Is GSAR about to get its due in CAP?

[Flying Pig]

Interesting observation though..... we have a 30 member volunteer SAR component to our department team.  They pay for their own gear, a lot of their own training.  Their monthly meetings are about SAR and always involve something physical fitness related.  Not a bunch of peripheral stuff that is liability based.  Lame safety meetings, promotions, ribbons, uniforms, Eservices, etc etc.   If you didnt know the people personally, you would not be able to tell the volunteers from the full timers.  Gear, training, physical fitness levels and abilities. 

And who does all the "safety, liability, and eservices administration"? 

Oh, right - the professional department they are attached to - and I'll bet a Venti that department spends plenty on
"lame" safety, liability, ribbons, and administration.

Comparing a volunteer component of a professional department isn't exactly cricket.

Nope.  They are a self supporting 501(c)(3).  But good try though.  As far as what the department spends on its paid full time employees is irrelevant.  We are talking about volunteers. 

[Eclipse]

Nope.  They are a self supporting 501(c)(3).  But good try though.  As far as what the department spends on its paid full time employees is irrelevant.  We are talking about volunteers.

Are they attached to your department or not?  You characterized them as a "component" of your department's SAR team.
The vagaries of their "separation" is for the lawyers, not the practical reality.  Are you also saying that a SAR team your
department utilizes never discusses safety or liability and does no administration?  Or perhaps the meetings you see don't include that? Any more then a SAREx will include CDI sessions or launching rockets.

You and I generally agree on most topics, but you laid down a bunch of literally "made up facts", and then are trying to compare
a small SAR group attached to one department to a national organization that has more missions then SAR.

And you're ignoring the political atmosphere of your state that prevents a lot of CAP inclusion - namely the sheriffs who
don't really want to play with anyone.

[Flying Pig]

Im not seeing the confusion. I thought I laid it out pretty well. "Made up facts". Hmmm. that would make me a liar. Just figured Id give some incite as someone whos done both CAP and paid, professional, full time SAR. Good luck in your quest to be relevant.

[Eclipse]

Im not seeing the confusion. I thought I laid it out pretty well. "Made up facts". Hmmm. that would make me a liar. Just figured Id give some incite as someone whos done both CAP and paid, professional, full time SAR. Good luck in your quest to be relevant.

Why the 'tude?

And as to "made up facts" - see my rebuttal to your multi-faceted assertion about who can ride where and do what.

And...

...is that SAR team attached to your department or not?

[wuzafuzz]

The local SAR team in my county is also a 501(c)(3).  They have a memorandum of understanding with the county sheriff detailing responsibilities and describing what each organization provides for the other.  I think that's a pretty common setup.  They are darn good at what they do, so there is almost no local need for CAP GSAR.  UDF is about the only mission that gets to play on the ground.  Frankly, in that environment training cadets as GTMs amounts to little more than a merit badge.

I've heard there is an increasing trend for public safety agencies to bring volunteers in-house.  That was a significant discussion topic during a DHS AUXCOMM class I took last year.  According to the instructors, gov't departments are tired of volunteer groups showing up with a collection of goobers dressed like generals, driving their own "response vehicles," acting like God's gift to the served agency, and quite possibly criminal deviants in their midst.  Plus "outside" volunteer groups have a tendency to wax and wane as members come and go, suffer from internal politics, etc.  That makes them unpredictable.  How many people can they really field?  Can they really deliver on their promises?  Who else are they beholden to?  Will any of them go rogue and embarrass us on TV?

Bringing volunteers under their own umbrella allows served agencies to run background checks on their helpers, control how they dress, who they talk to, guide and manage their training, and so on.  Plus they have a much better idea of their volunteers' talents and capabilities.  They want to know what they can count on from you. 

CAP falls victim to the perceptions described above.  Sometimes it's earned, sometimes not.  Either way it's still a reality we face when dealing with emergency managers.  For CAP to earn and maintain a seat at the table requires us to build solid relationships, maintain consistent training programs, and stop shooting ourselves in the foot with unprofessional behavior.  Even if your local CAP GSAR team totally rocks the SAR mission, you can get torpedoed by a team of wannabe losers on the other side of the state.  Sheriff's go to meetings with other sheriffs and talk about such things.  Be prepared to play defense and prove you are worthy.  If you aren't trained and practiced to a professional standard, just stay away from GSAR.  Renewing GTM3 every few years isn't good enough.

[RiverAux]

Sheriffs have their Reserves and volunteer SAR Posses. 

You mean that a small percentage of sheriffs have volunteer SAR groups in some states.  In my state fewer than 10% of counties have any sort of SAR team. 

[PHall]

Sheriffs have their Reserves and volunteer SAR Posses. 

You mean that a small percentage of sheriffs have volunteer SAR groups in some states.  In my state fewer than 10% of counties have any sort of SAR team.

Who has the primary responsibility for SAR in your state?

In many states (California for example) the Sherriff of each County has responsibility for all SAR activities in their county.
Which is why many Sherriff Departments have Volunteer SAR Teams.

[bosshawk]

I am in CA and am a member of the local Sheriff's SAR team.  We have three or four deputies as team leaders with one Sgt as the Team Chief, as an additional duty.  The deputies run the team for training and deployments.  There is one volunteer who does admin, one who is the treasurer and a couple who head up subordinate units like deep water, ropes, four wheel and the like.  I am the one and only pilot and I own an airplane which I use once in awhile.  This team is recognized as one of the better ones in this part of the state.  We operate in big mountains(called the Sierras), so it is pretty serious stuff.  In my nine or ten years on this team, CAP has never been asked to play and there are three or four CAP Sqs within commuting distance.  In fact, I would bet that CAP never crosses the minds of those putting a search into use.  I am two counties over from Flying Pig and our respective SAR teams occasionally are asked to provide mutual aid, which is provided by MOU.  Typically, we can put a team out in the field in an hour: waiting two days for CAP would not be a realistic scenario.  In fact, my impression in CA is that CAP GTs are not players, in most cases.  There recently was a search for a missing airplane and I am told that getting four or five of the 28 aircraft in CAWG was a lesson in futility.

[Devil Doc]

I have noticed it is hard to get a plane, unless it is a Air Force designated misson. I understand how a few bad apples in CAP can spoil the whole organization. But in CAPs defense thats like saying that so and so county Sherrifs messed up, does that make all Sherriffs bad? I do understand the all the points made. What i am not understanding is, i have always learned the more the meerier, wouldnt you want alot of help from alot of different organizations when doing SAR? Even if its handing out water, working the First Aid Tent, Working Communications, Signing people in. The more people you have, the more you can roatate groups, rest people in need, have broader searches.

[Texas Raiders]

The term "volunteer professional" is an oxymoron, while "volunteer amateur" actually compliments itself, a pleonasm.  There is no such thing as a volunteer professional.  Although, volunteers commonly use the word professional to describe their conduct.  I know, I've been a volunteer in one fashion or another for 19 years. 

Volunteer is defined as -1. a person who voluntarily offers himself or herself for a service or undertaking. 2. a person who performs a service willingly and without pay.

Amateur is defined as -1. a person who engages in a study, sport, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons.  2. an athlete who has never competed for payment or for a monetary prize.  3. a person inexperienced or unskilled in a particular activity.

Professional is defined as - 1. following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain.  2. of, pertaining to, or connected with a profession.


If an incident commander knows that he or she can call upon a professional/career agency, they will likely do so.  They know exactly what they're going to get.  I've been both a volunteer and a professional firefighter.  I can tell you from my experiences that the two don't compare well. There are very few instances (I am aware of some) when a volunteer can demonstrate the same level of proficiency and consistency of a professional.  Everyone wants to believe that they are good at what they do.  However, in the case of a volunteer, you find yourself having to continually prove it.  If you read my previous post, you'll find a list of questions that my chief had for me regarding CAP.  I think the answers to those questions make up the very basic information we should be providing to the agencies we desire to work with. 

I am still not able to find a clear definition of CAP's role in SAR nor exactly what kind of specific SAR activities CAP engages in.  What does CAP want us to do?  In my 19 year relationship with CAP, I have always been under the impression that we specialize in "aviation" related SAR, meaning.....an aircraft goes down and we go look for it.  It sounds as though a number of people want to participate in SAR regardless of the nature, which is fine.  I understand that everyone wants to play.  I personally don't think that we should participate in "LE" SAR.  There is a lot of unecessary risk and uncertainty involved in it.  Do we know the factors leading to an "LE" search?  Why is this person missing?  Do they want to be found?  Then again, maybe I don't understand what people are referring to as "LE" SAR.  When a plane goes down, the situation is pretty clear.  No?  Furthermore, I don't believe that CAP should be involved in any technical rescue activities until CAP identifies their intentions and qualifies their personnel through proper training and certification.   Search is one thing, do we actually rescue?

[Devil Doc]

I can rescue, I was part of the Chip n Dale Rescue Rangers Club 

I am/was a Medic. I can Save people. Rescue them from the grasp of death, the one they call DOC.

Im A  long haired, sometimes bearded, Marine hatin Sailor with certain medical skills that would go through the very gates of Hell to tend to a wounded Marine. (or Person) 

[Eclipse]

I have noticed it is hard to get a plane, unless it is a Air Force designated misson.

In this context it has to be a mission of some kind, though C-Status would be fine if the customer is paying for it.

That's one of our limitations on the national level.  AFRCC only pays for "people" SAR.

1AF will get involved in HLS stuff, but little else, from there it's either self-funded (bad idea), corporate funded (limitations),
or paid by the customer (as it should be). The latter requires contacts be made well before you need the plane.

With that said, a lot of wings are struggling with flight hours, and the planes are there waiting for the call.

[Flying Pig]

  I personally don't think that we should participate in "LE" SAR.  There is a lot of unecessary risk and uncertainty involved in it.

By LE SAR, I mean SAR teams/missions that are controlled by a law enforcement agency.  Not a suspect search.  In CA, Sheriff's are constitutionally mandated to be responsible for SAR.  I guess other states aren't like that?   Thats why you see Sheriff's Offices in CA with huge SAR capabilities.  They can choose to pass it off, but someone in the Sheriff's Office will be responsible ultimately.  Some do it completely in house, others use outside resources.  Others call in volunteers and have a couple deputies on scene to act as a representative.   

Eclipse, to answer you question, the volunteer SAR is its own entity, that has permission to work under the Sheriff's authority. But they are responsible for themselves, their training, funding, internal issues, etc.  They do train with the departments SAR, but they dont answer to the Sheriff. 

[Texas Raiders]

  I personally don't think that we should participate in "LE" SAR.  There is a lot of unecessary risk and uncertainty involved in it.

By LE SAR, I mean SAR teams/missions that are controlled by a law enforcement agency.  Not a suspect search.   

I figured as much.  I wouldn't expect nor want us to assist in a suspect search either.  I would hope that CAP's involvment in any LE SAR mission would be thoroughly evaluated beforehand. 

[sardak]

In CA, Sheriff's are constitutionally mandated to be responsible for SAR.  I guess other states aren't like that?

Sheriffs are in charge of SAR in most of the western states. California, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Oregon for sure, in Washington it's the "chief law enforcement officer of each political subdivision" and in New Mexico it's the state police. And all of them, for the most part, use volunteer SAR teams either as the primary resource, while a few have their own teams. Even those still typically use volunteers as adjuncts.

Mike

[Eclipse]

In CA, Sheriff's are constitutionally mandated to be responsible for SAR.  I guess other states aren't like that?

I'd have to go read the constitution to actually know for sure, but from a practical perspective I can tell you that's not
the situation in my state, at least where people actually live. The State's EMA has the primary authority for coordinating SAR and DR, and they almost always have to be involved in asking for AFRCC or other help (unless the local authorities ask first).  They
are Federally mandated to have an MOU with AFRCC, but aren't interested in anything beyond that, with CAP, or most other organizations, either.

In the urban areas, municipal law enforcement and fire people are the ones tasked, with the Sheriff's departments being relegated to mostly jail issues until you get into the rural and unincorporated areas.  In the urban and small suburbs there's a whole lot of mutual aid, but little to no SAR teams that aren't directly charted by a city or county, etc.

When you get to the farm and rural areas where volunteer fire and part-time police are the norm, manpower is an ongoing issue and there are ad hoc SAR teams and single-resources deals all over the place.  In a good deal of those areas, CAP is
on the -first call list and we have had a lot of activity in missing persons, including command and control in the last few years.

The reality is the sheriffs and other local resources simply do not have the  expertise that we do in these areas - we're not talking about technical rescue, repelling, or any of that nonsense.  We're talking boots on the ground and eyes in the sky - exactly what we're tasked with and good at.

[FARRIER]

Their monthly meetings are about SAR and always involve something physical fitness related.  Not a bunch of peripheral stuff that is liability based.  Lame safety meetings, promotions, ribbons, uniforms, Eservices, etc etc.   If you didnt know the people personally, you would not be able to tell the volunteers from the full timers.  Gear, training, physical fitness levels and abilities.  You are laying CAP on the table with a "FREE" sign attached and in certain areas, nobody is picking it up. Keep sitting by the phone making excuses  if you want ..... but face it, for some reason she aint callin' you back.  Maybe something to be learned there.

Using Flying Pig's post as a point of reference, wouldn't it be the squadron commanders responsibility to set the tone of the meetings on what training is or is not going to be conducted. Could it be issues with commanders not wanting to take the time to train GTSAR and losing interested members? Or, could it be the commander needs to take the time and start with the members interested and attract new members?

[FARRIER]

In some states, they specifically disallow individuals under the age of 18 from participating in SAR.

Again, NIN's post as a reference point. What is the reasoning behind those States or even individual Counties that prevent use of individuals under 18? Two examples one in the past and one current.

1. When I was a cadet in the 1980's, I took the ground portion of the radiological monitoring training through Larimer County in Colorado. It was conducted by two reserve Air Force LTC's. I had just turned 17 at the time. My squadron commander at the time could have said no. There were three other cadets beside myself, all the same age. I'm guessing he made a decision based on maturity level at the time.

2. The town of Byers in Colorado has no official Explorer type program for it's fire department. What it has is two positions open to two youth's, age 16 to 17 for cadet positions to work under fully qualified EMT's. They have to apply for the positions. They also get some college credit since they are sent through an area community college for some classroom training. They have to commit to two years.

Again, just asking about the reasoning behind the restrictions.

[Eclipse]

Risk, liability, history.

Anyone under 18 is going to be (perceived) as a supervisory burden, for starters, and they also are not going to be
legally responsible for their own actions, including liability for damage, negligence, etc.

I am personally a staunch advocate of cadets being involved in ES, but the unfortunate reality is that the number
of people under 18 who are both a legitimate asset and no factor for increasing the ORM numbers is going to be very small.
Not to mention missing school, etc.

They also don't usually carry their own medical insurance, liability insurance, etc., etc.

For every 15 year old cadet EMT with a full kit and mature attitude, you'll find five who wind up playing Mumblety-peg when they
get bored.  Further, the lack of self-supervision and independent capability makes them generally harder to use.

I have to admit to more then once wishing the cadets we have could be sent as a separate team, or left at base for
rest without having to worry about CPT or simply watching them.

Any place we >can< use them, especially in the ICPs, we >should<, but they should be a marginal portion of the force
and the clear exception in deployment situations.

[sardak]

The second oldest organized SAR team in Colorado is the Arapahoe Rescue Patrol (ARP). Membership on the team is limited to high school students, except for adults who serve on the corporate Board of Directors and oversee operations. The team used to be an Associate Member of the Mountain Rescue Association (not accredited in all three areas - technical rock, search and winter operations). At one point the focus of the team shifted somewhat and the team dropped its MRA membership. The teams serves as Arapahoe County's SAR team. ARP is called out as a mutual aid assest by other teams, even those with an 18 year old minimum age requirement for their own members.  http://www.arapahoerescue.org/

Mike