Mounted search and rescue

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

This sidesaddle discussion turned into disagreement with people not remembering that there can be vast differences between different operational areas, so I have some thoughts to share. How each MSAR team is expected to function by the authorities, terrain, and other issues can be very different. Someone says they respond to search in a Park and I relate thinking of hundreds of thousands of acres of very steep, very remote, very hazardous high mountains ... yet to someone else that may mean searching in a couple thousand acres of flat terrain or gently rolling hills, or swampy terrain, etc. We all have our own regional perceptions and experience ... and varying needs.

 

In my region you don't even see trail riders in our mountains in flat saddles, much less a side saddle. In another region they may be very common because the terrain, riding hazards, etc., are different. So while the local MSAR expectation is for western or Australian saddles for safety concerns, flat saddles or even sidesaddles may be very suitable elsewhere.

 

Because MSAR response needs can be so very different in various parts of the country and world, a local standard or policy suitable for one may not be suitable for another. This is why there are *minimum* MSAR standards, developed through ASTM, to create a common foundation in training and basic expectations for all. Locally you are expected to add to those requirements, as needed, and design your own appropriate policies.

 

Locally you are supposed to know your own needs and also recognize your limitations, which can be very different even a hundred miles away. For example, MSAR that trains and responds in gentler terrain wouldn't be expected to be comfortable or experienced in steep mountain response. MSAR accustomed to remote wilderness won't be experienced in more urban searches. One area might expect 24 hour packs (or longer) and overnights in the field, another might only require day packs for most missions because they're rarely very far from the trailer or a road. In one place 12 hours in the field is common, in another the searchers rarely spend more than a few hours in the field. One area might expect riders to respond sometimes as ground searchers, another might only expect riders to dismount as needed. Locally we may have concerns due to major and rapid changes in altitude, yet that may be a non-issue for others. Some MSAR want and need extra training in tracking from the saddle, or using a saddled mount to transport injured folks. Some MSAR are also qualified and experienced packers, and may be used for logistics. One area may see huge value in having an MSAR Support unit that routinely responds as non-riders to provide camp and road services for the riders, but another area may not. Some MSAR are also sworn law enforcement. Some MSAR are attached to and train with ground SAR or dog teams, and I suspect there are MSAR who also work a search dog from the saddle. Some in MSAR have trained their horses in scenting, much like a SAR dog. Some areas the local authorities run SAR incidents, in others SAR / MSAR is expected to provide their own management, and some are a mix of authorities and trained volunteers. One group may be cross trained for certain disaster response, another may not. Some MSAR are directly affiliated with the authority having jurisdiction, others are independent operating on MOUs, or somewhere in between. The list goes on, influencing not just local MSAR requirements but also policy, etc.

 

The equine choices for type and size can vary greatly. The same is true of tack needs. And team attire can vary greatly with different regional weather conditions, etc. Even horse trailer requirements can vary, since in some response areas the access is much easier than others, and in some areas length has to be restricted or minimum clearance considered.

 

It makes little sense for any of us to judge - or impose personal opinions - regarding what may/may not be appropriate for another area's MSAR, other than the common fundamentals, although we can certainly share differences for general awareness and a reminder that there *are* differences. While there may be similarities, and options to consider that may/may not benefit others, the only common ground we really have is meeting the *minimum* MSAR requirements and things like related documentation.

 

You [generic you] might have a personal opinion that your own MSAR is better trained, equipped, etc., than another, but that doesn't mean the other MSAR *must* do anything beyond meeting minimum requirements, just that your own MSAR is held to a higher level of expectation ... and feel lucky you have a program where riders are willing and able to invest the extra time, funds and effort. Also keep in perspective that a newly formed unit, or one converting to using recognized standards, will take time to evolve even to meeting basic expectations, yet that is a huge milestone for them.

 

Bottom line is as long as the mount and rider - using whatever saddle - are meeting all minimum requirements as a ground searcher and as a mounted SAR responder with a suitable mount, any additional local requirements or policies are entirely up to the locals. This includes the locals meeting any additional expectations from authorities in their response region, which may also include meeting state level standards or even standards from a nearby state that is also in the MSAR unit's response region. And we also need to take into consideration that there are still areas where local authorities are still using untrained volunteers for SAR / MSAR, so local expectations there aren't the same - yet - as those where recognized training is required.

 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Jorene Downs

SAR, CERT, Emergency Communications,

Disaster Planning, Animals in Disaster

Mounted SAR

http://www.ceoates.com/msar

KJ6JCD