# Prohibition of non-issued boots?



## Matt_Fisher (29 Mar 2005)

I just spoke with a friend of mine who's in 39 CBG and he told me that a CANFORGEN has came out that states that the only boots authorized for wear in the field are the Mk IIIs and the Cold/Wet Weather Boots.

I'd always known that non-issued kit has been dicey at times, but in the field, the choice of footwear has been pretty much left up to the individual soldier (within reason).  However from what my buddy was telling me is that in 39 CBG at least, the Brigade RSM is on a witch hunt for anybody not wearing CF issued boots, and that even jungle and desert boots you were issued are prohibited from wear in Canada.  Does anyone have any more substance on this?  Is this something limited to 39 CBG or is it now Forces wide?


----------



## jswift872 (29 Mar 2005)

I don't know if this helps much, but a bunch of guy's from my unit (PLF) wear these boots they picked up in Virginia called Magnums I beleive (correct me if I'm wrong)  hope this helps...a little


----------



## Nfld Sapper (29 Mar 2005)

I know for LFAA ARCON 04  (36/37 CBG's/0 in the Joining Instructions/ARCON Orders it was stated that desert and jungle boots were not to be worn as they are only authorized for use outside of Canada.

So, it might be forces wide, not entirely sure.


----------



## COBRA-6 (29 Mar 2005)

Not a CANFORGEN, likely a 39 CBG dress reg...


----------



## perry (29 Mar 2005)

I spent the summer of 04 and other times at the ARMD School and I always wore jungle boots or desert boots in the field but only in the field only and nothing was ever said to me and I have seen lot of others wearing them as well.I believe this may be a Unit/RSM thing, even at my old Unit we used to wear jungle boots or "other than issue" boots in the field and nothing was ever said.


----------



## Britney Spears (29 Mar 2005)

Like we'lll ever be that well organized. I'm sure the troops are just waiting it out until the RSM gets some new hair in his @ss. Besides, 39Bg is a reserve BG, I highly doubt that 90% of the soldiers have ever actually SEEN the brigade RSM, much less seen him in the field.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (29 Mar 2005)

If it is a CANFORGEN would you happen to know what it is?   Also there are many instances of people getting chits to wear better boots.   We all know the MK 3's cause injuries over time that aren't necessary.   Another instance of a dinosaur that needs to be put to pasture.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (29 Mar 2005)

39 CBG

11 Medical Company
11 Service Battalion
12 Medical Company
12 Service Battalion
15 Field Artillery Regiment
15 Field Artillery Regiment Band
39 Canadian Brigade Group HQ
44 Field Engineer Squadron
5 Field Artillery Regiment
6 Field Engineer Squadron
British Columbia Dragoons
British Columbia Regiment
Canadian Scottish Regiment
Rocky Mountain Rangers
Royal Westminster Regiment
Seaforth Highlanders of Canada


----------



## Haggis (29 Mar 2005)

The direction is a CANFORGEN, issued about a month ago. Unfortunately I don't have the complete text on my home PC, but the topic was field dress.

Specifically it says the following:

-  The only boots approved for field wear in Canada are the Mk 3's and the Wet Weather Combat Boot. It goes on to specifically mention that desert boots are not to be worn in Canada.

- The only headdress for wear in the field (other than a helmet) is the wide brimmed combat hat.  The BDU pattern Ranger boonie hat and old Robin Hood combat cap are forbidden.

There are many other ponits as well pertaining to the fielding of the ICE kit and wearing mixed ICE/IECS and mixed CADPAT/OD kit as well as a restriction on wearing CADPAT (AR) in Canada.

All RSMs and SSM/CSMs should have seen this by now.

Bottom line is that this CANFORGEN has the force of an order so no one has any excuses if you get jacked up for  wearing desert boots in Northern Alberta.


----------



## chrisf (30 Mar 2005)

You're not allowed to mix ICE and IECS? Ridiculous... as much as I can understand if you've been issued both sets of equipment (Though I can't see why anyone should have), I know plenty of people who've been issued bits and pieces of ICE due to shortages of IECS. 

*sigh*


----------



## Bomber (30 Mar 2005)

The funniest thing of that Canforgen is that it prohibits the wearing of Mukluks, Arctic Slippers, Snow shoes, skis, anything else that might go onto your feet, by saying that the only authorized footwear is the Mk 3, WWB, and the yet to be released TCB.  Put the appropriate stock into this CanForGen.  I think this "no desert boots or jungle boots" is some kind of madness that a bunch of people have been pushing for years.  I figure it is a "I don't have them, so neither can you".  If you have a chit for something, like boots, and are ordered to go against it by someone other than an MO, get ready to receive some pension action.


----------



## Big Foot (30 Mar 2005)

Great, so according to that CANFORGEN, I have no jacket that I can wear with my combats because it says you can't mix OD and CADPAT and since they won't give me a Goretex jacket, I guess I'm SOL. Oh well, rules are rules I suppose.


----------



## KevinB (30 Mar 2005)

1 CMBG has directed that no non issue boots be worn -- and get a load of this - EVEN if you have a chit...

 The only exception is that if the CF buys non issue boots for you. 


 Now - I have had a Danner chit sicne '95 -- I now need to prove to someone that I dont get MkIII's or WW Boots  :

Someone flipped the "GAY" switch


----------



## chrisf (30 Mar 2005)

Big Foot said:
			
		

> Great, so according to that CANFORGEN, I have no jacket that I can wear with my combats because it says you can't mix OD and CADPAT and since they won't give me a Goretex jacket, I guess I'm SOL. Oh well, rules are rules I suppose.



No, it said you can't mix IECS and ICE, the OD goretex vs the CADPAT.

Despite the CanForgen, if you haven't been issued it, you can't wear it, if the person jacking you up for it has a problem with that, then they should be the ones marching you off to supply to get you the new kit.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (30 Mar 2005)

Quote,
1 CMBG has directed that no non issue boots be worn -- and get a load of this - EVEN if you have a chit...
The only exception is that if the CF buys non issue boots for you. 

.....well obviously the author knows more than your doctor :...every once in a while something I read reminds me of why I booked it.


----------



## chrisf (30 Mar 2005)

Perhaps an evolution of liability issues? Same as a bastardization of "no running in combat boots"?


----------



## KevinB (30 Mar 2005)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> .....well obviously the author knows more than your doctor :...every once in a while something I read reminds me of why I booked it.



Never let common sense get in the way of uniformity


----------



## Nfld Sapper (30 Mar 2005)

Just a Sig Op said:
			
		

> Perhaps an evolution of liability issues? Same as a bastardization of "no running in combat boots"?



What ??? So what are we "supposed" to walk into/during battle  ;D : ???


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 Mar 2005)

That's odd Kev because we were told we could wear black JB's in garrison (I think because the DCO wears them all the time).


----------



## chrisf (30 Mar 2005)

Apparently.

(As I understand it, originally, it started as a ban in PT with the combat boots, running on pavement, as it was causing unnessascary injuries. Then it evolved into no running on pavement in combat boots. Period. Not even if you're in a real hurry. Then it evolved into no running in combat boots. Period. Stupid? Yes. No arguments there.)


----------



## chrisf (30 Mar 2005)

I still don't understand why they can't make a general issue of black jungle boots anyway, say, for wear with summer dress only.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 Mar 2005)

There is running in Cmbt boots in the field pure and simple.  There is not suppossed to be running in garrison.


----------



## KevinB (30 Mar 2005)

CFL said:
			
		

> That's odd Kev because we were told we could wear black JB's in garrison (I think because the DCO wears them all the time).



Ya - you guys in butt fuck nowheresville seem to beat to your own drummer.

No joy on the NSN for the Bolle's T800's


----------



## Infanteer (30 Mar 2005)

The headshed spits these CANFORGENs out every year - I remember the last one (about a year ago) that outlawed any non-issue digital cam (or something to that effect) because of the "IR Resistant nature" of CADPAT.  Or how about the 3VP Battlegroup on OP APOLLO getting nasty-grams for modifying the helmets to accept NVGs.

It seems that, most of the time, the pointy end smiles and nods....

Perhaps this is what happens when you have 70 Generals, a few hundred full Colonels and over 500 CWO's - someone is bound to go looking for new petty rule to enforce like what boots are being worn.  I hope there is some sort of professional satisfaction gained from doing so.... :

Infanteer, of the "Shut Up and Die Ranks" Alumni


----------



## TCBF (30 Mar 2005)

"Or how about the 3VP Battlegroup on OP APOLLO getting nasty-grams for modifying the helmets to accept NVGs."

Actually, the most heat was over the guys who cut the mag pockets off the front of their shirts and sewed them on the sleeves of their upper arms.  I think trimming the rim of the bush hat by a few rings (though not as much as "Bung" in The Odd Angry Shot) came a close second.

Tom


----------



## Infanteer (30 Mar 2005)

Our very own "Artist-formally-known-as-Bartok5" had some nice things to say about NDHQ and kit - I'm betting this "Boot" CANFORGEN came from the same place:



			
				Bartok5 said:
			
		

> Army Medic,
> 
> Believe it.   As OC Cbt Sp Coy 3 PPCLI, I was sufficently "connected" within the BG HQ to know exactly what was going on regarding kit as well as everything else that affected the BG before, during and following the deployment.
> 
> ...





			
				Bartok5 said:
			
		

> Oh, I forgot to mention that the troops deployed on the G-8 tasking in Kannaskis had the next generation moncular NVG that 3 PPCLI had ordered for the Afghan deployment.  Apparently the state-of-the-art night vision gear worked flawlessly  for watching miscellaneous wildlife and RCMP members fornicating in the wilds.
> 
> Overseas, we had the old AN-PVS7 binocular night vision goggles, with the inane and unworkable "soft" head harness.  No helmet mount, despite repeated requests for a compatible mount dating back to October 2001.  To add insult to injury, the NDHQ Life-Cycle Manager for night vision gear had the utter gall to get "pissy" when we promptly butchered those ludicrous head harnesses to cut out the mounting block and fabricate our own improvised in-theatre helmet mounts.  The LCMM for night vision was only marginally more removed from reality than the helmet Life-Cycle Manager, who threw a conniption fit because we screwed holes in the front of our  helmets to affix our rudimentary "home-brewed" NVG mounts.....
> 
> ...


----------



## TCBF (30 Mar 2005)

Man, that bring back memories...

Me and my Bravo c/s come back with our two Coyotes from one of the 80 km "pushing out the bubble" patrols.  We then wait and help the mechs change my right-front McPherson strut - complete.

Go easy, they told us, there is only one more spare...

This, while I was waiting for the drive motor that changes my Coyote Turret thermal sight picture from wide FOV to narrow FOV.  Only took six weeks.  But hey, we waited eight weeks for an engine.

Tom


----------



## Infanteer (30 Mar 2005)

But did you make sure that you were wearing issued boots throughout all of this?


----------



## TCBF (30 Mar 2005)

Oh yes, and cammie (but not desert cammie, of course) shower shoes in the shower (which was a black bag. I didn't get to "camp shower" until July).  And brown US t shirts because our "Mid tour socks and t shirts issue" turned into the "end tour socks and t shirts issue"

But I used a non-issue Garmin GPS to stake in the first Coyote OPs around the perimeter because I had to buy it so I would have a GPS with batteries.  The PLGR is a nice piece of kit, but when you can't take the LSD batteries on the C-5B/C-17 because they might make the friggin plane blow up.  But, the guys with the red arm bands with the yellow wheels on them (henceforth known as the universal symbol of a pathological liar) says "Dont worry, your batteries will be waiting for you when you get there!"

OK, pal, I think, "Thanks for coming out!" because I am commanding the first Coyote into Kandahar on 3 Feb 02 and the btys werent on that C-17 were they?  Three weeks later: "You guys need  batteries for your GPSs?"

Right.

Tom


----------



## mover1 (30 Mar 2005)

I am a pathological liar and I happened to be one of those AIR FORCE types who stayed in the Four Star Hotel. Which was dry and we had a curfew to be in by midnight but if you paid the little security guy in at the staff entrance you could get in for a few dollars without the fun police getting you in the lobby or just spend the night with a hooker they were nice and inexpensive and stayed at nice three star hotels.

      We were under the two beer per day because that was an ARMY rule. To be enforced in theater. The Navy had no rule when their ships came into port. Hell  they were even allowed in for duty free. Plus our R&R location had a drink all you want rule just don't leave the resorts compound. So I think whoever made said rules made a bad one. 

       Now I know you might be hating the airforce. But it is the nature of the beast that we stay in hotels when we go away. ( Thats why I took my LOTP) We aren't army and we are by no means tactical when we deploy. The only weapons we see are the ones the MP's have and the ones that you guys locked up in the sea cans behind supply.

             As for your supply problems in Kandahar. All of your equipment was sent to East Dover AFB to be loaded on the C-17s. Canadian Equipment got last priority.  

Remember the mail?

Sorry you didn't have any batteries. Were they booked on the flight? Did your UEO identify them on your dangerous goods manifest. If not then they would have been bumped.

Sorry about your having to rough it in a war.


----------



## Haggis (30 Mar 2005)

This sure turned into a "let's bash the NDHQ types who just don't get it" thread.

I'm at work now and have found the offending message. I won't re-print it here but it's:

CANFORGEN 016/05 CLS 001/05 261806Z JAN 05
DRESS POLICY AND ENTITLEMENT - CTS FIELD COMBAT CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT


----------



## Meridian (30 Mar 2005)

Big Foot said:
			
		

> Great, so according to that CANFORGEN, I have no jacket that I can wear with my combats because it says you can't mix OD and CADPAT and since they won't give me a Goretex jacket, I guess I'm SOL. Oh well, rules are rules I suppose.



Apparently it is not an issue for the Gold Bar Boys here in Ottawa because I see OD jackets with Cadpat all the time.

I see OD jackets and DEU's even more frequently.


----------



## George Wallace (30 Mar 2005)

Meridian said:
			
		

> Apparently it is not an issue for the Gold Bar Boys here in Ottawa because I see OD jackets with Cadpat all the time.
> 
> I see OD jackets and DEU's even more frequently.



Them that make the rules - can break them!  Funny how they can MIX Dress in NDHQ and the National Capital Region - Great show for all our Foreign Visitors.


----------



## Steel Badger (30 Mar 2005)

Yea verily should we not point the finger of recrimination at the worthies inhabiting the sacred precincts of Colonel By Drive.

Yea, even though the state of their rainments would cause event the most hardened RSM to break down and cry tears of agony;

Yea even though they bask and frolic through the Rideau Centre, hatless and in such great states of dissarray such that they maketh the Airforce and the denziens of John's Trout farm appear to be guardsmen.....

We, brethern, must not be swayed by their example......nay not even when they come forth from their dank offices dress in Deu with Oxfords and CADPAT Jacketry.......We must not give in!


----------



## Meridian (30 Mar 2005)

I must admit, I live on the same block as the Airforce HQ? (at least it has the airforce logo on some of the doors) so it is the lads in blue (well, not so much blue, but more green cadpat, but I digress) that I see the most....  although it is true, the Rideau Centre is awash in berets of all colours of the rainbow associated with a multitude of green, cadpat, black and blue, withe the occaisional white.


Secondary question - Why is it the navy can never have a properly formed beret? Is it because they wear it so infrequently that it must look like a disheveled puff pastry?  Nothing like seeing a LtCmdr with a puff-ball beret on his head on the bus-ride home. 

All of this must do wonders with the impressions of the ambassadors and diplomats roaming Ottawa streets.


----------



## AmmoTech90 (30 Mar 2005)

Look!!!

There's a new slip on for use with CADPAT!

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/community/MapleLeaf/vol_8/vol8_12/812_07.pdf


----------



## KevinB (30 Mar 2005)

mover1 said:
			
		

> As for your supply problems in Kandahar. All of your equipment was sent to East Dover AFB to be loaded on the C-17s. Canadian Equipment got last priority.
> 
> Remember the mail?
> 
> ...



Gee and I can't understand why people like us hate WOG's...


 Maybe if you realised it was a WAR - some of your chicken shit little safety nazi policies could have been relaxed?

My first major run in with the Safety Nazi's made me conclude that if we ever tried an Entebbe style raid - we'd need about 80 fricking Herc's.  DART to RWANDA circa Nov'96.  Sorry troops can't take ammo and POL on a plane with Troops -- OKAY - you want me to wait in Rwanada for a WEEK until the next chalk comes with no ammo, pyro or POL?

And you stay in a HOTEL  

War is hell right    :


----------



## Haggis (30 Mar 2005)

The dress regs allow wearing the IECS and ICE jackets and parkas with DEU with the exception of parades.  Yes, it looks like crap, but it's the best winter jacket we've got and a damn sight less socially insulting that wearing a greatcoat with a kilt.  You look like a bloody flasher!

The standard of dress in the NCR runs the scale from "not bad" to "abysmal" with limited instances of "aceptable" and "excellent".  Those with the best dress usually come from the "hard" trades in each environment.  In an effort to raise the standard of dress in the NCR, last fall it was directed that all Warrant Officers and above will wear DEU on a daily basis.  Not a lot of folks are happy about this.  The least affected are those people who formerly wore DEU to work and still don't shine thier shoes, cut their hair or press their trousers.  If they were a bag of shyte before the change, they've remained one afterwards.

I'm lucky. In my building I have a CWO who takes dress seriously (and he's Air Force... but he's a jumper.)  Unfortunately this only accounts for about 65 members in the entire NCR.  Gotta start somewhere!


----------



## Meridian (30 Mar 2005)

I wondered about that Haggis because I remember reading an NCR joining instructions type sheet that clearly outlined that DEU's were the Dress of the day every day for WOs & O's.

But I still see Officers in Cadpat all the time... (although it is moreso junior NCMs)... does the instruction not apply to Reserve officers on posting or something of that nature (im talking daytime here, not Evenings while people are on their way to the armoury)


----------



## mover1 (30 Mar 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Gee and I can't understand why people like us hate WOG's...
> 
> 
> Maybe if you realised it was a WAR - some of your chicken crap little safety nazi policies could have been relaxed?
> ...



         War is heck alright. And there was a realization to that fact in theater. All herc flights to Afghanistan were done under what is called a combat load. That means screw the regs and get the suff over there ASAP.  
However the stuff that went from Canada to ***** needs to be properly documented and diplomatic clearances are needed for every country you overfly.  American rules are more strict than our own. 
Sorry but thems the rules. 

As for dreaming of doing an Entebbe style raid. You would still only need three Hercs like the original plan. Unless you were bringing some useless crap that you bought at the surpluss store or Crappy tire. Like a laptop, GPS, extra danner boots, lazer pointers, some new gadget that you think you need but don't. Don't forget the average Israeli in 1973 was smaller than todays average Tim Hortons going CF Member.


----------



## combat_medic (30 Mar 2005)

OK, this is getting pretty hostile. 

*locked*

If you feel you can discuss this in a civil manner, you can start a new thread.


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Mar 2005)

> It goes on to specifically mention that desert boots are not to be worn in Canada.



Honestly what the fuck is it with desert boots? Every single spring and summer i've been in theres always some big argument over desert boots.   Desert boots are not allowed, period. People deploying overseas are allowed to wear them. Certian base commanders let troops wear them. People go out and buy them at the surplus store then get pissed off that they aren't allowed to wear them. Wear them in the field, not on base.   Anyone caught wearing desert boots will be charged (except the general who showed up to chat up the troops)

It's like a constant back and forth bitch fest (maybe thats just on CFB kingston and CFB petawawa?)
I used to think the desert boots signified some kind of 'ive been there ive done that' badge when i first joined.   Not so. Everyone has them.

Am i missing something here?   If were issued the stupid boots why not just wear them? If someone is stupid enough to wear desert boots int he winter, let them. (same goes for someone wearing mucklucks int he summer) I say go for it stupid.
The army loves to issue boots. I have 10 pairs of various issued boots. Why issue them and then give yourself a headache over them.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (31 Mar 2005)

"(except the general who showed up to chat up the troops)"
part of the problem.


----------

