Mounted search and rescue

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

Great observations, Chris! I’d add that while the individual horse (or mule) is a key issue in selection, sometimes there are bloodlines within a breed that have a reputation for having a disposition more suitable (or not) for SAR. Also, let’s not forget that there needs to be a good match between horse and rider. A horse calm and reliable for one rider may not be suitable for another rider … not a good match. It may be a personality clash, riding style, the level of riding experience, or something else. Another factor may be nutrition, where the “hot” horse on a different diet may be notably more relaxed, or there may be another less obvious health issue that makes the horse uncomfortable carrying a rider. There is the obvious potential for simply changing a bit in the horse’s mouth – or other tack changes - to change that mount’s “disposition” under saddle. Paying attention to the horse can make a big difference, with the critical issue the human knowing enough to understand and having the ability to reduce the human error that is likely creating whatever issues the horse is perceived as having.

 

Making the choice of gaited – or not – may be impacted by the environment most common to the rider’s response area. Many gaited horses tend to move out with a faster “walk” than the average non-gaited horse. If the environment is filled with a lot of obstructions to reduce visibility, moving naturally faster may require the rider to be even more diligent quickly looking for clues. In a rather open view environment, the gaited horse’s faster natural walk could be more advantageous and not quite as challenging for the rider in “search” mode.

 

Having a mix of gaited and non-gaited horses can be an issue for team selection with regards to the mounts tending to move along at similar speeds. This is also true regardless of gaited / non-gaited. More compatible riding speed reduces issues in the field related to a horse tiring more quickly keeping up with faster mounts, or fussing due to being held back, etc.

 

On the question of tall / short horse selection, there are several factors beyond the mount being well capable of packing the rider’s weight along with tack and all the gear … or simply the size “looking good” with that particular rider. The environment can be a factor for height – and width – horse selection. For example, if you ride a 17h horse and continually need to duck under branches, you’re more focused on protecting your head than searching. If you are no longer ducking those branches on a 15.2 horse, that would likely improve the rider’s capabilities as a searcher. Terrain can be a factor, with the shorter horse often more agile in more challenging terrain. Tracking from the saddle – or looking for clues in general – may sometimes provide an advantageous angle from the taller horse, but also puts that rider at a disadvantage for detection by being further from the smaller, less obvious clues.

 

Management should also consider building field teams that include a shorter horse on each team, assuming the teams have the appropriate training to transport / evacuate someone in the saddle. The lift to a 15h horse is much easier than to a 17h horse, and the non-rider passenger is usually less uncomfortable closer to the ground. A smoother moving horse packing that person (who may be sick or injured) is also an advantage.

 

In general, selection of an MSAR horse suitable for that rider’s needs is very specific to each rider, their riding experience, where SAR response is likely to occur, etc. Other obvious concerns are  to invest in a horse well suited to moving calmly and reliably even in the more challenging regional terrain, and in a size that makes searching from the saddle productive for that mounted searcher.   

 

- - - - - -

Jorene Downs

SAR & CERT

Mounted SAR

www.ceoates.com/msar

 

 

 

From: pennbo@verizon.net

LOL   This IS business!! We are in the business of using equines to do Search and Rescue. Whether a particular breed is or isn't suited to the work should be a valuable topic of discussion AS LONG AS it's done respectfully. So far it seems to be.

Personally I do not prefer QHs simply because they are so quiet. I prefer a more interactive partner. Doesn't mean that a QH isn't a good SAR mount. :-)  Just means that for ME, and the type of riding I do, I have other priorities. When I think about the horses in our unit it's actually amazing that there are NOT an abundance of one breed or another. We have QHs, Morgans, Arabs, Rocky's, Paso, FoxTrotters, haflingers, Fjords, and grades. Some are better at SAR work than others. Some are better at some facets of SAR work that other facets. All are well loved and well trained. I am happy to have them, and their riders, on my team!

We had a horse on the team once that no one wanted to work with. He would blow up with no notice. He was very large- 16+h and he hated to be anywhere but first, so he bullied his way around. Always laid down in water no matter where you were. LOL  Didn't think a thing about hitching a leg into the rider behind if he felt like it. His rider is extremely experienced and saw something that the rest of us didn't. Here, 6 years later, that is one FINE, very fine, SAR mount! He came into his own and is a valuable team member. So even individuals can become special with time and training. (oh- he is a QH!)

Getting them to the point where they are valuable team members is probably more important that the breed they are.

Chris