Lack of ES response

[754837]

One evening in a severe thunderstorm with tornados occurred during the Wing Commander's monthly staff meeting.  The storm caused some deaths, many injuries and significant damage just off the military base where the staff meeting was being held. I was a squadron commander but due to work issues I was not able to attend that night but two of our senior members did attend.  Wisely, the wing staff took refuge until the "all clear" was sounded.  Once the all clear was received, the staff members left the base and returned to their respective homes. There was no CAP emergency response.

At a later date, I questioned the lack of response.  I do not remember all of the reasons but they sounded to me, at the very best, weak, and at the worst, cowardly.  One reason given was that the staff members were wearing blues rather than an appropriate ES uniform.  Another was that they were ill equipped for an ES response.  The wing supply depot was within a couple minute walk from the meeting location.  My two members left the base, drove through the disaster area on their way back to our community that was not impacted by the storm.  Yes, I was very critical of my own members.  One of them was a MD and both are dear friends of 25+ years.

I am intentionally being vague about the where & the when because first, it does not matter and second, the lack of response weakened some long standing friendships.  This incident is what shattered my opinion of CAP's EM mission.  I guess I am still struggling with my squadron and my wing's total lack of response to a huge emergency that happened less than a mile from our HQ.  I am not trying to start an argument – I am trying to understand. 

[Major Lord]

Rule number 1 in ES: We do not self-dispatch to missions! We are assigned missions. If you go off on your own, you are just that; On your own. Unless they were assigned a mission, they should not undertake a mission on their own authority. This would/should not stop people from pitching in, in the event of a disaster, but they are acting as private citizens. CAP is not trained or equipped for disaster recovery, its not our gig, although many ( as I do)  feel that it should.

Major Lord

[jeders]

CAP does not self-deploy, period.  Just because an emergency happens in our own back yard doesn't mean we can just go in and start doing stuff. In order for CAP to have responded, they must have been requested. This is where working with the local and state EMAs is important, so that when something happens, CAP will get the call. Now, any member of CAP could have gone to the disaster area and volunteered as a member of the community, but it would not have been done as a part of CAP.

One thing that you must remember, CAP is not a first responder agency. We are at very best a secondary or even tertiary response agency.

[754837]

Understood & thanks.

I would have thought that the wing leadership would have had the relationships in place so that the call would be placed.

CAP members are far better trained and managed than typical private citizens.  It is a waste of good talent to not to use CAP assets.  I wonder if we have become entanged in a bureaucracy that reduces our effectiveness.  Red Cross gets their volunteer boots on the ground very quickly.

I also think my personal definition of "emergency services" is not inline with CAP.

I appreciate your replies and it was nice that you did not bust my chops!   

[Eclipse]

There was no CAP emergency response.

What "response" would you have expected or like to have seen?

For A&B missions, the AFRCC has very specific rules regarding when or if they can respond, and number one on that list is that
there must be evidence of imminent risk of life.  The second one is that, by law, in most cases, requests for assistance must come from or through
the State's designated Emergency Management Agency.

C-level and DR missions fall under corporate guidelines, which go through the NOC, but still have rules about requester, funding, and similar.
We can provide a significant amount of help, but those relationships have to be in place before the disaster occurs.  Most Agencies don't have time
to respond to "we can help" calls while they are digging out their own EOC's.

Tornado, storms, and similar weather events, tend to be short-lived, heavy damage events that can severally impact the area they effect, but
those areas are usually contained to a small area, and outside those hurt or killed immediately, do not live past the practical response threshold
of the AFRCC or CAP.  A situation where a subdivision is devastated, but no one is missing or in imminent harm is a tragic, but non-emergency situation
we can help with, but a campground with a bunch of people scattered and lost would certainly be in our lane if we're asked to help.

Further, if it happened a mile from your HQ, you may have been considered "effected", so even if your wing was involved, your people may well have been told to stand down for safety and CISM reasons.

I can't imagine why you would have been critical of anyone.  Was there a critical shortage of other agencies responding?  Any announcement to the public regarding a call for more help?  The average GP/MD isn't equipped to be doing house-to-house triage in a disaster, and is likely to be as
much a liability as an asset.

We are lucky enough to live in a country that has a robust infrastructure and system for dealing with disasters, and CAP has a role it plays every day.
If you want to be involved in disaster response in a more immediate,  or different way, CAP may not be for you, but that doesn't mean CAP is
performing its mission or is somehow failing.

We do what we do, and if what we "do" isn't needed that day, we stay home.

[NCRblues]

isn't needed that day, we stay home.

I think one of the major issues many members see (cadet and SM alike) is that we are staying home 99.9% of the time now.

A recent example is the Joplin Mo tornado of last year. Over the TV as far away as Hannibal Mo the state was calling for ANYONE with any emergency services background. They needed roads blocked off, tents set up, water distributed to rubble search teams and many more simple items that CAP can and SHOULD be doing during these times. One of the biggest requests and needs was to expand on their ability to communicate. The EMA's radio set up was overwhelmed and they could not keep in contact with all of the teams in the field. What a better way for CAP to help then to set up a radio net for the EMA?

Yet even with the state and county and city begging over open news, CAP in Missouri and Kansas Oklahoma (the city is right next to the border) never got asked or called. Now im sure you are going to say that is MO wings fault for not having the contacts. And I agree to a certain extent, but I also feel that it is CAPs overall fault with the lack of consistent guidance on how to contact and maintain a healthy relationship with "local" authority. CAP seems to think grand of it self, but never tells anyone outside CAP about what we can do.

I just feel that ES response in general is slipping away for more reasons than one.

[Eclipse]

SM alike) is that we are staying home 99.9% of the time now.

Well, for better or worse, 99% of the time what is needed isn't what we do.  Fireman do not respond to riots just because the police are overwhelmed, and LEO's don't grab turnout gear when fires get out of hand.

I think one of the major issues many members see (cadet and
A recent example is the Joplin Mo tornado of last year. Over the TV as far away as Hannibal Mo the state was calling for ANYONE with any emergency services background. They needed roads blocked off, tents set up, water distributed to rubble search teams and many more simple items that CAP can and SHOULD be doing during these times.

Legitimate agencies are required by law to have response and escalation plans, and those generally do not include getting on television and
asking for help from anyone, at least not in the US.

If your wing has a capability that could have met the need, then since that Tornado they should have been leveraging that need into MOUs and other agreements so that next time they make the calls.

There's a system and a process to the requests, and it's all well and good when you're hip-deep in water to not care who comes to pull you out,
then later you're suing everyone in sight because they left your shoes in the mud or didn't rescue your cat, etc.

Those "all-hands" call-outs are for the local people to help themselves, CERT teams to stand up, and the local agencies to start shutting down their PC's
and going home early from work.

As to "guidance", I'm not sure what more is needed from NHQ.

We all know who you call.

We all know who is supposed to pay for what and when.

We know our own local capabilities, response times, and sustainability.

If you don't know those three things, then you have work to do internally.  When you do know those three things, then you
start an expanding square at the unit level and start calling townships, agencies, EMA's and others to connect with their
EM planners and get on the call lists - this last part is the one that takes effort and perseverance, and usually ends when
a unit ESO leaves a voice mail with a busy EM chief and then waits for a call back.

[754837]

Let me change the scenario just a bit:  In this fictitious situation, the storm did not occur just outside of Wing HQ during a Wing Staff meeting, it happened outside of my squadron HQ during a squadron meeting.  We would have notified, or attempted to notify Wing what was going on and that we were assisting.  We would notify or attempt to notify PD or FD.    We would have gathered up the resources at hand and jumped in to help to the best of our ability.  We would render first aid,  help move people to a safer place (i.e. help them out of the street, out of standing water, away from hazards etc.). In short, we would have done what we could to help those that we could while safeguarding our members.  The idea of not showing up to the dance until you get an invitation is, in my opinion, weak, especially when you are looking at the dance floor.  Maybe this would be against regulations (and I would not fight a 2b action)  but I would be able to sleep at night.  A situation like this overwhelms fire departments, law enforcement and emergency management.

When I was a cadet in the 70's, several times a year we would go on what was then called REDCAP missions looking for lost aircraft.  With technology today, the need for this emergency service has been greatly reduced.  If we want to have an emergency service mission, we need to provide an emergency service. 

[bflynn]

Over the TV as far away as Hannibal Mo the state was calling for ANYONE with any emergency services background. They needed roads blocked off, tents set up, water distributed to rubble search teams and many more simple items that CAP can and SHOULD be doing during these times.

I think it's a stretch to say that the Civil Air Patrol should be blocking off roads, setting up tents or distributing water to search teams.  There are dozens of organizations that do that, possibly hundreds of them.  There is one civil service organization that can fly an airplane over a disaster scene and do what needs to be done.  CAP should focus what makes us unique.

If disaster relief is the direction that CAP is heading, I'm less than interested, I'm opposed to it.

[754837]

Over the TV as far away as Hannibal Mo the state was calling for ANYONE with any emergency services background. They needed roads blocked off, tents set up, water distributed to rubble search teams and many more simple items that CAP can and SHOULD be doing during these times.

I think it's a stretch to say that the Civil Air Patrol should be blocking off roads, setting up tents or distributing water to search teams.  There are dozens of organizations that do that, possibly hundreds of them.  There is one civil service organization that can fly an airplane over a disaster scene and do what needs to be done.  CAP should focus what makes us unique.

If disaster relief is the direction that CAP is heading, I'm less than interested, I'm opposed to it.

Before I share my opinion, I will disclose that I am a pilot!  CAP is not the only organizaiton that can fly an airplane over a disaster scene and do what needs to be done.  USCGA has that capability as do many law enforcement agencies.  I am not a law enforcement pilot but in my opinion, they are some of the finest pilots.  Where I live, the LE agencies and the National Guard provide these services as well - promptly, quickly, professionally, with a lot less paper work. 

[Eclipse]

The invitation is the nature of the best, and as I said ES doctrine, in a lot of cases, restricts responders in the affected areas from doing anything but
taking care of themselves.

Without the invitation we have no expectation of funding, indemnification, nor even a legitimate presence.  Without that we're just vigilantes, and vigilantes
make for great t-shirts and movies and non-so-great ideas in real life.

You can find me 100 stories where some guy showed up and "just did it", and I can show you a hundred pictures of whackers with 10K of lights on their truck and no idea what they are doing.

We are part of a federalized, professionalized resource, that means we get access to a lot of things smaller groups don't, but also means we don't get access to things smaller groups do all the time.  We had a huge flooding event earlier this year in my wing.  Big response from state agencies, nothing from CAP on a federal level because the types of help needed weren't in our wheelhouse.

If you want to be called when the sirens are still going off, then you need to join up with a local agency that is a first responder.

[Eclipse]

B the LE agencies and the National Guard provide these services as well - promptly, quickly, professionally, with a lot less paper work.

No.  There's less paper that day.

LE can go wherever they want in their jurisdiction, because they are LE - a first responder agency, and one which is likely fully funded with people on call and on site when the sirens go off.

I can't speak to the USCGAux, other than to say that the they are legally tasked as part of the USCG with maritime, shoreline, and waterway SAR, and they also have LE powers, which means they too have more latitude and no Posse-Com issues to their response.   They've got plenty of paper, too, and I can tell you that the USCGAux has a much smaller presence inland in most places of the US than CAP.

[754837]

Based on this logic, you would drive around a car crash rather than to stop and render aid.  The scenario I gave, and lived, was an emergency that was basically happening right in front of you.  I am not suggesting that we jump fire/ems/police calls.  I am a career LEO with 25+ years of full time, paid service &  I don't like call jumpers!

I don't mean to sound harsh but I have more respect for someone that is trying to help and make a difference than for one that sits back and makes excuses for inaction.  Here we had a trained group of emergency services people that did not participate when a)needed and b) when the event was in their own yard.

[bflynn]

Over the TV as far away as Hannibal Mo the state was calling for ANYONE with any emergency services background. They needed roads blocked off, tents set up, water distributed to rubble search teams and many more simple items that CAP can and SHOULD be doing during these times.

I think it's a stretch to say that the Civil Air Patrol should be blocking off roads, setting up tents or distributing water to search teams.  There are dozens of organizations that do that, possibly hundreds of them.  There is one civil service organization that can fly an airplane over a disaster scene and do what needs to be done.  CAP should focus what makes us unique.

If disaster relief is the direction that CAP is heading, I'm less than interested, I'm opposed to it.

Before I share my opinion, I will disclose that I am a pilot!  CAP is not the only organizaiton that can fly an airplane over a disaster scene and do what needs to be done.  USCGA has that capability as do many law enforcement agencies.  I am not a law enforcement pilot but in my opinion, they are some of the finest pilots.  Where I live, the LE agencies and the National Guard provide these services as well - promptly, quickly, professionally, with a lot less paper work.

Ok, you're right - the CG Aux flies planes too, but I think their focus is still supporting the regular CG, not supporting civil authorities?  Law enforcement agencies are civil volunteers, they are professionals.  As such, they have priorities already.  That may or may not include supporting EM officials during a disaster.

CAP is the only civil service organization focused on using airplanes to serve our communties.  It's what we do.  If it ever becomes what we don't do, we'll have lost something major.  We seem to be doing less and less flying and more and more non-flying service.

BTW, I'm a pilot too.

[754837]

I did not want you to think I am anti-pilot!

[jeders]

Based on this logic, you would drive around a car crash rather than to stop and render aid.  The scenario I gave, and lived, was an emergency that was basically happening right in front of you.  I am not suggesting that we jump fire/ems/police calls.  I am a career LEO with 25+ years of full time, paid service &  I don't like call jumpers!

Once again, if you are trained and capable of helping others in that situation, then go right ahead. But it won't be a part of a CAP response and you will have no CAP coverage should something bad happen to you. Personally, I would render what aid I could at a car crash right up until the real first responders arrived and then I'd be gone. But acting as a member of CAP, there is nothing I can do at a crash scene other than call 911.

CAP is the only civil service organization focused on using airplanes to serve our communties.  It's part ofwhat we do.  If it ever becomes what we don't do, we'll have lost something major.  We seem to be doing less and less flying and more and more non-flying service.

Emphasis mine. I always love the attitude of some pilots that think it is somehow beneath this organization for anyone to put boots on the ground. They forget that only a small portion of our membership are actually pilots.

[Eclipse]

Based on this logic, you would drive around a car crash rather than to stop and render aid.

No, as a private citizen I would render any aid I was capable of, as were you and your unit's people fully allowed to act in any way you wanted as
private citizens.  My go-box, 24 hour gear,  and other related equipment doesn't stop working just because I'm wearing shorts and a t-shirt, I just can't go representing CAP.

[Eclipse]

CAP is the only civil service organization focused on using airplanes to serve our communties.  It's part ofwhat we do.  If it ever becomes what we don't do, we'll have lost something major.  We seem to be doing less and less flying and more and more non-flying service.

Emphasis mine. I always love the attitude of some pilots that think it is somehow beneath this organization for anyone to put boots on the ground. They forget that only a small portion of our membership are actually pilots.[/quote]

+1 - CAP is not a "civil service organization", is not "focused" on the aircraft, and isn't the only game in town with regards to aircraft, either.
If anything, one of our biggest, unmarketed abilities is in SAR management, but we've got lots of other stuff going on, too.

[754837]

I just feel that ES response in general is slipping away for more reasons than one.

Agree 100%.

[RiverAux]

There is a very fine line that CAP members can walk between legitimately responding to an immediate event right in front of their faces and self-deploying to an event that they weren't invited to.  Hard to separate them in CAP policy. 

For example, in another thread the situation is discussed where some CAP members are getting CAP awards for responding to the crash of a vehicle into a hanger on the airport that they were meeting at.  In essence they self-deployed to that emergency and are getting an award for it.  Is that essentially different than the situation discussed in the original post?  Yes, but not by a whole lot. 

[bflynn]

I always love the attitude of some pilots that think it is somehow beneath this organization for anyone to put boots on the ground. They forget that only a small portion of our membership are actually pilots.

Well, Ok.  Let's just be honest then and just call it the Civil Patrol.  If we aren't about airplanes, then why do we have so many of them?

Our original Congressional mandate was 90% about airplanes and flying and 10% about being a civic minded organization.  My belief therefore is that our activities should be similiarly balanced.

[SarDragon]

Well, then, let's rename the Air Force as just The Force, since there are many more people involved in supporting the flying of airplanes than there are actually doing it.

I've got some broad statements coming up here, so don't nit pick the numbers. If you have more accurate figures, bring 'em.

Nationally, our membership is split about 50/50 cadet and senior. The cadets aren't really part of the flying aspect of CAP. A significant chunk of the seniors exist only to support the cadets. I'm going to throw out a 33% figure, although I think it's actually higher. That leaves only 1/3 of the membership doing the flying.

Hmm... Three missions - AE, CP, ES (flying). It looks like the percentages come out about right.

YMMV.

[Eclipse]

If we aren't about airplanes, then why do we have so many of them?

The airplanes support our other missions as well.

Flight-based ES actually works out to be less than 1/3 of our mandate.  Quoting the charter is meaningless since things have evolved significantly since it was adopted.

[RiverAux]

Our original Congressional mandate was 90% about airplanes and flying and 10% about being a civic minded organization. 

Uh, no.  Might want to read that again.

[wuzafuzz]

Self-deployment is preached against in every ES, ICS, or public safety class I've ever attended.  Self-deployment has been documented as counter-productive in many incidents nationwide.  CAP, as an organization cannot merely decide to mount an organized response to an emergency we aren't invited to.  Moreover we might not be properly equipped or trained to respond to the incident in question.  We only saddle up as a team if our leadership offers assistance and that offer is accepted, or we are activated pursuant to an MOU or other agreement.

Having said all that, if we find ourselves knee-deep in an emergency that unfolds around us then we are within our rights to act...as private citizens.  We do what we must until we can remove ourselves and others from the danger.  Then we get out of the way of the professionals.  Once that happens we don't go back in representing CAP unless invited.

Would it would have been appropriate for CAP to offer assistance in the story you shared?  That depends on the circumstances, including the training of your local CAP members and relationships with local public safety.  Labeling a decision to stay out of the way as cowardice might be a bit much.

Personally I have been involved in disaster recovery work with CAP.  There are useful things we can do as a group, even with minimal training.  In my case we assisted Salvation Army with food and water distribution after a tornado.  Worthwhile work, but we only did that after being asked.

[Private Investigator]

I am not suggesting that we jump fire/ems/police calls.  I am a career LEO with 25+ years of full time, paid service &  I don't like call jumpers!

I am retired after 25 years as a policeman.

I had an interesting call jumper scenario. A police sergeant called to tell me to tell my CAP buddies not to jump a call. If they were not CAP they would have been arrested. I call the Senior Members involved and their story was, we responded as private citizens.

I really should of called the sergeant back and told him to arrest those morons. That is why we are called last or never. Some people think they are God's gift to SAR and when you point out they screwed up they just go into denial.

[wuzafuzz]

Even when duly authorized, CAP members sometimes don't help themselves.  Once upon a time I was an airport patrol officer and threatened to arrest some CAP members who were driving recklessly on an airport ramp while searching for an ELT.  I threw a nice warning their way before they displayed continuing stupidity that required a more direct approach.  I was a CAP member at the time so it was a little awkward.

[Spaceman3750]

In my case we assisted Salvation Army with food and water distribution after a tornado.

Interesting that you bring the SA up. I've heard that they have a nasty habit of self-deploying in my area.

[LTC Don]

Rule number 1 in ES: We do not self-dispatch to missions! We are assigned missions. If you go off on your own, you are just that; On your own. Unless they were assigned a mission, they should not undertake a mission on their own authority. This would/should not stop people from pitching in, in the event of a disaster, but they are acting as private citizens. CAP is not trained or equipped for disaster recovery, its not our gig, although many ( as I do)  feel that it should.

Major Lord

All true except for the italicized.  It is absolutely CAP's 'gig', and is clearly stated as such in CFR Title 10 and Title 36.  The problem has been for decades though, that NHQ talks the talk, but has not shown any leadership on walking the walk in terms of meeting the requirements of Federal Law. A great example of this is to compare the 2004 version of 60-3 to the 2009 version and see how badly it was gutted of DR material, which was already vague.  NHQ still has no clue on how to administer any kind of coherent CERT program in partnership with Citizencorps/DHS.

If the OP's wing had been on the ball, and had already prepared itself, it should have been dispatched on defined missions, not - "We have ground teams, we can help!"  Emergency Management doesn't do CAP-speak and doesn't know, nor care what CAP ground teams are.  Emergency Management speaks FEMA-speak and until CAP can also talk FEMA-speak....there will continue to be problems integrating CAP into the disaster response framework.

It's a simple statement:  CAP performs Disaster Relief.

OK.  Fine.  What exactly does that mean?

Typical response:  "Well, we help people."

"How, exactly do we do that?"

:crickets:

Until that last question can be answered in a way that any FEMA or Emergency Management staffer can understand, or themselves answer in a competent manner, CAP will continue to be grossly underutilized in an actual disaster situation.

From the ground perspective, the two most promising programs a wing can undertake are:

CERT  (IS-317)

and

FEMA Points of Distribution (IS-26)

From the air perspective:

Aerial digital imagery

Communications relay

Evacuation route overwatch

Aerial Damage Assessment (flying FEMA/EM staffers or other political leaders)


Many wings are doing a great job and I'd love to see a listing of what programs other wings are doing in times of disaster.

[Major Lord]

LTC Don,

Don't get me wrong, I wish CAP trained its ground people to National Standards; NASAR, CERT, etc. Our pilots do a lot of work in disaster recovery. Our inability to carry out DR with personnel on the ground stems from inconsistent membership ability, certain federal agencies requirements for Personnel to be at least 18 Years old, and the undeniable fact that we have no infrastructure to support lines to forward operators. Its not our Gig because that's the path our leadership has chosen for us. After nearly a Year on the ground ( well mud) doing DR after Katrina, I became acutely aware of what's required to support and maintain ground pounders and civilians in the field and come back with all your fingers and toes. ( Although I managed to come back with a bacterial and parasitic gut infection that triggered a case of Crohn's disease which will eventually kill me unless an angry Captalker busts a cap in me first!)

Getting back to the original post though, it makes me sorry for the member who feels a loss of friendship for what he perceive as indifference or cowardice. If he came to CAP for ES, someone should have thoroughly briefed him on our rules of engagement. Who knows if he was over-sold on the program or naive and optimistic about our potential?

Major Lord

[bflynn]

Our original Congressional mandate was 90% about airplanes and flying and 10% about being a civic minded organization. 

Uh, no.  Might want to read that again.

Actually, I'm trying to find the original public law 80-557, but for some reason, google is failing me.  I know I've read it before.

Anyone have a link?  All I can find is a bunch of pages that say that CAP was chartered under 80-557, but nothing with the original law...

[FlyTiger77]

Our original Congressional mandate was 90% about airplanes and flying and 10% about being a civic minded organization. 

Uh, no.  Might want to read that again.

Actually, I'm trying to find the original public law 80-557, but for some reason, google is failing me.  I know I've read it before.

Anyone have a link?  All I can find is a bunch of pages that say that CAP was chartered under 80-557, but nothing with the original law...

Here is a link to 36 USC 403: http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/36C403.txt

The purposes of CAP, Inc are codified at 36 USC 4302  which states:

The purposes of the corporation are as follows:
(1) To provide an organization to—
(A) encourage and aid citizens of the United States in contributing their efforts, services, and resources in developing aviation and in maintaining air supremacy; and
(B) encourage and develop by example the voluntary contribution of private citizens to the public welfare.
(2) To provide aviation education and training especially to its senior and cadet members.
(3) To encourage and foster civil aviation in local communities.
(4) To provide an organization of private citizens with adequate facilities to assist in meeting local and national emergencies.
(5) To assist the Department of the Air Force in fulfilling its noncombat programs and missions.


It may or may not have what you are looking for.

[bflynn]

I think this is part of it - http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Public_Law_79-476

This is the 1946 law that converted CAP from a combat oriented organization to a civil service organization.

Section 2. Objects and purposes of corporation.The objects and purposes of the corporation shall be—
(a) To provide an organization to encourage and aid American citizens in the contribution of their efforts, services, and resources in the development of aviation and in the maintenance of air supremacy, and to encourage and develop by example the voluntary contribution of private citizens to the public welfare;
(b) To provide aviation education and training especially to its senior and cadet members; to encourage and foster civil aviation in local communities and to provide an organization of private citizens with adequate facilities to assist in meeting local and national emergencies.


Ok, maybe it's only 80% about aviation.  If all we're doing is the last phrases of each part, then we're failing at the rest.

My point is that CAP ought to be about airplanes.  It's why we were chartered, it's what we're known form.  Forays into Emergency Management learning how to stand up emergency supplies distribution points is nice, but not the main focus of what we were charged to in 1946.

Later laws may alter this, but this is what I see as the original mandate of CAP.  We're about serving our communities with airplanes.  That's what our focus should be.

[bflynn]

Ok, this is better...

Chapter 403 is about CAP.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/subtitle-II/part-B/chapter-403

The section on Purpose is specifically in chapter 2 at:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/36/40302

The purposes of the corporation are as follows:
(1) To provide an organization to—
(A) encourage and aid citizens of the United States in contributing their efforts, services, and resources in developing aviation and in maintaining air supremacy; and
(B) encourage and develop by example the voluntary contribution of private citizens to the public welfare.
(2) To provide aviation education and training especially to its senior and cadet members.
(3) To encourage and foster civil aviation in local communities.
(4) To provide an organization of private citizens with adequate facilities to assist in meeting local and national emergencies.
(5) To assist the Department of the Air Force in fulfilling its noncombat programs and missions.

I recounted and I was wrong above - so I'll amend my earlier statement to say that 80% of our charged mission is about aviation.  The remaining 20% is about assisting in emergencies.  I'll still suggest that what we can contribute to emergencies that is most valuable and unique is our skill at operating airplanes.

[RiverAux]

Yeah, but you're totally ignoring the fact that in so far as emergency response is concerned, there is absolutely no suggestion that CAP is meant to be an aviation-based resource.  In fact, CAP could buy 500 flat-bottomed boats and go pick up stranded people after a flood and be entirely in keeping with Congressional intent. 

Sure, when we're not responding to disasters we're clearly supposed to be focusing on aviation, but otherwise we're not constrained. 

[LTC Don]

Irregardless of percentages, the quoted CFRs are not mere suggestions, but our marching orders.  How we get there is up to CAP to decide, and that is why the statutues are phrased so ambiguously such as:

"(4) To provide an organization of private citizens with adequate facilities to assist in meeting local and national emergencies."

As long as this statute has been around, CAP still hasn't been able to define what that means, and set up a framework to address it, in partnership with the Air Force, FEMA, et al.

We, as volunteers choose what area(s) to specialize in; those that don't interest us, we don't have to be involved with, but we certainly need to at least be familiar with those areas and respect those members that choose to be involved in said areas of expertise.

This is a great thread.

[bflynn]

I agree that it doesn't prohibit us from using flat bottom boats or running POD units during emergencies.

Still, the overall body of the law tells us that we're about aviation.  Let's not dilute what we do by doing something completely different.  Especially when I don't think we're doing all that great a job (anything?) with some of the other marching orders.

[johnnyb47]

We can be all about aviation via the Aerospace Education mission without owning any aircraft at all, couldn't we?
Not that I'd want that myself, just sayin.

[CAP_Marine]

I find it interesting how many here hold so dear to the misconstrued notion that CAP has no role to play in DR, or that because we are so set in our ways other organizations don't recognize our capabilities. It is obvious that some Wings are doing a great job in getting the word out. WA Wing is specifically mentioned in one of my examples below.

FEMA 508-2 (Typed Resource Definitions, Incident Management Resources) mentions CAP specifically in regards to Airborne Relay as well as doing so again for Communications Support Teams. In my opinion, this document (and the next) is where we should concentrate any revamp of our ES training curriculum to make ourselves more useful to agencies.  With a couple of exceptions, there really isn't a role (in 508-2 at least)  that we couldn't provide, given proper training and programming.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nims/incident_mgmt.pdf

FEMA 508-8 (Typed Resource Definitions, Search and Rescue Assets) has tailor made typing for CAP aerial search teams and also has typing established for Radio Direction Finding Teams that I would be surprised to find was not based off a CAP model. Wilderness Search and rescue teams are also an easy fit for SOME ground teams.

Where we go wrong is in not using the proper terminology when we communicate our capabilities to outside agencies. Which makes more sense: To tell the local Sheriff that your unit has a Ground Team, Incident Management Staff, radios and an aircraft available? –or- Tell your local Sheriff that your unit has a Type II Air Search Team, a Type IV Wilderness Search and Rescue Team, a Type II Radio Direction Finding Team, a Type II Communications Support Team (CAP), and a Type IV Incident Management Team available and ready to support? It really doesn't matter what CAP calls it (although it would be nice to get on the same page as the rest of the nation!), if you are able to translate CAP talk into FEMA speak, your unit has a much better chance at getting the call when the balloon goes up. I've never heard of the Virginia Defense Force, but they offer a decent example of how to state their capabilities on their webpage (notice the availability of aircraft?)
http://www.vdf.virginia.gov/vsdfcapabilities.html

The OP seems like an excellent opportunity to conduct some analysis, open up the lines of communication with outside agencies, clearly communicate your capabilities and set up some MOUs. As was mentioned, making the call to offer support when you are already standing on the X is usually not the best time. I will say, however, that when the desperate call for help wdid go out, somebody from Wing should have been on the horn trying to figure out how CAP could assist. Then again, maybe they were...

[754837]

If he came to CAP for ES, someone should have thoroughly briefed him on our rules of engagement. Who knows if he was over-sold on the program or naive and optimistic about our potential?

I came back to CAP mainly because of the Cadet Program. When I was a cadet in the 70's, the ES component is what made me and my fellow cadets feel special & superior to boy scouts.  In fact, in my squadron to be called a "boy scout" was the supreme insult!

As far as being over-sold on the program... maybe.  Naive and optimistic... I think both are accurate.

Maybe it is just me but when I was a squadron commander I spent nearly all of my CAP time on paperwork and almost none of it "doin stuff".   

[arajca]

It really doesn't matter what CAP calls it (although it would be nice to get on the same page as the rest of the nation!), if you are able to translate CAP talk into FEMA speak, your unit has a much better chance at getting the call when the balloon goes up.

Head, wall. Wall, head. Play nice.

[Eclipse]

Lack of response to local issues has nothing to do with the terminology of our resources and everything to do with lack of contacts and relationships locally.

Everything else is an excuse or a reach - and the nonsense about the charter isn't even relevant.

Many complain about "not being called...", but few talk about the "6-months to 1-year of meetings, conferences, MOUs, and joint training we did
with our local EMA and Sheriff's department, and then they didn't even call us to help when it was needed."

We speak all the FEMA we need to, we just don't want to actually do the leg work to foster the relationships.  It's much easier to "blame wing" and then just flip through the DVR queue, then actually take more nights in the month to attend EMA meetings, or use a personal day to visit a local Sheriff during business hours.  Bottom line: those units and wings that take the time are on the call sheets, those that don't, aren't.

There's plenty we could be doing at higher levels to help foster those local relationships and expand the expectations with national agencies, but it's difficult to market a resource that feels free to come and go as it pleases with no ramifications when golf is more attractive than training. 

Every unit ESO is charged with creating and growing local relationships.  If you want to help more, make it happen.

[CAP_Marine]

It really doesn't matter what CAP calls it (although it would be nice to get on the same page as the rest of the nation!), if you are able to translate CAP talk into FEMA speak, your unit has a much better chance at getting the call when the balloon goes up.

Head, wall. Wall, head. Play nice.

I was definitely playing nice. My intention was to point out that no matter what WE call it, it is recognized by other agencies in a far better defined way. Whether or not CAP decides to use FEMA speak or not, it is fairly easy to translate into it for the purpose of clear communication. It doesn't require a total revamp of our current system to use the terminology that others do.

[Eclipse]

I was definitely playing nice. My intention was to point out that no matter what WE call it, it is recognized by other agencies in a far better defined way. Whether or not CAP decides to use FEMA speak or not, it is fairly easy to translate into it for the purpose of clear communication. It doesn't require a total revamp of our current system to use the terminology that others do.

And that's not something that can be done on the fly during the meetings...

...locally?

[CAP_Marine]

I agree with the "not on the fly" comment, as it takes some preparation to make sure you are typing the asset correctly and not overstating your capability. As for "locally" why not? It constitutes no change to how we operate. It is simply a more accurate descriptor of our capabilites. If we said we had fixed wing capability, C182's with glass cockpits, or a Type II Air Search team, we are saying the same thing with varying levels of descriptiveness. Using the proper terminology when speaking with people always helps to get the point across better, whether we are talking about incident typing or anything else in general. Potatoe, Potahtoe.

I couldn't agree more that the leg work and meetings with local EMAs are thebread and butter to getting called up during a response. I mentioned that in my post but perhaps without enough enthusiasm. My purpose of bringing up the FEMA typing was 1- to dispel the notion that CAP doesn't have a role to play in DR, and 2- to provide an example of a tool that can be used to better describe our capabilities in a language that most of the EMAs understand. Certainly not the be all to end all, but it might help some make a break through when they do go to these meetings.

[Larry Mangum]

I agree with the "not on the fly" comment, as it takes some preparation to make sure you are typing the asset correctly and not overstating your capability. As for "locally" why not? It constitutes no change to how we operate. It is simply a more accurate descriptor of our capabilites. If we said we had fixed wing capability, C182's with glass cockpits, or a Type II Air Search team, we are saying the same thing with varying levels of descriptiveness. Using the proper terminology when speaking with people always helps to get the point across better, whether we are talking about incident typing or anything else in general. Potatoe, Potahtoe.

I couldn't agree more that the leg work and meetings with local EMAs are thebread and butter to getting called up during a response. I mentioned that in my post but perhaps without enough enthusiasm. My purpose of bringing up the FEMA typing was 1- to dispel the notion that CAP doesn't have a role to play in DR, and 2- to provide an example of a tool that can be used to better describe our capabilities in a language that most of the EMAs understand. Certainly not the be all to end all, but it might help some make a break through when they do go to these meetings.

CAP does not have FEMA typed Aircrews. CAP HHQ DO shop has been working on this for awhile and even sets on some of the FEMA typing committees, which are still working on defining Typing. 

[754837]

I would like to see our ES participation expand in a useful way.  The ES mission is what justifies the use of aircraft, uniforms, radios, etc.  Without it, we are just pretending.

I don't think we have an ES management role outside of our own organization.

No doubt many more experienced people on this site will disagree with most if not all of my opinions but I truly believe the ES component is fading fast.  When it goes, the need for aicraft, uniforms, radios, special activities like "Ranger Training" goes away and we become a program like the Boy/Girl Scouts, Sea Scouts, JROTC & the like.   

[Eclipse]

I would like to see our ES participation expand in a useful way.

Such as?

[Major Lord]

If your Squadron, or some members therein, want to do DR, they could conceivably or independently establish a charter as a BSA venturing crew. I think that it would be great to establish a Co-charted "Venturing Crew" ( kind of like a task specific Explorer Post) to train to NASAR standards, medical training, military specialty skills as local units can be brought into the fold. To turn this, like all other threads into a Uniform Thread, venturing crews can create their own uniforms, boonies hats, Shootin' iron,  berets, Ho chi min sandals, almost whatever you want. Imagine turning a group of young people into GSAR professionals, ready to bring a higher industry standard to CAP's future! You still can't wear your Scout uniform to CAP meetings though, sorry day campers!

Major Lord

[Private Investigator]

Even when duly authorized, CAP members sometimes don't help themselves.  Once upon a time I was an airport patrol officer and threatened to arrest some CAP members who were driving recklessly on an airport ramp while searching for an ELT.  I threw a nice warning their way before they displayed continuing stupidity that required a more direct approach.  I was a CAP member at the time so it was a little awkward.

Eric, roger that! I have those awkward moments too. Actually some are very embrassing.

[Private Investigator]

I think we need to remember being a national forum what works in PA might be illegal in CA. Some states give their Wings zero ($0) and may not expect anything. PAWG gets $500,000 annually from the state. Big difference, HUGH DIFFERENCE.   

[754837]

LE can go wherever they want in their jurisdiction, because they are LE - a first responder agency, and one which is likely fully funded with people on call and on site when the sirens go off.

LE aircraft can go where they need to go and are often outside of their jurisdiction.  LE agencys usually have mutual aid argeements in place to address jurisdictional issues.  Many states also have laws that specifically permit LEO's from working outside of their traditional geographic jurisdiction in times of emergency.

[754837]

I think the underlying issue that I want to emphasize up is that our ES mission is going the way of bombing German U-Boats off of the east coast during WW2.  Maybe DR is a place where we want to help & maybe it is not. I don't know.  There is plenty of work to be done in DR & I don't think that we are too good to do it but that may be a topic for a different thread.   What I am suggesting is that if CAP is to thrive, the ES mission needs to evolve.
   
I have some but admittedly limited lobbying experience with a state legislature on LE issues unrelated to CAP.  If asked, I could not in good conscious ask for public funds for CAP especially in such trying economic times.  The money would be better spent on block grants to volunteer fire departments (no, I am not a fire fighter & I have no desire to become one).  I don't see CAP delivering the biggest bang for the public buck.  I am sure that moments after I post this it will be pointed out to me how wrong I am. 

Look at the "bragging rights" post – 16 pages of conversation mainly by people preparing to and having a serious desire to serve.  Without providing a viable, useful emergency service (whatever that is) the organization will fade away.  I am definitely not Anti-CAP.  That is not the case.  Many good things in my life came directly through my CAP experience, mainly with the cadet program.  I have left the senior program on two occasions because of job complications and my frustration with the CAP bureaucracy.

I want to see CAP not just survive but to thrive. Just one man's opinion...

[Eclipse]

OK, fine.

But you've made the same assertion several times with no suggestion as to the fix.

DR is ES, and we're heavily involved all over the country, where we aren't, it's generally because of local failings or local politics.
The AFRCC told us that in Washington the state does their own DF'ing for missing aircraft.  Bad for WAWG, but that's only 1/52 of our total organization.

What aren't we doing that we are supposed to?

[bflynn]

What aren't we doing that we are supposed to?

A serious answer -

I don't feel like the leadership is leading toward a solution that involves CAP being a critical part of the future of EM services in this country.  I'd welcome being proven wrong on that because it would mean that I'm missing a big part of the activity.

What I'd like to see is guidance from a national, regional and wing level about how individual squadrons can identify, approach and work with state and local Emergency Management officials to help them understand what CAP can and cannot do for them.  I think that doesn't get done because nobody has a clue how to begin it.

I feel like a lot of CAP's energy is spent on compliance...look at the thread here, 90% of them are about following the rules.

[lordmonar]

What aren't we doing that we are supposed to?

A serious answer -

I don't feel like the leadership is leading toward a solution that involves CAP being a critical part of the future of EM services in this country.  I'd welcome being proven wrong on that because it would mean that I'm missing a big part of the activity.

What I'd like to see is guidance from a national, regional and wing level about how individual squadrons can identify, approach and work with state and local Emergency Management officials to help them understand what CAP can and cannot do for them.  I think that doesn't get done because nobody has a clue how to begin it.

I feel like a lot of CAP's energy is spent on compliance...look at the thread here, 90% of them are about following the rules.

That guidance already exists in the form of the ES Officer's Specialty Track Guide.

It is mainly about meeting with the county ES managers and finding out what they need from CAP, what CAP can bring to the table and keeping those relationships healthy through frequent joint training and cooperation.

[Spaceman3750]

What aren't we doing that we are supposed to?

A serious answer -

I don't feel like the leadership is leading toward a solution that involves CAP being a critical part of the future of EM services in this country.  I'd welcome being proven wrong on that because it would mean that I'm missing a big part of the activity.

What I'd like to see is guidance from a national, regional and wing level about how individual squadrons can identify, approach and work with state and local Emergency Management officials to help them understand what CAP can and cannot do for them.  I think that doesn't get done because nobody has a clue how to begin it.

I feel like a lot of CAP's energy is spent on compliance...look at the thread here, 90% of them are about following the rules.

Hello, EMA Director, my name is John Bagodoughnuts and I would like to meet with you about an organization called CAP.

That said, I'm not doing a stellar job in this area right now either. The bottom line is that it takes work and the folks at wing, region, and national can't do it all. The SQ/Group ESOs and CCs need to arrange meetings with EMA directors, sherriff departments, and the like for their local area.

I will agree with you on the compliance bit.

[Woodsy]

What aren't we doing that we are supposed to?

A serious answer -

I don't feel like the leadership is leading toward a solution that involves CAP being a critical part of the future of EM services in this country.  I'd welcome being proven wrong on that because it would mean that I'm missing a big part of the activity.

What I'd like to see is guidance from a national, regional and wing level about how individual squadrons can identify, approach and work with state and local Emergency Management officials to help them understand what CAP can and cannot do for them.  I think that doesn't get done because nobody has a clue how to begin it.

I feel like a lot of CAP's energy is spent on compliance...look at the thread here, 90% of them are about following the rules.

Hello, EMA Director, my name is John Bagodoughnuts and I would like to meet with you about an organization called CAP.

That said, I'm not doing a stellar job in this area right now either. The bottom line is that it takes work and the folks at wing, region, and national can't do it all. The SQ/Group ESOs and CCs need to arrange meetings with EMA directors, sherriff departments, and the like for their local area.

I will agree with you on the compliance bit.

We have found here locally that a great way of nurturing that relationship is to attend training classes and events ran by the EMA.  For example, ICS 300 and 400 classes, position specific ICS classes (like PIO, branch directors, etc.)  Also things like annual hurricane or mass trauma exercises (cadets make great "bodies.")

I am in a major metro area, where the full time paid emergency responders number around 8K between sworn LEO and fire, so it's hard to get a face to face with the EMA director, who here happens to be the chief of the fire/rescue dept.  However, he always makes an appearance at ICS classes and usually teaches at least one of the days personally.  With a class size of 30 or so, it's easy to walk up to him on one of the breaks and chat a bit.  I was actually surprised to find out he knew as much as he did about CAP when I talked to him during my ICS 300 and 400 classes last December.  I exchanged business cards with him and several other chiefs who were teaching the class, as well as many of the students, who were mostly captains and above from police and fire.  We also had a couple Marine fleet protection guys, CG, Navy, and more.  I've kept in touch with many of them and our relationship with the EMA has grown because of it.  We've been invited to participate in more events now.

My point is that these training classes and events are a good way to have your uniform seen.  They see it enough times, and are impressed with your actions, and they will come looking for you.  It also gives you a chance to network on the peer-to-peer level with fellow classmates, who often will find themselves in high level roles a year or 2 after the ICS 300-400 classes.  Here, most of them are taking it because it's a pre-req to take the chief's test. 

[bflynn]

That guidance already exists in the form of the ES Officer's Specialty Track Guide.

It is mainly about meeting with the county ES managers and finding out what they need from CAP, what CAP can bring to the table and keeping those relationships healthy through frequent joint training and cooperation.

I must still be missing it...can you give a link?  When I put ES Officer's Specialty Track Guide into Google, everything points back to CAPP-213 which doesn't cover what you're suggesting.

[johnnyb47]

The materials for presentation are here:
http://www.capmembers.com/emergency_services/capabilities-handbooks--briefing/

Specific guidance on how to initiate contact with local agencies doesn't seem to prevelant though I suspect it differs so much from state to state that the suggestion is to start by contacting the Wing ES officer for guidance on who to contact.

[LTC Don]

We have found here locally that a great way of nurturing that relationship is to attend training classes and events ran by the EMA.  For example, ICS 300 and 400 classes, position specific ICS classes (like PIO, branch directors, etc.)  Also things like annual hurricane or mass trauma exercises (cadets make great "bodies.")

I am in a major metro area, where the full time paid emergency responders number around 8K between sworn LEO and fire, so it's hard to get a face to face with the EMA director, who here happens to be the chief of the fire/rescue dept.  However, he always makes an appearance at ICS classes and usually teaches at least one of the days personally.  With a class size of 30 or so, it's easy to walk up to him on one of the breaks and chat a bit.  I was actually surprised to find out he knew as much as he did about CAP when I talked to him during my ICS 300 and 400 classes last December.  I exchanged business cards with him and several other chiefs who were teaching the class, as well as many of the students, who were mostly captains and above from police and fire.  We also had a couple Marine fleet protection guys, CG, Navy, and more.  I've kept in touch with many of them and our relationship with the EMA has grown because of it.  We've been invited to participate in more events now.

My point is that these training classes and events are a good way to have your uniform seen.  They see it enough times, and are impressed with your actions, and they will come looking for you.  It also gives you a chance to network on the peer-to-peer level with fellow classmates, who often will find themselves in high level roles a year or 2 after the ICS 300-400 classes.  Here, most of them are taking it because it's a pre-req to take the chief's test.

Well Done!  :clap:

That's the way it needs to be done, and with commitment, and perseverence.  The more members you motivate to take inter-service courses like ICS, the more the dividends it will pay out as other agencies see you and become more comfortable with you.  As I mentioned before, the more FEMA-speak we do, the more our utilization will be.

The only unfortunate thing is with our current culture, you'll have to drag your members into those classes kicking and screaming but eventually, as you state, it will be worth the effort. 

[LTC Don]

Current CAP Volunteer - 1st Air Force Commander - Page 16.  Worth reading.

http://cap.imirus.com/Mpowered/book/vcap12/i2/p1

"CAP also needs to continue to maintain and grow relationships at the local, state, and federal levels."

CAPP-213, Emergency Services Officer Training Guide  15FEB98
Second bullet statement under Position Description, on Page 2:
"Develop working relationships with local agencies responsible for search and rescue, disaster relief, and other local emergencies."  < This would also be in accordance with CFR Title 36, mentioned above in several posts.

[sardak]

The more members you motivate to take inter-service courses like ICS, the more the dividends it will pay out as other agencies see you and become more comfortable with you.

Very true. Unfortunately, too many of our members and units don't invite outside agencies to "our" classes or want classes tailored to CAP. Doing these really defeats this purpose of agencies getting to know one another. Despite this, in our presentations and handouts to other agencies we point out that CAP members "have ICS and NIMS training from IS-100/700 through ICS-400 in accordance with NIMS requirements."

As a point of reference, they are Titles 10 and 36 of the US Code (USC), not Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). It's a distinction that only lawyers could love, because it doesn't matter when the feds are putting the cuffs on you:
The United States Code (USC) is the codification by subject matter of the general and permanent laws of the United States.
The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is the codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
Violating something in the CFR generally leads to something in the USC.

Mike

[wuzafuzz]

My point is that these training classes and events are a good way to have your uniform seen.  They see it enough times, and are impressed with your actions, and they will come looking for you.  It also gives you a chance to network on the peer-to-peer level with fellow classmates, who often will find themselves in high level roles a year or 2 after the ICS 300-400 classes.  Here, most of them are taking it because it's a pre-req to take the chief's test.

Excellent points.  I will add one thing.  If anyone chooses to wear a CAP uniform to such classes, please please please, for bogs sake PLEASE wear that uniform correctly.  A sharp appearance is mandatory.  Unless relationships are already strong, anyone who shows up looking like a clown will ruin the very relationships we want to develop. No, this isn't becoming a uniform thread.  But conducting oneself professionally in such classes is a minimum expectation. 

[Woodsy]

My point is that these training classes and events are a good way to have your uniform seen.  They see it enough times, and are impressed with your actions, and they will come looking for you.  It also gives you a chance to network on the peer-to-peer level with fellow classmates, who often will find themselves in high level roles a year or 2 after the ICS 300-400 classes.  Here, most of them are taking it because it's a pre-req to take the chief's test.

Excellent points.  I will add one thing.  If anyone chooses to wear a CAP uniform to such classes, please please please, for bogs sake PLEASE wear that uniform correctly.  A sharp appearance is mandatory.  Unless relationships are already strong, anyone who shows up looking like a clown will ruin the very relationships we want to develop. No, this isn't becoming a uniform thread.  But conducting oneself professionally in such classes is a minimum expectation.

Absolutely! These are look and act your best situations. The goal here is to impress people, and earn credibility.  Looking the part goes a long way in doing that.

[Extremepredjudice]

My point is that these training classes and events are a good way to have your uniform seen.  They see it enough times, and are impressed with your actions, and they will come looking for you.  It also gives you a chance to network on the peer-to-peer level with fellow classmates, who often will find themselves in high level roles a year or 2 after the ICS 300-400 classes.  Here, most of them are taking it because it's a pre-req to take the chief's test.

Excellent points.  I will add one thing.  If anyone chooses to wear a CAP uniform to such classes, please please please, for bogs sake PLEASE wear that uniform correctly.  A sharp appearance is mandatory.  Unless relationships are already strong, anyone who shows up looking like a clown will ruin the very relationships we want to develop. No, this isn't becoming a uniform thread.  But conducting oneself professionally in such classes is a minimum expectation.

Absolutely! These are look and act your best situations. The goal here is to impress people, and earn credibility.  Looking the part goes a long way in doing that.

And be punctual, and respectful of the instructor.

[Private Investigator]

The AFRCC told us that in Washington the state does their own DF'ing for missing aircraft.  Bad for WAWG, but that's only 1/52 of our total organization.

Correctamundo. Washington State gives zero ($0) to WAWG, CAP and they expect nothing. I am guessing the Sheriff's Association wants it that way too. That gives them more money in their budget.

[RADIOMAN015]

OK, fine.

But you've made the same assertion several times with no suggestion as to the fix.

DR is ES, and we're heavily involved all over the country, where we aren't, it's generally because of local failings or local politics.
The AFRCC told us that in Washington the state does their own DF'ing for missing aircraft.  Bad for WAWG, but that's only 1/52 of our total organization.

What aren't we doing that we are supposed to?

Regarding your comments "heavily" involved, surely our aircraft are utilized extensively on photo recon missions and also taking officials up for flights to survey damage. :clap:  There's a lot of articles in "CAP Volunteer Now" that confirm this.    Ground Team operations wise there's "some" DR activity, but not much is published in the "CAP Volunteer Now".

I know in my wing with a state police air wing with helicopters, their website has mentioned they have DF capability.    The air wing flies "patrols" on a daily regular basis (daytime & nighttime) and conceivable could respond IMMEDIATELY if an ELT signal is reported.  They also have FLIR, spot lights, satcom, camera/video, radios programmed to talk with every PD/FD/EMS in the state.  They have teams that train to repeal down from the helicopter if it is necessary.   Since CAP is NOT a first responder, it is likely going to take about 2 hours for us to get a plane in the air.   IF you are the unfortunate pilot just recreational type flying, no flight plan, with an old ELT only on 121.5 mhz and crash with no witnesses you are in a Crash And Pray situation.  Add in the potential of serious traumatic injury, then you better hope someone is listening and can pinpoint your location quickly, otherwise it's not going to be a 'rescue' but a 'recovery'.    (BTW when the last time you've seen CAP have a big information display (at the local general aviation airports) about why one should get a new ELT or another less expensive device in case of a crash   Isn't part of DR/ES also trying to prevent or mitigate damage/ responses

As far as DR goes, I think the prime issue is what can realistically be supported by local units on the ground.   Personally, I would be very reluctant to sign an agreement locally to provide assistance without having a backup plan with wing assistance for manpower.   I think that's the reason why in many ES responses many wings do a general page to everyone because availability of volunteers is an unknown and its' better to have a pool of personnel you know that can respond even if it is from a distance

Additionally I think on the ground side simple assistance, e.g. water/food distribution, directing cars to park, courtesy/safety patrols at large gatherings, etc give CAP the exposure that could help with providing additional ground assistance/supplementation to public safety.      However, it will continue to be a challenge for the organization.
RM         

[bflynn]

The materials for presentation are here:
http://www.capmembers.com/emergency_services/capabilities-handbooks--briefing/

Specific guidance on how to initiate contact with local agencies doesn't seem to prevelant though I suspect it differs so much from state to state that the suggestion is to start by contacting the Wing ES officer for guidance on who to contact.

Good links, I'm taking time to digest them...

[Spaceman3750]

Personally, I would be very reluctant to sign an agreement locally to provide assistance without having a backup plan with wing assistance for manpower.

That's good, since an MOU/MOA can only be signed at the wing level .

[CAP_Marine]

I wholeheartedly agree with the suggestion to attend training with outside agencies. I attended IS 300 and 400 classes hosted by two separate counties in my area and made some great connections. I ran into one other CAP member in each class that I didn't know, but mostly connected with outside folks to spread the good word. What seemed to work for me was to wear the uniform (+100 on PROPERLY) on the first day and take your cue for following days off of the other participants. My 400 class was full of command level sheriffs and PD, all wearing civilian attire, actually more like 5.11 Tuxedos, but I digress. Wearing the uniform the first day was good to gain credibility, let folks know who you are and strike up a conversation. I wore civvies to blend in on day two but if there was more of a uniformed presence I would have worn one then as well. Don't be afraid to reach out and take one of these classes, it might just be THE opportunity you have been looking for to connect with your local EMA.

[LTC Don]

As far as DR goes, I think the prime issue is what can realistically be supported by local units on the ground.   Personally, I would be very reluctant to sign an agreement locally to provide assistance without having a backup plan with wing assistance for manpower.  RM 

What should happen, is when the local squadron guy goes to meet with the local EM guy, the Wing ES/DR (or Group) guy should be there as well to provide a larger-picture context of what the Wing, and then the Region can provide if necessary.  Any any instance, a local squadron is going to be exhausted quickly, so the fear of over-selling is a real one, but merely needs to addressed before meeting with any EM official(s).

Secondly, you wouldn't be signing any MOU without it first being screened by Wing and NHQ anyway, but certainly it would be developed with great input from the local agency(s) first so everyone is on the same page.

Thirdly, any incident that happens on a scale that overwhelms a local EM agency is automatically going to be kicked up to the State EM/EOC level so this is where the CAP Wing needs to have a strong state-level relationship.

Here in NC, if there are CAP assets being utilized at the local level, we automatically have an Agency Liaison Rep stationed in that local EOC, and thus communicates with the CAP IC at the State EOC or Wing HQ level (if it is a large-scale event like a hurricane so there may be multiple ALRs in multiple counties). The ALR in ICS is the liaison between the agency (CAP), and the local government entity (Emergency Management). Each state has a unique political landscape, and in NC, if a county can't address the issue (such as staffing multiple Points of Distribution, for example), they can escalate the need up to state so then state has to address it (NC is a "home-rule" state).  So a local EM manager really needs a sense of what CAP can provide not just locally, but on a state-wide basis so any meeting held with local EM people should be a joint meeting with wing/group/sqdn and EM.

A local squadron may be able to staff or manage a Type III POD (twenty pesonnel) for a few days, but what if that county needs 5 Type III PODs?  Or, in the case of Hurricane Wilma in Florida - 96 total PODs?

Creating the necessary response infrastructure prior to an event happening is not something that happens in a day, month, or even year.  It literally takes years to cultivate a strong, healthy working relationship depending on the specific program being developed, and constant contact and oversight.

[Eclipse]

Creating the necessary response infrastructure prior to an event happening is not something that happens in a day, month, or even year.  It literally takes years to cultivate a strong, healthy working relationship depending on the specific program being developed, and constant contact and oversight.

Yep.   Something a lot of people get bored of doing if nothing happens immediately.

[RiverAux]

I wonder if there are any Wings out there that have actually made a concerted effort to sit down with EVERY county emergency manager and/or sheriff in their state (not just the counties where we have squadrons)? 

I know our wing has at various times spoken at meetings of the county emergency managers, but beyond that coordination has been generally lacking.  Although this is a duty of a the ES officer, I think all these "orphan" counties fall through the cracks, which probably hurts us as those are usually the counties with the least people, most rugged terrain, and a higher potential for wilderness SAR. 

Although I hate to add staff, I think it might not hurt to have a Wing/Group staff officer whose only job is to keep in touch with local officials, primarily through personal meetings. 

[Eclipse]

I wonder if there are any Wings out there that have actually made a concerted effort to sit down with EVERY county emergency manager and/or sheriff in their state (not just the counties where we have squadrons)? 

Already started / planning as we speak.

Although I hate to add staff, I think it might not hurt to have a Wing/Group staff officer whose only job is to keep in touch with local officials, primarily through personal meetings.

We call ours SAR/DR officer...

[RiverAux]

Yeah, I suppose you could use either the SAR or DR officers -- those positions have also been un or under-utilized in our Wing. 

[Larry Mangum]

The AFRCC told us that in Washington the state does their own DF'ing for missing aircraft.  Bad for WAWG, but that's only 1/52 of our total organization.

Correctamundo. Washington State gives zero ($0) to WAWG, CAP and they expect nothing. I am guessing the Sheriff's Association wants it that way too. That gives them more money in their budget.

But to say that the state of Washington does all of its own DF'ing is a misrepresentation. The state has 1 A/C configured for DF'ing and for all most any missions that last more than a day you can count on CAP being involved.  It has not been unusual in the past for CAP to have the majority of it's fleet of 11 WAWG based aircraft searching.

[NavLT]

I guess the common thread I am hearing is that the relationship building is not happening, opportunities to be a player for your community are slipping away.  I have heard wing officials blame AFRCC and the NOC and heard the NOC and AFRCC point to the lack of requests.  CAP has about a half a dozen skill sets according to the 60 series that could be utilized from Air, to Ground, to Comm, to Management.  The big problem I frequently see is that a key player on the org chart represents 1 of these areas and not the others (no offense ment but usualy the pilot side.....)

The question I have is where is the oversight of the Wing/Region/National commanders to look at these incidents and ask the question "Why were we not utilized" and identify and fix the issues blocking us from being part of the solution. If the Wing DO turns down or does not pass on requests for non-flying missions then where is his boss to re-adjust his perspective?

  I recently heard a squadron commander say they were authorized to fly one "AF Approved" Sortie on a missing person search.  Is flying the best tool?  Who choose one sortie, because in over 20 years of SAR AFRCC never gave me #'s like that when they gave me a mission #.

Other agencies are stepping up to the plate and if we don't become actively engaged we will be surpassed and left out.  The comment about 1/52 of our organization is true unless there are 5 more waiting to follow the example. 

As bill Engvall says "Heres your sign"