If there was such a lack of options for a forced landing should they even have been flying over the area?
I dont think it is the lack.
When you have done PFLs how often have you decided at 500 feet you arent quite so keen on what you saw from 2,000 feet?
How often have you driven past a field that you have done PFLs over and thought I am quite pleased I never actually had to land in that field?
I am not saying it doesnt work a lot of the time. I am questioning how easy it is to be certain enough that the field is the best option at 2,000 feet; at 1,000 feet there arent many alternatives in a conventional aircraft, with a chute there is another alternative.