The approach when educating kids is a bit different, but the message is the same: once a person finds themselves in a bad situation, the preference is to stay put and ask for help, if possible.
> the above steps are also the most logical expansion routes FOR a search zone.
It doesn't really work like that. Although there are books on the subject (Lost Person Behavior) and some other efforts to figure out behavior statistically, and local SAR managers will have some hunches based on experience, nobody can entirely get into the head of a missing person and judge with any certainty whether one direction or another is better during a search.
Search managers are well aware that "follow water downhill" is common advice going back to the boy scouts, but when a missing person inevitably encounters some obstacle along the way, they deviate from that plan. The search area gets big really quickly, and SAR teams are a limited resource. It's way better to respond to coordinates from a phone call or a PLB than it is to spend days with a lot of boots on the ground.
> nobody can entirely get into the head of a missing person and judge with any certainty whether one direction or another is better during a search.
Let's say a group gets separated during a hike, and Bob goes missing. No one noticed for a little while. Bob doesn't have a map but is fairly capable in the outdoors.
Your group sends a couple people back to the last place he was seen. It's a nice straightforward search area. Bob isn't there. Now we need to widen the search area.
Bob might have followed a steam - and in the couple of hours it took to get back to where he was last seen, he may have gone a couple miles.
Or he might have tried to get to a high point to look around. The nearest likely hill is a mile away, but there's another option in the other direction.
Or maybe Bob retraced his steps and is headed back on the trail you all came in on together.
All of a sudden your search area is 15 square miles, and with each potential decision with every passing hour, it gets wider.
You could put complete trust in his abilities and just wait for him to self rescue, but what if he gets hurt? What if he doesn't show up in a couple days?
Wouldn't it have been great if Bob had hugged a tree?
> the above steps are also the most logical expansion routes FOR a search zone.
It doesn't really work like that. Although there are books on the subject (Lost Person Behavior) and some other efforts to figure out behavior statistically, and local SAR managers will have some hunches based on experience, nobody can entirely get into the head of a missing person and judge with any certainty whether one direction or another is better during a search.
Search managers are well aware that "follow water downhill" is common advice going back to the boy scouts, but when a missing person inevitably encounters some obstacle along the way, they deviate from that plan. The search area gets big really quickly, and SAR teams are a limited resource. It's way better to respond to coordinates from a phone call or a PLB than it is to spend days with a lot of boots on the ground.