Mounted search and rescue

[Una Smith <una@lanl.gov>]

Jorene wrote:
>Apparently you're not aware that NASAR is already changing?

I am aware that there is far more talk about NASAR changing,
than actual change.

>You can now take the SARTECH III written test online and
>receive a certificate of completion from NASAR - not recognized
>as SARTECH III, but documented recognition for passing the test.

I learned about the online exam for SARTECH III a year ago;  
that's not new.  But what I didn't know is that it does not
confer SARTECH III certification.  Which boggles my mind.
Why bother taking it, except to practice for a real SARTECH
III exam, eh?  And you pay for the priviledge of practicing.

NASAR could just but the exam question pool on the web, free,
like AARL does for all its amateur radio certification exams.
Now *that* would smooth the path for more SAR volunteers to
get SARTECH III certification.


>I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not authorized to give anyone
>permission to do anything

Then please do us all a favor and don't make promises and
give assurances that you cannot keep.


>NASAR standards are typically either officially recognized or
>perceived as a national standard.

No, they are not.  That is your fantasy.  NASAR is a national
organization.  However, there is no national SAR authority to
adopt a NASAR standard, hence there is no "national standard".
NASAR's description of SARTECH I, II, and III certifications,
on the NASAR website, notes that these certifcations have been
adopted as standards for basic SAR by some states etc.  That's
all!

Finally, NASAR's is not "the" standard;  there is no one SAR
standard.  NASAR has three standards for general SAR, a basic
standard for canine SAR, and we hope will soon have one for
MSAR.  But other national organizations, not NASAR, have their
own standards for advanced SAR, technical rescue, mountain
rescue, wilderness first response, etc.  The entire Incident
Command System is an established standard.  I would say that
if there is any *national* standard in use in SAR now, it is
ICS.  And NASAR has nothing to do with establishing ICS.  


>You used the term "rewrite the NASAR standard" which I definitely don't
>recommend - you'd be fiddling with copyrighted documents.

The document may be copyrighted, but the conceptual parts are
not copyrightable.  Especially given the derivative nature of
any MSAR standard written now, with the established knowledge
of so many prior works.

Jorene, did you ever resolve with Susan Thrasher whether the
work of the NASAR MSAR committee involves copyright transfer
or a work-for-hire agreement?  She kept telling me "there is
no copyright" and "there is no work for hire" and "all rights
belong to NASAR".  Of course, these are mutually inconsistent
statements.  If this question was not resolved then in fact
the copyright of the committee's work appears to be in legal
limbo.

        Una Smith
        Santa Fe County Sheriff's Posse, in New Mexico