Mounted search and rescue

["Jorene Downs" <Jorene@CEOates.com>]

Good questions, Barbara.

 

Written testing hasn't been developed yet, but I suspect it will include some basic "stable management-type" questions that a horse owner should already have the answers to. For example "How much water might a horse drink daily?" Identify some basic parts of the horse and tack. (I'm thinking something similar to the 4-H Horse written material I remember from 15-20 years ago when my daughter was involved and I was a 4H leader in the Horse group.) Since written testing for MSAR hasn't really been discussed yet regarding specifics, I'm just speculating. ;)

 

FYI - You can see what is required for the different SARTech levels - for certification - on the NASAR web site. www.nasar.org in the menu under Education / NASAR Courses indicated as ISAR (Intro level - classroom), FUNSAR (fundamental field ready) and ADSAR (Advanced level).

 

Keep in perspective that the MSAR standards for NASAR will only reflect "certification" status. Consider the levels of certification as being more like a benchmark to indicate a minimum level of training, plus meeting equipment standards.  Local training would be designed to help team members pass each test, then include additional training useful to that team's response area. If a rider is certified at level X, you know they passed pre-defined testing, carry certain gear, etc., which provides some consistency for riders with that status. This consistency is beneficial for MSAR Units, and can be a valuable tool for Mutual Aid where the request for Mounted can be specific for level X or above. 

 

Currently around the country there is no consistency for MSAR in training or standards. There are well trained MSAR Units with good standards, and MSAR Units who are essentially a group of riders who show up to help search but have little/no SAR training and no equipment standards. For liability purposes it is critical to have written standards, and many MSAR Units don't even have that. Anyone shooting for NASAR MSAR certification would be using the same testing standards, which establishes a minimum level of consistency.

 

In a real world application for a team using NASAR standards, the requirement for new members might be to have SARTech III and MSAR III certification within 1 year, and SARTech II and MSAR II certification within 2 years ... or something. For safety, a team might choose to require the new applicant to pass (non-certified) MSAR III level Practical testing before being allowed to continue in training. This provides opportunity to say the horse/rider does not pass entry level testing ... encourages that rider to go take lessons / get their horse to a trainer ... and a few months later that same horse and rider might pass the test.  Or the serious applicant might choose to buy a new horse better suited for MSAR. ;)

 

In general, teams with an organized training program will start with teaching the classroom basics and building on them ... and start in the arena before moving to the field. A new applicant might pass the MSAR III testing - or even pass MSAR II - but not be eligible for certification until the Ground SAR portion of training is complete. Linking a Ground SAR training level with an MSAR level kinda insists the riders have SAR knowledge and gear, not just riding skills and a good horse. ;)

 

In another real world application an MSAR Unit might compare their own standards with the NASAR MSAR standards, make adjustments as needed, document all training and testing, and claim equivalency ... or higher. A Unit with no written standards might choose to base their new standards on NASAR MSAR standards, without going after official NASAR certification. In either situation those teams would still have some consistency in minimum standards. While the emerging NASAR MSAR standards may not be considered by all as the "best" minimum standards, for liability purposes having a local standard that meets / exceeds the published standards from a nationally / internationally recognized SAR organization would be legally advantageous compared to "we do it this way locally" standards.

 

I got a bit side-tracked sharing my thoughts. Hope I answered your questions?

 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Jorene Downs
Tulare Co, CA
SAR, MSAR, Swiftwater Rescue, US&R,
Technical Rescue, Cave Rescue,
Hasty Team, ICP
www.CEOates.com/sar
Tulare-Kings CERT Program Coordinator
www.tk-cert.org

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Slybarbara@aol.com

1) Can you give an example of the type of written test you would use?  If a rider and horse passes the physical test, I can't imagine a written test would stand in the way of their being considered competent. 

 

2) If I read the document correctly, it appears you advocate having mounted team members  fully trained before the mounted test. Is this classroom training only?  [...]

 

3) How many other mounted teams do all the training first as opposed to rider/horse evaluation first...could we take a survey?  If a significant number of MSAR units test riders/horses first, then the language of the draft should reflect this.

 

Barbara Sly

NWHSAR Vice-President, OL