Hawk Mountain Ranger School

[arajca]

So, a Master Medic does what a unit or activity HSO does (or should be doing). Got it.

[Stonewall]

I see volunteers all the time who show up to SARs with patches from every 2 day SAR course they've attended. Generic EMT patches on their sleeves, CPR, First Aid patches all over, High Angle Rescue Tech patches from a 3 day rope course they paid 1 million dollars to attend.  They have so many patches they look like outlaw bikers.   Then you look at the guys who do it for a living and they have a name tag.  Something to think about.

And that about sums it up.  Nice.  Nice.

[Nathan]

I've had my fair share of debating about Hawk. I've softened up a bit since my cadet days of arguing, but there are still some questions I haven't figured out.

1) I have often heard that it is okay for PAWG people to wear certain uniform items because "it's authorized." That's fine. If it is authorized, I have no problem with it. But who exactly signed off on the order? The wing commander can't authorize whistles, scarves, tabs, and a new place for the Hawk patch, at least not outside of a special occasion. So if the PAWG commander did sign off on it, the signature is as valid as my signature would be. So who exactly is the approving authority for these uniform violations, and why are they only permitted in a single wing? Did the mountain itself sign off on it? I guess I wouldn't want to fight a mountain, but my guess lies in that nobody legal signed off on this order, and it's only going on because it's been going on for a while.

2) Concerning the tabs, as others have pointed out, what exactly do they signify that would be necessary for them to be distinguished from a regular GTM badge. From what I can tell by looking at the website, many of the ranger grades lie up pretty close with the criteria required for a GTM level (but never completely). So, if I were a GTL, should I expect someone with a Ranger 2nd class to be more capable in the field than my GTM 3? Are the skills that a Ranger 2nd class uses that would make him/her superior or different applicable in CAP? Are the skills even useful when in an environment different than that found on the mountain? For instance, rappelling is pretty hard to justify using in CAP anyway, but in Kansas, the only places we could rappel from are sidewalk curbs. So if I'm in Kansas, should I care what your ranger level is?

3) Although we can argue back and forth as to whether or not Hawk provides an elitist attitude all day, I have found that the only people who generally assert that there are such attitudes are people who have had EXPERIENCE with such attitudes. People who haven't generally don't have anything to say about the issue. And with so many members on at least two different boards who have had some negative experience regarding the "ranger 'tude", I have to imagine that there is a bigger issue going on than just a few bad apples. Either that, or these few bad apples are bad enough for many of us to hear about, and they're spread all over the country.

And no, I will not deny that there are bad attitudes that come from other activities as well. I have definitely, personally dealt with elitist attitudes from NBB, PJOC, and HGA graduates. I've dealt with bad attitudes from Spaatzens. However, not only does this not excuse Hawk grads from having an elitist attitude, but, in my experience, there are far less graduates that have this bad attitude from other activities than those who come from Hawk. Perhaps it is because Hawk is so much bigger than most cadet activities. Perhaps it is because Hawk has the support of a whole wing that ignores uniform regulations in support of Hawk. Maybe it's because the requirements to enter Hawk generally allow younger and less experienced cadets to enroll than the other activities. I can't say for sure. But I do know that there are some issues that probably need to be fixed, and while the uniforms that PAWG members wear are so far down on my priority list that it is awe-inspiring, I do care that I seem to have to fix discipline issues with almost every single cadet from my squadron that has attended the activity.

For what it's worth, I actually remember that as a cadet officer, I only had three cadets fight me on uniform issues, on three separate occasions, and all three involved those silly ranger tabs. I cannot imagine what these cadets must feel in regards to showing off that they are a "ranger" that they would openly back-talk a C/Capt-C/Col about taking it off, but elitism is a pretty simple explanation. I guess one could owe it to me not having the respect of my inferiors, but I can't recall any cadet ever back-talking me about any other uniform issue, so I don't feel particularly bad establishing a correlation.

[Spaceman3750]

A two-man dog team came to demonstrate to some classes at one of the schools I work in. They came wearing soiled K-9 hats, BBDUs that saw their best days long long ago, and one of them was even wearing those moccasin-style shoes instead of boots (actually, they looked quite comfortable). They definitely wern't sleek and shiny with freshly starched uniforms and ascots, tabs, etc, like some would prefer CAP GTs to be. But you know what? Nobody cared. Why? Well, from the perspective of others on the mission, they are there to get the job done and that only. And to the ones being demonstrated to? They were the ones holding the dogs that would probably save their life if they ever had an accident in the woods.

Moral of the story: get the job done and don't worry about how uber-kewl you are, how well-pressed your BDUs look, or how shiny your boots are (or how many patches you are wearing, or whatever). If you do your job well, nobody will care what you look like. They will simply be glad you saved a life.

EDIT: In retrospect this does stray a bit from the eb and flow of this thread, but it's a point that's worth making regardless.

[RogueLeader]

I guess one could owe it to me not having the respect of my inferiors,

I think you meant subordinates. . .

Other than that, I'd agree.

[FW]

I've had my fair share of debating about Hawk. I've softened up a bit since my cadet days of arguing, but there are still some questions I haven't figured out.

As a former PAWG/CC, I'll attempt to answer these questions for you, Nathan.

1) I have often heard that it is okay for PAWG people to wear certain uniform items because "it's authorized." That's fine. If it is authorized, I have no problem with it. But who exactly signed off on the order? The wing commander can't authorize whistles, scarves, tabs, and a new place for the Hawk patch, at least not outside of a special occasion. So if the PAWG commander did sign off on it, the signature is as valid as my signature would be. So who exactly is the approving authority for these uniform violations, and why are they only permitted in a single wing? Did the mountain itself sign off on it? I guess I wouldn't want to fight a mountain, but my guess lies in that nobody legal signed off on this order, and it's only going on because it's been going on for a while.

No PAWG/CC in the last 20 years "signed off" on the various paraphernalia worn at the HMRS.  As in other NCSA's, CAP allows certain distinguishing items to be worn only at the activity.  They can not be worn any other time. 

2) Concerning the tabs, as others have pointed out, what exactly do they signify that would be necessary for them to be distinguished from a regular GTM badge. From what I can tell by looking at the website, many of the ranger grades lie up pretty close with the criteria required for a GTM level (but never completely). So, if I were a GTL, should I expect someone with a Ranger 2nd class to be more capable in the field than my GTM 3? Are the skills that a Ranger 2nd class uses that would make him/her superior or different applicable in CAP? Are the skills even useful when in an environment different than that found on the mountain? For instance, rappelling is pretty hard to justify using in CAP anyway, but in Kansas, the only places we could rappel from are sidewalk curbs. So if I'm in Kansas, should I care what your ranger level is?

The tabs signify a "ranger level".  How the levels compare to CAP GT levels is written down.  You can contact the Activity Commander for more information.

3) Although we can argue back and forth as to whether or not Hawk provides an elitist attitude all day, I have found that the only people who generally assert that there are such attitudes are people who have had EXPERIENCE with such attitudes. People who haven't generally don't have anything to say about the issue. And with so many members on at least two different boards who have had some negative experience regarding the "ranger 'tude", I have to imagine that there is a bigger issue going on than just a few bad apples. Either that, or these few bad apples are bad enough for many of us to hear about, and they're spread all over the country.

And no, I will not deny that there are bad attitudes that come from other activities as well. I have definitely, personally dealt with elitist attitudes from NBB, PJOC, and HGA graduates. I've dealt with bad attitudes from Spaatzens. However, not only does this not excuse Hawk grads from having an elitist attitude, but, in my experience, there are far less graduates that have this bad attitude from other activities than those who come from Hawk. Perhaps it is because Hawk is so much bigger than most cadet activities. Perhaps it is because Hawk has the support of a whole wing that ignores uniform regulations in support of Hawk. Maybe it's because the requirements to enter Hawk generally allow younger and less experienced cadets to enroll than the other activities. I can't say for sure. But I do know that there are some issues that probably need to be fixed, and while the uniforms that PAWG members wear are so far down on my priority list that it is awe-inspiring, I do care that I seem to have to fix discipline issues with almost every single cadet from my squadron that has attended the activity.

For what it's worth, I actually remember that as a cadet officer, I only had three cadets fight me on uniform issues, on three separate occasions, and all three involved those silly ranger tabs. I cannot imagine what these cadets must feel in regards to showing off that they are a "ranger" that they would openly back-talk a C/Capt-C/Col about taking it off, but elitism is a pretty simple explanation. I guess one could owe it to me not having the respect of my inferiors, but I can't recall any cadet ever back-talking me about any other uniform issue, so I don't feel particularly bad establishing a correlation.

After 50 years, there have been enough "few bad apples" to bring a pretty large sample into view.  Good leadership at the squadron level should correct any problems arising from a cadet returning with the wrong perception.  As of this date, the tabs are not authorized on the BDU (they are authorized on the BBDU).  There are no exceptions.

[sarmed1]

No PAWG/CC in the last 20 years "signed off" on the various paraphernalia worn at the HMRS

except for the policy letter a few years back authorizing the wear of the LL patch in place of the wing patch for school graduates...

I have a fuzzy memory of a PAWG letter back around 2000/2001 about only authorizing/clarifying ranger tabs for wear in PAWG only by PAWG members

and though maybe more than 20 years (mid/early 90's) there was a Ranger SOP published (pre electronic pubs) that spelled out uniform items....I cant say that was actually signed by the wing commander though.


mk

[Spike]

^Most of that crap was from the "Ranger Club", which had nothing to do with today's NCSA-Hawk Mountain Ranger School.  Remember before becoming an NCSA (and it was a huge battle for that) it was a Wing Activity that at one time counted as credit for Encampment (how they managed that I will never know).  Today it is following actual guidelines from NHQ, but still do stupid things. 

[sarmed1]

...HMRS hasnt counted as an encampment since the 80's...
All of the complaining about uniform bling has everything to do with the "club" days.... all the tabs, scarves etc are hold overs from the 70"s even.  Everytime NHQ tries to do away with "treasured" ranger uniform items therer is an uproar.

When Westover Wings were phased out from the OG's to BDU's there were people who wore greens or jungles up until the phase out only so they could wear thier wings

When tabs got axed a few years ago there were people that sewed them to the undersides of thir pocket flaps.... (and these were cadets that were never part of the "club")

mk

[Nathan]

No PAWG/CC in the last 20 years "signed off" on the various paraphernalia worn at the HMRS.  As in other NCSA's, CAP allows certain distinguishing items to be worn only at the activity.  They can not be worn any other time.

Who in CAP? Berets are specifically authorized per CAPM 39-1. Hats can be authorized by the wing king. But everything else? I'm not sure about that, especially in light of the "ranger uniform" thing that was posted a page or so ago. But I haven't visited PAWG, and haven't seen any of their grads recently, so I'll take your word for it.

After 50 years, there have been enough "few bad apples" to bring a pretty large sample into view.  Good leadership at the squadron level should correct any problems arising from a cadet returning with the wrong perception.  As of this date, the tabs are not authorized on the BDU (they are authorized on the BBDU).  There are no exceptions.

No argument that good squadron leadership is the key to FIXING the issue. But I'm not sure why I should be dealing with the "wrong perception" in the first place. Obviously, the issue is starting at Hawk, and I'd like to see it stop at Hawk, not at the squadron. Bad attitudes, if acknowledged as a bad attitude by the activity, should end at Hawk.

The same goes with the uniform issues. I think that part of the problem is that so many PAWG members I had met as a C/officer did boast about wearing their Hawk bling back at the squadron, but why are the grads coming back with the idea that they can wear the stuff off the mountain, despite what we weeny non-rangers say about it? Like I said, I have not been to Hawk, so I don't know if they're making these issues clear. But there is something in the line of communication that isn't making sense to these cadets, and given that they are already confused by the time they get back home, I don't know what else I can do to fix the issue except ask Hawk why the grads don't have a better idea of what they should be doing when they get back to their squadrons.

Granted, I'm not saying that this is an issue exclusive to Hawk. I know at NBB they said at least once (the year I went) that berets were NOT authorized for wear outside of NBB, or even off the NBB compound, yet some grads obviously do anyway. However, a beret issue seems to be much easier to fix than having to rip three different patches off a uniform, so I guess it hasn't been seen as a major issue when compared to Hawk grads.

[FW]

No PAWG/CC in the last 20 years "signed off" on the various paraphernalia worn at the HMRS

except for the policy letter a few years back authorizing the wear of the LL patch in place of the wing patch for school graduates...

I have a fuzzy memory of a PAWG letter back around 2000/2001 about only authorizing/clarifying ranger tabs for wear in PAWG only by PAWG members

and though maybe more than 20 years (mid/early 90's) there was a Ranger SOP published (pre electronic pubs) that spelled out uniform items....I cant say that was actually signed by the wing commander though. 

mk

No policy letter allows for the ranger "LL" patch to be worn anywhere other than authorized by 39-1.  No policy letter was written on the "tabs" (I was the CC then).  The only policy implemented at the time was to corelate ranger grades with CAP ground team member levels.  The Ranger SOP printed in the 90's was only for school purposes and, not for general uniform wear.  It was not signed by the wing/cc.  In fact, the "SOP" was never approved by any CAP authority until HMRS was approved as a NCSA.

[FW]

No PAWG/CC in the last 20 years "signed off" on the various paraphernalia worn at the HMRS.  As in other NCSA's, CAP allows certain distinguishing items to be worn only at the activity.  They can not be worn any other time.

Who in CAP? Berets are specifically authorized per CAPM 39-1. Hats can be authorized by the wing king. But everything else? I'm not sure about that, especially in light of the "ranger uniform" thing that was posted a page or so ago. But I haven't visited PAWG, and haven't seen any of their grads recently, so I'll take your word for it.

We let activity commanders allow uniform items like; special shirts, pins, hats, etc to be worn at encampments and other special activities so CAP allows HMRS to have belts, scarves, etc. 

No argument that good squadron leadership is the key to FIXING the issue. But I'm not sure why I should be dealing with the "wrong perception" in the first place. Obviously, the issue is starting at Hawk, and I'd like to see it stop at Hawk, not at the squadron. Bad attitudes, if acknowledged as a bad attitude by the activity, should end at Hawk.

The same goes with the uniform issues. I think that part of the problem is that so many PAWG members I had met as a C/officer did boast about wearing their Hawk bling back at the squadron, but why are the grads coming back with the idea that they can wear the stuff off the mountain, despite what we weeny non-rangers say about it? Like I said, I have not been to Hawk, so I don't know if they're making these issues clear. But there is something in the line of communication that isn't making sense to these cadets, and given that they are already confused by the time they get back home, I don't know what else I can do to fix the issue except ask Hawk why the grads don't have a better idea of what they should be doing when they get back to their squadrons.

Granted, I'm not saying that this is an issue exclusive to Hawk. I know at NBB they said at least once (the year I went) that berets were NOT authorized for wear outside of NBB, or even off the NBB compound, yet some grads obviously do anyway. However, a beret issue seems to be much easier to fix than having to rip three different patches off a uniform, so I guess it hasn't been seen as a major issue when compared to Hawk grads.

Cadets at the school (I've been told) are instructed in the proper wear of the "LL" patch and the current prohibition of the tabs on the BDU.  The current PAWG/CC has assured me there are no exceptions to the wear of these items.  Cadets who have trouble understanding this should be "re instructed" by their unit.  Leadership development should be constantly taught and its principles reinforced at all levels.  Discipline at home is as important as the skills taught at any NCSA.  I would continue to remind cadets of this and hold them accountable for their actions.  That's my $.02 on the issue; YMMV.

[JoeTomasone]

We let activity commanders allow uniform items like; special shirts, pins, hats, etc to be worn at encampments and other special activities so CAP allows HMRS to have belts, scarves, etc. 

By "we", whom are you referring to, sir?   In what manner was this approved, and in what form was this approval promulgated?

It's very difficult for the troops "on the ground" to understand what is permitted and what is not when said permissions cannot seem to be found in regulations, manuals, pamphlets, ICLs, and Board minutes.   Pointing out where this permission was overlooked would go a long way towards resolving these issues.

[sarmed1]

The current PAWG/CC has assured me there are no exceptions to the wear of these items.

He should probabally put that into a memo to the Wing/School and send an enforcer there...because last time I was there (first aid weekend) everyone (or just about) had on either a medic or ranger tab above the cap tape on their BDU's.

mk

[FW]

We let activity commanders allow uniform items like; special shirts, pins, hats, etc to be worn at encampments and other special activities so CAP allows HMRS to have belts, scarves, etc. 

By "we", whom are you referring to, sir?   In what manner was this approved, and in what form was this approval promulgated?

It's very difficult for the troops "on the ground" to understand what is permitted and what is not when said permissions cannot seem to be found in regulations, manuals, pamphlets, ICLs, and Board minutes.   Pointing out where this permission was overlooked would go a long way towards resolving these issues.

Joseph; "We" meaning "all of us".  I have no idea if it's been written down however, it is standard SOP with many activities.  It's up the the NB to make it regulatory if they desire.   Maybe it's kind of the "What happens in Vegas Stays in Vegas" syndrome. 
The point I'm making: NO one in the higher levels of the CAP Chain of command condones the wearing of unauthorized uniform items in CAP outside of an individual activity.  The Air Force does take this seriously and, so should "we". 

Bottom line is to use your best judgement when dealing with any uniform violation.  HMRS is not the problem, IMO.  Enforcing what is correct is.

[Eclipse]

We let activity commanders allow uniform items like; special shirts, pins, hats, etc to be worn at encampments and other special activities so CAP allows HMRS to have belts, scarves, etc. 

Encampments and other activities authorizing the wear of multi-colored shirts, metal grade on ball caps, or anything outside 39-1 are violating regulations and receiving the benefit of the same "look the other way" apathy that HMRS does.

The only t-shirts any members are allowed to wear are white, brown, or black (depending on uniform).  Insignia on those t-shirts also have specific rules.

Unit commanders can authorize ball caps, but grade on those caps is specifically prohibited.

You can't use this as a precedent.

[FW]

^It is what it is, Eclipse.  I'm only stating my opinions on what I've observed over the last 30 or so years.  Right now; 39-1 only allows HMRS bling to be worn on the BBDU.  That's the guidelines I go by when making comments to members not being correct.  Wear of the "bling" on the BDU is still going through AF channels for a yes or no decision. 

The precedent has been set by continually allowing uniform violations for many many years.  Only until a clear consice CAPM 39-1 is written, a strong and representative uniform board is developed and, membership buy in occurs, will it change.

[Nathan]

We let activity commanders allow uniform items like; special shirts, pins, hats, etc to be worn at encampments and other special activities so CAP allows HMRS to have belts, scarves, etc.

Well... yes and no. There are some activities that can have items that are authorized by the commander, but NOT for encampments or special activities. Allow me to quote the CAPM 39-1...

In all cases, these items will have no national significance or recognition as a part of the CAP uniform. They will not be worn at summer encampments or national events (cadet exchange, special activities, etc.), unless specifically
authorized by National Headquarters. They may be worn only while performing the duty for which the use of the items was authorized. Wing/region approved items will be worn only within the boundaries of the authorizing commander.

The list of items following includes the scarves, pistol belts, etc. So unless Hawk Mountain Ranger School specifically has written authorization to have these items be worn at the activity, they are not and cannot be authorized for wear either at Hawk or outside of it. Period. Since you have said that nobody at national level has signed off on these items (indicating that such authorization does not exist), then it becomes clear that Hawk is wearing their items either in clear ignorance or in clear defiance of written regulations. Simple as that.

Cadets at the school (I've been told) are instructed in the proper wear of the "LL" patch and the current prohibition of the tabs on the BDU.  The current PAWG/CC has assured me there are no exceptions to the wear of these items.  Cadets who have trouble understanding this should be "re instructed" by their unit.  Leadership development should be constantly taught and its principles reinforced at all levels.  Discipline at home is as important as the skills taught at any NCSA.  I would continue to remind cadets of this and hold them accountable for their actions.  That's my $.02 on the issue; YMMV.

What you have been told happens at the activity goes directly against what the results show. If the cadets are being told that wear of Hawk Mountain bling is unauthorized, or that in PAWG the LL patch does not replace the PAWG wing patch, then either the vast majority of graduates I've met are profoundly stupid or profoundly defiant.

I might be accused of being stubborn on this, but I can promise that I have no personal vendetta toward Hawk when I make my argument. I simply cannot accept that when the majority of cadets I've met who come out of Hawk have these bad attitudes that it is MY JOB to fix it. I have very little control over what happens to my cadets when they are at the mountain, and so to tell me that I simply need to deal with the fact that these cadets are going to have these attitudes is, in my opinion, unacceptable.

To date, I have never had to deal with a cadet defiantly wearing a Glider Academy booney, or HGA bling, or PJOC hat, or COS pin. I've never even had to deal with cadets coming home and insisting on wearing a colored hat worn at an encampment. The only thing that has come close is the beret, and the regulations covering the beret are more confusingly flexible than those covering Hawk bling, so I can at least understand why a cadet might think that the beret is authorized when the regs at least offer a possibility of this being true.

But Hawk bling has no leg to stand on, even at the activity itself, and yet it somehow manages to not only find its way outside of the activity, but back to the squadron. The only way for me to have any more control over the situation is to chaperone my cadets to Hawk myself and sit there and correct the Hawk guys with a set of regulations in my hand every second of the day. I really think that if it comes down to me doing THAT, then there needs to be a little bit of reform at the school itself.

[JoeTomasone]

The precedent has been set by continually allowing uniform violations for many many years.  Only until a clear consice CAPM 39-1 is written, a strong and representative uniform board is developed and, membership buy in occurs, will it change.

Interesting concept - if the regulation doesn't permit what they want to do, or is wordy, or sometimes unclear, Hawk can pretty much do whatever it wants and wait for it to become precedent, and then have an affirmative defense for its actions.    Or is this just limited to 39-1?   Can they institute motivational pushups, if they choose?   Are Form 78's still required?   This opens up a multitude of possibilities.  I'm beginning to really appreciate this program the more I learn about it.

[Nathan]

^It is what it is, Eclipse.  I'm only stating my opinions on what I've observed over the last 30 or so years.  Right now; 39-1 only allows HMRS bling to be worn on the BBDU.  That's the guidelines I go by when making comments to members not being correct.  Wear of the "bling" on the BDU is still going through AF channels for a yes or no decision. 

The precedent has been set by continually allowing uniform violations for many many years.  Only until a clear consice CAPM 39-1 is written, a strong and representative uniform board is developed and, membership buy in occurs, will it change.

I don't mean to sound rude when I ask this, but if you agree that enforcement is the key (I agree with you), then why didn't you enforce it as the PAWG commander? Why did you continually allow uniform violations that allowed the precedent to continue? From what I read, the CAPM 39-1 is fairly clear on the issues that we're talking about, so I am genuinely interested in why you are willing to say that enforcement is a problem when you were one of the few people in a position to actually deal with the issue.