Credibility is Currency in ES

[Stonewall]

Many on this forum know me, but for those that don't, I retired from CAP earlier in 2025 after 38 years in the program, with my first five being as a cadet. I had always been involved in ES and considered it an equal effort of mine along with cadet programs. At the time of my retirement I had been a qualified observer, IC, ground branch director, along with many other boxes checked on my 101 card.

For 30 years while continuously serving in CAP, I've spent three decades in the military (active and guard), was a volunteer firefighter/EMT, police officer, and have years working with and around emergency managers at all levels. For the past couple of years, I've been a Guard Emergency Liaison Officer (GELO) as part of my duties in the Air National Guard.

All that to simply say, I wasn't the most-ES guy in the room, but I was fairly qualified with a lot of real-world experience.

I retired from CAP for a number of reasons, none of which was because I was bitter toward the organization or any one thing "finished me". Simply, I needed to detach myself because it was a self-inflicting wound as I couldn't seem to say "no" and I really needed to focus on work and family. To put it simply, I still love and support CAP.

On to my topic: Credibility is Currency in ES

Is CAP a credible SAR organization? Is our credibility worth anything? If so, how much?

What ES functions do we excel at other than flying?

If you talked to a police chief, fire chief, or emergency director, is CAP on their go-to list of organizations to call when someone needs finding or an airplane is known to have crashed and they need people on the ground to locate it?

I still follow a lot of CAP social media (albeit mostly gone) and to this day scratch my head when I see certain images of our members involved in ES. The question I ask is, "Do we lose credibility by our appearance alone?"

Let me clarify that I'm mostly referring to all things ES on the ground, not Air Operations. So include UDF, GT, Mission Base, Comms, etc., does our overall, broad appearance, cause us to lose credibility?

EXAMPLE: Earlier this week I saw a picture of a group of members, cadets and seniors, out in the field posing for a picture after completing some ground team training. I won't post the picture, but you've all seen it hundreds of times.

PICTURE THIS: 15 members, 11 cadets and 4 seniors, OCPs, ABUs, BBDUs, and a senior with the polo/gray pant combo. You've got cadets aged 12 through 20 and seniors aged 25 through 60; all shapes and sizes. You've got a couple cadets with over-sized ABUs and ill-fitting patrol caps, a couple of cadets in OCPs, seniors are a mixed bag, but no one is actually wearing their uniforms incorrectly. Individually, they mostly seem to look decent.

Then dissect it one by one and then as a group and here's what I found:
- Missing rank on OCPs.
- Sunglasses resting on patrol cap.
- Three didn't blouse their boots.
- No one has anything matching as far as individual equipment.
- Some wearing reflective vests, some not.
- Half the reflective vests are too big (on cadets).
- Of those wearing them, none of the vests are the same style/color.
- Boot laces hanging loose.
- Civilian cold weather clothing mixed in.
- Water: canteens, Nalgene bottles, disposable bottles, CamelBaks, etc.
- Of the individual equipment displayed, most is clearly not of professional grade, i.e., toy-looking compasses and whistles, dollar store first aid kits, etc.

I get it, safety first! Keep them warm! Keep them safe! No question about it and not arguing that aspect of it. But what are we trying to accomplish? Where do we strike the balance of "professional" or "liability"?

Are we using ES as sort of field craft and life skills educational program? Which would be cool in my opinion. Or are we selling our organization as a viable and respected resource to be called upon to support missing person searches, communities devastated by natural disasters, or even spending a couple of days looking for an overdue airplane in a national forest? What exactly are we trying to do?

Now that I have spent a few years working with emergency managers across my state and looking at it from a perspective as a lead agency, I ask myself, would I want the team, as described above, to show up to support my emergency operation? Specifically, missing person or aircraft missions.

Or, should CAP focus only on Points of Distribution (PODs), food banks, CERT-type operations, etc.?

I know many squadrons all over the country who simply don't get involved in ES, but there's always one or two, maybe three, cadets who go to HMRS or NESA every year, and then return to their units, never applying what they learn. Is it worth it?

[Paul Creed III]

I kinda wondered where you went sir. Congrats on the retirement. I hope you got a nice retirement party!

I am also retiring on December 1, 2026 which will be 20 years for me. I am saddened by how things turned out for me in the end but I did some pretty awesome things over the years and a new chapter of my life has opened up so it is time to move on.

A number of things you mentioned on uniforms are nuances that the general public may or may not take notice or care about but for those of us "in the know" can really grind our gears. But, proper uniform wear is one of my biggest pet peeves. During my 3 command tours, my uniform inspections were known to be brutal. Of course, I didn't haze my people but I held them to the standards (within professional reason, based upon their grade and availability of components) and I demonstrated the standards as the commander. Commanders need to demonstrate and enforce the standards.

Back to your primary topic as to the future of ES in the organization, I don't know where that will lead but it seems like we need to find the new niche that will be a focus for the next decade and strive for excellence in that area. I believe a more agile approach that meets the ever-changing needs of the public would be beneficial - trying to stick to the past needs that are rarely - if ever - actually called upon seems like an unnecessary challenge.

[RiverAux]

I've been complaining on here for gee, getting close to 20 years now, that CAP needs to develop some sort of doctrine regarding what we want to do in regards to non-aviation related emergency services activities. 

We sort of know that we want our ground teams qualified for GSAR, but beyond that is a black hole filled in a hodgepodge way around the country as local needs and interests dictate all sort of other ground-based uses. Now, I'm okay with that as a way to test new capabilities, but NHQ has to be willing to take a demonstrated success and nationalize it. 

I've long advocated that GSAR could be the future of CAP ES as the need for that is much more extensive than Air SAR and since most local agencies lack any trained forces of their own.  I suspect that in quite a few states, CAPs GSAR capabilities exceed that of the vast majority of counties.  Making this switch is well within the expectations for CAP set by Congress. 

At one time I considered starting a senior squadron in a town of 60K outside our capitol that would be entirely focused on GSAR (no airplane and if pilots wanted to join, thats fine, but they would need to get their training with the unit in the capitol).  I had the background to pull it off, but frankly came to the conclusion that while the Wing probably wouldn't actively oppose it, their lack of interest in any GSAR activities, even when we had high quality Wing Commanders and staffs and even with a Wing ES officer strongly pushing GSAR, would ultimately doom the effort.  Perhaps this model would have failed and I wouldn't have been able to recruit enough adults to make it worthwhile, but several State Defense Forces have developed credible GSAR capabilities, so its not impossible.   

As a person who joined CAP as a cadet primarily because of GSAR, I hate to say it now, but CAP will never be taken seriously in this realm if cadets are participating.  I don't think this is the same for other ground-based ES activities, but we will never be able to promote any GSAR capability when we have to depend on pulling 14-year olds out of school to get enough members for a ground team. 

Now, regarding uniforms, I don't know that the CAP uniform situation is a major problem.  Locals are just fine with SAR teams wearing whatever they want, so I don't think that it is a big strike against us if we show up in several types of uniforms.  It doesn't help anything, but as long as there isn't anything so obviously wrong that any civilian would spot it, they'd be ok. 

[SarDragon]

I've been in CAWG since 1999, and have participated in ES off and on. Our biggest problem here is that the county sheriffs are the primary GSAR resource, and they are very protective of their "territory". Our primary role has been ELT/EPIRB location, because we are better at it. Once the beacon is located, they jump in and take charge.

As for cadet participation, I'm mixed. They are, in many cases, the most physically fit for tromping around in the woods. I think a mature 16 yo cadet is capable of functioning as an effective ground team member. I'm not as sure about a 14 yo.

[Stonewall]

I kinda wondered where you went sir. Congrats on the retirement. I hope you got a nice retirement party!

I am also retiring on December 1, 2026 which will be 20 years for me. I am saddened by how things turned out for me in the end but I did some pretty awesome things over the years and a new chapter of my life has opened up so it is time to move on.

A number of things you mentioned on uniforms are nuances that the general public may or may not take notice or care about but for those of us "in the know" can really grind our gears. But, proper uniform wear is one of my biggest pet peeves. During my 3 command tours, my uniform inspections were known to be brutal. Of course, I didn't haze my people but I held them to the standards (within professional reason, based upon their grade and availability of components) and I demonstrated the standards as the commander. Commanders need to demonstrate and enforce the standards.

Back to your primary topic as to the future of ES in the organization, I don't know where that will lead but it seems like we need to find the new niche that will be a focus for the next decade and strive for excellence in that area. I believe a more agile approach that meets the ever-changing needs of the public would be beneficial - trying to stick to the past needs that are rarely - if ever - actually called upon seems like an unnecessary challenge.

Paul,

Good to hear from you and good luck on retiring next year. Since the minute I decided to punch out I always kept rejoining on the table. I don't think I'm done for good, but any other status, patron or otherwise, would have drawn me back in before I was ready. Retirement was necessary to allow me to focus on life outside of CAP. Plus, I need to find my purpose in CAP outside of ES.

With regard to uniforms, the mismatch of uniforms isn't what grinds my gears, it's overall novice vibe and appearance. I agree that while the general public, or victim's family probably doesn't care or notice discrepancies like you and I would, I'm looking at it through the lens of a professional, i.e., an IC, chief of police, fire chief, or director of emergency management. As a victim or family of a victim/lost person, etc., I don't care if you're an untrained civilian in pajamas or an Air Force PJ, as long as you're helping.

When I look at groups like Shenandoah Mountain Rescue Group (SMRG) out in Virginia, an all-volunteer group of searchers, they have certain standards and expectations. When they show up, you know what they're there to do. They look the part, they act the part, and they exude competence and confidence. I know because I worked with them for decades while I was a CAP member. They know their craft, and they know their limits.

Then, CAP shows up with a handful of folks in military-style fatigues, some are ill-fitting, with their $2.99 "emergency poncho", toy compass, and half of the team is questionable on their physical abilities. I just saw a pic from a SWR unit doing "GSAR" training and I'm not quite certain the youngest cadet and oldest senior member wouldn't end up victims themselves. And I'm not shaming them at all. I was that tiny cadet and I'm approaching the age and condition of someone who maybe shouldn't be hiking up a mountain.

Perhaps it's time we consolidate and reorganize our roles in emergency services. Maybe it's time we admit to ourselves, me included, that GSAR isn't what it used to be for CAP, and we put our focus and effort something more relevant to today's needs throughout the country.  Can we still have a few pockets of specialized Ground SAR teams around the country? Sure, but they should probably have some minimum standards along the lines of NASAR which includes both physical requirements and formal training.

Today, if I were an emergency manager for a city or county and oversaw the area's response to search and rescue resources, including mutual aid agreements with other organizations like CAP, I would absolutely keep CAP's air ops on speed dial, but I'm not sure I'd commit to CAP's GSAR resources. A little over a year ago I thought we had a shot, but then I had some meetings, long discussions, and exchanged passionate emails that persuaded me otherwise.

[Stonewall]

I've been complaining on here for gee, getting close to 20 years now, that CAP needs to develop some sort of doctrine regarding what we want to do in regards to non-aviation related emergency services activities. 

We sort of know that we want our ground teams qualified for GSAR, but beyond that is a black hole filled in a hodgepodge way around the country as local needs and interests dictate all sort of other ground-based uses. Now, I'm okay with that as a way to test new capabilities, but NHQ has to be willing to take a demonstrated success and nationalize it. 

I've long advocated that GSAR could be the future of CAP ES as the need for that is much more extensive than Air SAR and since most local agencies lack any trained forces of their own.  I suspect that in quite a few states, CAPs GSAR capabilities exceed that of the vast majority of counties.  Making this switch is well within the expectations for CAP set by Congress. 

At one time I considered starting a senior squadron in a town of 60K outside our capitol that would be entirely focused on GSAR (no airplane and if pilots wanted to join, thats fine, but they would need to get their training with the unit in the capitol).  I had the background to pull it off, but frankly came to the conclusion that while the Wing probably wouldn't actively oppose it, their lack of interest in any GSAR activities, even when we had high quality Wing Commanders and staffs and even with a Wing ES officer strongly pushing GSAR, would ultimately doom the effort.  Perhaps this model would have failed and I wouldn't have been able to recruit enough adults to make it worthwhile, but several State Defense Forces have developed credible GSAR capabilities, so its not impossible.   

As a person who joined CAP as a cadet primarily because of GSAR, I hate to say it now, but CAP will never be taken seriously in this realm if cadets are participating.  I don't think this is the same for other ground-based ES activities, but we will never be able to promote any GSAR capability when we have to depend on pulling 14-year olds out of school to get enough members for a ground team. 

Now, regarding uniforms, I don't know that the CAP uniform situation is a major problem.  Locals are just fine with SAR teams wearing whatever they want, so I don't think that it is a big strike against us if we show up in several types of uniforms.  It doesn't help anything, but as long as there isn't anything so obviously wrong that any civilian would spot it, they'd be ok. 

River,

Thank you for the reply.

Yes, I would agree that CAP's capabilities may exceed that of some municipalities, but those local CAP units are made up of the very citizens within those areas. Billy Bob the volunteer fire chief's son and cousin are in CAP along with a 66-year-old Desert Storm veteran, a small business owner and her family, and a handful of others who like SAR, but aren't exactly well equipped or trained. They just follow the CAP Ground Team handbook that was published two decades ago, and the squadron van's tires are a no-go because they are out of date. However, two hours away in Big City USA, is a 50-person squadron with an airplane who are happy to assist, but the city folk aren't too familiar with the vast farmland and hilly terrain that Aunt Sally wandered off into last night.

Building a strong senior-only SAR squadron is a valid option and has been before, albeit mostly successful until the operating environment proved too challenging. In the mid-90s, specifically over a long July 4th weekend in Callao, VA, SAR organizations, to include CAP, was called to search for a missing airplane. There was a senior squadron who referred to themselves as "Rangers" (or something along those lines) who showed up in force. The heat, dense forest, and rolling terrain became too much for some of them. Wearing BDUs, cumbersome gear, and lacking physical endurance required for such an operation caused several to transition from rescuer to rescuee. Fortunately, my ground team (from a different wing with an MOA in place) happened to be properly equipped, trained, and conditioned to operate despite the weather and environment. We just happened to be younger and were very selective as to who got called for real missions.

Like you, I absolutely joined CAP as a cadet primarily because of GSAR and we did GSAR! A lot! Real world! From almost weekly ELT/EPIRBS to a few downed aircraft and missing people each year, at the time, we were very much the go-to resource for such missions. Different time, different landscape, different technology. I do think at one point in time, maybe for decades at a time, CAP was considered a viable GSAR resource throughout much of America. Unfortunately, I tend to agree with you that we probably won't be taken seriously moving forward and that has probably been the case longer than I'm willing to admit.

On the uniform piece, I should probably clarify that it's not the fact that we wear military-style uniforms, it's the fact that a single resource/organization, can show up with 10 people wearing eight different uniforms or version of uniforms. Blue or green flight suits, a variety of styles of polo shirts, BBDUs, ABUs, OCPs, and whatever NFL team jacket you can find.  For a paramilitary organization trying to help out with GSAR, it'd be hard to tell what's what and who's who. Who is in charge? The big guy in the skintight flight suit with eagles or the 22 year old outfitted in military camouflage with a $350 Eberlestock tactical pack?  Or maybe it's the 18 year old cadet wearing the Expert Ranger tab from HMRS. If we all showed up with the same tactical/utility pants, matching orange shirts that say "EMERGENCY SERVICES" on the back, and matching orange ball caps, and everyone had quality, professional-level equipment, then maybe we've accomplished the first step of being recognized as worthy of being present.

Or maybe I'm just over thinking it. Which wouldn't be the first time. Maybe there's a balance in there somewhere.