Ehhhh.

SAR varies a lot depending on the team, agency, and coordinator. I think it's reasonable to remind people that these are largely volunteer efforts, but it's also reasonable to call out and criticize problems with SAR when they arise. These can be due to poor training, insufficient funding, an inexperienced or unenthusiastic coordinator, or a corrupt sheriff's office. (They exist.)

It's been a while since I last read through Tom's stuff, but as I recall, his main gripe was with the Inyo County Sheriff's Office (and, in the Ewasko case, NPS).

And he's right: because SAR operations, in the US, usually fall under the management of law enforcement agencies, you get as side effects the usual problems associated with law enforcement -- poor information management, big egos, paranoia, credit-seeking, and an emphasis on security over getting the job done, among other problems. This is especially problematic on big incidents where multiple agencies are involved.

CalOES exists in part to get all the kids to play along in the same sandbox, but that sometimes doesn't happen until the operation gets enough attention for a CalOES bigwig to appear in person, and then suddenly the various sheriffs involved start acting like adults.

(Purely for background: I've been in SAR for several years, currently on a hiatus but was extremely active and responded to numerous incidents across the state. I was trained and certified in incident management, was a team leader, and an instructor for several different skillsets. I've butted heads with sheriffs a couple times and had my wrists slapped a time or two. Sometimes they were in the right, sometimes I was.)

I don't disagree with your points. Sometimes there are personality issues (we're all a little quirky), sometimes there are structural/institutional issues. The point I raise is pretty focused on the author's harsh parting words and how they are generalized enough to affect those who aren't the individual(s) in question.

As someone from the alps where search operations are not rare this makes me wonder. Over here the teams that do the search are seperate entities specifically trained for the (alpine) terrain they operate in.

If they need a specific tool or capability only the police or the firefighters have, they ask them for help. That being said those alpine units are closer to an ambulance than to law enforcement, because that makes more sense

That sounds like the right way to do it. This is another casualty of the for-profit medical industry in the US; SAR is one of few free medical-related services available and we are quite firm that it stay that way (exclusions apply; don't visit New Hampshire!).

We do have an independent Mountain Rescue Association here that can certify teams for specialized technical rescues, and those teams are generally among the best in the country. Maybe not skilled to alpine mountaineering standards, but they can search for and retrieve people from extremely challenging terrain at 14,000 ft.

There is also a national search and rescue organization (NASAR), but they are a joke, speaking candidly. They have almost no presence in the west and we can't figure out what they're actually doing with the membership dues from the few suckers that decide to join in exchange for a sticker. They offer some certifications in some regions, but they're optional and many teams just develop their own programs.

But, nobody gets to deploy until a sheriff says-so, teams usually need a sworn (law enforcement) member escort on any operation, they are funded by their local sheriff's office (and whatever grants or community donations they can get), and the sheriff can decide when it's time to go home. That makes SAR across the US a patchwork quilt of solid teams and ragtag posses, with a broad variety of attitudes and standards.

There is a mutual aid system that allows counties to develop agreements (MOA/MOU) to render aid if requested, and is often used to dispatch higher-qualified resources to difficult operations in poorer counties.

But it's still, always, a law enforcement operation.

Thanks for sharing this. I've read this account quite a few times now and I've always wondered if his attitude towards the SAR teams was completely justified. I don't have any personal experience, but I read about rescue efforts by local SAR teams in the local news almost weekly. The risks and danger these volunteers expose themselves to in order to save others are incredible. And often they deal with people who are wholly unprepared and end up in situations requiring rescue that could have been easily avoided. That must be very frustrating sometimes. Thank you for your work!

>> I have personally been on a number of very challenging searches and rescues in the vicinity of this incident - some of the toughest things I've faced in my life.

Thanks for sharing your perspective. Can you tell us what made your searches so challenging. I suspect the team is well prepared, has adequate resources, and knowledge of the area. Was it mostly the unbearable heat and conditions?

The team is often very well prepared, very knowledgeable, and we mostly have the resources needed. That is what makes the mission possible.

Conditions are often challenging (weather, terrain (ranging from Mt. Whitney to Death Valley), and carrying 'rescue' loads, which are much more cumbersome than a recreational load) -- but that is sometimes the fun part of the work.

There are also very long days sometimes. For instance, helicopter resources are not always guaranteed due to availability from other agencies, limited weather windows, and caps on pilot flight hours. You might get flown-in and dropped miles in the back-country in challenging terrain and have to hike out with heavy gear and a litter after an extensive, physical mission - but that is sometimes a part of the adventure.

The biggest challenge is often the mental/emotional side of things - seeing how the person, their friends and family are affected; thinking that you could have done something differently; or wondering how you've gotten so lucky yourself. There have been some heart-breakers in my short time, for sure.

I think at the end of the day, it's very understandable that Inyo County would be of the mind that they may not know every blow by blow detail but it's a case that's basically solved and they don't want to get dragged into a costly resurfacing of some minor point.

I thought he was clear he was taking about the sheriff's office rather than the search and rescue people.

Even then it was clear a bit of a grudge but an understandable one, if that final multi day grueling trip could have been avoided if they'd just been told about the children's remains beforehand. And it's extra frustrating that he was never told for sure where they were found so, after all that effort, he can't know what really happened to them.

This is the first time I've read the story.

I completely understand it how you view this piece as you are out there putting your life at risk. However, for me it came across as nothing more as some minor annoyances that seemed justified from his point of view in the grand scheme of things. We have to remember, he was also out there putting his life at risk too.

In fact, I felt he gave the search and rescue a lot of praise and as a reader I left with a very positive view of the Search and Rescue effort and the people involved, and his annoyances seemed to be with the sharing of information in the years after.

I have met, played with, and admire several Inyo County SAR members, and have only had iffy encounters with the Inyo Sheriffs so far, so in a way I aligned with what the author said. Luckily this man's blog post has nothing to do with you or anything that happened during your time, everyone is entitled to their unique/weird experiences and opinions, and you don't need to defend anyone.

The author sometimes seems a bit unaware that despite being aligned with Riverside Mountain RU, he's not really credentialed to be mixing and gaining access to the ear or information of all the other involved agencies. After he was essentially the source of a leak (the bank card) and had moved evidence, folks might have been justifiably hesitant to enlist him and/or engage him fully. Plus he accomplished something they weren't able to. Annoying! It's a premise for a great story that he inserted himself in this puzzle, and he got to see a whole heck of a lot of puzzle pieces, but does he deserve to place the last few pieces? And might he be a little bit bitter that he wasn't "better recognized" for his work? People are just people. Once we find them rotting in the desert we maybe realize that none of the little stuff matters.

I thank you endlessly for your service.