Horses Versus Helicopters

Now that helicopters are readily available for travel in northern bush areas, seeing a geologist out mapping on horseback seems about as likely as a summer day without mosquitos. Who, in this modern era, would consider slogging along through the valley bottoms on a smelly old horse when they can flit from outcrop to outcrop by helicopter and then go back to the nearest lodge at night for supper and a warm bath?

With these thoughts it comes as a surprise to me to learn that horses are now being used on geologic mapping projects in the north. The biggest advantage comes from using horses in bad-weather areas where helicopter parties can be kept grounded days on end. Not only is the work stopped by weather, expensive standby costs of the helicopter still must be paid.

Alaska's Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (DGGS) in its June 1980 edition of Mines and Geology Bulletin gives some of the pros and cons of using horses in the field. Some are serious comments and some might not be. For example, it is stated that no geologist ever got airsick from riding a horse, nor are there reports of poor visibility causing horse crashes. Lack of engine noise and necessity to meet helicopter pickup schedules are cited as refreshing and conducive to good geologic mapping. Being closer to his work, the horse-borne geologist is less likely to miss significant but inconspicuous geologic variations than the one being rotored swiftly overhead. Horses usually give advance warning of nearby bears and therefore are a comfort to have around.

Even as they stand rubbing their saddle-sores, geologists say they like equestrian geology. They are willing to admit that the work sometimes proceeds faster by helicopter, but argue that some field operations are more efficient and more economical using horses, or combinations of horses and helicopters. I wonder how big a part nostalgia plays in the discussion.