I'm looking for study material on the mathematics of Search and Rescue.<br><br>I've found a couple of websites - one of them, www.sarinfo.bc.ca, is for a company that makes software to perform probability calculations (e.g. given the last place the missing person was seen, the type of terrain, where they were heading, weather conditions, etc. what are the most likely places to start searching? How far could they have gone? etc.) Another site that had some good information is www.islandnet.com/sarbc - it had some mathematical formulae but no info on how to use them.<br><br>For those who don't know (which is probably the majority of you) I run a Saint John Ambulance Family division in Calgary, Canada. We have a number of teenagers involved - they seem quite interested in volunteer work and community service. At least one of them wants to become a doctor, but her grades in math and science are hovering between 50 and 60 percent. My brother's a doctor, and I know there's no way she'll get into medical school if that doesn't improve. <br><br>As a professional mathematician, this causes me great pain. I want to find a way to show these kids that math is not only fun (don't snicker that way, lots of people think sleeping on the ground in subzero temperatures isn't fun either) but practical as well. As they're all quite interested in helping out the community and what our role will be if there's ever a disaster, I think this is something that might appeal to them - as long as I can understand it well enough to 'dumb it down' to high school level.<br><br>I decided to post this to the campfire forum, as it's not directly related to "survival". Any help or pointers would be appreciated.

arrdwolfe,<br><br>Check out <br><br>http://www.sarbc.org/sar2002<br><br>Regards,<br>Comanche7

??? You mean some folks don't think math is fun??? I'll ask my wife; she's a math teacher. I cannot imagine how one gets along in life without math, tho.

For several years, I have been playing mathematical & other games with my own children. I have even offered monetary rewards, the most powerful motivator known to my 12 ½ year old, all with what seems little effect to me. These are my own offspring. And I love math. The effects are only occasional & intermittent: e.g., my discussion of the decimal system with the 9-year-old. It had at least a little effect. My frequent use of the Pythagorean theorem with the then 7 & 10-year olds may have had some impact. It has many applications in bird hunting & in estimating measurements. I regularly use it in estimating range of birds. A few years ago, it established that we were in a legal hunting area. In that instance we were in one of the few good hunting areas in that region. That actually seemed to affect-- in fact, actually impress-- them. Perhaps, they were reading the faces of those around them, including at least one Olympic shotgunner. Whatever it was, at least it motivated them to some extent. And, perhaps that is as much as we should reasonably wish. Anyway, at least they were impressed with the value of mathematics & education (and maybe even the old man). <br><br>As I think about it, a lot of my own comfort with math dates back to my second year of algebra in high school. Maybe a certain facility needs to develop before math becomes fun. I also recall doing ballistics problems for extra credit in math. Somehow I doubt such fun, natural, practical applications are offered in our current school books. Anyway an inquisitive mind can still discern those applications. IIRC, some of those applications may be found in Hatcher's Notebook , a book which is about due for a rereading. I also have my old math & physics books containing the requisite formulae. Maybe its about time to review them for potentially interesting problems for the kids. When the shotgunning is really slow, it can also be interesting to compare the hypothetical pattern densities of various loads at different ranges against the size of the bird hunted to determine the theoretical number of pellet hits on a bird. Obviously the procedures are pretty basic; the fun part is trying to keep all the calculations straight in your head. <br><br>I think the key to interesting kids in math is perseverance.<br><br>Good luck!<br><br><br>John

John;<br><br>thanks for your insight. I have read a number of books on math and math teaching. One book that I though highly of is "Math Power" by Patricia Kenschaft (ISBN 0201772892), although it seems to be out of print now. She points out that all kids love to count things when they're little; somehow, the school manages to take counting (which is fun) and turn it into "math" (which most people hate). <br><br>A while ago, I arranged a "puzzles night" in my division, putting groups together and giving them math puzzles to solve. This made it a social activity, where they could brainstorm together and come up with a collective solution. I was quite surprised by how successful this was - I thought they'd get bored after solving the first problem and want to do something else, but they actually asked for more.<br><br>The biggest problem with the way math is taught in schools, IMO, is that it's turned into a boring, frustrating, solitary activity. You sit down at your desk and stay there until you come up with the correct answer. Whereas in real life, you would get up, go for coffee, talk to your co-workers, see if they had any insight into the problem - maybe a couple of you would get together and brainstorm a little bit. If my boss told me I had twenty problems to solve by 4 o'clock, and I wasn't allowed to go for a coffee break or discuss them with my colleagues, I'd laugh in his face. Yet that's how we expect kids to learn math. It's insane, IMO.<br><br>Like you, I can trace my love of math back to my second year in high school, or possibly my last year of junior high. I was fortunate enough to have a really good math teacher that year, who for whatever reason or through whatever brand of sorcery made me realize that math was something I was actually good at. I had always enjoyed doing puzzles before that, it was probably in high school that I came to the realization that those puzzles were actually math problems (in a flimsy disguise :-)

Comanche:<br><br>Actually, I had already found that site - in fact, it was the site that first opened my eyes to the possibility of using SAR as a math teaching incentive. Unfortunately, the math formulae they give didn't come with much explanation - not even a definition of what the terms mean, which makes it hard to understand their application.<br><br>However, once you pointed me back to the site, it occurred to me that by adding those terms - POA, POD, and POS (which doesn't mean what I thought it meant ;-) - to my Google search, I might be more successful. It led me to another page on that site, which somehow doesn't seem to be accessible by a direct link from their home page - http://www.sarbc.org/probabil.html<br>which is a fairly high level paper on "Search Probability Theory". At least it gives me some more detailed papers to read and some idea on how I might develop a series of math problems, possibly an entire desktop exercise (where the cadets would get to play the roles of the emergency SAR co-ordinators, trying to calculate the best areas to search).

Aard,<br><br>As I think further about it, my enjoyment of math really stems from 2 years of exceptionally talented and concientious teaching. That teacher truly helped me to learn how to think and reason logically & methodically. I suppose diligent teaching may often not show the full extent of the benefits until long after the course of study has ended. Hence the need for the diligence in teaching.<br><br>John

Ooh! A fellow math geek. I'm in heaven ;-)<br><br>Here's a draft of the scenario I plan to present to the division, FYI:<br><br>Scenario: A 6-year old boy, Jay Walker, has been reported missing by his family from a campsite. He was last seen 6 hours ago playing near the campsite. Temperature is currently a few degrees above freezing. Expected to reach 0 degrees Celsius (32 degrees Fahrenheit) around midnight tonight, temperature will continue to fall throughout the day tomorrow. Snow starting early tomorrow morning, expected to continue for the next three days.<br><br>So far, there have been four reported sightings of a boy matching Jay's description; unfortunately, they are in widely separated areas. However, we will begin by concentrating our search in these areas. (Subsequent exercises, if this one proves popular, may have fewer initial "clues", as they gain more experience.)<br><br>Assignment 1: Calculate the POA (probability of Jay being in each of the four areas), based on a) terrain (good way to work some map-reading in), and b) speed of walking (probably a simple formula, 3 mph uphill, 5 mph on the flat, 7 mph downhill.<br><br>Assignment 2: You have 4 experienced searchers and about 100 untrained volunteers. Develop a search strategy. Be prepared to explain to Jay's parents why you chose that strategy. (Actually, for the first exercise, I think maybe I'll propose two or more different strategies and ask them to decide which ones have the best chance of locating Jay.)<br><br>I figure if I split the cadets up into groups of 4 or 5 and treat each group as though they were co-ordinating the search efforts, they should soon get into the spirit of the thing. Needs a little more work to flesh out the details, but what do you think so far?

Aard,<br><br>Alas, I think you honor me undeservedly: I fear I have more the interest than the aptitude. Were it otherwise, I would probably be eking out an honest living as an engineer.<br><br>But in any case, I think you have laid out a good scenerio. I'm anxious to see how you work it out.<br><br>John

There's no such thing as making an honest living as an engineer ;-)<br><br>I'm not allowed to call myself an engineer, you see - the Alberta Professional Engineers union won't allow anyone to use the word "engineer" in their title unless they are a P.Eng. I did once look into becoming a P.Eng. but if you don't have an actual Engineering degree - a Master's in mathematics doesn't cut it, apparently - you have to write more than 20 exams, at over $100 a pop, in order to "challenge" the qualification. A bit much, to let me use a word that's been in the dictionary at least since Shakespeare's day (and that they swiped from the army, anyway :-)<br><br>But I digress. I'm going to work more on the details this weekend and spring it on our cadets a week from Tuesday. (I won't tell them anything about math - I'll bill it as "Introductory Search and Rescue Techniques". With any luck, by the time they figure out it's math, they'll be having too much fun to care ;-)

aardwolf,<br><br>I like the scenario you are working up. My one comment concerns the Speed of Walking estimates you are going to use. For a 6 year old child in a forested area these estimates of speed seem too high to me. You may not actually care because this is a simulation, but I think estimates for even downhill in a forest would not exceed 3 MPH for a child or even an adult if this is a NW forest with lots of underbrush etc.<br><br>I usually do not calculate my speed when walking in a forest, but I do not think I could do 4MPH when I was younger and far less fat <br><br>I will be interested to hear how the cadets do on this. I am glad you found the secret info on the BC SAR site to explain some of the information in their cheat sheets.<br><br>

Schwert;<br><br>Good point. I was intending to go back to the website and get more data on how fast children are likely to travel - I believe they have compiled some pretty detailed statistics covering the speed of different categories of people in different types of terrain. From the point of view of the simulation, you're right of course, mathematically it doesn't matter what numbers I choose (I could have the kids doing 100 mph on foot and still make the numbers come out right) but since that's the case, I might as well choose values that are close to reality.<br><br>Another number that I will have to consider will be the speed of the search team in covering the ground - I believe the paper I found estimated 3.5 mph for that, I'll have to check and see if they qualify that for different types of terrain.<br><br>Once I have the scenario compiled, I'll post it here - anyone who wants to try running this as a group exercise with Scouts or other youth groups is more than welcome to steal any of my ideas, just in case anyone was wondering. :-)<br><br>Of course, I'll definitely let you all know how it goes over with the cadets.

Aard,<br><br>Always happy to help when I can. I wondered when I first saw your request if you had already hit that site, but when I checked the one that you posted it appeared to be different enough to post the reference. <br><br>Good thinking about adding the other reference words to the search. I found a couple of those sites about 2 months back and had a good time reading through it. <br><br>My thought were kicked into action after looking at postings that referenced family geared "what if, action plans scenarios".<br><br>Regards,<br>Comanche7

we have found that on the average 1-2 mph is a good travel rate in forested areas.<br><br>This value will also keep your areas small enough to work on the problem.<br><br>and...with 4 to 5 trained searchers and 100 untrained you will be able to do some realistic POD calculations in grid search patterns.<br><br>Thanks<br>Ted Fisher<br>Vermilion County Search and Rescue

I also ran across this web site several months ago that has some intresting info and links about the bayesian formulas used in Search and Rescue. It may or may not help your need.<br><br>http://sarbayes.org/<br><br>Thanks<br>Ted Fisher<br>Vermilion County Search and Rescue

Ted: Thanks very much for your input. I think I'll use 1 mph for uphill, 3 mph for downhill, and see what sort of calculations I can come up with. <br><br>Thanks also for the site you posted. It took me a while to reach it - I kept getting error messages - but I have it up now and I'll take a closer look at what it has to offer.<br><br>Again, thanks for the feedback.

Wow - that site even has a bibliography. I'll be able to buy books on the subject. Kewl!

Once again, thanks to all who assisted me in this quest. I will be presenting my first lesson on Search & Rescue techniques to our cadets on Tuesday. It's based on several books I purchased online from www.nasar.org, including William Syrotuck's "Mathematics of Search and Rescue".

Fwiw, this is the scenario I intend to present to the cadets:
==========================
Scenario:

Randy Walker, an 8-year old boy, has gone missing from the Hummingbird Lake Campground. (I will provide a rough map) He was last seen by his family shortly after breakfast, about 10:00 a.m. When last seen, Randy was wearing blue & white running shoes, blue jeans, a red flannel shirt, a beige jacket, and a red ball cap.

According to interviews with Randy’s family, he has no wilderness survival training. Like most children these days, he has been told never to talk to strangers; as a result, it must be assumed that he may not respond to searchers who are looking for him, and may even hide from them.

It is now 4:00 p.m. Local sunset will be at 8:17 p.m.

There is a paved road running North-South past the campground. Hummingbird Lake is approximately 1.5 miles to the West of the campground; the eastern shore of Hummingbird Lake also runs North-South. The road is marked on the map with a solid line; the lake is marked as the shaded area.

There are two footpaths leaving the campground. One of these runs East from the campground; the other runs South. There is a third footpath which runs southeast from the shore of Hummingbird Lake, across the paved road, and joins up with the North-South footpath approximately three miles south of the campground. The footpaths are marked on the map with a dotted line.

The terrain in the area is mostly flat, consisting of fairly thick woods.

You are the Incident Command Team Leaders. You have approximately 100 volunteer searchers from the campground, camp staff, and citizens of the Town of Hummingbird Lake, 5 miles to the North. These include four members of the camp staff who are experienced trail runners, and a dog and handler from the Hummingbird Lake RCMP Detachment canine unit.

Your task is to develop a plan of action. As it is getting late in the day, time is of the essence – if the search does not start soon, we will be unable to start searching until tomorrow morning. You have 45 minutes to decide which areas will be searched first, what types of search you will conduct, etc.
===============

Hopefully, the cadets will have fun working in groups on this problem. I'm very interested to see what they come up with.

Anyone who wants more information on this, please feel free to e me @yahoo.com (first name aardwolfe).

Again, thanks.

aardwolfe,


I find this interesting, please keep us posted on how things turn out.

Can the cadets get more info if they ask for it specifically? There are a couple of details I´d try to get from the family if I had to plan the search (e. g. size, weight, favorite playgrounds). How do you give the info (sheet, briefing, role game)?

M_a_x; If it goes well and they want to learn more, I'll get into things like briefing sheets, interviewing the family, etc. I know people who are involved in CASARA (the closest Canadian equivalent to CAP) and I'm sure at least one of them will be happy to come out as a guest speaker - or maybe we could even visit their offices at the airport.

But for now, since it's supposed to be a fun evening, I didn't want to fall into the trap of doing 5 nights of boring theory and one practical exercise. I basically have them for about an hour; I want them to leave with a feeling of "That was <img src="images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />; I could do this for real if I had to" rather than "That was really <img src="images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> (or worse, boring); I'm glad I don't have to do it in real life."

Comanche: I'll be more than happy to post progress reports as we go along. <img src="images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I should have mentioned that I have other material for the cadets - I just posted the bare scenario. I also have a hand-drawn map (very crude, just shows the campsite, road, trails, and lake - 6 mile x 6 mile, centred on the campground); two weather reports (one predicting fairly mild weather for the next two days, the other predicting snow and freezing temperatures) plus a couple of pages on basic terminology and types of searches.

The idea behind the two different weather forecasts: I'll give them the "mild weather" forecast and get them to come up with a plan of action. If time permits, I'll then give them the "harsh weather" forecast and get them to think about what changes, if any, this would force them to make to their plan.

aardwolfe, it´s good that you make an exercise of this. But your scenario seems pretty vague to me. To my experience kids discover that they want certain info for their decisions. When you have an idea where they should find the boy (after all it´s your scenario), you could point them to that direction when they ask. That´s considerably easier for kids than making their own assumptions. If you just make up something when you´re asked, the info might be inconsistent. This could make it more difficult than you intended.

Well, I guess the point of this exercise isn't so much to actually "find" the lost child, but rather to simulate a realistic SAR scenario. I could make up a location for the child (e.g. he's 1.7 miles northeast of the campsite) but what would that prove? S&R is statistical in nature, so there isn't really a "right" answer, only some that are better than others. If they come up with a realistic plan that happens to miss the "book" solution, is that really a valuable learning experience?

Right now, this is a way to teach the basic theory without "teaching" or making it an extension of their normal school day. My intent is to give more complex scenarios and introduce some more tools. Perhaps we'll make it an extension of the current scenario: e.g. "After searching three of the four grids around the camp, searchers found a child's footprints in a patch of mud 1.7 miles NE of the PLS; he appeared to be heading east or southeast at the time." Bear in mind, I have no S&R training, so I'm pretty much reading the books and making the training plan up as I go along.

Probably in the spring or early summer, we'll go out to a camping lodge that we use for our Wilderness Survival training and perform a real S&R exercise "in the wild". (There's a fairly large wooded area, about a mile by a mile and a half, bounded by a fence on three sides and a clearly defined cut-line on the fourth, so there's almost no chance of it turning into a real S&R :-)

aardwolfe, I agree in most points with you. What I had in mind wasn´t giving a really detailed complex scenario to the cadets (maybe I didn´t make this too clear). In order to make a scenario realistic, it helps to have a plausible story for the lost child (e.g. just wandered around a lost orientation vs. tried to find that lake). You could use that story to tailor the scenario to your needs (and preempt unwanted questions).

Max: I don't believe in unwanted questions. Questions are good <img src="images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Actually, as simple as the scenario seemed to me, it was still almost too complicated. I split the cadets up into teams of two and handed each team a copy of the scenario. (It didn't help that my car battery died and I had to get a jumpstart and arrived twenty minutes late.) Basically I wanted them to ask questions - one pair asked was it his real family or was it foster or step-parents? They were wondering whether it was just a missing kid, or a possible abduction. That was a very good question.

I figure if they ask a lot of questions it means they're interested.

It's pretty late right now, I have to go to bed. But I'll post a summary in a couple of days.

Thanks very much for the feedback. We'll be doing more along these lines in the future - nice to know I have friends here I can ask for advice <img src="images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Actually your scenario is very realistic as compared to the searches I have been on(over 200). Many times we have little or no information or conflicting stories at best. I have had state of the art maps available down to no maps available to us.

Realistically investigation and questioning starts at callout and does not finish untill call off or a find. One search I recall we had over 100 possible scenarios to contend with.

Another type of search that may be of interest to you is the evidence search, where we layout a rectagular grid on the ground, we then search each grid square for evidence and note its location by using x y coordinates or polar coordinates. We have used this type of search at two plane crashes where parts of the aircraft are cataloged and then later reconstructed in another location for investigation.

In any event, the possibilities for using search and rescue in education is enormous, and I commend you for making education interesting for your students.

Ted Fisher
VCSAR Coordinator

I would be interested in what types of solutions your students came up with if you would be so kind as to post it or email me

tedf@vercomis.org

Thanks

Ted Fisher
VCSAR Coordinator

Well, it was interesting. The results weren't what I expected (what ever is?:)) - in some ways I was disappointed and in others pleasantly surprised.

We had 8 members show up (that's close to our normal turnout, only one member couldn't make it), ranging in age from 11 to 18, with one adult member.

I split them up into four groups of two: the two youngest (both boys); two girls who were classmates and close friends; one boy and one girl who were also classmates (the boy is a Ham Radio operator and has some experience of SAR exercises; the girl is our most experienced cadet); and the youngest girl was paired up with the adult member. I'll denote them, respectively, as BB, GG, BG, and AC (for Adult/Child).

I then handed them the written scenario, the hand-drawn map, and a couple of cheat sheets on how to perform a ground-based search.

In summary, none of them got into the math at all. They seemed to have a good time, although the youngest one said it was "boring". (He didn't act bored, and I suspect he really meant "I didn't come here to have to think".)

Only two groups (AC & BG) came up with anything like a plan of action. The AC group got fixated on the fact that there were 36 grid squares on the map, so they split the searchers up and assigned 5 searchers to each of the central grids; no consideration of how 5 people are going to search a square mile of boreal forest.

The BG group also had a plan, of sorts. They were going to keep 1/2 of the searchers in reserve and send the other half out to search. The reasoning behind this was that, after 12 hours, the searchers would be too exhausted to continue, so they would want to rotate them. I didn't think this was a good idea, and stated so as a fact. (I should have suggested it, rather than stating it, of course.) The boy in particular seemed obsessed with keeping something in reserve, as if it was a military operation. It made more sense to me, at least at the beginning of a search when there's a strong possibility of finding the subject alive, to have 100 searchers out for 12 hours and then have everyone stand down for 12 hours, than to have 50 searchers out there for 24 hours. (Obviously, having your searchers sitting around doing nothing for 12 hours at a stretch isn't optimal; I'm just pointing out that it would be better to have a strong effort at the beginning than to have a weaker effort that runs twice as long.)

But they had some good questions. The youngest team asked for a "strobe light"; when questioned, it turned out they really meant a spot light, that could be shone straight up in the hope of providing a signal to the lost boy. This is known as "passive searching" and I hadn't even mentioned it in the notes. So I was pleased they thought of it.

Two groups thought of cordoning off the main highway North and South, but only one of them also thought of cordoning off the pathways as well.

All of the groups either asked for additional resources, or simply assumed that the other resources were available. The BG group had a helicopter "on standby"; when asked why the helicopter wasn't being used in the search, the boy explained that a helicopter wouldn't be able to see anything from the air, and would only be used to evacuate the subject once the ground searchers had located him. I think his experience with ground-based SAR (his father is a trained SAR volunteer) has left him with a bias against other types of searches. I plan to ask a friend of mine, who is active in CASARA (Canadian Air Search And Rescue Assn) to come in and be a guest lecturer some night. Or if possible, we will make it a site visit to the airport.

They all expressed interest in actually going out and doing a search-and-rescue exercise in the field, so that's something I'm going to be looking at this summer, or possibly late spring.

Next step, I think, will be to come up with my own plan for the same scenario and present it, then let them try to pick holes in my plan. At least now, I think, they have an understanding of why there's more to SAR than simply grabbing a couple of hundred volunteers and sending them out into the woods. Although they didn't seem too keen on "doing the math", I think it's an essential component, so I'll probably come up with a couple of sample problems. (Yes, we have computer programs that do the calculations for you now, but I think you still need to understand the basic principles behind it in order to make an informed decision.)

All in all, it seemed like a success, though not a resounding one. Otoh, 5 of the 8 are teenagers, and you never know with teens - they could be having the time of their lives, but they're much too cool to give any sign of it <img src="images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Anyway, I'm having fun with it, and learning lots of cool stuff - and that's what counts, right? <img src="images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I would have to lean more to plesantly surprised, due to some creativity in the action plans. Here are my 2 cents worth.

"None of them got into the math at all"
Many searches are conducted without doing any planning or math at the onset they then find themselves after several operational periods researching areas at random because they had no method of tracking where they search and how much effort was deployed into those areas. This is when the search goes to $*&^, people start blaming each other and the operation disitigrates rapidly. Not only does the math assist SAR planning who, where and what to deploy, but it also illustrates to others what and why things were done. You may need it in court.

"no consideration of how 5 people are going to search a square mile"
This is another very common action, when your incident commander(IC) or your planners do not understand the capabilities and limitations of your teams.

"searchers in reserve"
Another topic of heated debate, I have tried this both ways and I can assure you that when the family members and the news media observes your seachers standing down for 12 hours, they will hang you out to dry. You must deploy your teams in such a way that a continued search effort is on going. Our teams are rotated in such a way that we search around the clock 24/7.

"In The Spot Light"

Excellant idea we as searchers often forget passive search techniques when in fact they do work and at a remarkably high degree in some cases.

"Confinement"
Excellant as well. I don't know how many searches could have been shortened if the initial responders would have confined the area so the search area did not grow.

"Helicopter and air support"
Another hot topic for debate, there are many variables involved with air support, the ability of the air crew, the weather, the terrain, the subject, the scenario, and on and on.
In my opinion if you have them use them but do not every bank on them totally.

"IN CONCLUSION"
It may be a difficult task to get your participants to focus on the math, because its a lot more fun to go in the field to find the subject than it is to crunch numbers.

It brings back memories of a search we had for a run-a-way where the subject was located 1500 miles away and we never deployed a search team to the field. Through investigation and SAR math and planning the subject was found.

Keep up the good work. you may want to join a team yourself!

Your concluding example reminds me of a search over twenty years ago, when we (Pima County SAR) were just beginning to integrate math into our operations, especially POD. We had a search for a missing guy, and we were rolling along, confining the search area, using both ground teams and air searches, and working up our probabilities on a state of the art calculator. After about five hours, we looked at the probabilities, and our coverage, and were concluding that our subject was not within the area. This was confirmed right on cue as a call came from a sheriff's investigator that the subject had been located at home. We always included background investigations on any search that went beyond five minutes.

I am surprised that there is controversy over the use of air resources. Nothing is perfect, not even well trained ground troops. To me one of the great pleasures of SAR operations was the way we cooperated with both state and AF choppers, often dramatically increasing our efficiency and/or coverage, with frequent beneficial effects for the victim. It is a shame that people get focused on any one technique as "the" way to save those in need. I love helos and planes, but it didn't keep me from pounding ground to get to the victim.

Maybe it has to with the size and diversity of the group, but we never had to "ration" our resources on an initial response; in fact, we often drew positive responses because it was our policy to go out immediately in whatever conditions were prevailing. If the search continued, we usually had follow on folks who were able to keep the effort going.

>>>when the family members and the news media observes your seachers standing down for 12 hours, they will hang you out to dry.

I can certainly sympathize with that. Otoh, it's a shame that we are sometimes forced to accept a non-optimal solution (read: more likely to get the searchee killed) because of uninformed family or media pressure.

Not having done this for real, I'm hesitant to play armchair quarterback. But in the exercise scenario, I still think I'd put all my searchers out there for the first 7 hours or so (at least enough to search the 1 mile circle closest to the Position Last Seen) and hope that, if we came up empty, we'd be getting reinforcements the next day, rather than cut my chances of an early success in half. But, as I say, I've never been in the position of having to justify my decisions to an anxious parent.

I agree, I'd very much like to impress on them the importance of "doing the math" and coming up with a real plan, rather than just going out and tromping through the woods.

We're going to give it a rest for a couple of weeks - variety being the spice of life and all - and go back to first aid training tomorrow. A week from tomorrow I have my first ARES meeting (Amateur Radio Emergency Service) so you may see me out there on a SAR mission yet. :-)

The controversy of air support may be just a regional issue, on one search we used helicopter with FLIR with less than desirable results. The target being a bright red canoe along a river in daylight conditions. Same search at night with dense fog, air crew had difficulty locating base camp using the FLIR (may have been the fog). We also were involved in a research study trying to develop POD values for different aircraft, this to had undesirable results. On the other hand we have worked with CAP air crews in other areas and they turned out to be a valuable resource. In any event people in our area have a mind set that aircraft and K9's are a solve all resource.

Thanks
Ted Fisher
VCSAR Coordinator

In all reality we start with local resources first and begin an organized call in of other area teams to arrive when our teams are standing down.

The most difficult thing about Search and Rescue is calling off the search when the Math tells us its time.

Ted Fisher
VCSAR Coordinator.

My experience in this area is somewhat dated, about twenty years ago for really extensive work. We (Southern Arizona Rescue Association and Pima County) did a controlled study evaluating the POD for various subjects in a desert environment. Our main finding was that passive subjects, even plainly exposed in the open, were far less likely to be seen than actively signaling subjects. Even in best case scenarios, there was an uncomfortably high likelihood that the victim could be missed. Basically, we never downgraded an area until it had been air and ground searched. In the end, so much depends on the vigilance and concentration of searchers, both aerial and ground.

I would argue that there is no solve all resource and circumstances always change. I recall a search for a young boy (about nine). About midnight, I learned that the kid had been in a school class to which I had given an outdoors survival presentation about a month earlier. Talk about personalizing the operation!

Anyway, we found our lad early the next morning in an area quite capably searched the evening before. He had listened to me - when night came, he found a small rock shelter and was sleeping away when the team came through. He had woken up when the next effort came through. I always thought dawn after the first night was the "Golden Time." Visibility returns, everyone starts stirring, and people find one another.

Implications for seach strategy - immediately deploy teams, and go all night, or at least get into the search area and take a quick nap. Plan for new crews to hit the field right at first light and really hammer hard. This is also a really good time for air operations. If 10 AM comes and goes, you may have an epic on your hands.

Media pressure is a funny thing. On one search, our coordinator carefully explained that he was calling us out only "to fly the flag" because skilled Border Patrol trackers had traced our subject, a rather spacey elderly gentleman, to the road where he had gotten in a car. The "real" search was focusing on downtown.

Guess what? We found our guy about two hundred yards from the road after about twenty minutes.

I think the main way to avoid media and family criticism is to start quickly, keep going, and be receptive to new strategies and techniques. We knew we were in the terminal phases of an epic when we started listening to the clairvoyants. But we did, because, what the hell, we had tried everything else.

I agree 100%