Its the Annual USCG issue:

http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/archive/month.asp?ID=254

ALOT in there about the new direction Commandant Allen is taking the CG in, and it includes the AUX. I think its very interesting. If ya can get your hands ona copy, its worth the read-JRC

As I cnnot get a copy - what does it say about the aux?

Thanks for the alert and the posting. I didn't see any mention of the AUX in the story, which is well done. Pachesma probably meant that the changes affecting the CG are also affecting the AUX.

From what I've seen of the Admiral, mostly from Coast Guard Channel and a few other places, I'm fairly impressed. However, he really needs to cut back on using so many buzz words.

The article in said issue of PROCEEDINGS where the AUX is specifically mentioned is entitled " THE COAST GUARD COULD BE BETTER USED......", and while the articles title doesn't really make the article sound like it, its actually a VERY glowing overview of just how good the USCG is at what it does, and it includes the AUX in that overview. The "gist" of the article focuses more on how some of the USCG's mission, such as ice-breaking and AToN, could or should be realigned or remissioned to other gov't agencies, such as ice-breaking to the USN and AToN maint and control to MARAD.The article even includes discussion of the USCG operating a small fleet of old "pigboat" subs for nearshore defense capabilities.

There's a whole para in the article, Titled "NEW STRUCTURES FOR NEW CONDITIONS", thats about the AUX, CLEARLY identifying the AUX(and the boating public in general) as a viable "living sensor" in the safety and security of our nations coastlines, ports,and boating public.

I think the author maybe wasn't aware of this:

http://www.americaswaterwaywatch.org/

but the fact that the AUX was mentioned positively in an article of The USNI's premiere magazine in its USCG specific issue, which more than likely means EVERYBODY in the USCG upper echelons will read it cover to cover, can't do anything save put the USCGAUX in a good light. "Food for Thought" kinda thing, and the AUX is including on the list of those "Foods".

I don't know whats gonna happen to the AUX in the future, I don't think anybody really knows whats gonna happen to the USCG in the future, but I think its pretty clear that the working relationship between the USCG and the AUX has to change. In some areas in the USCG the AUX stands right beside in most of their missions, in other places its the "oh, its just the AUX" mentality where its more an attitude of tolerance than acceptance.

When I was on AD in the CG ata small boat sta, our attitude towards the AUX was acceptance, they were just as much a part of our unit as anybody else was. When; as a civilian many years later I joined the AUX, the attitude of the AD in my AOR towards the AUX was pretty clearly moreso one of tolerance. "They're here, and we gotta put up with them. Let 'em go out and ride around on their boats, but don't give 'em anything "important" ta do".

And I gotta say, judging from some of the other AUXIES I saw out on the water during my short tenure in the AUX, that attitude within the AD was somewhat justified. NOTHING says T-E-A-M Coast Guard more than an OPFAC on official patrol under orders tieing up to the dock and shutting down totally(not even a radio guard)while the whole crew steps off an goes to a restaraunt to have lunch.

Anyways, that was yesterday. But that IS one of the 2 primary reasons I decided being in the AUX wasn't worth it for me. The primary reason was the absolute horrid attitude and treatment some AUX members showed to other AUX members.

I can't find a link to this specific article, if I find one I'll post it here-JRC

Hi Shipmates,

At Nacon, the Commandant gave the keynote address. When or if one can find it online the new (it seams) direction should be clearly communicated.

1. The Auxiliary doesn't work with the Coast guard, rather it is the Coast guard along with the active duty and reserve and civilan employies.

2. There is no "wrong way" to be an Auxiliarist. The only requirement is that you bring your skills to the table. It is up to everyone involved to find a fit, and to do their very best at what ever their duties are. This means that what ever skills you bring, you should use your talents to exacute the Coast Guard missions.

3. The Guardian ethos applies fully to us. As guardians we are to watch out for our shipmates where ever they sit in our Coast guard. Just as they are to watch out for us.

4. Changing roles and change in general. There is currently an Auxiliarist deployed on the Dallas in the black sea. There are Auxiliarists assigned throughout the Coast guard filling every type of role. The feuture is to continue this type of intagration.

Anyway, when you hear the speech, you will see what I'm talking about. Exciting times for sure. I had a chance to ask the Commandant some questions, and while I can't give his answers (yet), I can say the answers were very supportive of us, and I believe based upon these answers and the tone of his voice that he is really trying to move the Coast Guard all of us in a positive direction. He is undertaking some steps to better support the "volunteer members of our Coast guard."

P.S. his wife wanted to pet Snickers so that is how I caught his ear. His aide took a good picture of him petting my dog and talking with my girlfriend and I. The funny thing is that when she met him she had both of our drinks in her hands. She said "Sorry Admeral, I'm double fisten it tonight." To which he replyed, "That's okay, we'll knock elbos then." Then they knocked elbos, and he said "Sweet as my aide would say."

A very dinamic person.

Semper Paratus Guardians.

quote:

The "gist" of the article focuses more on how some of the USCG's mission, such as ice-breaking and AToN, could or should be realigned or remissioned to other gov't agencies, such as ice-breaking to the USN and AToN maint and control to MARAD.

And this is what has worried me ever since the CG was put under DHS. Because there are so many different orgs under the DHS umbrella I worry that some scatterbained, no-nothing bureaucrat will decide that they could get rid of some of the CG's duties and maybe combine the CG with Border Patrol, ICE, or whomever.

I believe embracing the "Guardian"
title is a mistake the CG made all by itself. Now folks will think...."Hmmm, Guardians" - Law Enforcement, lets meld all the various LE agencies into one".....and out goes many of the traditional CG roles and missions.

The term "Guardian" will have different meanings to different people. From what I have researched the term is not new, and has been used to discribe the Coast guard before.

A Guard to protect, or to safe guard,. To guard against,
One who Guards

So, the term Guardian doesn't only mean law enforcement. People in Boating Safety guard against the loss of life through education. A radio guard listens for traffic to provide a safety guard against loosing contact...

In this way, they are guardians. I wish I could explane it as well as others, but there you have it.

anyway, I don't mind the term. and my Uncle a for mer GM3 now retired doesn't mind it either... So, my $.02

I understand completely what Gunny is talking about. Under the DOT we were easily identified and our function was always fairly clear. Since we went under the DHS we are thrown in with many different agencies that are armed and have search, seizure, and arrest powers. Jurisdiction is extremely confusing when several of these agencies are all involved with the same incident. Some of the other agencies feel the same way as we do concerning going under the DHS so we are not alone.

First thought I had when it was decided that the USCG was gonna be "absorbed" into the newly created DHS was "Uh-Oh, there goes the Coast Guard", and I still don't think that book is fully written either.

And as far as "Guardian" goes, seems to me in the late 70's, early 80's the USCG had a recruiting poster that showed a 41UTB with its docking lights on coming towards ya with a "COASTIE" on deck with the line "GUARDIANS OF THE SEA" emblazoned over it.

I'd like to think that this new "guardian ethos" comes more from the strong maritime tradition and history of the service than it does from a pretty bad recent movie of the same name starring Ashton Kutcher and Kevin Costner, but WHY am I willing to bet it has more ta do with the latter than the former??-JRC

quote:

Originally posted by Ex_CG_GM:
And this is what has worried me ever since the CG was put under DHS. Because there are so many different orgs under the DHS umbrella I worry that some scatterbained, no-nothing bureaucrat will decide that they could get rid of some of the CG's duties and maybe combine the CG with Border Patrol, ICE, or whomever.

Bad news, then. I believe the entire (weak) rationale for putting the USCG under DHS was to do entirely what you describe above. To combine what was seen as independant agencies that needed to be combined. Especially BP and CG. Whether that was a wise decision remains to be seen....

Just to make it clear this particular article in PROCEEDINGS in NO way, shape, or form made any statement or suggestion that the US Coast Guard EVER be anything other than the US Coast Guard.

It was moreso an article that spoke more of just about how good the USCG was at the many missions its been frocked with accomplishing, and just maybe it would be alot better if some of its "sub-missions" were handed off to other agencies to oversee and run.

It never once even gave a hint of a statement that the USCG should be part of anything else.

Having said that though, this is just an article writen in a "trade" publication, I hope the USCG always is nothing but the USCG, but like I said, I don't think that book is done being written yet-JRC

http://sites.google.com/site/cgauxnacon2008/Home/commdores-banquet

Geez Robert, I just listened to all 20 minutes and 50 seconds of the speech, and I didn't hear much to get "all excited" over.

Obviousily with no longer being in the AUX it didn't apply to me, but I never once heard the term "search and rescue", I never once heard any reference to any kind of specific AUX operation(surface or Air), what I did hear(thru all the government speak) primarily is that the USCG is gonna be looking to the AUX to do administrative and logistical support. Oh, and to "babysit" the young members of the AD, which in and of itself probably ain't a half bad idea.

My ears are definetly "tuned to a different frequency" while listening to the COMDTs keynote speech, I'm listening to it from a different perspective, but I didn't hear anything that would lend credence to your theory of a new, better AUXILIARY, unless of course your definition of new and better was doing administrative and logistical support.

I'm not saying the AUX SURFACE or AIR ops programs are gonna disappear, it just sure sounds like;from the USCG standpoint, that those programs are gonna diminish until they are just a pin ***** on the AUXILIARYs radar scope.

I'm sure the AUX will still have the "chosen few" in those programs, to foist up and take pictures of so they can be slathered everywhere, but I don't see any sign of either program moving forward with the same gusto that the USCG wants the "administrative and logistical support" programs to move forward.

I mean, its not like any of this should be "new" news, as an outsider looking in from what I've seen the USCG and the AUX "leadership"; in a very subtle way, have been saying thats what the future of the AUX is gonna be since around the beginning of 2004.

I don't know Robert, I didn't hear what you claim to have heard in the same speech-JRC

Patch,

Perhaps we have a different view of what a positive change for the Auxiliary is. I believe there is nothing wrong with completely obsorving the Auxiliary into the rest of the Coast guard so that Auxiliarists insted of crewing their own boats, serve as part of a mixed crew. I see nothing wrong with Auxiliarists getting away from the "flotilla" construct, and rather being assigned to regular or reserve commands. Granted, there will need to be some Auxiliary detachments to cover the areas where the sector is too far away, but over all command and control will rest with the sector and the "Auxiliary detachments" will fall under the command and control of the sector.

Perhaps there is nothing wrong with the Coast Guard as a whole working as one rather than the Auxiliary sometimes feeling it may do as it wants, that "we" are different than "them" is the wrong way of looking of the picture.

From where I sit, there is nothing wrong with trying to manage the Auxiliary as the reserves are managed. If intragrating Auxiliarists into regular and reserve commands, or, "useing your God given talents to excicute the missions of the Coast Guard" gives us better support, then what is the problem?

I also heard nothing about the boat crew program going anywhere, or loosing operations in any way. What I did hear is that we now have Auxiliarists deploied into a zone that isn't very nice right now.

So, maybe we are hearing things differently. Besides, wouldn't being more involved with the rest of our coast guard prevent some of the issues we talk about on here? but then again, maybe we just see things differently. Take care my friend,

I agree with Pachesma, in that Surface Ops is on life support. It is in this AOR. It is a sad thing indeed that my Persian cat has more on-the-water patrol hours than the flotilla Ops, Division Ops, and District Ops combined! On our last patrol we went for three and one half hours without giving an "Ops Normal" as no one would respond on the VHF until we secured. When I reported this occurence the attitude was "so what?" Can anyone say reorganization?

You know, I hope I am not disillusioned by this. I am currently studying to be crew. It has not been an easy task. Getting crew qualified takes a lot of patience, study, and willingness to have an open mind. Whether Aux Operations fall to the wayside or not, I am still going to continue with the training. yeah, I know, just another gung ho wannabe but I would rather be prepared than to stand on the sidelines. You know, I ignore the political BS the best I can and just want to do the job. If I need to get involved, then I get involved. Isn't that what it's all about?

Well, sorry, just ranting and raving I guess. I like what I do. And at 44 years of age, I really hope that I can continue on. I had the humble privilege to hand one our flotilla members his thirty year award. Thirty, fricking years AS A VOLUNTEER. I have had what, 3. 30 years, you know what. That says alot for this man. Boy, I hope he sticks around long enough so he can tell me some of his experiences...

I don't know whats causing it, but these are the total U/w numbers of my former DIV for the past 4 years. I've only included U/W numbers thru the 1st 3 quarters of the year-

2005-1997 hours

2006- 1733 hours

2007- 2207 hours

2008- 900 hours

So in 2008 thats pretty much less than half of the same time period in the 3 prior years. Our boating season is pretty much from memorial day to well, this weekend, with the bulk of the locals being out on the water in july & aug.

This isa pic that was taken on sunday 24AUG08 from Great Hill in North Weymouth Mass showing "Hull Gut" and the southern approaches to it in Boston Harbor:

I took it late morning/early afternoon, and as ya can see, while I do think boating traffic is down, it ain't dead.

I don't know why my former DIV's U/W hours are down so much compared to the past few years.Price of fuel I'm sure has some impact on it, but I don't think boating in general is down as much as the U/W hours are. Theres absolutely fewer boats out, but it ain't down by half.

Asa civilian I'm not "out there" as much as I used to be, but thats due to issues other than the price of fuel, I had the same opportunities to be "out there" this year as I had in past years, I just chose ta do it less.

The little cove right at the beach I live 50 yards from at the southern end of Hull Mass. has more pleasure boats moored there than I've seen in the past 15 years. Theres usually 15 or 20 boats there, this year there is at least 30.

And in 2008 I've yet to see an AUX OPFAC on patrol in or around Boston Harbor.

So is it the price of fuel; probably at least some of it, but is the program also being cut back some????

I can understand losing 25, 30, maybe even 35 per cent due to the price of fuel, but not more than half.

Gas wasn't that cheap in 2007 either, but the numbers thru 3 qtrs stayed pretty much the same as 2005 and 2006, actually showed up some hours in '07.

I think the price of fuel may actually become a very convenient "exit stage left" for the USCG to curtail the surface ops program. As we all know the price of fuel, it would be very hard for anyone to argue the point if the USCG comes out and says "we can't afford the fuel costs of the AUX surface OPS program so we're cutting it back to nothing".

And as for what ANCORA says, heck, I experienced the same mentality and sentiment when we would be out on patrol, and that was 5 years ago. And; to make matters worse, the watchstander at the unit we reported to when we were on patrol was an Auxiliarist!!

Lot cheaper for the USCG to supply a box of pencils or black pens to the AUX than it is to pay for fuel for an OPFAC-JRC

I have absolutely no data or evidence to back this up, but my completely blind guess is that we're seeing fewer OPFACs on the water in part because fewer new members joining are owners, and the existing owners are getting older and older... maybe?

hey midnmike,

I looked at that as well in AUXINFO, except instead of my DIV I looked at my old FLOT.

Pretty much same "players" that were there when I was in the AUX are still there, maybe 3 or 4 "new" names. So in 4 years they've picked up 3 or 4 new members.

There are 27 names listed there in AUXINFO under my old FLOT that actually did some documented worthy USCGAUX mission in 2008. Under the "U/W" part of AUXINFO, only 9 have any U/W hours documented in 2008. For a grand total of one hundred fifty something hours. To put that into perspective last year I was "in" and active in the surface OPS program I alone had 140 hours, to date in 2008 the whole FLOT only has about 10 or so more hours than I did by myself.

Of those 9 names, they are all the same people that were active in the surface OPS program when I was doing it. But there "U/W" hours to date in 2008 are all like 8, 12, 14, or so hours, the highest hours "U/W" of any individual is only 40 hours!!!

A couple of these 9 same people ain't as young so the part that they are just slowing down due to age could very much be true. As I identified, as a civilian I'm not out there as much as I used to be, but in my case its due to disability, not age, I guess we could kinda superimpose that same general theory to my old FLOT.For whatever reason, age or them old knees ain't working as good as they used to, they just ain't getting U/W as much.

There are 3 listed OPFACS, I think when I was there it was 4. But one of those OPFAC owners had 2 OPFACS, a "cabin cruiser" and a "center console". But the "cabin cruiser" was a veteran of MANY U/W hours(it was essentially our DIV training platform), and was in need of some new engines(which was actually a project myself and the OPFAC owner were working on when that PSI came along and I decided to "just say NO"), so I'm willing to bet that THAT particular OPFAC ain't anymore.

That parts kinda sad to me as this OPFAC owner was one of the all round nicest guys I ever met, and one heck of a good AUX coxswain.Only AUX OPFAC I spent any time U/W on.

I was pretty sure I was leaving the AUX anyways when the PSI came along, and there was "GOB" bad blood between me and some of the "senior" both FLOT and DIV members when I left, (I spent the 1st 6 months post member pulling all the "daggers" from them outa my back. notice I said back, not a one of 'em had the stones ta do it to my face), so all communication between us ceased and I don't know if the repower ever got done.

I imagine not as the repower was to be done "on the cheap" and I was a major factor in the "on the cheap" part as I was gonna volunteer my efforts to the cause, and it was gonna mostly be my effort.

So I think the only OPFAC he has now is the "center console".

Six Coxswain/six crew listed current in AUXINFO, and again pretty much the same names as before.

So; in my old FLOT, its pretty much a stagnation in the surface OPS program, I guess the big question would be "WHY"???

Is it age and naturally backing up a bit?? Well, 2 of them coxswains are of the "not young in age" set, but the coxswain in my old FLOT currently showing the most U/W hours at 40 or so IS one of the 2 "not so young in age" coxswains. The other "not so young in age" coxswains is the cox whose OPFAC I was gonna help to repower.

The other 4 coxswains are right around my age(55 +/- probably 5 years), so why ain't they getting U/W??? They were all in pretty good physical shape last I saw 'em, ones even the DIV Capt now, a professional "dagger" thrower and head of a "GOB".

Is it lack of OPFAC?? I don't think so. The guy I knew that owned the 2 OPFAC always made his "cabin cruiser" available for use to any current coxswain in our DIV, I imagine his "center console" is the same.

So I guess it would come down to either "I don't wanna do that anymore" OR "we've been told we can't do that anymore".

And its not necessarily age as a little less than 2/3rds of my old FLOT is in the age 59 or younger bracket.And most; if not all, of the FLOT new members are my age or younger.

There are 9 "VE's", pretty much evenly split between the "new kids on the block" and the members been around for awhile.

But that probably is a record high for "VE's" in my old FLOT.

There were 4 new members "took the oath" same nite I did, two of 'em still there. Both qualed "VE" and crew. Only one of 'em got any U/W times this year, and its only like 6 hours. But they are also I believe the current FC and VFC.

Out of the last 3 or 4 new members they have(post since when I joined)2 or 3 of them are "fog a mirror" members that don't do nothing.

So is the surface OPS program dying a natural death or is the USCG shoveling some shovel fulls of dirt on the program after its already in the ground???

The expense to the USCG to have the AUX do VE's and "adminstrative and logistical support" is almost nothing, the expense to have them same members cox and crew qualed out on patrols is significant. Well, its more significant than the cost of "VE's" and "backfill" support.

When I joined the AUX it was for one reason, and one reason only- surface OPS. Had no problem with any collateral logistical or administrative support I may have had ta do in the AUX. Heck I was my FLOT IS guy. I considered any of that part I had ta do is part of the overall mission.

Didn't want ta do VE's, didn't want to work a booth at boat shows, didn't wanna visit the local marinas and boat dealers and set up them little pamphlet racks, ABSOLUTELY DID NOT want to be any kind of "administrative or logistical support" for any kind of USCG unit.

Was in the USCG active duty 4 years and already did all that, and alot more.

Look at it from a straight business question- Wheres the USCG gonna get the "best bang for the buck" outa the AUX???

I think the COMDT already answered that as the keynote speaker @ NACON 2008, and he answered it more than once-JRC