Pathfinder Technical School

[Eclipse]

It's not just the name, but the name is a big part of the issue, and an unnecessary distraction.

Our national process already has the allowance for adding CERT qualifications to the 101 card,
and disavows CAP "medics", yet we have a new school which presents an unnecessary MOWG-only rating
including "Pathfinder Medics".

The collateral indicates this is a wing-sponsored activity, being brought back after a 10-year hiatus.

If the name has ingrained tradition, so be it, but like Blue Beret, it likely harkens a different CAP era
which has little relevance to today's CAP ES.

The additional training is fine if the wing has a need for it, but the special ratings and the "medics"
are a problem.

Being a "pathfinder" will have no more meaning in another wing then being a "Hawk" or a "Beret",
either you're a GTMx, or you're not, but the Tacti-kewl connotation could well be an issue
for those expecting their "special" to be recognized elsewhere, or even within the wing itself.

It's not like I expect anyone to care that "Eclipse has an issue..." but if it gets posted here,
with public curricula, it's fair game for comment.

[LSThiker]

a new school which presents an unnecessary MOWG-only rating
including "Pathfinder Medics".

What is their intent of the medic curriculum?  How do you know this rating is unnecessary or a problem?  What task is unnecessary on the "medic" task list?  What task is inappropriahat is their intent of the medic curriculum?  What task is beyond basic first aid or wilderness first aid?  Perhaps having a person with wilderness first aid would be an advantage in some of the remote areas of the Ozarks?  Have you hiked the 230 mile Ozarks trail?

[Eclipse]

>Any< task or training that purports to call someone a "medic" in a CAP context is inappropriate.

[LSThiker]

>Any< task or training that purports to call someone a "medic" in a CAP context is inappropriate.

So based on the name, which is not really the issue according to you, the program is inappropriate and unnecessary?  So without judging the program or curriculum you have already determined this program to be unnecessary for MOWG simply because the program is called "medic"?  Where does this program purport to calling someone a "medic"?

[Eclipse]

Let's not play semantic games, k?

See the website for details.

[LSThiker]

Let's not play semantic games, k?

See the website for details.

I am not playing any semantic games.  Since you are the person making the claim, you are responsible for providing the evidence.  "See the website for details" is not providing evidence.

Therefore, I ask again:


What is their intent of the medic curriculum?  How do you know this rating is unnecessary or a problem?  What task is unnecessary on the "medic" task list?  What task is inappropriate?  What task is beyond basic first aid or wilderness first aid?  Perhaps having a person with wilderness first aid would be an advantage in some of the remote areas of the Ozarks?  Have you hiked the 230 mile Ozarks trail?

[Eclipse]

Are you serous?

CAP does not have medics and disavows people who try to play that game.

Basic first aid is all CAP gets involvd in, and PER REG is not allowed to provide that training.

Basic First Aid doesn't make you a "medic", and anything more is verboten.

The term should NOT be used in a CAP training context.

Ever.

[sarmed1]

...

lord beat me to this. With the PAWG Ranger ratings, they are their own special thing that out of pure coincidence happen to have similarities with the regular ES curriculum. It seems that MOWG on the other hand is taking the preexisting ratings and building on to them in order to make better GTMs. And if you look at the ratings, you'll see not only do they require an equivalent GTM level first, some of the requirements are things that USED TO BE required nationally; things which were taken out, usually because it "took too long"; things which I for one would like to see in the national requirements still. They also include things like Storm Spotter training which is of little to no use to a lot of the country, but absolutely invaluable to a GT operating in Missouri.

Whereas the PAWG Rangers seem to be all about the bling and are pretty useless in actual operations, this school seems to be focusing on 1) getting people trained to the national standard and 2) giving advanced training to help meet local needs. I believe that every wing (except for the northeast where the entire region is probably smaller than one group in some western states  ) should have a school or training program like this. One where you take people who already have the national baseline training and then give them the added training needed to meet local demands. Maybe that local training is in the form of Storm Spotter training, or disaster relief after a major tornado, or maybe it's wilderness survival in snow conditions, or even surviving in a swamp....

I know I am biased here as a HMRS person, but have you looked at their skill sheets?  GTM qualification at the comparable level is a requirement for a ranger rating.  The skills added into the Ranger Ratings are exactly the same thing as you mention above.  Enhanced ground team skills and local requirements/needs;  Wilderness/Outdoor skills, increased navigation ability and rope/low angle rescue.   Given there is a large number of the students who attend the school from out of state and will not need the rope skills in their local area, but a large number SAR calls I have been on in PA (in or out of CAP) required some sort of rope/low angle rescue skills either for access or actual rescue of a victim or body recovery.

MK

[lordmonar]

It's not just the name, but the name is a big part of the issue, and an unnecessary distraction.

The only one distracted seems to be you.

Our national process already has the allowance for adding CERT qualifications to the 101 card,
and disavows CAP "medics", yet we have a new school which presents an unnecessary MOWG-only rating
including "Pathfinder Medics".

Okay...I'll buy that one.

The collateral indicates this is a wing-sponsored activity, being brought back after a 10-year hiatus.

If the name has ingrained tradition, so be it, but like Blue Beret, it likely harkens a different CAP era
which has little relevance to today's CAP ES.

If....hanging a cool name...or even some useless bling...onto a program helps the aims and goals of that program.....where is the harm?

The additional training is fine if the wing has a need for it, but the special ratings and the "medics"
are a problem.

I will grand you the medic part....but what is really wrong with the special ratings?   You have GTM3s and you have Pathfinder 3s (GTM3 plus extra training)......they are different...and ergo should have different names.   Arial Photographers are not just called Scanners.....no they are scanners with additional training.

Being a "pathfinder" will have no more meaning in another wing then being a "Hawk" or a "Beret",
either you're a GTMx, or you're not,

Yeah.....and?   Being a MP has no meaning outside of CAP, so what's your point?

but the Tacti-kewl connotation could well be an issue for those expecting their "special" to be recognized elsewhere, or even within the wing itself.

Seems like a problem for MOWG.....if it is going to be a problem at all.    This is the same old line we get about Hawk Mountain and NBB (and NHGA to an extent).  "They are all going to come back with an ego and make me respect their 'autharatay!'"   A.  Other then a few anecdotal stories about some 16 year old with an attitude.....it is not really a common problem....and for the few bad apples.....it should take about 30 seconds for a leader adjust said attitude.

It's not like I expect anyone to care that "Eclipse has an issue..." but if it gets posted here,
with public curricula, it's fair game for comment.

Sure thing....it's fair game....no problem with you saying "this is wrong".  And I agree with you the "medic" rating does go against CAP policy of us NOT being a medical provider and should be eliminated.

But beyond that......hating for the sake of hating.....and that is exactly what you are doing.....is just wrong.   I don't know this program beyond what is on their web page.   I don't know if there is a legitimate need for this sort of training.    But really......your problem with them is simply their name and the medic thing.   You need to be honest with yourself........what is in a name?   Those who finish all the requirements for MOWG special ground team training could just as easily be GTM1 and MOWGGTM1s........what a mouthful....or we can just say pathfinder 1st. 

Nope....I think you are just jealous that anyone would think of upping their game and maybe even reveling in the fact that they are a little better then all those GTM1s out there. 

Instead of knocking them down.....maybe you just steal their program.  Tailor it for your wing and have your own pathfinder school.

[LSThiker]

Basic first aid is all CAP gets involvd in, and PER REG is not allowed to provide that training.

You have a reference for this "per reg" because CAPR 160-1 states the general duties of the HSO is:

Provide or arrange for the provision of training in first aid, CPR and other life-saving measures by a certifying agency (American Red Cross, American Heart Association, American Safety and Health Institute, National Safety Council, etc.).

Basic first aid is all CAP gets involved in is correct.  So what task on the skill sheet is beyond basic first aid?  Perhaps the use of the term "medic" is a bad choice, but that is not to say the program is unnecessary for MOWG. 

It appears that your only argument is that the course is unnecessary simply because they call it "medic" as you have provided zero argument otherwise. 

[lordmonar]

For the record....I agree with Eclipse that we need to drop all the "medic" ratings......HMRS and at this Pathfinder School....as well as at NESA.
That does not mean we should not be offering advanced first aid courses.....so long as they stay in the area of lay person skills.   

But when you start making a "medic" rating as a stand alone rating....then that implies that you are going to be doing the duties of a "medic" which to the lay person is someone who provides medical services to others in the field....which we are forbidden to do.   

We are not a medical provider.....and "medic" implies that we are.

So.......by all means let's do the advanced/wilderness/First Responder First Aid courses.....but let's not have a rating that says "medic" because we can't do that.


P.S.   I think CAP needs to get off the dime on this issue and write some rules so we can be a medical/emt/medic provider......it is pretty lame where you say you are SAR agency who can't treat anything that is not life threatening.  YMMV/

[Eclipse]

I call it as I see it.

CAP is awash with affectation, inappropriste training and setting inappropriate expectations for its members.
Its a big problem we need to eradicate, not encourage.

When it starts firing a n a few cylinders via anything but random chance, it can worry
about adopting hardkewl nomenclature. Until then it all just wasted theater and makes us look silly
both internally and out.

[Eclipse]

LST

If it says "medic" it's a nonstarter, period.

As to HSOs or anyone else, if they are doing First Aid training, it has to be under the auspices of a different organization
while the PowerPoint's are running. 

Members are not allowed to provide First Aid training as members.

[LSThiker]

For the record....I agree with Eclipse that we need to drop all the "medic" ratings......HMRS and at this Pathfinder School....as well as at NESA.
That does not mean we should not be offering advanced first aid courses.....so long as they stay in the area of lay person skills.   

But when you start making a "medic" rating as a stand alone rating....then that implies that you are going to be doing the duties of a "medic" which to the lay person is someone who provides medical services to others in the field....which we are forbidden to do.   

We are not a medical provider.....and "medic" implies that we are.

So.......by all means let's do the advanced/wilderness/First Responder First Aid courses.....but let's not have a rating that says "medic" because we can't do that.


P.S.   I think CAP needs to get off the dime on this issue and write some rules so we can be a medical/emt/medic provider......it is pretty lame where you say you are SAR agency who can't treat anything that is not life threatening.  YMMV/

I have no problem with dropping the term "medic" and agree that medic is a bad choice for terminology.  However, judging a program or curriculum based on the term "medic" and calling it unnecessary is inappropriate.

[LSThiker]

LST

If it says "medic" it's a nonstarter, period.

As to HSOs or anyone else, if they are doing First Aid training, it has to be under the auspices of a different organization
while the PowerPoint's are running. 

Members are not allowed to provide First Aid training as members.

You have evidence that is not what they are doing?

[lordmonar]

Basic first aid is all CAP gets involvd in, and PER REG is not allowed to provide that training.

You have a reference for this "per reg" because CAPR 160-1 states the general duties of the HSO is:

Provide or arrange for the provision of training in first aid, CPR and other life-saving measures by a certifying agency (American Red Cross, American Heart Association, American Safety and Health Institute, National Safety Council, etc.).

Basic first aid is all CAP gets involved in is correct.  So what task on the skill sheet is beyond basic first aid?  Perhaps the use of the term "medic" is a bad choice, but that is not to say the program is unnecessary for MOWG. 

It appears that your only argument is that the course is unnecessary simply because they call it "medic" as you have provided zero argument otherwise.

Minor quibble......"BASIC" first aid......is not all CAP gets involved in.    "First Aid" is what CAP gets involved in.   As a "lay person" responder to an emergency we as individuals (by regulations) to render any and aid to save a life up to our level of training.   So a person with EMT training can do what ever an EMT can do.   if all you got is ARC Community Health and Safety.....that's all you got....if you got wilderness first aid....well you got a little more.

Now...having said that....some levels of training by their nature crosses the line into "professional" level treatment.  Doctors, Nurses, and some EMTs cross that line into "professionals" and are held to a different set of standards depend on where they are and what they are doing....i.e. if you are Doctor in California you may not be licensed to practiced in Nevada and so you may not be able to do anything.  Also...in some states simply holding the training may incure a "duty to act" which means CAP regs counter what the state laws say.

One of the reasons why CAP is NOT in the medical provider buisness is because the laws from state to state are so different....so they just opted out of it all together.

But......bottom line.   CAP can provide first aid training.  We are free to use any and all skills to save a life.   We should not be advertising ourselves as a medical provider.....so CAP Medic, CAP EMT, CAP First Aid Provider.....are all titles that could imply that we are medical providers....and we should avoid doing that.

[Eclipse]

The regs are clear that members can't provide training internally to others members.

To comply with requirements, you have to get it externally.

[Johnny Yuma]

I'm no fan of the "Super Troop" schools. All too often the prestige of graduation becomes the goal over learning and gaining tools for your Emergency Services toolbox. I believe the Katrina AAR made pointed references about one specific wing who hosts a well known SAR school being sent home packing because they couldn't play well with others despite all their ascots and special ratings.

We had a Pathfinder thread on here years ago that I was involved in, IIRC the school was known for taking casualties due to the intense training. I do remember at least one fatality attributed to the training there, but that was back WIWAC and after and I've slept since then...

Now taking a look at the curriculum of Pathfinder: There's some good training that can be had. I also like the agility test, although even in my GTM/GTL prime could never do one pullup and nowhere in most wings would one need to walk 10 miles with full 24 gear. That said, I'd rather see this kind of training get implemented at National for a better distribution of training than kept locally at the Wing level. Much of this training should be done at NESA or at least offered as additional classes, especially the mantracking. That alone could be its own course at Atterbury.

[lordmonar]

I call it as I see it.

CAP is awash with affectation, inappropriste training and setting inappropriate expectations for its members.
Its a big problem we need to eradicate, not encourage.

When it starts firing a n a few cylinders via anything but random chance, it can worry
about adopting hardkewl nomenclature. Until then it all just wasted theater and makes us look silly
both internally and out.

Good thing you are not in charge then. 

I challenge you to show that any of this training (not the titles...but the training) is inappropriate.   
I would like to know what expectations this Pathfinder Program are inappropriate?

To what right do you get to claim to be the arbitrator of when this program if firing on a few cylinders?   If this were ILWG...and you were the DO....maybe....but MOWG?  Think not.   If you got specific information about this program....even a "I once knew a guy, who dated a girl, who's sister saw....." story that showed there is a "problem" with this training and/or program.....i would love to hear it.

[lordmonar]

The regs are clear that members can't provide training internally to others members.

To comply with requirements, you have to get it externally.

Quote please.