Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

msar-riders - Re: [MSAR] ICS Field Coordinator

msar-riders@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Mounted search and rescue

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "trailsendfarm@erols.com" <trailsendfarm@erols.com>
  • To: msar-riders@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [MSAR] ICS Field Coordinator
  • Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 14:19:10 -0500

Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 20:22:39 -0700
From: Una Smith <una@lanl.gov>
Subject: Re: [MSAR] ICS Field Coordinator
>...be sure you convey a positive "can do X", not a negative "do you expect
>us to X".

Well put, Una. I have a team member who's statements always seem to come
out as a "can't do," "why bother calling us," slant to it. Life seems so
much more pleasant to live when you live with a "can do" attitude.

>Here is what the Source Management Systems Workbook (used in
>training New Mexico SAR Field Coordinators) has to say about
>Mounted Resources:
>Advantages
>- Travel at a slightly faster hourly speed than hasty searchers.
>- Rider sits higher, has a different perspective, and can see
>further.
>Limitations
>- A greater logistical support need: trailers, feed, corral
>facilities.
>- Hoof prints destroy footprints and other subtle clues.
>- As rider is further from ground, less likely to discover
>footprints and other subtle clues.
>- limited to trails and open country, can't effectively search
>thick vegetation or rugged terrain.

So true! This is the common non-horseman perception we seem always to be
facing. And I very much like your suggested alternative list. I'm going to
save it and see how I can incorporate it as suggested language in the
"definition of MSAR" section of the standards. (I also plan to draft a
preface for the committee to review that will list and credit as many of
the sources of information and language as we can identify.)

>In lieu of the above, I suggest:
>Advantages
>- Travel at least twice as fast as groundpounders.
>- Travel at least twice as long as groundpounders.
>- Travel far more easily than groundpounders off trails,
>in mud, in snow, in rough terrain, and in thick brush.
>- Travel many places where vehicles cannot go, some places
>where groundpounders cannot safely go.
>- On horseback a searcher's point of view (POV) is about 3
>feet/1 meter higher than on foot; may be more likely to
>find clues not on trail and/or at a distance.
>- Riders can devote more attention to mission assignment;
>horses watch their own footing.
>- Backcountry riders more likely to have personal experience
>of specific wilderness areas rarely visited by other means.
>- Horses hear, see, and detect scents better than humans do.
>- Horses have excellent night vision, comparable to dogs.
>- Horses carry far more weight than groundpounders: rescue
>gear, repeater radio, power supply, extra water, exhausted
>dog or groundpounder, subject.
>- Powerful, high clearance, often 4WD vehicles.
>- Haul-in services: extra water, food for base camp operations.
>- Trailer should have many gallons of potable water to spare.
>- Trailer may have toilet.
>Limitations
>- Enormous disparity between unskilled and skilled horsemen
>and horses; difficult for non-horsemen to evaluate skills.
>- On horseback a searcher may be more likely than on foot to
>miss small or subtle clues.
>- Horses don't know not to step on footprints or other clues.
>- Horses have limited ability to climb.
>Additions or changes, anyone?

Horses don't snorkle very well either ;-)

Suzanne Anderson
TROT Mounted Search Team
Maryland
and
NASAR Committee for proposed MSAR standards


--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .





  • Re: [MSAR] ICS Field Coordinator, trailsendfarm@erols.com, 10/29/2003

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page