolt the head when one hits the water.

Comment of Pessl.
…lack of improved equipment technologies did not doom the Moffatt Dubawnt journey… [Pessl book, p 163].

Response to Murphy’s accusations.
George Luste and I were professional colleagues for four decades.
Always generous with his time, he helped me considerably when I began tripping in earnest.
I knew him reasonably well. He had a strong sense of right and wrong.
I believe that he would have been much angered to learn that Murphy had used his recommendations for paddlers circa 1996 to defame Moffatt, who died forty years earlier.

A request.
I ask that the reader assess Murphy’s assertion that Lack of…proper equipment…contributed to his [Moffatt’s] demise in the light of the evidence presented above.

The assertion of Kingsley.

There was no satellite technology in those days to provide either the illusion or the reality of decreased risk, but they didn’t even bring a radio. [Back and Beyond, p 14].
Comment. The unstated source can be only We carried no radio. [Grinnell book, p 11].
Response.
Moffatt asked for permission to carry a transmit-receive radio but the Canadian government refused the request, even though they recognize the increase in safety such a set would give our party. [Pessl, p 13].
Question.
Given that there exists no evidence that the lack of a radio played a role in the tragedy, why was the accusation made?
Conclusion.
An accusation remarkable (as best I know unique) in the Moffatt literature, for it is true.

Internal URLs.

Foreword and Forum.
Main text.
Appendix 1. Reality.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Ancillary 4. Distances.
Ancillary 5. Loose ends and the future.
Ancillary 6. Addenda.
Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.
Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.
Bibliography.

Notice.
With the exception of quoted material, copyright to the above belongs to Allan Jacobs.

Appendix 4. Experience.

Major renovations were completed in early November 2017 but I expect that warts remain.
Thanks for your patience. Allan

Appendix 4. Experience.

Arthur Moffatt did not die due to lack of experience or poor leadership (a group of novices…an inexperienced party…indifferent leadership…poor leadership skills or poor planning) as asserted by James Murphy, Charlie Mahler and Bob Thum.
The cause of his death is documented in Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.

The opinion of James Murphy.

Grinnell and four other young men were led on a poorly planned and lackadaisically executed canoe trip by Arthur Moffatt… I…would recommend this one as an excellent example of how not to conduct a canoe trip. [Murphy’s review (1996) of Grinnell’s book].
Response. Murphy’s accusation is only peripherally related to the matter of experience and so I omit further discussion of it, here.

The opinions of Charlie Mahler and Bob Thum.

Source. The following articles (likely identical) of 2005.
http://www.ottertooth.com/che-mun/122/chemun122.pdf
http://www.canoeing.com/advanced/feature/deadmansriver.htm
Comment. I say that the accusations are opinions because neither Mahler nor Thum provided supporting evidence.
The opinion of Mahler.
…the Moffatt story unfolds as a tragedy just waiting to happen – indifferent leadership, an inexperienced party, bad chemistry, a plodding pace, and an apparent apathy to the season closing on them…
Thum, opinion 1.
Those guys had no business being up there. … They were a bunch of guys who didn’t know what they were doing and led by a guy with poor leadership skills. They fooled around and did a lot of crap and it finally came back to bite them. This was simply a group of novices led by someone more interested in film than travel, which squandered its time and resources and then made some tragic mistakes.
Thum 2, opinion 2.
Moffatt … had some experience, but not much.
Comment. One might have expected Thum, a lawyer, to provide evidence in support of these two assertions.

Item 1.

Thum.
… a group of novices and Moffatt … had some experience, but not much.
Mahler.
…an inexperienced party…
Comment 1.
As in nearly all the accusatory literature, no supporting evidence was provided, no source was mentioned.
Comment 2.
As I document in Ancillary 1. Accusations, Thum and Pessl had corresponded prior to the former’s 1966 Dubawnt trip; perhaps then much of the evidence provided below was known to Thum at the time.
Response 1.
…Art Moffatt was already an accomplished adventurer when other boys were still tying their first Boy Scout knots. At 17, he embarked on a major expedition, 700 miles down the Albany River from Sioux Lookout in western Ontario to the lower part of Hudson Bay. Incredibly, he made the trip alone. …
From 1950 to 1954, he led yearly trips down the Albany, studying the region’s geology and wild life as he went.
[Sports Illustrated, p 71, left column].
Response 2.
As well, Moffatt had paddled the Allagash, Androscoggin and Penobscot Rivers in Maine.
I suggest that he must have known what he was doing to make such demanding trips.
Response 3.
Pessl had made two Albany trips with Moffatt and other trips as well. Franck had tripped with Moffatt on the Albany. Grinnell had paddled but not tripped. Lanouette and LeFavour were young outdoorsmen but with no canoeing experience. [Pessl, p XIV].
Response 4. The matter of Grinnell’s experience.
The literature is contradictory and so I provide the following clarification.
(a) On page 14 of a follow-up to Kesselheim’s C&K article of 2012, Grinnell asserted the following. I was not the least experienced canoeist, but the most experienced.
That claim was denied by Pessl, in a later follow-up to the same article.
(b) In his book, Grinnell comments as follows regarding his experience.
But Joe Lanouette and Bruce LeFavour, my fellow bowmen and novices like me… [p 6].
But we novices in the bows… [p 33].
We three bowmen had never been on a long-distance canoe trip. [p 53].
Conclusion. Grinnell’s statement that he was most experienced paddler in the Moffatt party is at variance with his own evidence. Perhaps he was baiting Pessl.
Summary. The Thum-Mahler assertions
… a group of novices, and
Moffatt … had some experience, but not much, and
an inexperienced party
have no basis in evidence.

Item 2.

… didn’t know what they were doing … [Thum]
Again, the accusation is an opinion only.
Summary.
Early on 14 September (after 11 weeks on the water), the party had gotten through many rapids on the Dubawnt (some highly dangerous) without a wrap, without a dump, without serious damage to the boat.
Damage.
Results of an incomplete search.
I heard the stem crack…I heard the ribs cracking… [Grinnell, p 75].
A hole in one canoe [Grinnell, p 126].
There was a small dent in the bow…the real damage as from the rock in the tail. The inner planking had a cracked place and the canvas was scraped. [Franck, in Pessl, 26 July, p 53.]
…struck a rock…a brief check showed no water… [Pessl, 6 September, p 122].
…splintered a plank…[Pessl, 6 September, p 122].
…cracked a rib pretty badly [Pessl, 6 September, p 123].
…a little piece of planking knocked in, but the ribs weren’t broken and the canvas wasn’t cut; no serious damage. [Franck, in Pessl, 6 September, p 124].
Summary of the damage. … we had some scrapes / and dings … but no serious damage nor significant mishaps. [Pessl, private correspondence].
Swamps.
There were two swamps, neither in rapids. [Grinnell, pp 79 & 80. Pessl, p 168, 26 August].
Wraps.
None.
Dumps.
The only two dumps of the entire trip occurred in the rapids where Moffatt died.
Summary.
Thum’s assertion … didn’t know what they were doing … has no basis in evidence.
I repeat that the Moffatt party descended a dangerous river without serious incident, even a single dump, until the afternoon of 14 September.
To put the matter gently, evidence that I provide elsewhere in this document demonstrates that the tragedy did not result from inexperience (as asserted by Thum); the cause was rather incorrect information from a source (J B Tyrrell) that had proved trustworthy for weeks previously.
Reference. Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
To put the matter bluntly, Thum was just mouthing off, building himself up in his own mind, at the expense of the reputation of a dead man.

Item 3.

…poor leadership skills…. [Thum]
Responses.
1. The accusation of poor leadership is an assertion only, a gratuitous judgment, one made without supporting evidence.
2. The burden of proof would appear to lie with the defamer. Evidently, Thum considers an assertion by himself to be proof; others might disagree.
3. As every paddler knows (I had thought), there are several ways to lead a party. Indeed, some groups have no leader; they work by consensus (sometimes not achieved). Some paddlers demand to be the boss, others resent being bossed. And a guided party is very different from a group of friends. As I see matters, the Moffatt party lay somewhere in the middle. Perhaps Moffatt could have been more assertive, but perhaps the others would have objected had he been. Who is to say, especially someone, like Thum, who was not there? In short, there is no one answer regarding which leadership style is best. Thum should have known that.
4. To me, the key question is whether/how the leadership affected the tragedy.
In fairness, I record Pessl’s comment
…the tragic disregard for time, distance, and season of the Moffatt leadership (and I include myself in that category)… [Pessl book, p 173 (2014).]
Response. I believe that Pessl was being overly self-critical here, as he was in other comments on nearby pages.
5. My reading of the literature leads me to conclude that the leadership was not poor at any time.
6. The evidence of Appendices 8 and 9 is that the cause of the tragedy had nothing to do with leadership, or experience, or planning, or blah, or blah, or blah. The cause was rather incorrect information from a source (J B Tyrrell) that had proved trustworthy for the entire trip up to the afternoon of 14 September 1955.
Appendix 8. Other rapids and
Appendix 9. Fatal rapids.

Summary.

Moffatt’s defamers Thum and Mahler asserted only that lack of experience was a cause of his death. But they provided no supporting evidence and so assertions are at best only opinions.
Certainly some participants were poorly experienced initially, but they acquired plenty of that in the 11 weeks on the river before Moffatt died. But, after 11 weeks in difficult conditions, likely all members of the party were sufficiently experienced by the afternoon of 14 September.
The challenge.
Let Thum and Mahler to explain why the only dumps of the entire trip on a dangerous river occurred in the fatal rapids. Let not hold our breaths waiting for either to respond.

Conclusion.

The assertions of Thum and Mahler, namely that lack of experience and poor leadership played a role in Moffatt’s death, have no basis in any evidence known to me.
The cause of the tragedy is described in Appendix 9. Fatal rapids.

Internal URLs.

Foreword and Forum.
Main text.
Appendix 1. Reality.
Appendix 2. Holidays.
Appendix 3. Equipment.
Appendix 4. Experience.
Appendix 5. Pace and weather.
Appendix 6. Food.
Appendix 7. Schedule.
Appendix 8. Rapids in general.
Appendix 9. The fatal rapids.
Ancillary 1. Accusations.
Ancillary 2. Lanouette excerpt.
Ancillary 3. Tyrrell excerpt.
Ancillary 4. Distances.
Ancillary 5. Loose ends and the future.
Ancillary 6. Addenda.
Ancillary 7. Moffatt’s Tyrrell sources.
Ancillary 8. Evidence regarding the tragedy.
Bibliography.

Notice.
With the exception of quoted material, copyright to the above belongs to Allan Jacobs.