This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
MEL FREDEEN
In these pictures taken more than 50 years apart, the Coast Guard patrol boats don’t look all that different. The smuggling vessels, Helena Star in 1978 and Mary Langdon in 1925, differ principally in the nature of their respective cargoes of contraband, marijuana and alcohol. In each case, the Coast Guard was directed to carry out the national will with regard to an undesirable substance. And in each case, the job found the Coast Guard with insufficient tools.
this
young man does not understand that all Coast
T
-4- he U. S. Coast Guard is the world’s largest jfiarine police force. It is potentially the most power. of federal law enforcement agencies. Yet, today, *s so weak in this field that it is barely able to Carry out its growing responsibilities. Without needed equipment, personnel, training, or commit- |nient, the Coast Guard’s law enforcement program is eing conducted with considerable risk, both to the safety of individual boarding officers and to the repu- tat'on of the organization.
Mission Origin: The service is having difficulty acCepting the fact that marine law enforcement is a ternary, if not the primary mission for the 1980s and eyond. In the words of one senior officer:
We are once again the Revenue Cutter Service of ancestors. And yet, not all of us appear comfort- le m this role. We have identified so long with our te saver’ and other various images that an organiza- tlonal inertia has developed which inhibits an aggres- s,Ve approach to law enforcement.”1
This resistance to law enforcement can be found at levels. In completing a recent survey on the Coast uard’s retention problems, one young seaman exposed what is thought to be a widely held belief, “I ^nd a lot of others joined the Coast Guard to save Ves and not to go out and bust people for smug- ^lng, or anything to do with law enforcement. If I Ranted to bust people—I’d be a cop!” The fact that
p O
Uardsmen beyond the pay grade of E-3 are at least j^0tential policemen is not surprising. The Coast uard’s history as a lifesaving service is a long and l*roud one. The lifesaver image is one which has been ^•ltivated, and it is the common view of the service. °Wever, the Coast Guard traditionally traces its °ots back to the Revenue Cutter Service.
In setting forth an economic plan for this nation in °9> Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton ^ec°gnized the great threat posed by smuggling. On August 1790, he received congressional support for Seagoing military force that could enforce this na- ^°n s customs laws.2 This force became part of the 0ast Guard, which was formed in 1915, through e rnerger of the Revenue Cutter Service and the e'Saving Service. Thus, law enforcement is not tle'v ro the Coast Guard. It was in fact the reason for
°r footnotes, please turn to page 65.
the origin of the Revenue Cutter Service.
Even after assuming its responsibilities for lifesaving, the service continued its police work. In one of this nation’s largest law enforcement undertakings, the enforcement of Prohibition, the U. S. Coast Guard was a principal player. The rum war at sea was waged for 14 years (1920-1933). During this period the Coast Guard exercised its law enforcement responsibilities on an unprecedented scale. As a result, it emerged from the “war” larger and more important than ever before.3 Law enforcement has, however, in the words of one chief boatswain’s mate, “. . . been put on the back burner since the repeal of Prohibition in the 1930s.” But congressional heat, in the form of more and more new laws requiring Coast Guard enforcement, is causing the pot to boil once again. The Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 is an excellent example.
Statutory Basis: Title 14, U. S. Code establishes the Coast Guard as the only agency with plenary jurisdiction over all violations of federal law on and under the high seas and on waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Section 89 authorizes commissioned officers, warrant officers, and petty officers of the Coast Guard to go aboard any vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United States in order to make inspections, searches, seizures, inquiries, and arrests. They may also use all necessary force to compel compliance. Under the provisions of 14 USC 141, the Coast Guard may also assist state and local authorities in the enforcement of their laws. It may also assist other federal agencies in the enforcement of laws which they administer.4 Additionally, Title 14 USC 149 authorizes Coast Guard personnel, with permission of the president, to assist foreign governments in the enforcement of their laws, if requested to do so. Unlike other law enforcement agencies, they may conduct searches (within certain limits) and seizures without a warrant. This may prompt civil libertarians to cringe and FBI agents to envy, but the nature of the marine environment has been found by the courts to be sufficient reason for allowing such actions without a court order. It’s very difficult to get a judge out of bed when boarding 50 miles at sea.
Coast Guard jurisdiction is as large as its authority. The Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 gave the service responsibility for fishery law enforcement over 2.2 million square miles of ocean.4 However, the “beat” is even larger than that. Continental shelf fishery laws are enforced beyond the 200-mile fishery conservation zone (FCZ) where the continental shelf so extends. The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 and the Deepwater Port Act of 1974 also extend to the limits of the continental shelf (a limit which lacks legal definition). Although the above laws apply to U. S. and foreign vessels alike, Title 14 also gives Coast Guard jurisdiction over U. S.-flag vessels anywhere on or under the high seas.
Scope of Mission: While fisheries, anti-smuggling, pollution, and recreational boating law enforcement are best known, Congress has handed a myriad of other statutes to the Coast Guard for enforcement. Chapter IX of the Coast Guard’s Boarding Manual lists 11 “Fisheries and Conservation” laws, 17 “Customs” laws, 15 “Navigation” laws (including antipollution statutes), 5 “Public Health” laws (quarantine statutes), and 90 “Shipping” laws which are of specific concern to the Coast Guard boarding officer. In addition, the organization has an interest, along with others, in the observance of such laws as the Immigration and Nationality Act, various firearm control acts, and certain statutes dealing with neutrality and national security. These latter acts are responsible for the Coast Guard’s nearly continuous patrolling of the Florida Straits for the past 20 years.
The ELT Program: While the list of laws to be enforced is long, the Coast Guard’s Enforcement of Laws and Treaties (ELT) Program is most concerned today with fisheries and smuggling. The pollution and boating safety law enforcement efforts mentioned above are administered outside of the ELT Program. Of these, the anti-pollution program has done relatively well in the budgetary process, thanks to the concern generated by the rash of tanker accidents in 1975. The service’s boating safety effort, on the other hand, is being transferred to the states and is in an accelerating decline.
Fisheries law enforcement is the largest area of activity in the ELT program. Dating back to the Coasting and Fishing Act of 1793, which required the Revenue Cutter Service to prevent foreign fishing within America’s territorial sea, this enforcement role has been broadened over the years to include protection of seals, otters, whales, sponges, and various species of fish. Today, the Coast Guard’s role in fisheries has been greatly expanded. Long- and medium-range aircraft monitor foreign fishing fleet activity and report their positions to cutters on patrol. Personnel from these cutters board and inspect the foreign vessels to determine that quotas are not exceeded and agreed methods are being used.
In its anti-smuggling role, the Coast Guard has stepped up its efforts to prevent drugs and other controlled substances from being smuggled into the country by sea. These efforts range from the boarding of pleasure craft by small boats from local stations to extensive multi-unit operations involving cooperation with the Drug Enforcement Administration and the U. S. Customs Service. In 1973, the service participated in the seizure of seven vessels carrying contraband worth $4.8 million. In one month of 19^0 (15 March-10 April), the organization seized eight vessels and more than 40 tons of marijuana.
Problems: The state of the Coast Guard’s fleet is a prime example.of the service’s handicaps. The cutter fleet has not expanded to meet the increased requirements of the ELT Program. The number of cutters has decreased from 339 in 1969 to 246 in 19?9 because of budget cuts.5 This occurred during a period when Congress added the 2.2 million square miles of patrol area.
The General Accounting Office has gone so far aS to state, "The Coast Guard does not have enough vessels to carry out its missions, and some available vessels are in poor operating condition.” Its newest classes of cutters are into their second decade of service. Its former Navy fleet tugs are approaching their 40th birthdays, and the venerable 327-foot class |S even older. The new 270-foot class is now under construction. However, current funding does not indicate that these ships will be built in sufficient number to make up the shortage. Additionally, there are those in the Coast Guard who question the abihrf of this 19.5-knot vessel to fully support the ELT Pr°' gram. It has been “designed to keep up with ouf slowest targets.”
In 1924, the Coast Guard found itself overwhelmed by the liquor smugglers and unable t0 intercept more than perhaps 5% of the flow. To in1' prove this record, Congress:
► Authorized the transfer of 40 aircraft, 24 destroyers, and 2 minesweepers from the Navy
► Started construction of 409 new cutters and boatS (ranging from 34 to 125 feet in length and some capable of speeds to 35 knots)
► Increased the manpower ceiling by 3,535 people> funded acquisition of modern communications an direction-finding equipment
► Provided funds for informants and an intelligence network
Today, Coast Guard officials estimate that they art| intercepting no more than 10% of the marijuana an “hard stuff” being smuggled into the United StateS
^ Sea. And, according to Newsweek, we are losing e drug war, afloat and ashore. Federal agents are °pelessly outmanned with 200 or so smuggling flrigs running out of Miami alone.7 The congres- ^°nal reaction? On 5 May 1980, Senator Howard ■j,ar>non, chairman of the Commerce, Science and ^rar,sportation Committee (with jurisdiction over • 0ast Guard activities), stood before the Senate ask- ^8 that $160 million not be cut from the service’s 1Scal year 1981 operating budget, as had been rec- 0rntnended by the Budget Committee. He pointed °Ut that such a cut would not allow for any inflationary increases and would not even allow the service to c°yer increases in costs which have already occurred.
^°t only is Congress not providing the support needed for the law enforcement job (to name but one 3rea of need), it is threatening the service’s ability Ven to maintain the status quo. In reacting to the j^oposed fiscal year 1981 cut, the Commandant, t^c ^iral John B. Hayes, advised Senator Cannon that j e likely effects would include ”... substantial cuts g enforcement of laws and treaties, Marine nv,tonmental Protection, Outer Continental Shelf C^ivies, Commercial Vessel Safety Operations, and ^ ers- A number of stations, ships and aircraft will aVe to be decommissioned, and personnel will have 0 released.”8
As are all of the armed services, the Coast Guard is suffering from severe personnel retention problems. Moreover, budgetary constraints prevent the “hiring on” of all the help needed. In the Coast Guard of the 1980s there are units in which port and starboard liberty is the rule and 100-hour workweeks are routine. The personnel at these units are not exactly thrilled at the prospect of increased law enforcement responsibility. Because of its unpopularity with many Coast Guard personnel, and because of the added work load it represents, law enforcement contributes to the organization’s retention problems (although pay remains the larger factor by far). This, in turn, means that training must be increased and repeated, because no experience base is being developed.
According to the General Accounting Office, nearly 50% of the Coast Guard’s enlisted personnel now have less than two years of experience. This hits the ELT Program especially hard. The complexity of
vide for the incorporation of Coast Guard policy, an^ are mostly of a non-recurring nature. This is *n marked contrast to the training required for a civil marine police officer. A marine policeman of rbe Orange or Los Angeles County, California, harbor department has been graduated from a 16-week police academy, spent hundreds of hours as an aP' prentice, and receives recurring training on a weekly or monthly basis. Firearms training and proficiency firing is performed quarterly. Coast Guard weap°n* training is conducted annually, at best. A shortage 0 funding for ammunition has not always permit** even this in the past.
Of all the areas in which training is needed, it lS in fisheries enforcement that the need seems greatest- This least glamorous of law enforcement efforts get* little more than an honorable mention in much 0 the established training. Admittedly, there are fun' damentals which transfer between types of enforce' ment work. However, there are also many uniqu£ aspects to fisheries enforcement work. The laws, the jurisdictional restraints, and the types of offenses arc all different from, say, customs enforcement.
The ability to identify a prohibited species
the job and the high stakes involved require both maturity and experience. To a great degree, resolution of the Coast Guard’s equipment and personnel problems lies with Congress, the Department of Transportation, and other forces outside of the organization’s control. Training, however, is an area in which the service can make some changes on its own.
There is, in the words of one unit commander, “. . . a paucity of law enforcement training— operational training, weapons training, and policy/ procedure training.” The ELT job is large, complex, and potentially dangerous. It can involve the issuance of penalties for thousands of dollars, the seizure of vessels, the arrest of suspected offenders, and even the employment of deadly force. Even so, few of those Coast Guardsmen involved have had more than the most rudimentary of training.
The centerpiece of the Coast Guard’s law enforcement training effort is its Maritime Law Enforcement School at Yorktown, Virginia. Conducting an intensive five-week course, for which it has earned an excellent reputation, this school is limited to an annual output of 490 graduates, 70 of which are senior administrators. This amounts to just over one graduate for each of the nearly 350 units that have some form of law enforcement assignment.9 There is currently no service-wide follow-up or refresher training. On one coast, units do receive a week of general law enforcement instruction annually from a visiting training team. This team provides 35 hours of teaching over some 12-15 subjects, ranging from rules of evidence to drug identification. That is the full extent of the training received by the majority of enforcement personnel on this coast.
Units in 5 of the Coast Guard’s 12 districts receive no standardized inter-district training at all. They may, however, have access to an intra-district program of some form. These vary in length, content, frequency, and quality. Additionally, most districts also conduct an annual boating law course which covers those laws, policies, and procedures peculiar to the recreational boating program. General law enforcement procedures—how to conduct a search, make an arrest, and so forth—are not included. To supplement this rather meager offering, many units have sought out training from non-Coast Guard sources. One unit has developed a program around training provided by a Navy shore patrol school. Another has included its personnel in a local sheriff’s training effort. Others are sending personnel through the law enforcement courses of local colleges. These boot strap” efforts demonstrate commendable initiative. Nonetheless, such programs are rarely marine oriented, are lacking in standardization, do not proon
board a foreign fishing vessel is not easily gained- Still, little has been done to teach species identified tion. One law enforcement administrator, lamenting the lack of training materials, suggested that boar ing officers . .go out and buy a book on the sub ject.” Others prefer to rely on the National Marine Fisheries Service agents who usually accompany Coasc Guard patrols. This, however, is at odds with the Commandant’s policy that we “. . . not allow °uf selves to be dependent on any other agency to plan’ develop, or carry out any law enforcement operatic11 which is within our capability and jurisdiction.1
There is probably no type of Coast Guard ^ot that has greater potential for mushrooming into ‘lfl international incident than a fishery patrol. The De partments of State, Commerce, Transportation * have a stake in their proper execution. A mista here could well land in the White House’s situat*0^ room, as occurred in 1972 when the boarding Pat of the cutter Storis was taken captive by a Soviet * tory ship. Having observed these many concerns, submit that a fisheries boarding officer should be-
► An agile seaman—capable of boarding frorn
small boat in heavy seas and driving snow __
► An accountant—able to decipher the catch reC
ords and transfer logs of fishing vessels and fact( ships alike j:
► A language specialist—able to understand any ^ six different languages well enough to detect inc0(l sistent statements between captain and crew
th^u8gestions: With time, money, and effort, all of 0/ ^r°k*ems listed here can be resolved. A great deal each will be required to replace the Coast Guard’s °lr*8 fleet. But some equipment needs can be more y met. Equipping boarding officers with proper
ft
°otw,
tts
antly, fisheries boarding officers need a shoe that stand up to the triple threats of slippery decks, ’ and freezing wet fish holds. No issue shoe has Passed this test. New shoes may not be the most Ssmg of equipment needs, but they would help
^ A marine biologist—capable of identifying any of *everal different fish types from scales, a scrap of ^esh, or after filleting and freezing has occurred j. ^ diplomat—always sensitive to the cultural dif- rences of Koreans, Japanese, Taiwanese, Soviets, others—and a model representative of the ^ n*ted States
^ marine policeman—professional, confident in ls knowledge of the law, able to find and recognize 3ny °f a number of offenses, capable of gathering and Preserving evidence, expert in the use of the .45 •her pistol, and able to carry out an arrest or sei- *Ufe with a minimum of force toward the above ideal, one Coast Guard district t°nducts a comprehensive one-day course in addition ^ whatever other training the enforcement unit may ave sought. Other districts provide none.
easil
Wear is an example. Everything from “boondock- L t0 chartreuse tennis shoes is now being worn by Va>ard'ng personnel. A deck shoe that will not scar Wished gunwales or slip on wet decks, and still
Peats as part of the uniform, is needed. More im
port;
can salt yet
Pte
tht . .
^ service in the personnel retention struggle.
arding parties need to know that the larger organization cares about their well-being. Training and proper protective clothing can convey this.
Personnel also need to understand the nature and the value of their law enforcement efforts. Recruiters and boot camp instructors need to make clear that the U. S. Coast Guard is a marine police force and that police work is an honorable profession. The Coast Guard needs to promote its law enforcement work internally as well as externally. This is clearly illustrated in the statement of a second-term petty officer, a boatswain’s mate first class:
“I understand we as a service have been in the law enforcement game a long time, but not until recently at the pace we are now. I’ve been trained and feel good about SAR [search and rescue] and A/N [aids to navigation work]. I feel this is m'y job and is why I stayed in. I feel we are highly unqualified as a unit for LE [law enforcement]. Nobody came in for LE and as such don’t [sic] have the enthusiasm needed to do the job. . . . We used to
d
ols
in
d-
be a helping type service. Now I feel the boating
public feels we are something to be avoided.
11
Training can help overcome this feeling, but more is needed. As noted by one law enforcement professional:
“It is idle to think that the police officer of today can carry out his many duties in the exemplary fashion the community has a right to expect without being trained ‘to the nines.’ . . . The many social, economic, and cultural changes which time has brought have made on-the-job police training anathema to our contemporary society.”
The alternatives to on-the-job training include expansion of the Marine Law Enforcement School. Increased trainee capacity is needed. This might best be done by establishing a second such school on the West Coast, as has been done in the leadership/ management program. A school or satellite program aimed specifically at fisheries law enforcement should also be considered. Graduates of the Marine Law Enforcement School should be provided with appropriate training materials and given the responsibility to conduct unit training. Such training could be varied to fit with the particular type of law enforcement performed by the parent unit.
The Atlantic and Pacific Area training teams need to be expanded to provide greater law enforcement training, to act as conduits of policy and new procedures, to evaluate the status of local training, and to provide some standardization across district boundaries. District and local level training should be continued and expanded, but only in accordance with a service-wide training standard. The present practice of taking law enforcement training any place it can be found should be pursued with greater discrimination, and with an eye toward some “terminal task objective”—what is it we want the trainee to be able to do? Learning Korean martial arts on Coast Guard time may be appealing to some but distinguishing a halibut from a salmon may be more pertinent.
There is a need for recurring training by the unit as well as by visiting area and district teams. Just as with search-and-rescue planning, first aid, or rules of the road, periodic review is required to ensure the availability of knowledge when needed. A standardized unit law enforcement training guide could be produced using the present Boating Safety Training Manual (CG 464) as a model. Law enforcement training exercises are also needed. Fire drills, collision drills, and gunnery exercises are required periodically. Search, seizure, and arrest exercises should also be required. Such, along with a review of a unit’s overall law enforcement training effort, could be added to the district inspector’s requirements list.
Weapons training has received considerable attention within the last year, and steps are being taken to upgrade it further. The judgmental firing program lS excellent, as is the high-level attention being given to this aspect of law enforcement preparation. What is still needed by Coast Guardsmen is instruction to the use of the baton, handcuffs, and other gear which comprises the law enforcement equipment outfit- More frequent weapons requalification should also be a long-term goal, at least for some categories of enforcement personnel.
Many of these training suggestions involve money- A great deal in some cases, not much in others. But resources appear to be available even for some of the high-pricetag items. Knowledgeable and capable la"' enforcement trainers exist within the Coast Guard s 54 boating safety detachments. Trained in boarding procedures, basic law enforcement principles, and instructor techniques, these personnel could be moved into an Enforcement of Laws and Treaties Program training position with only a modest amount of additional preparation.
The lessening need for a Coast Guard presence on the nation’s inland waters has been established. The reprogramming of some boating safety program re' sources has begun. Thus, with the states assuming the burden for recreational boating law enforcement on their waters and Coast Guard operating units increasing their boardings (to ensure compliance with equipment and customs laws) on coastal waters, the move of some boating safety personnel to ELT train' ing seems appropriate.
Conclusion: Over the past eight years, the Coast Guard has been tasked by Congress with a larger an larger law enforcement role. Resources have not kepc pace, and other problems have complicated the j°b Nonetheless, 18- and 19-year-old petty officers an(
21-year-old ensigns have strapped on their pisr and gone out and done a damh fine job. Nothing this article is intended to detract from the outstan1 ing performance of those who have been in the fis holds and the bilges enforcing this country’s laws- The point is that there is risk associated with work. Coast Guard personnel have been assaulted anL shot at. These risks grow as the importance of marine law enforcement grows and as the Coast Guard be comes more limited in its ability to apply resources' The policing of this nation’s marine resources |S growing in importance as more and more country* turn to the sea for the protein which their pe°P‘ need to survive. Control of these resources is ernerg
^ng as a point of focus in world politics. Competition etween U. S. fishermen for various species can also e expected to increase, even to the point of violence. ”IS has been seen already in the Florida lobster wars t^le eady 1970s and the more recent salmon war in 1 e Pacific Northwest.
k "^he smuggling of narcotics into the United States y sea shows no signs of lessening. In addition, the ehhood of the smuggling of aliens and firearms aPpears to be growVhg. On top of these concerns is a Altitude of other laws which are of potential consequence to the Coast Guard’s future. Don Walsh, a J^abtime observer of some note, states: “The Coast uard will continue to be tasked with the principal r°k °f the policing and regulatory functions in the j^astal and resources zones surrounding the United ates- ■ . . [M]any experts believe that there will be ^fadual assignment to this agency of virtually the erit‘re regulatory responsibility for this region.”12 .here can be little doubt that law enforcement ^h be the Coast Guard’s main challenge in the °bs. To meet this challenge and reduce the attendant risks, resources and change are needed. Some of these require congressional help. Some require serious soul-searching by the service. Let us hope that both will be forthcoming because the Coast Guard is standing into danger, not because the waters are uncharted but because the law enforcement “ship” is not well found. The course must be altered or the “ship” made seaworthy once again.
Lieutenant Commander Ebersole is an 18-year veteran—officer and enlisted—of the Coast Guard. His service afloat has been in six cutters, of which he commanded the Cape Morgan (WPB-95313) and the Point Grace (WPB- 82323). Staff experience includes tours as operations officer. Division 13 in Vietnam; three years in Coast Guard Headquarters; and assignment as Director of Auxiliary in Long Beach, California. While in headquarters, he served as Chief, Training Branch, Office of Boating Safety and developed a marine law enforcement program for Coast Guard boating safety personnel. He is a distinguished graduate of the Naval War College and holds a bachelor’s degree in public administration. Lieutenant Commander Ebersole is now commanding officer, Coast Guard Training Team One, Alameda, Calif.
Seniary Purcell, "GAO Report Says Coast Guard Is In Poor Condi- q avy Times. 19 May 1980, p. 2.
*C '
inlander W. T. Leland, USCG, "Law Enforcement—The Re-
c- . ^,ng Mission,” The Bulletin (of the USCG Academy Alumni Asso-
2C U)n^ January-February 1978, p. 40.
y^Ca‘n Stephen H. Evans, USCG, The United States Coast Guard: 1^49) '^ ^ Definitive History (Annapolis: U. S. Naval Institute,
.^mander Malcolm Willoughby, USCGR, Rum War at Sea (Wash- 4S(-t0n ^ U. S. Government Printing Office, 1964), p. 163- Pish EnS'8n Robert J- S1ye’ USCG’ “The Economics of a 200-Mile •.Theries Zone,” Proceedings. February 1977, pp. 35-39. Gerald D. Hill, Pp ^ ^w°“Million Square Mile Challenge,” NOAA magazine, July 1976,
V” Nt
^Ptroller General of the United States, The Coast Guard—Limited
Resources Curtail Ability to Meet Responsibilities (Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 3 April 1980), front cover.
7Dennis A. Williams and Elaine Shannon, "Miami’s Narcobucks,’ ” Newsweek. 9 June 1980, p. 44.
8U. S. Coast Guard, "Senator Pleads Budget,” Commandant's Bulletin. 19 May 1980, pp. 3-4.
"This number is arrived at by adding the Coast Guard’s WHECs, WMECs, and WPBs and combining them with its bases, marine safety offices, and stations.
’"Rear Admiral G. O. Thompson, USCG, letter 5920/1, 8 December 1975, to Commander 14th Coast Guard District.
’’Anonymous response to retention survey questionnaire completed during January 1980.
12Don Walsh, "Some Thoughts on National Ocean Policy: The Critical Issue,” San Diego Law Review. March 1976, p. 619.
_____________________________ Only 159 Shopping Days Left__________________
A Coast Guard cutter, undergoing refresher training at Guantanamo Bay, was holding a fog navigation drill during her morning sortie out of the harbor, and the executive officer was evaluating the radar navigation in CIC. His phone talker on the bridge was the chief yeoman, a giant man with a linebacker’s build and a thundering voice to match. Every few minutes the yeoman would sound off, "Combat reports we are two hundred yards left of proposed track,” or “Combat reports skunk charlie has passed astern!” There came a lull in the drill, and down in the isolation of CIC the exec looked at his calendar watch, noted it was 25 June, and mentioned that Christmas was exactly six months away. . . . while unconsciously holding the button down on his sound powered phone. The ship’s grade on the exercise was not helped when the chief yeoman bellowed, “Combat reports six months until Christmas!”
Lieutenant Commander Duncan P. Johnson, USCG (The Naval Institute will pay $15.00 for each anecdote published in the Proceedings.)