Man, I would agree with this - I don't know any CERT training course that anticipates CERT participating in first responder activities - that requires training that CERT doesn't provide.

I think that at the extreme, in terms of S&R and First Aid, CERT can act as what I call 1 Hour responders, which are persons who dig into rubble in the hours immediately after a major event when First Responders are overwhelmed and unavailable. It is neighbor attempting to rescue neighbors, and family rescuing family members: it will go on regardless of the availability of trained response, so CERT at least gives its trainees some of the knowledge necessary to perform a safe and timely rescue. Some knowledge, but not all - you need the training that Paramedicpete describes to know what to do and what not to do. Family going after family however tend to blow away all the training and safety, and families are more likely to enter unsafe structures in an attempt to save lives of family members. Some lives will be lost if members of the public and/or CERT engage in light S&R, that's a fact, but maybe not as many as assumed. In the meantime, some studies are showing that rescues in those first hours after a disaster can save lives.

The same can be said about rendering first aid - you can only practice to the extent of your training and licensure. I might pull a victim from underneath a collapsed structure, but I can't do very much for their crush injuries except triage, and maybe immobilize and alert actual medical assistance for help.

I am a couple zip codes over from the municipality where I took my CERT training years ago - in the event of a major EQ, I'm not reaching for my lime green CERT vest and helmet and organizing with other CERTs, they are few in our city. I'm pulling out my garbage can full of pry bars and wood blocks for cribbing and blocking, and possibly putting that to use. And my bags full of bandages, triangle bandages, 4x4s, tape, gloves, and tarps, and attempting triage of wounded. The 'best' disasters will be when I look a little foolish for being prepared - but no way can I provide the same assistance that an actual First Responder can give. The 'worst' will be when I put all this stuff to use to the extent of my training.

Any of us who have firefighter training are likely either firefighters (and with their departments) or retired and likely don't have the physical capabilities they'd need to do your kind of work.

Moving rubble piles, hauling equipment, check buildings/homes that have no apparent damage, those are the sorts of things we can do. We can also assist in search efforts outdoors or in large (undamaged or lightly damaged) buildings.

One of my jobs as a team leader is to articulate our capabilities to first responders who may not know them, and to be able to say no if we're asked to do things we aren't trained or equipped to handle.

I forgot to mention: We can triage the wounded in a mass casualty event, sending the red tags to the professionals and taking care of the yellow and green tags ourselves.

In the event of a disaster (think EQ) our training sets clear priorities - first yourself, then family, then neighbors, and then try and form up as some sort of green helmeted entity. I can visualize green hard hats clawing their way out of the rubble and gradually forming themselves into coherent teams.

I think CERT makes sense in that after a major disaster, there will be attempts by the public at self rescue- training the general public can only improve the quality of the efforts and reduce the toll, especially when you consider the alternative - just do nothing and let John Q. Public fend for himself.

Pete,

Although I understand your concerns, I would disagree strongly with you about the usefulness of these programs. This attitude takes me back to 911 when ARC turned down volunteers to help passing out water bottles - they were not ARC certified! Should you send a CERT team into a badly damaged multi-story building? Of course not, but there will be lots of places you can use them. You have included several of them in your discussion. Can they carry timbers to the scene of first responders doing a rescue? Certainly. Food and water distribution, walk or carry survivors to triage areas. All these and many more are well within their capabilities and reduce the load on the professionals. Many more are within their capabilities under the supervision of a well trained person. They are a force multiplier and can allow the use of the trained personnel for only those situations where their training is needed.

I have been on many wild land fires and major disasters where the availability of untrained volunteers was a great help. CERT training would have made them even more useful. The professionals need to plan on how to include them and use them as their training allows. Just remember that their CERT training may not be the only thing they bring to the party.

Respectfully,

Jerry

Jerry,

I do believe the program is useful and productive. I believe the greatest benefit is in helping out neighbors immediately following a disaster and performing those functions that mitigate potentially further damage, such as turning off utilities, clearing undamaged structures of injured individuals, helping with communications and probably a whole host of non-hazardous assistance.

The problem I have is with “A second part of our mission is to provide a trained force of volunteers to supplement first responders, such as for search efforts”. Many of you who have taken the course have indicated in your own posts there is significant diversity of training, equipment provided and expectations from community to community and course to course. This is enough for me to take pause as to whether or not to use you to supplement First Responders. Even your example of moving timbers, something that would seem relatively benign can lead to issues. Do you have the proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), such as steel toed boots, leather gloves, long sleeved shirt and pants, a proper helmet that will not fall off your head? Do you have any acute or chronic injuries that could be exacerbated if you are lifting heavy timbers? Do you know how to lift heavy timbers? If you get hurt or your actions result in someone else getting hurt, what is the liability in using you? Have you undergone a criminal background check? Can I leave you to search a residence that may contain valuables without worry? These are questions and concerns that would, in my mind limit the areas in which I would feel comfortable using you as a supplemental resource under my direction.

Lono indicated: “By comparison, the CERT training I took was not intended to create a force of CERT trainees who get called out together to support first responders - it was intended more for individuals who might be stuck in the first 72 hours without first responders present.” and “if the Big One strikes, the first responders won't be in your neighborhood for at least 72 hours, you will be on your own, so you should focus on rescue and care of your family and immediate neighbors, and our overall training reflected those needs.” and “the last organized function I recall was to fill sandbags and keep flood water from encroaching on a non-critical structure - a city park building.”

Chaosmagnet listed: “Moving rubble piles, hauling equipment, check buildings/homes that have no apparent damage, those are the sorts of things we can do. We can also assist in search efforts outdoors or in large (undamaged or lightly damaged) buildings.”

Again, I do appreciate everyone’s efforts, it takes time to obtain the training and do believe the program has merit. Just don’t be surprised or offended if you show up after an event and First Responders are somewhat hesitant to utilize or integrate you into or under their operations.

I would like to hear more real world examples both from CERT members and various First Responders who have responded to events in which CERT members have been utilized and what their experiences have been.

Pete

I would agree with Jerry Fountain. I have seen many situations where non-First Responders productively aided the operations. On one memorable occasion my very own DD, all of thirteen years old, was part of a crew of untrained volunteers that pulled on the rope of a Z rig as we brought out the remains of a drowning victim at the end of a very long, dramatic, and deadly day. On another occasion, three of us guided and provided OJT for about ten hikers and climbers as we lowered a stretcher and victim about two hundred feet to a LZ over non-trivial terrain. Their actions were quite competent.

I also recall vividly the time I violated protocol, firing a line gun to place a rope across a flooding stream and secure two victims stranded on a sloping rock by a classic southwestern "wall of water" flood. Normally one of the deputies who were present on virtually every operation would have handled the line gun, but they were both on the other side of the canyon when the water came down, quite out of the picture. I figured I was the closest thing to a trained individual with access to the appliance (I had a LE commission in the NPS at the time, and reasonable firearms training) so I stepped up and pulled the trigger, so to speak. It was a clear violation of the policies then in force but the ladies were rescued successfully.

I would say that untrained individuals can materially assist emergency operations, but proper oversight and supervision is absolutely necessary.

As a member of an active and vigorous mountain SAR group for several years, I was struck at how often the diverse occupations of the group contributed to greater effectiveness. We had members who were physicians, mathematics professors, biochemists, engineers, students, and even an archaeologist or two. One of our most stalwart members was a dendrochronologist (ten bonus points if you can identify what he did). What we shared was a common interest in the outdoors and in aiding others. The different occupational specialties often provided novel approaches and solutions

Dendrochronologist= Age dater by way of Teeth/Bones

You've confused Latin with Greek. You're thinking of dens (stem dent-), tooth in Latin. This word here is Greek: dendron (stem dendr-), and it means tree.

Some CERT folks know the classical languages -- otherwise whom will you rely on when you come across a warning like "liberate tutamet ex inferis"? (Extra points for those who can identify the right movie. Incidentally, the script misspelled one Latin word.)

Hikermor, you're talking apples and oranges. Around here SAR are the first responders in wilderness areas, and are also used for urban search missions. They are well-trained and well-equipped. They pass criminal background checks. They have ongoing training as a requirement to continue doing SAR. Depending on the SAR unit, I believe most are credentialed. We can rely on SAR to do things like set up a helicopter landing zone, safely splint a broken leg, and they are trusted to evacuate the deceased with dignity. Whether CERT volunteers can do any of these is a matter of luck or occasional training, but CERT itself doesn't train or prepare its volunteers to perform such functions.

What you did in the water rescue example was done in exigent circumstances, a good call when going outside of protocol appeared necessary to save lives. Well done - I'm positive everyone was glad it worked out, especially the rescued.

In an earlier thread I expressed some surprise that civilians were actually assisting with a cribbing operation over fire hoses around a plane crash in MD. Pictures don't tell the whole story of anything, but laying blocks for a fire rig isn't a task that I would expect civilians to do, even under supervision. Hauling the blocks from the rig to the hoses sure. Definitely I wasn't there, so no way would I second guess the responders, they definitely had a quite active scene and lots bigger fish to fry. Nothing wrong per se, but it does tend to stand out.

First responders are right to be skeptical of CERT and similar training. As cautious as we may be, we make (more) mistakes in following protocols, and even in our own safety. I did that the other day when responding to a fire scene for the Red Cross, coming straight from a trip to Home Depot, I was wearing tennis shoes and not my boots that I put on when going out on every other fire call (and my spare pair wasn't in my vehicle, which is another story). I had to enter the structure to do a damage assessment / walk-thru - the fire fighter noticed my tennis shoes, and reminded me that they wore steel shanked boots to protect themselves, and in this particular fire I should probably go no further than a specific area. There's a first time for everything, and that was my first fire scene in unprotected tennis shoes. I felt like a piker. My co-responder was actually dressed in flip flops! Basically I was only one nail away from adding to the disaster rather than responding to it.