To: "'Mounted search and rescue'" <msar-riders@lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [MSAR] Training
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:55:00 -0400
Please forgive my ignorance in these matters, but, please tell me why it is
imperative that the horse getting out of a tight spot necessitates going
forward as opposed to just simply backing out, which would be the more
natural thing to do.
m. spencer
-----Original Message-----
From: msar-riders-bounces@lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:msar-riders-bounces@lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of IRVIN
LICHTENSTEIN
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 4:34 PM
To: msar-riders@lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [MSAR] Training
I think we will run into the "one size doesn't fit all" problem. Using the
turn around in a confined area as the example do we pick one size box or do
we say it should be x times the length of the horse? When we train truck
drivers they get spaces and turning radii based on the rig, not an arbitrary
number.
If the objective is to get out of a tight spot and emerging pointed forward
(as opposed to backing out) we must determine if the horse size is a factor
for the test or merely getting out is the success measure, regardless of the
size of the area. This is where a breed based test is easier. Most QH's are
within a size range specified by the stud book so the AQHA can specify
dimensions for a course where we may not be able to.
Alternatively, testing for performance can be difficult if suggestions for
the tests are not included for those lacking in imagination.