4 ms·

I've spent a significant amount of time working in disaster response. In the US (and probably elsewhere), you have "Disaster Cowboys." These are people who are

I've spent a significant amount of time working in disaster response. In the US (and probably elsewhere), you have "Disaster Cowboys." These are people who are untrained but fancy they know better how to do things than people who have spent their lives training for these types of scenarios. Picture 1000 people showing up with their pickups and John boats following Hurricane Katrina. Or, imagine the Coast Guard conducting a search grid and all of these people zooming around the grid in every which way. On one hand, yes, they save some people. On the other hand, they are not on the official search grid rosters, don't tend to take directions well from the authorities, and can cause all sorts of havoc. They can make it harder to find people in need. In fact, when they don't coordinate with the authorities, they end up wasting the experts' time (who may end up covering the same ground) or, when they do coordinate, people in need end up getting missed because the random people who show up to help are not properly trained to conduct searches. Finally, as this news article shows, these folks have a tendency to go to the media and present themselves as heroes. You very rarely see that from the official search and rescue/recovery teams. Disaster response is extremely psychologically and emotionally stressful. You may ride a wave of adrenaline while you're out in the field, but most staff end up rotating out (by mandate) after several days to protect them. Even among professionals, there are a lot of people who end up relying on alcohol to ease their minds. Most importantly, the dignity of the people being rescued/recovered is important. It is all about those people, not about the hero rescuers. They are literally in trauma and can be dangerous and/or in need of urgent help, medical or otherwise. It is desperately unfair to them when somebody untrained, with a "cowboy" attitude, shows up and flips the script. Or, even worse, the cowboy crashes his helicopter and there's one more person who needs to be rescued. Not all people who randomly show up in their helicopters or John boats are like this, but enough of them are to sow chaos. And look at us all wasting time talking about this guy who feels slighted because his unprofessional help was refuted. It's the same story every time. Let the professionals do their job and, at the very least, let them coordinate the volunteers who show up to help. It sounds like a great idea for everybody to show up in their helicopter, but trust me, it's not.

exabrial 2y ago
So the main problem is what? Control? 1000 people show up and your leadership skills or ego can handle it? Sure be embarrassing if they outdid the government, that’s for sure. How about this: get out of their way. Or even better: clear their paths. Or conduct your own operations and don’t worry about it.
- voidUpdate 2y ago
  What would your reaction be if someone showed up to your place of work and just started trying to do things how they thought they should be done, ignoring the proper channels and now knowing any of the procedures?
  - oasisaimlessly 2y ago
    Bad analogy. If someone considers a disaster zone to be their personal fiefdom, they have a screw loose.
    - voidUpdate 2y ago
      Is enforcing established procedures making it their "personal fiefdom"? Because this is how most jobs work in my experience
      - rini17 2y ago
        There was not a shred of established procedure. Till a day later.
    - closewith 2y ago
      At every major incident I've ever attended, there has also been someone appointed in the hierachy who controls the scene as their personal fiefdom. We call them an incident commander.
  - Atheros 2y ago
    After a physical bomb went off 24 hours prior, trapping us, one of my co-workers is dead, and no emergency services responded? Is that really your question?
closewith 2y ago
We call them Walter Mittys, not Disaster Cowboys, but yes, these people appear at every scene. Everything else you said rings true, but sometimes motives are more sinister than a desire for personal glory. Vulnerable people attract predators and there's plenty of vulnerable people in disaster zones.
- exabrial 2y ago
  > Vulnerable people attract predators and there's plenty of vulnerable people in disaster zones. Funny you say that, because the government wants a monopoly on "help" and is willing to use lethal force to enact it.
lukan 2y ago
"It is desperately unfair to them when somebody untrained, with a "cowboy" attitude, shows up and flips the script. " Those rescued by the cowboys did not expressed that. Sure, everyone prefers the professionals to show up, but if they don't, because they are overwhelmed by the situation, I surely would be glad, if an "cowboy" comes instead to pick me up. Troublemakers in search for attention are to be kept away for sure, but those who are reasonable and willing to help and have a helicopter, like the person from the story, are probably open for an official way to help. Not what happened here.
- jquery 2y ago
  The article is written with an obvious slant, from the perspective of a guy who decided to go to the media to bash first responders after being asked to coordinate via proper channels. I would take anything he said with a huge grain of salt.
  - lukan 2y ago
    "I would take anything he said with a huge grain of salt." I do and I did not like that reporting, but if the facts are somewhat right, the arrest threat from wanting to at least still pick up his left behind son is way over the line, of anything reasonable.
    - jquery 2y ago
      Is it? He was simply told not to fly in that area anymore. Either his son was fine in which case no big deal, or his son wasn't fine in which case he was creating more people who needed to be rescued.
      - lukan 2y ago
        The son was left there on a mission agreed with local official staff to rescue a person of greater need, which otherwise would have been needed to rescue anyway. If the local chief decides to send a free helicopter away is one thing, but then sending the father away while failing to provide another extraction is just a sign of not being able to handle the situation. Ideally, there would have been an easy process for volunteers to get involved. They might have told him to come, but with the son back at home.
jquery 2y ago
Imagine working your ass off trying to rescue people and someone goes to the media after being asked to coordinate through proper channels and sends a pitchfork mob after you.
kortilla 2y ago
This is a bunch of gatekeeping with “yeah, they save lives, but might cause harm”. Has anyone actually done analysis to determine if a bunch of amateurs is actually a net negative? Search and rescue people get upset by these people not following authority, but that’s a standard response anytime amateurs show up to something. It’s the same dilemma of allowing regular people to serve food to large groups. Sure, discourage it if there is enough actual food to serve the survivors, but you sure as hell shouldn’t be doing it when the alternative is starvation. The same applies when you have dudes like this pilot who was flying where nobody else was. The people out there had 0% chance of rescue without him. Grounding “the cowboy” is just an authority flex.
- _djo_ 2y ago
  Do you not think that, if every disaster response and search & rescue organisation is saying the same thing about people just rocking up to get involved without the right coordination, that they might have a reason for it rather than just 'gatekeeping'?
  - jquery 2y ago
    Heavy downvotes on all the reasonable comments throughout this thread. Made me suspect there was more going on than just this incident and yep, Fox News and conservatives are trying to push an agenda filled with misinformation about how nobody is being allowed to help.
- nrjames 2y ago
  Sure, talk to the American Red Cross Society, which is the only nonprofit with a Congressional mandate to provide services during disasters. During Katrina, their Volunteer to Paid Employee ratio was about 64 to 1. It literally is an organization that exists to train volunteers for providing appropriate response during disasters. Is it bureaucratic and bloated? Sure, but its entire job is to get trained people in during these situations. Likewise, the Southern Baptist Convention provides most of the mobile kitchen that the ARCS uses (though they have no mandate to do so). There are official channels for getting volunteers trained up for these situations. The untrained folks have a tendency to make things worse, which is why the authorities usually don't want them there.
_djo_ 2y ago
Well said. Your point about 'disaster cowboys' is especially important, as disasters also unfortunately tend to attract people with a hero complex and without sufficient skills to be doing what they're doing. That's why you have proper volunteer organisations so that volunteers can be vetted before running around the disaster area.

exabrial 2y ago

So the main problem is what? Control? 1000 people show up and your leadership skills or ego can handle it? Sure be embarrassing if they outdid the government, that’s for sure. How about this: get out of their way. Or even better: clear their paths. Or conduct your own operations and don’t worry about it.

voidUpdate 2y ago
What would your reaction be if someone showed up to your place of work and just started trying to do things how they thought they should be done, ignoring the proper channels and now knowing any of the procedures?
- oasisaimlessly 2y ago
  Bad analogy. If someone considers a disaster zone to be their personal fiefdom, they have a screw loose.
  - voidUpdate 2y ago
    Is enforcing established procedures making it their "personal fiefdom"? Because this is how most jobs work in my experience
    - rini17 2y ago
      There was not a shred of established procedure. Till a day later.
  - closewith 2y ago
    At every major incident I've ever attended, there has also been someone appointed in the hierachy who controls the scene as their personal fiefdom. We call them an incident commander.
- Atheros 2y ago
  After a physical bomb went off 24 hours prior, trapping us, one of my co-workers is dead, and no emergency services responded? Is that really your question?

closewith 2y ago

We call them Walter Mittys, not Disaster Cowboys, but yes, these people appear at every scene. Everything else you said rings true, but sometimes motives are more sinister than a desire for personal glory. Vulnerable people attract predators and there's plenty of vulnerable people in disaster zones.

exabrial 2y ago
> Vulnerable people attract predators and there's plenty of vulnerable people in disaster zones. Funny you say that, because the government wants a monopoly on "help" and is willing to use lethal force to enact it.

lukan 2y ago

"It is desperately unfair to them when somebody untrained, with a "cowboy" attitude, shows up and flips the script. " Those rescued by the cowboys did not expressed that. Sure, everyone prefers the professionals to show up, but if they don't, because they are overwhelmed by the situation, I surely would be glad, if an "cowboy" comes instead to pick me up. Troublemakers in search for attention are to be kept away for sure, but those who are reasonable and willing to help and have a helicopter, like the person from the story, are probably open for an official way to help. Not what happened here.

jquery 2y ago
The article is written with an obvious slant, from the perspective of a guy who decided to go to the media to bash first responders after being asked to coordinate via proper channels. I would take anything he said with a huge grain of salt.
- lukan 2y ago
  "I would take anything he said with a huge grain of salt." I do and I did not like that reporting, but if the facts are somewhat right, the arrest threat from wanting to at least still pick up his left behind son is way over the line, of anything reasonable.
  - jquery 2y ago
    Is it? He was simply told not to fly in that area anymore. Either his son was fine in which case no big deal, or his son wasn't fine in which case he was creating more people who needed to be rescued.
    - lukan 2y ago
      The son was left there on a mission agreed with local official staff to rescue a person of greater need, which otherwise would have been needed to rescue anyway. If the local chief decides to send a free helicopter away is one thing, but then sending the father away while failing to provide another extraction is just a sign of not being able to handle the situation. Ideally, there would have been an easy process for volunteers to get involved. They might have told him to come, but with the son back at home.

jquery 2y ago

Imagine working your ass off trying to rescue people and someone goes to the media after being asked to coordinate through proper channels and sends a pitchfork mob after you.

kortilla 2y ago

This is a bunch of gatekeeping with “yeah, they save lives, but might cause harm”. Has anyone actually done analysis to determine if a bunch of amateurs is actually a net negative? Search and rescue people get upset by these people not following authority, but that’s a standard response anytime amateurs show up to something. It’s the same dilemma of allowing regular people to serve food to large groups. Sure, discourage it if there is enough actual food to serve the survivors, but you sure as hell shouldn’t be doing it when the alternative is starvation. The same applies when you have dudes like this pilot who was flying where nobody else was. The people out there had 0% chance of rescue without him. Grounding “the cowboy” is just an authority flex.

_djo_ 2y ago
Do you not think that, if every disaster response and search & rescue organisation is saying the same thing about people just rocking up to get involved without the right coordination, that they might have a reason for it rather than just 'gatekeeping'?
- jquery 2y ago
  Heavy downvotes on all the reasonable comments throughout this thread. Made me suspect there was more going on than just this incident and yep, Fox News and conservatives are trying to push an agenda filled with misinformation about how nobody is being allowed to help.
nrjames 2y ago
Sure, talk to the American Red Cross Society, which is the only nonprofit with a Congressional mandate to provide services during disasters. During Katrina, their Volunteer to Paid Employee ratio was about 64 to 1. It literally is an organization that exists to train volunteers for providing appropriate response during disasters. Is it bureaucratic and bloated? Sure, but its entire job is to get trained people in during these situations. Likewise, the Southern Baptist Convention provides most of the mobile kitchen that the ARCS uses (though they have no mandate to do so). There are official channels for getting volunteers trained up for these situations. The untrained folks have a tendency to make things worse, which is why the authorities usually don't want them there.

_djo_ 2y ago

Well said. Your point about 'disaster cowboys' is especially important, as disasters also unfortunately tend to attract people with a hero complex and without sufficient skills to be doing what they're doing. That's why you have proper volunteer organisations so that volunteers can be vetted before running around the disaster area.