Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

msar-riders - Re: [MSAR] Mounted orienteering

msar-riders@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Mounted search and rescue

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Una Smith <una.smith@att.net>
  • To: Mounted search and rescue <msar-riders@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [MSAR] Mounted orienteering
  • Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 07:42:42 -0600

In orienteering jargon, a vetter is someone other than the
course setter who goes out just before the meet starts to
run the course and check that everything about it is okay.
The vetter makes sure the map and physical locations of the
controls match, that the controls (windsocks, plates) are
still there, that the written clues are both present and
accurately described, and that the course is not dangerous.

Neither NACMO nor USOF rules involve veterinary or medical
checks at the end of the course. When there are only people
involved, perhaps self-interest is sufficient to discourage
runners from getting themselves badly hurt during an O meet.
It is not unusual for runners in USOF meets to finish with
scrapes and bruises; falling down because you chose a nasty
cross country route, or tried to go to fast for conditions,
is part of the learning process. Runners who finish late,
limping and/or bleeding, receive a big dose of approval for
getting themselves back to the trailhead rather than waiting
hours for SAR to come and get them.

Endurance and competitive trail competitions both involve an
elaborate vet check system. That adds a lot to the cost of
running an event. Perhaps so much that it would price such
events beyond the means of most MSAR teams. The vet check
seems to be most necessary for inexperienced riders; I have
the impression that the necessity for vet checking has more
to do with the emphasis in these sports on growing the sport
as fast as possible, hence the constant need to recruit new
competitors.

In NACMO, do horses earn standing based on how they place in
meets over time? That would provide a big incentive for the
rider to keep the horse in good shape, so it can continue to
compete.

One problem I see with NACMO is that there is not an explicit
progression of course difficulty level from easy to hard.
USOF has that, and it contributes immensely toward educating
new runners long before they attempt hard courses. In NACMO,
are there informal practices concerning differences of course
design for easy and hard courses?

Una Smith
New Mexico




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page