Rescue bill for "rescue"

This seems to be a regular thing lately.

Cheaply built boat sailed by unprepared crew who didn't know boat was unfit for sea ... too cheap to call commercial assistance, turned down "rescue" because rescuer was going the wrong direction and we pay the bill.

now what the EFF is this nonsense all about? - Page 4

Unfortunately the only answer is hearings and rules and penalties to keep this from happening (but only to a point) and it's a slippery slope for the government.

The USCG is fully funded for a year as a multi-mission organization and whether they trade off doing a drug patrol in circles for days or do a recue tow....no more money is generally spent than would be anyhow.

The USCG is not like other military branches that need increased funding levels to go beyond their normal "work-ups" or excercises or assist in SAR (not sure where that funding comes from...they may be able to ask for supplemental funding) when involved in big SAR cases)...also not sure how the Nat Guard is funded for public assistance missions...

But unless something has drastically changes and I missed the news story...the USCG gets plenty of money to do SAR...it's usually money to keep things running or purchase new that the USCG historically got screwed on...now that they are a big cog in homeland security...not sure how they are doing getting new/upgraded stuff.

psneeld said:

Unfortunately the only answer is hearings and rules and penalties to keep this from happening (but only to a point) and it's a slippery slope for the government.

Click to expand...

There are presently such mechanisms in place for reimbursement to the government (from local on up) for criminal investigations, and as I recall, there are similar policies that allow for reimbursement for assistance, ie: Rescue, especially in cases of negligence. Not sure why the USCG can't or won't take advantage of those? Some things can't be foretold. For those people, help SHOULD be free (taxpayer dime).

For the rest, (IMHO) stupid should get expensive!

The USCG is not like other military branches that need increased funding levels to go beyond their normal "work-ups" or excercises or assist in SAR (not sure where that funding comes from...they may be able to ask for supplemental funding) when involved in big SAR cases)...also not sure how the Nat Guard is funded for public assistance missions...

Click to expand...

The last I knew, the National Guard get's it's funding from multiple sources including the DOD budget, Homeland Security, and the individual States. As I recall, funding for a particular mission is determined by the activating authority, i.e.: FEMA, DOD Activations, Homeland Security or the Governor of the Home State. The last I read, if for example, Florida sends NG Troops to Ga. to assist with flooding under a STATE mutual aid agreement, Ga. offsets the cost. If the whole ball of wax ends up under FEMA, then the feds pic up the tab. Things may have changed though?

But unless something has drastically changes and I missed the news story...the USCG gets plenty of money to do SAR...it's usually money to keep things running or purchase new that the USCG historically got screwed on...now that they are a big cog in homeland security...not sure how they are doing getting new/upgraded stuff.

Click to expand...

You said a mouthful there my friend!
I don't think we ever had enough money for our overall tasks.
Everything from maintaining ATONs, to Environmental Protection, Commercial Vessel Safety, COTP, SAR, LE... Command was always bitching about concerns over fuel cost/usage, maintenance, need for newer equipment, training...Then factor in the cost for reserves and auxiliary mission requirements, and

It didn't help that at times, the gov't couldn't figure out what to do with us, bouncing us around through the years to DOR, DOT, DOD (as appropriate), and now HS???

Add to that at least one occasion where we had a hand wringing panty waist for a commandant who didn't care for our military or LE function at all! If given the option, he would have disarmed the CG, pulled us out of the military and LE functions all together, and had us chasing SAR calls, oil spills and lights.

They do seem to have a bit better funding after going under HS though, at least on the LE side of things.

Let's see how it holds out?

OD

Off Duty said:

For the rest, (IMHO) stupid should get expensive!

Click to expand...

Agree absolutely!

The only problem with the label "stupid" is that it can be applied to anyone when something goes wrong...especially the average boater...

Off Duty said:

Add to that at least one occasion where we had a hand wringing panty waist for a commandant who didn't care for our military or LE function at all! If given the option, he would have disarmed the CG, pulled us out of the military and LE functions all together, and had us chasing SAR calls, oil spills and lights.

Click to expand...

Pantywaist? Why? Because he saw what a waste of tax money, people, and resources it was to duplicate what other agencies do (so they claim)so much better?

Let the real military play soldier and sailors, let the water cops (and the hundred other gun toting jackboots in center consoles) keep us safe from whatever they find offensive and let the CG do what they do really well - rescue people in distress.

The CG is doing an abysmal job of merchant marine oversight and by the sound of things, their SAR efforts are hindered by wannabe admirals and self styled defenders of the American way.

The problem in US is, in general, with multiple organizations/departments/divisions overlapping in territory and mission/function. Dispose illegally a cigarette butt in a train station and three different police forces show up, in addition to firefighters and paramedics. Poop in the water and CG, LE State, LE Local, FWC, EPA, and a few other acronyms might show up ... you get the idea.

The CG was, and still is, the only organization trained, equipped, and capable of addressing end-to-end all types of emergencies on the water, including most notably search and rescue. I wish they would stick with the original mission and left heavy machine guns and homeland security chases to other existing branches of government.

Richard W said:

The problem in US is, in general, with multiple organizations/departments/divisions overlapping in territory and mission/function. Dispose illegally a cigarette butt in a train station and three different police forces show up, in addition to firefighters and paramedics. Poop in the water and CG, LE State, LE Local, FWC, EPA, and a few other acronyms might show up ... you get the idea.

The CG was, and still is, the only organization trained, equipped, and capable of addressing end-to-end all types of emergencies on the water, including most notably search and rescue. I wish they would stick with the original mission and left heavy machine guns and homeland security chases to other existing branches of government.

Click to expand...

Immediately after the American Revolutionary War the new United States was struggling to stay afloat financially. National income was desperately needed, and the government determined that a great deal of this income would come from import tariffs. Because of rampant smuggling, the need was immediate for strong enforcement of tariff laws, and on August 4, 1790, the United States Congress, urged on by Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton, created the Revenue-Marine, later renamed the Revenue Cutter Service by act of July 31, 1894 (28 Stat. 171).[1][2] It would be the responsibility of the new Revenue-Marine to enforce the tariff and all other maritime laws. In 1832, Secretary of the Treasury Louis McLane issued written orders for revenue cutters to conduct winter cruises to assist mariners in need, and Congress made the practice an official part of regulations in 1837. This was the beginning of the lifesaving mission for which the later U.S. Coast Guard would be best known worldwide.

the Revenue-Marine was the only armed maritime service of the United States, as the Navy had been disbanded.

psneeld said:

the Revenue-Marine was the only armed maritime service of the United States, as the Navy had been disbanded.

Click to expand...

Now that the Navy has been rebanded and we have more jackboots on the water than you can shake a fish at, it's a good time to disarm the coasties and let them take care of what they do so very well, SAR.

The really scary mission the USCG has....did you know???...they have the low level, low speed intercept mission over Wash, DC....anything too low and slow for the F-15/16s get gunned out of the sky by heavily armed USCG helicopters.....

The helos are out of Atlantic City but rotated in/out of Wash national (I think...they used to be)...they picked up that mission just as I was getting out.

If ever in Cape May County, you can watch them practicing intercepts on each other and I guess USCGAUX light aircraft on a regular basis.

I would NOT want to be the bozo that tries to ram a light plane into something in Wash, DC...I'm sure that Coastie flight crew would be pumped to be the "first"...

Coast Guard Choppers Intercept Small Plane Near US Capital at NYCAviation

psneeld said:

The really scary mission the USCG has....did you know???...they have the low level, low speed intercept mission over Wash, DC....anything too low and slow for the F-15/16s get gunned out of the sky by heavily armed USCG helicopters...

Click to expand...

As if the military assets in the area aren't better equipped and trained to do it themselves. It sounds like a bon bon to keep some CG admiral feeling like he has a defence role. Nothing quite so manly as herding a lost student in a C-172 away from that tall pointy landmark near the big dome thing.

When they were developing the intercept techiques and calibrating the radars used to identify a "threat" they used a pair of BD5Js that shared hanger space with my Starduster Too in ESN. They had some amazing hardware to record the flight data in real time outside the hanger. Nice guys with a fun job but one of them was killed in a crash at OXB.

I'm just pissed I missed all the fun...

Closest I ever got to put anything for my "Military Expertise" mark on my evaluation report (yep - invented by some wannabe gunslinging admiral or one of his weenies) was dropping sono-buoys in the middle of the North Pacific practicing sub location with the USCG 378 foot cutters.

Which one is more suitable for intercept and destroy mission? This ...



... or this?

All you have to do now is cruise around Puget Sound and see all the Coasties in the new, high-powered RIBs with the .50 Cal mounted on the bow. They are all in camo or black, vests, sidearms. If they had to jump in the water to save someone, they would sink.

Back in the early days of the "War on Drugs, early 80's, had a friend who was a CO of a cutter out of Miami. They got an order to shoot at a drug boat to disable it using their deck guns. He said the whole crew was lined up to take a turn at firing! They had never got to shoot anything before!

Richard W said:

Which one is more suitable for intercept and destroy mission? This ...



... or this?

Click to expand...

Actually over the crowded capital...the USCG helos properly armed...as was decided by a panel of experts....

in short....minimize collateral damage

THD said:

All you have to do now is cruise around Puget Sound and see all the Coasties in the new, high-powered RIBs with the .50 Cal mounted on the bow. They are all in camo or black, vests, sidearms. If they had to jump in the water to save someone, they would sink.

Back in the early days of the "War on Drugs, early 80's, had a friend who was a CO of a cutter out of Miami. They got an order to shoot at a drug boat to disable it using their deck guns. He said the whole crew was lined up to take a turn at firing! They had never got to shoot anything before!

Click to expand...

in the 80's .... EVERY cutter got to shoot at drug boats...

it was like fish in a barrel...if you took your eyes off the radar for a night in the passes...you would probably collide with a drug boat back then.

I was deployed to several cutters that shot to disable and finally sink after persons and drugs were recovered...very common back in the early 80's.

psneeld said:

in the 80's .... EVERY cutter got to shoot at drug boats...

Click to expand...

That's how we won the "drug war."

Greetings,
Mr. RickB...Should have waited another 6 minutes to post THAT reply.

THD said:

All you have to do now is cruise around Puget Sound and see all the Coasties in the new, high-powered RIBs with the .50 Cal mounted on the bow. They are all in camo or black, vests, sidearms. If they had to jump in the water to save someone, they would sink.

Click to expand...

Dark navy blue, not black, and Uh, no...they wouldn't

Back in the early days of the "War on Drugs, early 80's, had a friend who was a CO of a cutter out of Miami. They got an order to shoot at a drug boat to disable it using their deck guns. He said the whole crew was lined up to take a turn at firing! They had never got to shoot anything before!

Click to expand...

Was that the idiots (dopers, not the coasties) in the Windward Passage?
We had a video we used to use at various LE shows that was similar, and happened about the same time period.

psneeld said:

Actually over the crowded capital...the USCG helos properly armed...as was decided by a panel of experts....
in short....minimize collateral damage

Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing, just saying...1) Anything that comes out of a panel of anything in Washington is Suspect
2) Ex=Has been, Spert (Spurt)= A drip under pressure

Richard W said:

Which one is more suitable for intercept and destroy mission? This ...

... or this?

Click to expand...

Guess it really depends on "what" they're intercepting?
The craft I can think of right off hand that would fit that category are minimal. A Cessna 150?, an ultra light? Maybe a UAV? Maybe another helo?

Any of which I would think the gunship could dispatch with relative ease and accuracy.

I'm more inclined to believe our panel of experts were looking for a scapegoat. Don't endanger the DOD programs with civilian casualties. Throw the coast guard under the bus

Just a thought...

psneeld said:

The only problem with the label "stupid" is that it can be applied to anyone when something goes wrong...especially the average boater...

Click to expand...

Ok, I see what you mean. Maybe I should have said the "negligently stupid." Those that should have known better, can afford to do better, and refused. Guess I should have qualified the statement.

I wish they would stick with the original mission...

Click to expand...

They did...

psneeld said:

Immediately after the American Revolutionary War the new United States was struggling to stay afloat financially. National income was desperately needed, and the government determined that a great deal of this income would come from import tariffs. Because of rampant smuggling, the need was immediate for strong enforcement of tariff laws, and on August 4, 1790, the United States Congress, urged on by Secretary of the TreasuryAlexander Hamilton, created the Revenue-Marine, later renamed the Revenue Cutter Service by act of July 31, 1894 (28 Stat. 171).[1][2] It would be the responsibility of the new Revenue-Marine to enforce the tariff and all other maritime laws. In 1832, Secretary of the Treasury Louis McLane issued written orders for revenue cutters to conduct winter cruises to assist mariners in need, and Congress made the practice an official part of regulations in 1837. This was the beginning of the lifesaving mission for which the later U.S. Coast Guard would be best known worldwide.

the Revenue-Marine was the only armed maritime service of the United States, as the Navy had been disbanded.

Click to expand...

Good one!

RickB said:

Pantywaist? Why? Because he saw what a waste of tax money, people, and resources it was to duplicate what other agencies do (so they claim)so much better?...

Click to expand...

No. Because he was a hand wringing MOFO that would have been better suited to the Peace Corps (No intended offense to anyone who has served with the Peace Corps. - You probably have larger cojones than most of us, and thanks for your service.)
BTW-exactly which agencies would that be sur?

Let the real military play soldier and sailors, let the water cops (and the hundred other gun toting jackboots in center consoles) keep us safe from whatever they find offensive and let the CG do what they do really well - rescue people in distress.

Click to expand...

What an unbelievable statement...
Oh, and check your maritime history.

The CG is doing an abysmal job of merchant marine oversight...

Click to expand...

Now there's a job that could be turned over to an administrative civilian authority and serve everyone better. Actually, while on the subject, we could turn nearly ALL of the investigative functions (ie: Pollution Prevention, Oil Spill Investigations, Commercial and Cruise Ship Inspections, etc.), over to a civilian administrative group and save money and manpower. You might be surprised how many people like that kind of thing, and would hand over their guns to do this in a heartbeat.

CGI and all criminal investigation/intell work, could be outsourced to one of the existing Federal Agencies. Let the USCG go back to doing what they were designed to do...Enforce maritime law (on the water), protect American maritime assets here and abroad, and through administrative edict as stated above, SAR.

But since you brought it up, and not that I disagree with you, but please. How so?

...and by the sound of things, their SAR efforts are hindered by wannabe admirals and self styled defenders of the American way.

Click to expand...

I'm (almost) speechless

RickB said:

Now that the Navy has been rebanded and we have more jackboots on the water than you can shake a fish at, it's a good time to disarm the coasties and let them take care of what they do so very well, SAR.

Click to expand...

There's soooooo much that could be said, but I like it here, so......

Off Duty said:

There's soooooo much that could be said, but I like it here, so......

Click to expand...

Ahh, why not just loosen the old boot laces and relax. Tell us how you really feel about people who lack enthusiasm for the growing American police state.

And there really isn't much more that could be said that isn't a rehash of Nuremberg or the Hague. The authoritarians (of any and all ilk) sing the same songs and claim the same justifications we have heard for generations.

Off Duty said:

They did...
Good one!

Click to expand...

Perhaps we are diverging from the meaning by quoting back from really ancient part of US history. Let me rephrase this ...

I wish they would stick with the original mission of the USCG ...

RickB said:

Ahh, why not just loosen the old boot laces and relax. Tell us how you really feel about people who lack enthusiasm for the growing American police state.

And there really isn't much more that could be said that isn't a rehash of Nuremberg or the Hague. The authoritarians (of any and all ilk) sing the same songs and claim the same justifications we have heard for generations.

Click to expand...

I'm actually very relaxed. I enjoy a good debate. Just not much for purposeless bashing. that said, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
FWIW, I'm not big on "police states" either, and am very watchful of our government as a whole and many it's self serving practices. Remember the phrase "we're from the government, and we're here to help" hardly ever starts off a "good" thing
I just happen to think that in this case, you're either off base or ill informed on the CG matter. Then again, it's your dime and your time brother

The fact is, if we took the USCG back to where it began, you'd probably have more to complain about due to the revenue enforcement actions from whence they came.

Anyway, no harm no foul. Just sorry you see that you have such distrust or apparent disdain for them overall.

On the other hand, I do have a hidden stash of tin foil if you want some extra

Rest easy...big brother has your back.....
OD

Richard W said:

Perhaps we are diverging from the meaning by quoting back from really ancient part of US history. Let me rephrase this ...

I wish they would stick with the original mission of the USCG ...

Click to expand...

Oh you mean the Steamship Inspection Service...or was it the Lighthouse Service...I forget which one of those came right after the Revenue Cutter Service....

SAR really came pretty late in the USCG's history...yes the Life Saving Service was absorbed but the pressure and funding for most other USCG missions usually came first...

http://www.timetoast.com/timelines/46176

psneeld said:

Oh you mean the Steamship Inspection Service...or was it the Lighthouse Service...I forget which one of those came right after the Revenue Cutter Service....

SAR really came pretty late in the USCG's history...yes the Life Saving Service was absorbed but the pressure and funding for most other USCG missions usually came first...

Coast Guard History timeline | Timetoast timelines

Click to expand...

Dang dude!
Even I forgot about that!:lol:

When I was 14 working on a crab boat near Charleston, SC my boss and I rescued a "rich guy" in sport fisherman. It was his second time being rescued by Capt'n Joe.

I was told the first time the guy was unfortunate. The second time a damn fool.

1st one free - we've been contributing to the kitty all our working lives.
The rest....................pay up.

Funny you mention that.
In 84, I was assigned to the Terrorism Taskforce during the Summer Olympics in Cali.

We had this dude with more $$$ than sense, or just arrogant as it turned out, that ran his go fast out of fuel. A ridiculously priced speed boat and a non-working fuel gauge? Right!
Anyway, because of what and were we had to tow him out of the area twice. The command was pissed, so when he did it again, and he did, we let him sit until dusk. Not so bad if it hadn't been 100 degrees in the shade on a windless day....in an open boat We checked on him once an hour to make sure his vessel was still keeping water out, and he hadn't passed out!

He was upset to beat hell! So, since he was already pissed off, on the way in we boarded and cited him for a few violations.

Don't know what if anything they did with him, or really care. And I don't know if he was charged for the tow, but....he didn't run out of fuel again