Mounted search and rescue

[Una Smith <una.smith@att.net>]

Having trained my own horse to alert on people, and now spent hundreds
of hours assisting with SAR K9 training, I have to disagree with some of
what Irv just posted.


Irv wrote:
>Unlike a dog which primarily relies on its nose

Depends on the dog.  Certainly some SAR dogs I have watched appear to be
oblivious to anything but scent!  They will have me in full view but be
so focussed on following my scent on the air or my trail, that they miss
me.  Sometimes the handler is so focussed on the dog that they too miss
me.  But usually either dog or handler sees me.  This is partly a matter
of chance, but I also see the influence of the individual dog's way of
working and breed.  Scent hounds and sight hounds are different.  Some
dogs when following scent have a distinctly blank look in their eye;  the
dog is paying minimal attention to visual information.  Others have very
bright eyes;  they are looking for me.


Irv wrote:
>You do not train a horse the way you train a K-9 because the dog needs
>training but the horse doesn't.

Everything we do to teach horses and riders to airscent is modeled on
training methods for dogs and handlers.  Where they differ, and this may
be what Irv has in mind, is that with horses we start with airscenting.
Many but not all training programs for dogs start with tracking.  This 
is done on leash;  airscent training mostly is done off leash.  Working
off leash work requires the dog to be older and more reliable, which is
a big reason why the training is done in this order.

Yes, most horses do detect far more in their environment than we do.
Rarely do we know which senses they use to do it, but most horses in
training situations can be seen to detect the search subject long
before the rider does.  It may be scent, or sound, or sight.  We do
not know, and personally for the most part I do not care.

What we have to teach the horse is that *now* we want the horse to pay
close attention to any clues to people in the area.  We want the horse
to tell us about what he is detecting.  We want the horse to go to the
source.

Most of us do have to spend far more time and effort teaching ourselves
not to interfere when our horse is on task.  Dog handlers have exactly
the same challenge, by the way.  As a training search subject I see it
all the time.  From my hiding place I see the dog is following my trail
but the handler has an "idea" about where I am and assumes the dog is
just "crittering" and calls the dog away.

A ranching friend tells me her best cow horses know which calves she
has already branded, even when the brand is not in view.  Her horses
know exactly what she wants and are aware when she is making a mistake
and will try to let her know.  When she tries to go after a calf she
has already worked, they balk.  Momentarily.

Experienced riders who have never done work on horseback often have a
very hard time *not* micromanaging the horse.  Being "along for the
ride" is scary.  Novice riders do far better at this because they are
basically passengers anyway.


Irv wrote:
>The rider needs training in how to track

I absolutely agree.  But very few riders get much training in visual
tracking.  Even fewer dog handlers get it.  I do visual tracking and 
often am struck by how dog handlers miss sign due to their focus on
the dog.  As a search manager I always want 2 people on a field team
with a search dog:  handler and navigator/radio person.  It helps if
the second person is at least track-aware.  

Regards,

        Una Smith
        New Mexico