Mounted search and rescue

["JAMES NUTTALL" <jjlanuttall@msn.com>]

Una,  I am wondering where in New Mexico you are located,  I am here in Los 
Alamos and I don't know if you have any information you could help our Local 
Sherif's Posse.  We are in need of some help with re-organizing......  Would 
you be willing to come and talk with us at a monthly meeting?  Thank You
Linda Nuttall

LA Sheriff's Posse Member



> From: Una Smith <una.smith@att.net>
> Reply-To: Mounted search and rescue <msar-riders@lists.ibiblio.org>
> To: Mounted search and rescue <msar-riders@lists.ibiblio.org>
> Subject: Re: [MSAR] Minors as members
> Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 20:17:42 -0600
>
> Chris Pennington wrote:
> >Maybe the question we should be asking ourselves is SHOULD minors be
> >involved in our teams and if so WHY and HOW?
>
> Yes, start with SHOULD.
>
> In New Mexico, numerous of our approximately 80 state-recognized
> SAR (not just MSAR) units are family affairs.  But for the most
> part the families in question are tough ranching families, often
> with strong traditions of service in the armed forces.  One SAR
> unit is a youth-at-risk program, with an emphasis on rescue.  As
> in teenage EMTs, technical rescue training, etc.  A couple of
> SAR units are college undergraduate units, so most members would
> be under 21.  Of these, my impression is that the college units
> are the most fragile, but I don't know why.  The minors' ages
> vary, but so to do the units' social structure and dynamics.
>
> My first hand experience, to date concerning finds of suicides,
> is that some SAR responders are destroyed, while others are okay
> with it.  Youth by itself does not appear to be a good predictor
> of who will be destroyed.  My sense is that (in)experience is a
> far more important factor, but there is also a large element of
> randomness:  some factor of a given incident may have a special
> resonance for a given responder.
>
> There is a simple fix for inexperience:  training and experience.
>
> I am not at all convinced that "simple" rules such as rider must
> be at least 21 or mount must be at least 6 are a good solution.
> They rather miss the point.  What we should be aiming for is:
> Can *this* rider and *this* mount do the job, safely, effectively,
> and without undue emotional cost?  But then the question becomes
> how should we evaluate someone to make this delicate to-the-point
> determination, without simply throwing them in the deep end?
>
>         Una Smith
>         New Mexico
> _______________________________________________
> MSAR-Riders mailing list
> MSAR-Riders@lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/msar-riders