SAR question

[usafcap1]

Why don't states contact CAP for mission much? At least Washington state doesn't much.


I don't know maybe its me.

[a2capt]

I'm really not trying to just post a snarky answer  ....

But .. as a retentions officer .. you might want to do a little more research about the organization, and how it's three missions work. Someone might ask you. The more you can give in an answer right then, the better it looks.

CAP is not a first responder at all. In most states search and rescue falls to the county sheriff. In many states they end up calling in CAP for it. But some don't. Washington is one of those. Not exactly sure as to why, or the politics involved because I'm not part of WAWG, and the 'stories' I've heard are probably not with merit.. perhaps your Group or Wing ES/Operations people can fill you in.

Maybe it's changeable, maybe it's not.  I will say that California is pretty active in most counties, and gets the call, along with the county sheriff, which can at any time say "go home, we'll take it from here", or "It's yours, call us when you find something".

[bosshawk]

There are likely other people on CT who can address your question in more detail, but I do know that four or five years ago, I was in WA for a conference and was told that Washington state would call on just about anybody before they even considered CAP.  Apparently some real bad blood that went back a long time.  Hopefully, things might change, but from your comments it may not be the case.

Two or three years ago, I did help train some of your CD people on the ways that CAWG ran such operations.  Apparently, they went back to WAWG and had good success working with the DEA and the state police.

[Garibaldi]

We had a similar issue in my old unit. The DEM guy told us straight out that he would not use cadets in any capacity because he didn't want the liability and he thought our methods and training were a bad joke. Someone way back put a bad taste in his mouth about CAP and it's something we worked hard to overcome. Apparently not hard enough.

[FDLT19]

While I can not speak as a current member, I am just getting my feet wet again after a hiatus, I can give a perspective from a First Responder and how things were when I was "in the fray back in the day".

One of the things I have noticed is that, as a First Responder Organization (FRO), those I work with have little to no knowledge of what CAP even is, if they do its is generally because they have kids who are cadets, and equate the organization to a pudo ROTC program, that is for kids. 

Those who have limited understanding of the organization and have an idea that we do more than just "play army" have been put off from the organization in the past by members who what to "Command and Control" rather than function under the umbrella with the rest of us.  This is not to say that all of our personnel are like this, but, we all know at least one member who goes a little overboard on missions, and will inject them selves in the command structure of the ICS mission, not just the CAP mission.

In so far as political action and state lobbing, when I was a cadet i noticed that the government relations officer was generally an older member, who the wing needed to place.  While some of these officers were politically savvy, and did right by the organization helping push legislation that fostered mission participation in the state, some simply existed in the positions posing for the occasional photo op. 

One of the major problems I see, and not at all the fault of CAP, is the states general misunderstanding of resource utilization and where we fit in.   I would love to see CAP in our Emergency Action Plan (EAP) for the city, and county, as when a disaster occurs the first thing we seem to run out of is personnel that are trained to function in the ICS system.

This is just my opinion, could be completely off the mark.   

[sardak]

Why don't states contact CAP for mission much? At least Washington state doesn't much.

I don't know maybe its me.

See SarDragon's answer to your other question earlier this week: http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=16700.msg301230#msg301230

You have a limited knowledge of CAP, but ask why don't states contact CAP for missions much, as though your experience reflects the national picture. Here are specific answers instead of vague, generalized answers.

Answer 1: start with page 7 of the latest version of the Volunteer, January-March 2013, available from the CAP NHQ website. That is the beginning of an article on CAP's SAR statistics nationwide. There are some bad stats in the article, though, such as "CAP has a hand in up to 85 percent of the searches for missing people in the United States." That isn't even close to being true.

Answer 2: From the AFRCC 2011 Annual Report, four wings had fewer missions than WAWG, and five wings had a number equal to WAWG. That means about 80% of CAP wings had more missions than WAWG. So your perspective on WAWG is somewhat correct, but not your general question. This stat and the Volunteer article show that states do contact CAP for missions.

Answer 3: From the Washington State Department of Transportation Aviation Division:
WSDOT Aviation is tasked by the Legislature with the responsibility of managing all Air Search and Rescue operations within the state as well as coordinating the use of aviation assets for disaster relief efforts. WSDOT accomplishes this mission by closely coordinating with all available resources and agencies, including the Washington State Patrol, Washington Emergency Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Air Force Rescue Coordination Center. We also use volunteer resources from Washington Air Search and Rescue, the Civil Air Patrol and county sheriff's search and rescue programs across the state.

Mike

[manfredvonrichthofen]

The big issue I see, I have seen in two states of the three I have seen CAP in, is no one knows who we are and what we're capable of. INWG has a solid footing in ES, KYWG doesn't, from what I've seen, ARWG doesn't, from what I've seen.

What can be done to improve this is to make your presence known, invite the local paper, and tv news to do an open house for a segment once a week for a month, just five or ten minutes, explain to the crews that you are a positive organization tha tmore people need to see. Then have LEO come out on your ES night, run through a scenario, then they have seen you, the people have seen you with LEO, and you get a positive image. Just talk to your group and wing about it first.

[LGM30GMCC]

This is one of the areas that CAP gets into trouble with the popular 'Squadrons are the most important level' or 'Groups and above are only there to support squadrons.' When it comes to Cadet Programs, and to some extent A.E. that attitude is not without some merit (though I still have objections to it). In ES Squadrons do NOT perform missions. Arguably, Wings do not conduct missions either. Civil Air Patrol carries out missions either as corporate missions or on behalf of the USAF.

The purpose of Wings in ES is to develop the relationships with organizations throughout a geographic area and ensure assets are dispersed in such a manner to provide a reasonable response time. Squadrons role is to provide, train, and equip resources to carry out the missions within the geographic operating areas. This basic misunderstanding can be frustrating both for the squadrons and the outside organizations. A gung-ho squadron person really can't speak for CAP's capabilities to support missions in an area unless backed up by a wing. You may be awesome, but if the Wing doesn't want to pursue the mission, or can support the mission, you will lose credibility or simply can't do anything.

This is also complicated by wings that 'over sell' themselves. They may have a great plan, or great ideas, but without ensuring the personnel at the squadron level are able/willing to back it up, when the call comes they have to say 'Oops, sorry, we can't provide the support we said we could.' This is especially a problem if it is a somewhat time sensitive mission. In wings with a ratio of pilots-to-airplanes in the 1-2.0 range, especially in geographically large states, you run the risk of not being able to actually launch an aircrew. Ground teams are generally even more poorly manned with many squadrons unable to effectively, on short notice, provide a team larger than maybe 6 people. (Barely above the minimums dictated by our own standards.)

The fact that squadrons, and especially wings, have a hard time playing together, can cause tremendous loss of potential capabilities. Sure on scheduled SAREXs or a SAREVAL we tend to do a little better, but that is not necessarily a reflection of true operational capability. The ICS system is designed to combat this as was the NESCP but there has been considerable resistance to wings/squadrons losing control of 'their' assets.

I think CAP has gotten better about our training standards and evaluation but we need to continue to really enforce it. There is standardized training program out there, I can see adding some additional things to it for local geography, but overall there should be almost zero operational difference between a MTWG ground team or aircrew, a CAWG, or a MEWG crew. The quality should all be at least to the same level, and the operational practices should be nearly identical.

Folks MUST also get away from the 'we're only volunteers' mentality about training/operations. There is a lot of resistance to standardization or evaluation, especially evaluation that calls into question the abilities of someone. 'You should be glad I'm here and make use of me' is the wrong attitude of a professional organization, whether it is paid or unpaid. If we want to be treated like professionals, and play with them, we must do so consistently. The wings that have 'gotten that' tend to have better success in developing the relationships compared to those that continue to fight that mentality. And the only way to convince others is to show true professionalism, and then when it matters be there without complaint, overselling, or attempting to be more important to a mission than we are. Even if we are given the 'crappy tasks' if it's within our mission set we must carry them out to the best of our ability before we start to try to take on bigger ones.

The attitude of a number of members, scattered all over the place, is what gives us our problems. Attitudes and behavior speak far louder than anything we could say to an outside organization or anything we wear.

[kd8gua]

To be honest, I can't recall the last time my wing was called for an actual mission. Had to be maybe 2011 or so? We have the teams, fairly regular training, but never any missions. That's why many of my wing's personnel and assets were so quickly and readily dispatched for Sandy relief.

[Texas Raiders]

Connecticut's CAP resources are put to quite a bit of use. 

Am I wrong in assuming that squadron level ESOs and PAOs can be helpful in spreading the word about CAP and establishing/maintaining relationships with local agencies?  Those tasks are among the listed responsibilities of those two specialties are they not?  In Connecticut (It's a small state, I know.) the first responder community is very small and word gets around very quickly.  They also get on the online forums and talk like us. I know, because I am one of them.  If you start at the local level and make a good impression, the word will get out.  That, paired with the wing's efforts at the state level, should do the trick......one would think.  Education is a big deal.  CAP won't get used if people don't know about us.  On the other hand, we are our own worst enemies and history can be difficult to overcome in some cases.   Capabilities must be demonstrated and maintained in order to foster a reputation of proficiency and competence.  Professional conduct goes a long way too.  How many of you have seen local agencies invited to at least observe your squadron's training exercises?  Just some thoughts. 

[LGM30GMCC]

Local folks can spread word to local agencies, but as I said, that's not setting anything in stone that the local unit could provide support. CAP is tasked from the wing level down, not the squadron level up. Part of that is because by IC standards, the squadron is not a functional unit. A squadron may have resources, but they may not be able to support and the closest support for the local agencies' requests could be hours behind. This can be partly solved with MOUs and the like, but again, requires wing support. A good squadron cannot make up for a poor wing, and a bad group of assets from any mix of squadrons can do serious damage to the whole wing program.

[Eclipse]

What's an "IC Standard"?

By regulation and job definition the local unit and group ESO's are supposed to be making contacts and forming relationships to provide mission support
to their local communities.

It is absolutely >not< the responsibility of wing staff to be working at that level.  Provide support, yes.  Turn the wrench?  No.

Not only >can< a good squadron make up for a "poor wing", whatever that is, it's literally their responsibility to be doing the heavy lifting.

[Texas Raiders]

What's an "IC Standard"?

By regulation and job definition the local unit and group ESO's are supposed to be making contacts and forming relationships to provide mission support
to their local communities.

It is absolutely >not< the responsibility of wing staff to be working at that level.  Provide support, yes.  Turn the wrench?  No.

Not only >can< a good squadron make up for a "poor wing", whatever that is, it's literally their responsibility to be doing the heavy lifting.

+1

There are times in which one must take themselves by the hand.

[LTC Don]

Until CAP drops the 'ground team' nomenclature and adopts NASAR SARTECH II as the minimum acceptable ground ES rating, CAP will never be included in missing person search.  The civilian SAR and LE community doesn't know what CAP Ground Teams are, nor do they care.  They only want to know if you are SARTECH rated. This has been beaten to death here over the years. 

If NHQ can't let go of the 'ground team' rating system, then it's up to the local units to train up and certify their people as SARTECHs at the local level and work it from there by developing those all-important relationships with local SAR teams and Sheriff departments.  THAT's how you get included on SAR missions, and then walk the walk and develop a sound, credible reputation.

Civil Air Patrol most certainly can be a First Responder organization.  There is not one thing that says when a missing person call comes in that the first-in agency can't be CAP, if there is a solid plan and personnel in place.


It shouldn't come as a shock to some, but I'm seeing it has that all those years of chasing ELT's around airports wasn't entirely productive.   

[Eclipse]

Until CAP drops the 'ground team' nomenclature and adopts NASAR SARTECH II as the minimum acceptable ground ES rating, CAP will never be included in missing person search.

This is untrue, or at least a mischaracterization, at least in my wing.

A large portion of my state is rural and CAP is on the "first call list" for missing persons searches.  I am sitting in Wing HQ as I write this watching the
scanner chew through a 300+ page folder of mission documents related to a multi-day missing persons search, and that was the 2nd or third one that year.

This is due to specific contacts and relationships established by local units and groups with support by the Wing CC.

When you consider the fiscal situation in most states, if your Wing is not involved in SAR and DR, it's either because of the failure of those
charged with getting the relationships and established and curated (not all EMA's are equal).

[Walkman]

Until CAP drops the 'ground team' nomenclature and adopts NASAR SARTECH II as the minimum acceptable ground ES rating, CAP will never be included in missing person search...

What is amazing to me is how inconsistant our ES role is across the country. In 2011, MIWG participated in 2 missing persons search, one that used both air & ground assets. When I was in UTWG, there was hardly any GSAR work at all from what I could see and very limited aircrew work. MIWG does a ton in comparison.

With as many assets as we have and our connection to Ma' Blue, there really isn't a logical reason things shouldn't be more equal across the board. Caveats to the size of certain wings, population density, yada yada yada...

[Eclipse]

Its as much a product of the disjointed ES response framework in the entire country as a specific failing of CAP.
In a perfect world, CAP would walk over to the Federal Secretary of SAR/DR and work it out so we get called, but since
this country is full of ((*ahem*)) "individuals", every agency and governmental body wants a say, and a share of the money
in local SAR.

Every Sheriff does it different, and filter with 10,000 personalities on all sides.

The allowance for local units to treat out mission like a menu also severely impacts our ability to respond.  You can't promise you
will come and help if no one in the AOR is willing.

Why we're not higher on the list with the federal agencies remains a mystery to me.  If it's legitimately due to improper training, or improper characterization of the training, fine, but that's rarely, if ever cited by anyone in cases such as Katrina and Sandy, etc.  What's usually cited
is the lack of relationships both locally and nationally.

[Larry Mangum]

There are multiple reasons, as to why CAP does not get used that much in Washington.

The first of these is that the Sherieff of each county in Washington, determines who can perform ground SAR in its county. So in some counties CAP is used and in others it is not.

The second reason, is the Department of Transportation, Avaiation is responsible for AirSar in the state. Without naming names, the state AirSAR Coordinator is well versed in CAP's capabilities, as he is or was a CAP member who has served at the wing and region level in WAshington. With that being said, you must remeber that CAP is a FEDERAL Asset, so all local, county and state resources ahve to be used before CAP is called upon in most cases.There are multiple reasons, as to why CAP does not get used that much in Washington.

The first of these is that the Sheriff of each county in Washington determines who can perform ground SAR in its county. So in some counties CAP is used and in others it is not. That Sheriff also sets the training and equipment requirements for that county. There is not a state wide standard.

The second reason, is the Department of Transportation, Aviation (WSDOTA) is responsible for AirSar in the state. Without naming names, the state AirSAR Coordinator is well versed in CAP's capabilities, as he is or was a CAP member who has served at the wing and region level in Washington. With that being said, you must remember that CAP is a FEDERAL Asset, so all local, county and state resources have to be used before CAP is called upon in most cases. So be the time WSDOTA has utilized its resources, it often has located the downed aircraft.  It can often do that, due to the terrain and how that funnels aircraft traversing the Cascades into a few well known routes.

Finally, CAP has shot it's self in the foot with the state and many counties multiple times. Sometimes it is CAP's fault and sometimes it is the state or local agency not understanding how to either activate CAP or how to properly use CAP.   

[docbiochem33]

To be honest, I can't recall the last time my wing was called for an actual mission. Had to be maybe 2011 or so? We have the teams, fairly regular training, but never any missions. That's why many of my wing's personnel and assets were so quickly and readily dispatched for Sandy relief.

Missions are down significantly since they have turned off the satellites that monitored for ELT's.  With the new technology it is easier to call an airport manager and tell them that there is an ELT in their area and they should look for it.  Other than that, there are few missions Ohio is called for.

I was in Ohio Wing and on a mission once with E.S. Director that was there forever.  It was a cluster that had a prior Chief of Police for an Ohio Agency shaking his head.  All that happened was everyone followed his vehicle in circles.  Instead of sending people out in search areas, the search area was follow him.

I did research and found that for the longest time if missions were called in Ohio you could almost predict who had them when they were looked up online.  I did a search of about 4 years and almost always they were the same people pulling missions.  In one case I found out that they called a unit from the other side of the state of do a mission that was 25 miles away from a unit with ground teams.

Just these issues along with 2 city P.D. Chiefs telling me that they were not impressed with the previous Wing E.S. Officer makes me think that CAP in Ohio is not going to be called often until the bad taste of a few are out of the mouths of those in many counties that matter.  If I can have 3 Chiefs tell me that they were not impressed and would not want to work with someone, then how many others were there?

I did notice that there was a Wing E.S. officer that came in, but he had a long way to go to get things back up to speed.  All the units I knew of that wanted to do E.S. or were big into E.S. have lost a lot of their people and unfortunetly have made Ohio CAP look bad to some agencies.

I do know that there are a lot of people who are trying to turn things around, but they are working to overcome a lot.  I think with time and training, it will all change.

[SarDragon]

Missions are down significantly since they have turned off the satellites that monitored for ELT's.  With the new technology it is easier to call an airport manager and tell them that there is an ELT in their area and they should look for it.  Other than that, there are few missions Ohio is called for.

Not exactly true. Only the capability to monitor 121.5 MHz ELTs was turned off. The satellites can (and do) still monitor 406 MHz ELTs.

[Larry Mangum]

Until CAP drops the 'ground team' nomenclature and adopts NASAR SARTECH II as the minimum acceptable ground ES rating, CAP will never be included in missing person search.  The civilian SAR and LE community doesn't know what CAP Ground Teams are, nor do they care.  They only want to know if you are SARTECH rated. This has been beaten to death here over the years. 

If NHQ can't let go of the 'ground team' rating system, then it's up to the local units to train up and certify their people as SARTECHs at the local level and work it from there by developing those all-important relationships with local SAR teams and Sheriff departments.  THAT's how you get included on SAR missions, and then walk the walk and develop a sound, credible reputation.

Civil Air Patrol most certainly can be a First Responder organization.  There is not one thing that says when a missing person call comes in that the first-in agency can't be CAP, if there is a solid plan and personnel in place.


It shouldn't come as a shock to some, but I'm seeing it has that all those years of chasing ELT's around airports wasn't entirely productive.   

NASAR is not necessarliy the answer either.  First of all, almost all GTM3 can take and pass the NASAR SARTech III  exam without ever taking the NASAR Course and I am willing to bet any NESA GSAR graduate can take and pass the SARTech II course. So what is the issue? Cost and availability to start. The cost is about $65 to $80. per test, and $55 to $70 per course and they course and tests are only availble in or from a limited number of people and venues. Right now unless you are in AR,TX, IN or Ohio, you are out of luck for a course and if you want to take an exam you need to be in FL, CA, GA or OH.

So logistically and monetarily, it just is not feasable for CAP nationwide to adopt NASAR certification. Plus, being one of those guy's that man state EOC's representing CAP, I can tell you that NASAR is not the gold standard and that they get looked down as "NASAR Killer" and bad mouthed just as bad as CAP does when they let their ego's get in the way.

[Devil Doc]

I can tell you that ive looked at the NASAR Certifications. Who is the person that said that is the Standard? As stated before im sure any GT1 Member can perform the same capacity if not better than any NASAR Certification. Wouldnt it benefit NASAR to collaborate with CAP to get us all Certified? I think the main reason why we are not used is because of funding. If Fire Dept A and Rescue Squad B want to do SAR and need funding, they dont want to split the pot with CAP. Something along the lines of that.

[LTC Don]

NASAR is not necessarliy the answer either.  First of all, almost all GTM3 can take and pass the NASAR SARTech III  exam without ever taking the NASAR Course and I am willing to bet any NESA GSAR graduate can take and pass the SARTech II course. So what is the issue? Cost and availability to start. The cost is about $65 to $80. per test, and $55 to $70 per course and they course and tests are only availble in or from a limited number of people and venues. Right now unless you are in AR,TX, IN or Ohio, you are out of luck for a course and if you want to take an exam you need to be in FL, CA, GA or OH.

So logistically and monetarily, it just is not feasable for CAP nationwide to adopt NASAR certification. Plus, being one of those guy's that man state EOC's representing CAP, I can tell you that NASAR is not the gold standard and that they get looked down as "NASAR Killer" and bad mouthed just as bad as CAP does when they let their ego's get in the way.

And, the QWERTY keyboard design isn't the best answer either, but guess what?  That's the design that stuck and that's what we have today.

I'm not saying it's an ideal situation, but again, as long as we continue to play in our own sandbox, looking wistfully at the sky waiting for planes to fall, the rest of the world moves on.  That's why CAP is for all intents and purposes, out of the SAR game (I would say it never really was in the SAR game.  Somewhere down the line, CAP diverged and went off into la-la land).

Missing person search usually starts as a law enforcement case at the local level, and the case escalates from there, either into a criminal case, or an actual lost person.  Those local level agencies don't know CAP-speak, they know ICS and NASAR-speak.  When they hear CAP has 'ground teams', they have no clue what that means.  For all they know we are gardening experts.  The current ground team training is not appropriate for missing person search.  The are several elements of the SARTECH curriculum specific to missing person search that CAP does not have or seems interested in teaching/adopting.

Is this true for all parts of the country, certainly not but for many, it is.  Whether you like it or not, NASAR is the defacto standard even though their is also an ASTM committee on Search and Rescue as a standards development body.  http://www.astm.org/COMMITTEE/F32.htm

It would make so much more sense to just drop the ground team qualifications, adopt SARTECH as the general ground SAR qualification, and just include the relevant modules as needed unique to aircraft search.  Cost -- Yes there is a cost.  Is that something CAP nationally can work with?  Who knows?  I don't.   Heck, it seems to me if CAP can manage to afford a race car sponsorship, why can't CAP just buy NASAR and thus the rights to the SARTECH curriculum.  CAP can charge a small nominal fee for the certification, and thus eventually raise that money back to the corporation.  For non-CAP members, the fee would be slightly higher.  Hmm.....  Beyond that, members who want to participate should be able to be reimbursed for the certification fee.  There is absolutely nothing that says a member should have to bear that financial burden.  Squadrons should be reimbursing their members for expenses as much as they can.  The real benefit here is that SARTECH is a one-time expense, it doesn't have to be renewed so the only thing the member has to deal with is proficiency training.

Those that continue to cling to the whole 'ground team' thing (you know, like the bible and guns thing), will continue to perpetuate the lack of (real) mission involvement by CAP in missing person search.  Which is sad because CAP brings so much to the table as a real player.

[Devil Doc]

LTC Don i have trained with you in the passed. You ae very knowlegable. Is there any future in NC as in SAR and DR? Why hasnt CAP adopted NASAR? I dont think NASAR is that great, because of the availability its not so great.

[usafcap1]

Well found out why Washington doesn't call CAP for SAR.

1. WA state has no money

2. WA state will never call CAP for any SAR mission unless we register for WSDOT

3. My commander says that "WA state is the only state that does not call CAP for SAR" and that "I could go to any other state and do SAR"

[usafcap1]

The 85% of inland SAR... Not WA! 

[PHall]

So what is stopping WAWG from registering with WSDOT?
CAWG works with CalEMA and has so for years.
Doesn't cost us anything and it ensures that we have a seat at the table.

[Larry Mangum]

Well found out why Washington doesn't call CAP for SAR.

1. WA state has no money

2. WA state will never call CAP for any SAR mission unless we register for WSDOT

3. My commander says that "WA state is the only state that does not call CAP for SAR" and that "I could go to any other state and do SAR"

Not true, a lot of members of WAWg are registered with WSDOT and particpate in SAR. A review of WIMRS data for FY12 shows that WAWG ranked 2nd in the nation for actual SAR hrs flown (265 hours of A1 coded missions). As a cadet though, you are probably refering to ground team missions and that is not controlled by WSDOT but by each County Sheriff.

[Майор Хаткевич]

He's no longer a cadet.

[Larry Mangum]

He's no longer a cadet.

True, but he also according to his tag line, does not hold any ES ratings other than FLM. As a 20 year old Flight officer, he can train as an aircrew member or for ground. Both in February and in March, WAWG is conducting aircrew training along with training inconjunction with WSDOT.

[usafcap1]

So what is stopping WAWG from registering with WSDOT?
CAWG works with CalEMA and has so for years.
Doesn't cost us anything and it ensures that we have a seat at the table.

WSDOT does not like CAP.

[usafcap1]

He's no longer a cadet.

True, but he also according to his tag line, does not hold any ES ratings other than FLM. As a 20 year old Flight officer, he can train as an aircrew member or for ground. Both in February and in March, WAWG is conducting aircrew training along with training inconjunction with WSDOT.

WOW its almost like you were reading my calendar. But yes by June I will be aircrew trained and more inclunding WSDOT aircrew.

[PHall]

So what is stopping WAWG from registering with WSDOT?
CAWG works with CalEMA and has so for years.
Doesn't cost us anything and it ensures that we have a seat at the table.

WSDOT does not like CAP.

And you know this how?   Hearsay? Heard it from a guy who knows a guy. What?

[usafcap1]

So what is stopping WAWG from registering with WSDOT?
CAWG works with CalEMA and has so for years.
Doesn't cost us anything and it ensures that we have a seat at the table.

WSDOT does not like CAP.

And you know this how?   Hearsay? Heard it from a guy who knows a guy. What?

Heard it from my old ES Officer and a few wsdot sar guys

[Larry Mangum]

So what is stopping WAWG from registering with WSDOT?
CAWG works with CalEMA and has so for years.
Doesn't cost us anything and it ensures that we have a seat at the table.

WSDOT does not like CAP.

What WSDOTA does not like is people who self deploy or people without adequate training. I have worked very closely with WSDOTA in the past and consider the SAR Cordinator a good friend.

BTW, If you think WSDOT does not like CAP, take a look at where the majority of their resources received their initial training. Heck look at where the SAR Coordinator got his training and expertise which allowed him to be qualified for the job. Hint, he was a CAP Lt Col, NESA GSAR instructor, PCR staff officer, and WAWG DO and ES officer.
And you know this how?   Hearsay? Heard it from a guy who knows a guy. What?

Heard it from my old ES Officer and a few wsdot sar guys

[usafcap1]

Nothing heard