Feds restrict volunteers at disasters

[Eclipse]

I guess the 50-100 people who AFRCC credits us with saving every year must be zombies since we obviously only recovered them and didn't rescue them. 

The fact that there are 50-100 more people on this earth a year because of CAP is the justification for our existence, it doesn't change our place in the grand scheme, however.

We would all be better served if we just concentrated on our own programs and stopped worrying about what the outside world might want from us in 3-5+ years for missions we aren't allowed to do anyway. Those who are in areas which have a higher ops tempo or specialized needs (mountains, wetlands, desert) can add those skills as needed without implication that the whole world needs them, too.

A fully-staffed, fully-trained cadre within our existing program would allow us to ramp into anything else
we were asked to do fairly easily.  What we have today is a mish-mosh of people and units doing their own thing because they "felt like it", author included.

[Dragoon]

There are two intermixed issues here

1.  Should CAP "get ahead of the pack" and make sure that it's absolutely FEMA compliant with everything it does today, even if the FEMA stuff is still evolving?

2.  Should CAP expand its capabilities into more "front line" kinda stuff so that it can be called upon to do more?



Here's a possible set of answers.

To #1 - Nope.  Ain't worth it.  Better to ensure NHQ is tightly tied to the FEMA folks so that when standards ARE official and required, we can work towards them (along with everyone else in the free world.

To #2 - Mebbe.  Depends on a whole bunch of things like "is USAF interested in covering the insurance for some of these other taskings" to "does this distract from our core missions" to "can we reasonable expect our volunteers to master these more complex capabilities, or is this something best left to someone else's core mission."

The most important asset we have is volunteer air power.  There's no serious competition on that front.  Expanding those capabilities makes oodles of sense.  Expanding our ground capability to that overlaps with the air side (GT's, UDF, comms, SDIS, etc) makes sense as well.  But there's always someone thinking we need to become mountain climbers or scuba divers or whatever.  Those may not be such a good fit.

[Eclipse]

The issue with #2 is that we are barely capable today of initial response, let alone sustained operations, with a number of our members constantly banging the "I can't some to training, but I'll be there in a "real" emergency" drum, and of course there is no way to test that.

Sustained operations, especially Armageddon-scenarios such as Katrina are out of the question on a local or state level.  It took a national response to get the bodies we sent down there.  ( I know there were many who said they could go and weren't called, but there were also many who were called and said they couldn't go.  There were also many who went and should have stayed home).

Much of this is our own doing with poor event planning where members take time out to participate only to sit in a mission base watching the staff argue about minutia and never getting to actually do a sortie.

But its also a product of our lack of expectation of participation and performance, reward of bad behaviors, and acting as gateways to other organizations and agencies.

Organizations with clear mission statements that regularly execute in their core competencies have much more credibility when stretching into activities which are off target than those which can barely fill their assigned roles.

We need people, proficiency, and a top-down mission plan.

[Trouble]

The most important asset we have is volunteer air power.  There's no serious competition on that front.  Expanding those capabilities makes oodles of sense.  Expanding our ground capability to that overlaps with the air side (GT's, UDF, comms, SDIS, etc) makes sense as well.  But there's always someone thinking we need to become mountain climbers or scuba divers or whatever.  Those may not be such a good fit.

I agree whole heartedly with this statement.  We (CAP, on the ES side of the house at least) are basically an Air/Ground Task Force. We function best when our Aircrews and Ground/UDF Teams have the kind of symbiotic relationships that are a kin to "Marine Corps Close Air Support and Marine Infantry" or "USAF Air Assets and USAF Combat Controllers/ Forward Observers". In fact it is how we are meant to operate.   The Air and Ground units compliment each other while working toward the same objective. 

[CadetProgramGuy]

Let me add another question / perspective to this:

CAP is a self certifying organization, what for the most part has not changed our training by much.  Yes I agree we came out with new ES titles, but the training has not changed.

Unless you have a Medic with each GT you send to the field, we will never become a NIMS Type I team, which is most preferred.

Thoughts?

[RiverAux]

Makes very little difference.  Most county sherrifs or others running a lost person search are not really going to care what level the team is so long as it is trained. 

[mikeylikey]

They should still issue ID Cards.  I am not out to get another Govt ID card, but it is a very good idea.  Perhaps we can even move away from the library cards NHQ is issuing.

[Eclipse]

Let me add another question / perspective to this:

CAP is a self certifying organization, what for the most part has not changed our training by much.  Yes I agree we came out with new ES titles, but the training has not changed.

Unless you have a Medic with each GT you send to the field, we will never become a NIMS Type I team, which is most preferred.

Thoughts?

None, other than you are correct, and we should leave the first-wave ES operations to the professionals, and be ready to respond during round 2+ as needed.

[mikeylikey]

Let me add another question / perspective to this:

CAP is a self certifying organization, what for the most part has not changed our training by much.  Yes I agree we came out with new ES titles, but the training has not changed.

Unless you have a Medic with each GT you send to the field, we will never become a NIMS Type I team, which is most preferred.

Thoughts?

None, other than you are correct, and we should leave the first-wave ES operations to the professionals, and be ready to respond during round 2+ as needed.

We need to become the first wave professionals!  I am so sick of people saying CAP can't do this or CAP can't do that, and we are nothing more than a "cleanup" crew!

[Eclipse]

2nd and 3rd wave are also important, just not in the same manner.
You can't be a first responder when there is no requirement you answer the phone.

[sardak]

Unless you have a Medic with each GT you send to the field, we will never become a NIMS Type I team, which is most preferred.

Preferred by whom?  Outside of major disaster related SAR operations, there is no need for Type I SAR teams as currently typed by FEMA.

Mike

[KyCAP]

Just rummaging around on the internet.

First responder is really a relative term based on the state wide level planning which I have seen directly as a result of being involved with CAP. 

If in the middle of the earthquake that just took out all of your comm, knocked down the firehouse and 50% of your EMS force "victims" who is responding to the first responders?

It takes a different "skill" of first responder to fly the military supply routes in your state to guide the rest of the "first responders" to the afflicted area safely and accurately.

In the New Madrid area, CAP is the part of the "First Responder" force along with the Army National Guard, Air Force National Guard who has the "boots on the ground".  Their Blackhawk component is well practiced to fly a "task force" WITH CAP.  We practice this EVERY YEAR for the past THREE YEARS!!!

My point, your "First Responder" category is relative to the mission.

I can assure you that the LTC in the Army National Guard in charge of Civilian Response has my cell phone (and three other CAP members) on his check list.   He has called me this year... I see him no less than quarterly.  A WONDERFUL relationship.

As others would say... "Just sayin'"

[arajca]

Unless you have a Medic with each GT you send to the field, we will never become a NIMS Type I team, which is most preferred.

Thoughts?

Currently, there are no NIMS Type I SAR teams in CO. From talking to several SAR organizations, there never will be. It's not a matter of medical personnel, it's a matter of the sheer number of personnel - 50+.

NIMS typing is a matter of capabilities and also relates directly to costs. Type 1 is not the most prefered - it is the most expensive. The most prefered type is the one whose capabilities meet the needs of the incident. If all I need is a simple comm relay station, I'll order a Type IV or maybe a Type III Comm Support Team. I will not order a Type I because it is overkill and it is far more expensive. If I need search personnel to do line searches through a wooded area, I'll order several Type III or Type IV teams, not a Type I team for the same reason.

That is one aspect of planning and logistics that many folks in CAP (and much of the rest of the ES world) overlook - getting the right resources not the ones with the most capabilities.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Guys:

CAP can do ONE THING better than anybody else, or at least after 65 years we should be better at it than anybody else...

Air search and air recon with ground coodination.  We can fly low and slow, and coodinate with ground teams.  OUR ground teams.  

If you need a type I ground asset, and CAP can't provide it, AND you need to coordinate the ground op to an air search, then attach acoordinating CAP element (2 officers and a radio) to the other agency's type I team.

We don't do anything else very good.

We can do air/ground SAR and air recon in disasters and for Homeland Security.  We can do it well, with 535 airplanes pre-positioned around the US.

Let the EMT's be the medics, the nozzle-knockers put out fires, and the cops arrest people.  We're the flyers.

[Dragoon]

Guys:

CAP can do ONE THING better than anybody else, or at least after 65 years we should be better at it than anybody else...

Air search and air recon with ground coodination.  We can fly low and slow, and coodinate with ground teams.  OUR ground teams.  

If you need a type I ground asset, and CAP can't provide it, AND you need to coordinate the ground op to an air search, then attach acoordinating CAP element (2 officers and a radio) to the other agency's type I team.

We don't do anything else very good.

We can do air/ground SAR and air recon in disasters and for Homeland Security.  We can do it well, with 535 airplanes pre-positioned around the US.

Let the EMT's be the medics, the nozzle-knockers put out fires, and the cops arrest people.  We're the flyers.

There's a lot of truth here.

Obviously, planes are our main core competency - the thing we have that almost no one else has.

So with that in mind, what's the best role for our ground teams?  Well, the thing we can practice all the time is working with airplanes.  Also electronic search.

It could be that we could focus our GT effort on becoming effecting "Air Liaison Teams" that could be attached to other people's search teams in order to provide the capability of dealing with aircraft and doing beacon work.  That gives us a niche.

Better to do a few things well than to do many things poorly.

[RiverAux]

I guess everybody forgot that we have at least 3 times as many ground SAR personnel as pilots and about a quarter more vans than planes.  If there is another nation-wide organization with 6,000-8,000 ground sar personnel I haven't heard about it. 

This is one occassion where I will trot out the, "More than meets the skies" phrase.

[ZigZag911]

The fact remains that our GTs are principally trained in DFing and air-ground coordination.....this is what we do that virtually no one else does, and certainly no one does as well as we do.

Should there be a further 'specialty'? yeah, I think so, but I don't think it's a first responder role....I think CAP ought to focus on disaster relief mitigation, in support of the Guard & Red Cross....shelter management, damage assessment, and so forth.

[ELTHunter]

My two cents.

In my local area, CAP is better trained, better equipped, better organized and more professional than most of the local rescue organizations with the exception of a few small cities that have paid, full-time responders.  Most of the county EMA's around here have a part time Director and rely on volunteer workers, many of whom have practically no training.  I have worked federal disasters in neighboring counties where I saw rescue squad people that made me think it would be better to be left on my own then have them come after me in an emergency.  In the group of state trained Disaster Assessment Team Leaders (I'm talking about DATL's that will accompany first responders immediately in the aftermath of an event, not second tier follow-on's) that I trained with for a neighboring county, I was one of the very few trained people, and another one or two were volunteer firefighters.  If we are needed, I have no question that we would be accepted.  In the event of a real crisis here, CAP would be one of the better trained and equipped assets.  We are written in to response plans for several different scenarios.  Now maybe in big disasters in large metropolitan areas, where professional assets can come from all over, we wouldn't measure up, but those incidents are very few and far between.

Having said that, I agree with other posters here that have said CAP has a specific capability to be utilized.  We are trained and equipped to be airborne and ground to air resources, mainly in connection with missing aircraft and maybe missing people in certain instances.  We also do very well at airborne recon immediately after disasters, before satellites and other aerial imagery systems can be brought to bear.  We can also perform disaster assessment and relief (not rescue).  We are not high angle, swift water, underwater, or urban rescuers.  We are not first responder EMT's unless we happen to have an EMT on a ground team in on one of the previously stated missions.

Lets be the best trained, well equipped, professional resource for our core mission capabilities, and leave the rest to other organizations that specialize in those other areas.  I know there are a lot of people who don't want to accept this, and I have never understood why.  If you are trained and desire to perform high-angle, swift water, urban or some other highly technical form of rescue, find one of those other organizations and join it TOO.

[RiverAux]

The fact remains that our GTs are principally trained in DFing and air-ground coordination.....this is what we do that virtually no one else does, and certainly no one does as well as we do.

Thats funny since locating ELTs comprise and air-ground coordination comprise only about 10% of the tasks in the GT task book.  The fact is that CAP vastly underutilizes and underpromotes our GT capabilities while overpromoting our air SAR capabilities which are only of use in a few specific situations.    While there are certainly local independent SAR teams that overall have better GT skills than us, in most of the country the local CAP unit is only ground SAR organization available. 

So, I would argue that no other national organization does ground SAR as well as we do. 

[sardak]

Lets be the best trained, well equipped, professional resource for our core mission capabilities, and leave the rest to other organizations that specialize in those other areas.  I know there are a lot of people who don't want to accept this, and I have never understood why.  If you are trained and desire to perform high-angle, swift water, urban or some other highly technical form of rescue, find one of those other organizations and join it TOO.

Hooray!  As a someone who has always had joint membership in CAP and the local SAR unit, I concur wholeheartedly.  The person who recruited me into both groups 28 years ago said with dual membership, you get involved with just about everything.  I've given up preaching this because no one ever seems interested.

As for specialty teams, CAP has always had the opportunity to be the experts at ground DF.  But apparently this is boring or no fun or not exciting or something else because rarely does it happen. 

So, I would argue that no other national organization does ground SAR as well as we do.

And how many other national organizations do ground SAR?  I can think of only one.  The Mountain Rescue Association and I'd say its member teams do ground SAR as well as CAP.

Mike