July — September 2002

—1—

Vol. 35 • No. 3

� Executive Board Reelected� The Companion Flag� NAVA 36 Retrospective

� Flags of Native Tribes whoEncountered Lewis & Clark

� Los Angeles Sheriff ’s Dept.

� Flag Conservation Committee� Portland, Oregon, New Flag� Designer of Canada’s Flag

� Chumley � Flag Patch� Flag Design Competition

July—September 2002INSIDE THIS ISSUE:

July—September 2002 Issue #175

NAVA 37MONTRÉAL, QUÉBEC

CANADA

OCTOBER 10-12, 2003

Left to right: Treasurer Ted Kaye, First Vice President Andy Biles, President DaveMartucci, Secretary Rich Monahan, Second Vice President Kevin Murray. Photo byMason Kaye.

The Civic Flag of Montréal

NAVA’s Executive Board ReelectedThe 36th Annual NAVA Conven-

tion is now history. Held in Denver,Colorado, it was a small meeting butmany of those who attended thought

the plus side of that was the closepersonal interactions that were pos-sible at such a meeting.

As reported in the Retrospective

article that starts on page 4, we al-tered our fiscal year and reelectedour officers, although the office ofPresident was contested, with anomination from the floor.

There were many excellent pre-sentations given and the DriverAward went to Peter Ansoff, whohas done excellent research on theHistorical Sources of the First U.S.Navy Jack, which, it turns out,wasn’t a jack at all.

The NAVA Flag ConservationCommittee made its first recom-mendation for an award that wasratified by the Executive Board (seearticle on page 13) and chose asecond project to support for thisyear’s effort. Please send your tax-deductible donations for thisworthy cause.

The Board also ratified the selec-tion of Montréal, Québec, Canadaas the site for next year’s meetingand decided that we should return

to the traditional U.S. ColumbusDay/Canadian Thanksgiving Week-end. Please plan to be there!

David Ott of Beaumont, Texas, dis-plays the flag of the so-called “Re-public of Georgia” used by the Anti-federalist Society of ChathamCounty, Georgia, U.S.A. The flag iswhite with a dark blue star. He un-furled this flag at NAVA 36 in Den-ver; see the article that begins onpage 4.

NAVA News 35/3 - #175

—2—

The Companion FlagBy Scott WyattWhat is it? The Companion Flag

is a symbol of all that human beingshave in common: the love of children,the desire for health and knowledge,concern for the safety and happinessof loved ones, our shared suscepti-bilities to pain and pleasure, illnessand injury, etc. It’s called the Com-panion Flag because it is flown be-low the other flags of the world, onthe same pole—never alone.

What does it look like? The Com-panion Flag is a white flag with asingle stripe of color across the top.The width of the stripe is 20% of theoverall height of the flag. The stripe’scolor is any color appearing in the‘host flag’ (i.e., the flag displayed di-rectly above the Companion Flag).When a Companion Flag is flownbelow the flag of the United States,for example, the stripe at the top ofthe Companion Flag will be eitherred or blue (at the discretion of thedisplayer), matching the red or bluein the US flag; when a CompanionFlag is flown below, say, the flag ofBrazil, the stripe at the top of theCompanion Flag will be either green,blue, or gold.

What’s the purpose of the Com-panion Flag? Its purpose is to in-crease and, more importantly, sus-tain public awareness of all thathuman beings have in common,without denying our differences, ortelling people how to think, feel, oract when human differences collide.It’s a gentle but constant reminderto all of us—especially our children—that it’s both possible and desirableto honor all parts of ourselves, andother human beings: both our dif-ferences, our separation, and diver-sity (represented by the host flag),as well as all that we have in com-mon with people everywhere in spiteof our differences (represented by theCompanion Flag).

An awareness of what we have incommon is the ground for compas-sionate understanding, and servesto underscore the essential dignityof all human beings.

The Companion Flag is designed

to be flown below all of the other flagsof the world as a matter of course:below every national, provincial,state, municipal, corporate, frater-nal, religious, athletic, and scholas-tic flag. Quoting at length from theCompanion Flag web site:

Flags are remarkable symbols —a unique marriage of elegance,power, and simplicity. They are dis-played in virtually every populationcenter, large or small, throughoutthe world. In addition to over 200national flags, there are thousandsof provincial, state, municipal, cor-porate, fraternal, religious, scholas-tic, athletic and familial flags. Gen-erally speaking, no two are alike.However, all have one thing in com-mon: they symbolize our diversityand separation. They divide us. Ev-ery flag in use today draws a line ofdivision over the world’s population:under each, there is a group ofpeople embraced and included, whilethe rest of the world, by definition,is excluded.

There are many important humandifferences manifest in our world, tobe sure. There are differences ofculture, nationality, race, history,language, and religion. There arepolitical and economic differences,distinct philosophies, traditions,

values, mores, etc. It isunderstandable and appropriate thatpeople sharing these differences andother special qualities take pride inthem, and cherish the emblemswhich they, or their predecessors,have chosen to represent them.Certainly, such symbols are not bad.

But just as there are differences,there are identities in the humanexperience which are remarkable andfar-reaching. The love of children, forexample; the instinct and desire tolive; the desire for health, knowledge,and happiness; the concern for thesafety and happiness of loved ones.These are the same the world over.

We humans share the same biol-ogy. We are vulnerable to illnessesand injuries. We feel sensations ofpain and pleasure. We come into theworld helpless, and require love, pro-tection, and nourishment to surviveand grow. Although there are differ-ences, we dress and protect ourselvesfrom the elements. We communicatein symbols. We have the same rangeof emotions. We are imperfect, andconscious of our imperfection. To alarge extent, we accept and buildupon the same body of knowledge.We build buildings, bridges, hospi-tals; embrace rules and customs;desire many of the same foods andproducts. We laugh and cry at manyof the same things. We create andtake pleasure in art, music, poetry,and storytelling. We value and keepalive the memories of our forebears.The list, it seems, is endless.

As one writer put it, human beingsare like pyramids whose differencescan be found only in the top few lay-ers of stone. This may be true; but,how do we explain the fact that, inlooking around us, we tend to see athreatening array of human differ-ences? Could it be that our essentialsameness is that part of the humanpyramid hidden below the horizon,out of view?

The flags of the world are univer-sally accepted symbols marking andcelebrating the division and separa-tion of the world’s people. Beautiful

July — September 2002

—3—

and enduring, they are worthy of theplace they hold in our hearts, to besure; but, at the same time, it is nolonger enough to just symbolize, orto just speak of, our differences. Todo this is to paint only half a picture— to describe a pyramid with refer-ence only to its top few layers ofstone. If the flags of the world aremeant to represent us (and they are)— and if we are to live under them(which we do) — then the time hascome to complete their symbolic mis-sion. The time has come to insurethat both our differences and ouressential sameness — two distinctfactors which are, after all, “at work”simultaneously in our daily lives —are depicted and honored simulta-neously, as well.

The Companion Flag, flown withthe other flags of the world, will ac-complish this goal. The CompanionFlag is a reminder — gentle, ever-present, and conspicuous — thatour lives, and the lives of people ev-erywhere, are informed and influ-enced as much by our essential hu-manity as by circumstances, condi-tions, and perspectives that are dis-tinct and idiosyncratic. Both influ-ences are valid; neither can be de-nied. But the former is special. Hu-manity is our common bond. It is apart of each of us, yet the same forall, no matter where we live or howpronounced our differences. TheCompanion Flag is a symbol of ourshared humanity. Its adoption willmark an historic moment of globalself-recognition, mutual under-standing, and respect.

Where is it flying? The Compan-ion Flag is a new and (as far as Iknow) unprecedented idea. Unless Iam mistaken, it is the world’s firsttangible symbol representing “allthat human beings have in common”and the only flag in the world de-signed strictly as a ‘companion flag’to be flown below the other flags ofthe world—never alone. (I am not aflag historian. Any corrections orclarifications from NAVA members—and all other feedback, positive ornegative, on the Companion FlagProject—will be most appreciated.

I began the effort to introduce theCompanion Flag and promote itsadoption in January 1999, and the

initiative (now under the auspices ofa 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organiza-tion, Companion Flag Support Inter-national) remains headquartered inSeattle. Since 1999, the CompanionFlag has been adopted or displayedin many places throughout theworld: from Ekaterinburg, Russia, toHaifa, Israel, to Sapporo, Japan, toTashkent, Uzbekistan. It was hon-ored as “A Gift of Service to theWorld” by the 2000 Parliament of theWorld’s Religions in Capetown,South Africa. It was adopted as amillennium symbol in Victoria, Brit-ish Columbia, and Winston-Salem,North Carolina. The Companion Flaghas been flown routinely at SeattleCenter (Seattle’s main downtownpark and site of the Space Needle),and it is on display at variouschurches, schools, homes and busi-nesses throughout the Pacific North-west (US). The City Council ofQuesnel, British Columbia has for-mally adopted the Companion Flag,and it flies below the Canadian flagoutside city hall on each of 11 UnitedNations Days throughout the year.The list goes on.

Why do we need the CompanionFlag? I’ve noted already that an ac-tive awareness of what we have incommon (even as we acknowledgeand celebrate our differences) is theground for compassionate under-standing, and serves to underscorethe essential dignity of all humanbeings. Against these ideals, as weall know, stands a long and still-metastasizing record of man’s inhu-manity to man.

At the core of the Companion Flagconcept is this idea: that a greatmany of our problems don’t arisefrom a definite or even passionatesense of our differences, but ratherfrom an unalloyed sense of differ-ences—from the belief that our dif-ferences and special affiliations arethe sum total of our experience.

It is a fact—albeit a paradoxicalone—that human beings are bothdifferent and the same. If one fullyaccepts this—if one accepts thatpeople are in some ways different(e.g., different races, nationalities,religions, etc.), and in other ways thesame (e.g., the love of children, thedesire for health and knowledge,

concern for the safety and happinessof loved ones, etc.), it is frankly sur-prising that our forebears thoughtonly of creating a symbolic landscapededicated to our differences.

Or perhaps it isn’t. The renownedtheologian and ethicist AbrahamJoshua Heschel has written:

“The human mind is one-sided. Itcan never grasp all of reality at once.When we look at things, we see ei-ther the features which they have incommon, or the features which dis-tinguish them.”

This tendency—the tendency of thehuman mind to see either the fea-tures that things have in common,or their distinguishing features, butnot both at once—illustrates the dif-ficulty of getting our minds aroundthe paradox of humanity. It may alsoexplain why the flags designed andpassed down to us by our forefathersare limited to a celebration of humandifferences.

In any case, it is only through anact of will that we, and our childrenafter us, will counter the tendencyto see in each other, and to honor inourselves, only our differences (ig-noring all that we have in common).Flying the Companion Flag is astraightforward expression of thatwill—of the desire to fully embracethe paradox of humanity: the factthat we are, at once, both differentand the same. Wherever the Com-panion Flag is flown, the messageconveyed by the Companion Flagand its host flag, soaring together,is unmistakable: Here we are proudof our differences, our diversity, andour special affiliations, but we aremindful, too, of our essential human-ity, and all that we share in commonwith people everywhere.

NAVA member Scott Wyatt, a resi-dent of Seattle, Washington, is thefounder of the Companion FlagProject and president of CompanionFlag Support International. He can becontacted at swwyatt@attbi.com or206-297-01021. To learn more aboutthe Companion Flag Project, visit theCompanion Flag web site: http://www.companionflag.org/.

�

NAVA News 35/3 - #175

—4—

Highlights of the NAVA 36 ConventionDenver, Colorado, August 30 - September 1, 2002

by Andy Biles and Dave Martucci

The 36th Annual Convention ofthe North American VexillologicalAssociation was held at the Den-ver Airport Mariott at GatewayPark in the City of Aurora, Colo-rado, which is located in DenverCounty, just southwest of theCity of Denver. As always a flagcompetition was held to deter-mine the best design for a meet-ing flag, the final design chosenwas co-designed by NAVA Presi-dent Dave Martucci and memberSecundino Fernandez. Based onthe flags of the City and Countyof Denver and of NAVA, it depictsthe sun of Denver over the V ofVexillology over the mountains ofColorado.

The Denver Airport Mariott islocated at the entrance to Gate-way Park and is a modern facil-ity. On one side of the gatewayare huge flags of the U.S., Colo-rado and the City of Aurora; onthe other side are the flags of theU.S., Colorado and the City andCounty of Denver.

After registration, a receptionFriday evening welcomed all withspecial salutations to six newmembers, first time attendees,and accompanying guests.

After breakfast Saturday morn-ing, new member and first timeattendee Dean Thomas from Cali-fornia brightly brought the groupto muster with his bugle call. Theregistrants and guests rallied infront of the hotel for the paradeof flags. The flag of the UnitedStates of America was carried byMartin A. Francis who smartlystepped off leading the as-sembled. Others quickly fell inabreast to keep up with Martin’sspirited stride. Others joined car-rying the national flags ofCanada, Mexico, The NAVA 36

flag, the state of Colorado, andthe cities of Denver, and Aurora.More members fell in carryingnational, state, provincial, city,county and parish, personal, andfavorite flags.

The jolly group marched to thesix flag pole plaza marking theentrance to Gateway Park. Morephotos, and salutes were made,and Dean Thomas sounded thebugle call for the opening of theConvention and then the returnmarch and onto the meeting athand.

The meeting was attended by32 members and guests. Every-one enjoyed the close personalcontacts that were made.

The flags everyone brought forthe parade were hung in themeeting room thanks to a fineloan of poles and stands by TheHouse of Flags in Littleton, a sub-urb of Denver. Thanks go to firsttimer John Seebeck, the ownerof The House of Flags!

Promptly at 1000 hours Presi-dent Martucci called the businessmeeting to order. Minutes wereread and approved. Officer andcommittee reports were deliveredand discussed. A bylaw change

Denver Airport Marriott at Gateway Park.Photo by Kevin Murray

Flag of the City of Aurora. The field,lettering and bar under the sun are blue;The circle is white. The sun is white withgold rays and the 5 stars are gold.

Seal of the City and County of Denver

Flag of the City and County of Denver.Gold sun on blue over white over red.

The NAVA 36 flag, gold sun on blue withtwo red triangles at the bottom and twoblue triangles at either end, separated bywhite.

NAVA’s flag, blue over white over red.

July — September 2002

—5—

regarding a new fiscal year ofJanuary 1 through December 31was offered which produced alively discussion. Past treasurersand certified public accountants,many who are active members,all thought the change of the fis-cal year a good idea. The motionpassed.

Scot Guenter, Bea Jones, andJohn Purcell were elected as thenew Nominating Committee. Theslate of current officers was of-fered for re-election. Gustavo

Montréal, Canada captured thecount! President Martucci ad-journed the business meeting.

Exhibits and information wereset up in an adjoining room forall to look over, to buy things andto enjoy the materials presented.Several of the displays related tothe papers presented. Otherswere personal collections, orga-nizational, and two commercialones. NAVA member DanielBroh-Kahn could not attend butsent all registrants gift packages

of Six Sided Simulations games,as well as a decorative display.You could read delightful littleexcerpts from all the NAVA news-letters; these were provided byMark Liss, past historian ofNAVA. From California Bea Joneshad assembled a table display ofthe Flags of the African Diaspora,Martin A. Francis displayed hiscollection of the Flags of the 50United States, and Members wereencouraged to buy some NAVAmementos from our NAVA shop-

The attendees of NAVA 36 at the height of the Flag March. Composite photo by Dave Breitenbach

Dean Thomas bugles in the meeting. Photo by Dave Breitenbach

Tracchia was nominatedfor President from thefloor by Whitney Smith.This produced animateddiscussion as well. Bysecret ballot DaveMartucci was re-elected,and the other officers allre-elected by acclama-tion.

Next, offers fromMontréal, Canada andOakland, Californiawere presented for nextyear’s meeting site. Avote was taken and

keeper, Mason Kaye.After lunch, everyone

the gathered for the af-ternoon presentations.Andy started off the pro-ceedings by showing hisnow-famous CheckpointCharlie flag he picked upin Berlin during the ColdWar. A jaunty paper wasdelivered by our newbugle master Dean Tho-mas discussing the flagsof the German Demo-cratic Republic. Shop-keeper Mason Kaye con-

NAVA News 35/3 - #175

—6—

ducted an auction of last year’sNAVA 35 (Norfolk, Virginia) flag.

Our second speaker, BobReynolds, a first time attendeefrom Oklahoma, provided us withhis study of vexillology and geog-raphy. He also supplied a tabledisplay which demonstrated hisClick and Learn Software Com-pany. Presentations were fre-quently interspersed with sur-prise door prizes.

The last talk of the afternoonwas a delightful presentation byDavid Ott of Texas. He gave a pro-vocative talk about The Anti-fed-eralist Society of ChathamCounty, Georgia, USA andshowed its flag of the Republic of

Georgia (dark blue star on white).The group broke business for theday approximately at 1630, andwere urged to visit the exhibits.

Saturday evening we all gath-ered for the activities. Memberswere brightly decked out in for-mal wear, Scottish kilts, andvarious colors. All were wel-comed and gifts of gratitude forfirst timers and, new members ofthe organization were presentedto Dean Thomas, John King,John Seebeck, Peter Ansoff, Rob-ert Reynolds, and JamesBolinger. A hearty round of ap-plause sounded. A special rec-ognition was directed to John

Seebeck who pro-vided flag poles,stands, gifts andother hardware andmementos which soadded to the successof the entire event.He received a jollyhand.

After a lovely meal,Scot Guenter gave asignal delivery onthe significance andflags relating to Sep-tember 11th. Hisspeech was most

ing, and many socializedprior to breaking for theevening.

The moderator opened theSunday morning session byreading excerpts from someof the earliest NAVA newslet-ters citing Whitney Smith forgenerating this seminalstudy, and David Martucci fordesigning the NAVA seal as ayouthful vexillologist. He thenpiped in the first speaker, af-ter rendering appropriate sa-lutes. Peter A. Ansoff, one ofthe three first time membersgiving presentations led offwith his very interesting his-

torical paper on the documentarysources for the first US Navy jack.

Next, Andrew Biles showedslides from a Cuban trip point-ing out the flag and family coatof arms of Señor Diego Velasquez,the first governor of Santiago deCuba. The flag can be seen in hishome, now a museum. The timewas 1516 and this was the origi-nal capital of Cuba.

Ted Kaye told us of NAVA’s in-volvement in the Utah flag designcontest. Our member, LoisCampbell had to leave early andcould not give us a personal ac-count from a Salt Lake Cityresident’s point of view.

Annie M. Platoff, who hails fromMartin A. Francis in front of his U.S. State Flags display. Photo by Andy Biles.

stimulating and thoughtful. A to-ken of appreciation was givenhim. All were thanked for com-

Andy Biles holds up the flag of the Provincia deMagallanes, the 12th and southernmost region ofChile. The stars are white on blue over whiteover tan. Photo by Dave Martucci.

Master of Ceremonies Andy Biles renders a proper nauticalsalute with Peter Ansoff, this year’s Driver Winner, afterpiping him aboard. Photo by Dave Martucci.

July — September 2002

—7—

What do I hear for this fine flag? Going once, going twice,... Sold to the highest bidder! Photo by Dave Martucci

A visit to the House of Flags. John Seebeck, the proprietor is seated and behind him standPresident Dave Martucci, First Vice President Andy Biles, Treasurer Ted Kaye, ShopkeeperMason Kaye and Second Vice President Kevin Murray. Photo by Dave Martucci.

Andy and most of the Board went to a local steak house, Evangeline’s,where he was peppered with great fun! Photo by Dave Martucci.

Kansas but now living and work-ing in California, presented a veryentertaining paper on the use offlags in the manned space pro-gram.

Prior to the last presenter, An-drew Biles held up the flag of theProvincia de Magallanes, the12th and southernmost region ofChile. David Ott knew it, and thisheralded Gus Tracchia’s presen-tation on new flags in the prov-inces of Argentina.

Speakers were all applaudedand awaited the decision of theBoard for the winner to be an-nounced. The Captain WilliamDriver award was presented toPeter A. Ansoff, who donated theprize money to NAVA and he waswarmly thanked for his gener-osity. President Martucci re-minded us that the National FlagFoundation co-sponsors this an-nual award.

All were thanked for their par-ticipation, and the flag was wavedsignaling the end of the meeting.

After the meeting closed, manyof the members enjoyed the localscene in the Denver area.

See you next year in Montréal!Remember the meeting date re-turns to the U.S. Columbus Day/Canadian Thanksgiving week-end.

More photos are available on the NAVA web site. http://www.nava.org

Native Americans Encounter Lewis & ClarkConfederated Tribes of

the Umatilla Reservation“Met Walla Walla Chief

Yalleppet” April 27, 1806

Nez Perce“We purchased

considerable quantityof sammon”

September 22, 1805

Colville ConfederatedTribes

Nez Perce areone of the tribes

Yakama Nation“200 men singing and

beeting on their drums”October 16, 1805

Chinook

Warm Springs, Wasco &Northern Paiute

Lewis & Clark called theWishram-Wasco

Chinookans “Echelutes”from the term meaning

“I am Wishram[-Wasco]”October 24, 1805

Blackfoot“The Indians soon asked

to smoke with us”July 26, 1806

Flathead of the Salish & Kootenai“Down the creek to the forkswhere we met a party of the

(Flathead) [Salish]” Sept. 4, 1805

Pawnee“Met a Pawnee Chief”November 10, 1804

Mandan, Hidatsa & ArikaraWintered 1804-05 at MandanVillages; Camped at Hidatsa

Village October 27, 1804

Northern Cheyenne“Cheyenne Chief invited

us to his lodge”August 21, 1806

Kickapoo“Passed 12 canoes of

the Kickapoo”September 21, 1806

Sac and Fox of Iowa“A Sac Chief with 8 or 10

arrived & stayed all night”March 5, 1804

Osage“Received gifts from

the Osage” May, 1804

Omaha of Nebraska & Iowa“Met canoeists of the Omaha

(Mahar)” May 27, 1804

Otoe-Missouria“Informed tribes of new Gov’t

(USA)” July 27/28, 1804

Yankton Sioux“Met 10 well dressed war-riors” September 26, 1804

A US Flag for use bythe Indian Departmentin 1803, 15 stripes, 17

stars plus the Eagle.(Howard Madaus)

ComancheMet someone going to

trade with them

CrowMentioned in journal

Flandreau Santee Sioux Lower Brulé Sioux Santee Sioux of NebraskaStanding Rock Sioux“Prepared some clothes [and] a few medals for the Chiefs of the Teton Band of Sioux”

Confederated Tribesof Siletz

Chinook are oneof the tribes

Sisseton & Wahpeton Sioux

©2002 TME Company - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Research by Don Healy & Ted Kaye.Concept by Dave Martucci.

Flag Graphics by Peter Orenski.Map by William Clark.

Location of encounter on map is approxmate, based on date. Many of these peoples have moved to different locations today.The flags are modern and are not contemporary with the Lewis & Clark Expedition.Quoted material is from the Journals of Lewis & Clark.This is not a full listing of Lewis & Clark encounter tribes.In some cases more than one tribeis represented by a single flag.

NAVA NEWS #175 - July-September 2002 http://www.nava.org/

Sac and Foxof Oklahoma

NAVA News 35/3 - #175

—10—

LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

New York Police Department). It pro-vides sheriff services to California’smost populous county as well asmunicipal police services to many ofthe county’s cities. Established in1850, its motto (selected in a simi-lar competition a few years ago) is“A Tradition of Service”.

Uniformed LASD personnel weara tan shirt, green pants, and a blackbelt and shoes. Their badge is a goldsix-pointed star with enlargedrounded tips; in the center a bluering with “Los Angeles Sheriff’s De-partment” encircles a silver grizzlybear (similar to the bear on the Cali-fornia state flag).

The department’s chief executive,Sheriff Lee Baca, had recently insti-tuted a strategic re-appraisal andreorganization under the title“LASD2”, with key personnel as-signed to the effort. After attendingthe funeral of a sheriff’s deputy killedin the line of duty, at which the flagof a police officer motorcycle club fig-ured prominently, he asked that anLASD2 team member lead the adop-tion of an LASD flag. As a very high-profile community leader (the high-est-paid elected official in the U.S.),Sheriff Baca appreciated the valueof flag adoption, which would coin-cide with his re-election in March.

In January 2002, the Los AngelesCounty Sheriff’s Department issuedthe following announcement to its19,000 employees on its Teletype,Intranet, and bulletin boards:

FLAG CONTESTThe Sheriff recognizes that a flagis a symbol that evokes history,tradition, and values. A flag andits logo help raise consciousnessand pride, create recognition, andestablish identity for an organi-zation. As such, the Sheriff’s De-partment, for the first time in itshistory, is conducting a flag de-sign contest (open to Departmentemployees only) to uniquely dis-tinguish LASD and create asource of pride and identity forour employees and the commu-nities we serve.CASH PRIZE: $2,500. If morethan one design is declared awinner, prize monies will be di-vided equally between the con-test winners.The announcement detailed the

entry requirements. It specified theform and size of entries, where andwhen to make submissions, and theprocess for separating each entrant’sname from the design.

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’sDepartment (LASD) is the second-largest law enforcement agency inthe United States (second only to the

Lt. Dave Waters received the as-signment and did his homeworkwell. He studied Peter Orenski’s AFlag for New Milford (Flag Bulletin#168) and my Good Flag, Bad Flag.He talked then to the Los AngelesCounty Fire Department, which hadrecently developed a flag. He con-sulted me as he created the contest’srules, timeline, and announcement.He raised the prize money and con-test costs from the Sheriff’s Relief As-sociation and corporate sponsors. Herecruited seven judges and asked meto volunteer to advise the process.The judges were: Sgt. Gil Carrillo, Lt.Jacques LaBerge, Capt. Detta Rob-erts, Sgt. Gregory Saunders, Dep.Michael Schaap, secretary JodyThurston, and personnel managerYvette White.

By the contest deadline, 726 en-tries had been received, numbered,tabulated by name, and inserted inplastic sheets and filed in several 3-ring binders. Most of the entries werecomputer-generated, although somehad been drawn with pen, coloredpencil, or even crayon. Some werecut paper or collages. They rangedin quality from primitive to profes-sional. A very few lampooned theprocess (perhaps because all en-trants were LASD employees). Be-cause of multiple submissions (of upto a dozen variations of a single de-sign), far fewer than 726 people en-tered the design contest.

On February 18th, Lt. Waters, thejudges, and I convened for a one-and-a-half-day session in a confer-ence room at the La Mirada Com-munity Center, where the LASDmaintains a sheriff’s station. Lt.Waters’ 11-year-old daughterStacey, usually home-schooled, ob-served the proceedings. The judgesrepresented a broad cross-section ofthe department: 5 sworn personneland 2 civilian employees; 3 white, 3black, and 1 Hispanic; 4 men and 3women; ranks from secretary to cap-tain. Their charge: to select 6 final-ist designs from which the Sheriffwould choose the LASD flag. Theyhad all prepared by reading a copyof Good Flag, Bad Flag, downloaded

Ted Kaye

Au/V

Au

N

New flag of the Los Angeles County, California, Sheriff ’s Department

July — September 2002

—11—

from the NAVA website, and seemedeager and enthusiastic about theprocess.

I attempted to establish my cre-dentials as a NAVA member, Raveneditor, flag design author, andvexillonaire, but perhaps my mostpersuasive claim to legitimacy wasas a Los Angeles County native!Serving as the judges’ coach, Itrained them on flag design and thenorganized the process of winnowingdown the entries. As we progressedthrough the day, I constantly revisedmy plan of action. I warned thejudges that flags drive strong emo-tions, and not to be surprised if theircolleagues got somewhat worked up.

We began with a two-hour sessiondevoted to the five basic principlesof flag design from Good Flag, BadFlag, enhanced by examples of otherlaw enforcement agency flags (re-searched on FOTW and othersources by my son, Mason Kaye).Using Annin catalogs provided byElmer’s Flag & Banner in Portland,I led an interesting exercise wherethe judges identified the “best” and“worst” state flags, then discussedthe reasons they’d chosen as theydid (their “best”: TX, NM, AK, AZ, CA;their worst: MD, GA, ND, NJ, NH). Idemonstrated how flags wear at thefly with real examples.

We spent a lot of time exploringhow the prospective LASD flag wouldbe used. With “Form Follows Func-tion” as the underlying principle, Iwanted the judges to test designsagainst all potential uses. Theylisted: 1) exterior display at LASDheadquarters and other sheriff’s de-partment venues, 2) internal displayin offices, 3) car flags, 4) mountedpatrol display in parades, 5) deskflags, and 6) coffee mugs, lapel pins,and bumper stickers.

With that background in place, wespent the rest of the morning on the“first cut”. Laying out all the designson large tables, the judges circulatedand selected any design that de-served to be considered further,moving it to a separate table. Thedesigners’ names had been sepa-rated from the designs, now identi-fied only by a number. There wereno limits, no rules—but judges un-derstood that if no one picked a de-

sign, it fell out of contention. While Istretched my “coach” role by advo-cating for certain designs, I did notselect any myself. With muchfriendly banter, comparison shop-ping, and difficult decisions, thejudges selected 72 in that first cut,a reduction of 90%. Time for lunch!

In the next step, we taped all 72designs up on the wall at the frontof the room, looked at them closely,then sat down. We began a rollick-ing discussion of their general mer-its, recognizability, symbolism, andmeaning. The distance (approxi-mately 20-25 feet) forced the judgesto evaluate the designs as they mightactually appear. At times, I wouldhold a design by its corner and simu-late its draping; at other times Iwould hold one up and wave it tosimulate its flying. Then we culledfrom those 72 by using the samemethod: pointing to each design inturn, I asked the judges if anyonethought the design was a “keeper”;if no one spoke for the flag, it camedown. This reduced the field to 29flags.

As part of that exercise, I helpedthe judges test ways in which de-signs might be misinterpreted orridiculed. For example, the blue ringon the badge often appeared as asignificant graphic element. Withoutlettering and enlarged somewhat, theblue ring seemed very recognizable.The judges affirmed that it helpeddistinguish the badge from those of

other sheriff’s departments. Butwhen I asked what else it looked like,one judge immediately provided theanswer that eliminated its consid-eration: “a doughnut” (perceived asthe favorite food of law enforcement).Another design, with an expandingwhite diagonal emanating downwardfrom a star in the hoist, looked tosome like a helicopter searchlight,perceived as too intimidating.

In these steps, I was seeking con-sensus among the judges, avoidingany “scoring” and relying instead ontheir combined understanding of flagdesign to narrow the field. At thispoint, I asked individual judges tovolunteer to speak for each design.By describing why they liked certaindesigns, the judges explored and re-considered their own perceptionsand shared their points of view withone another. At the end of the dis-cussion, we went through anothercull, leaving 18 semi-finalist designs.

All shared several common ele-ments: the colors gold, green, andtan, and the badge, often with thebear, and most were very simple.One judge made a perceptive state-ment: “We are a para-military orga-nization, and our flag should reflectthat connection”. So far, the judgeshad very similar opinions althoughthe designs still varied greatly. Buthere we got stuck. We tried scoringthe flags, using the criteria of sim-plicity, symbolism, color, attractive-ness, and distinctiveness. This only

Flag of the Los Angeles Fire Department. R field; Au ribbon with N letters; Bear in shadesof grey with N nose and eye; Seal R center, Au bordered ring, R diamonds, N letters,W Fire Hat with Au details, Au cross with N details; bottom stripe N with Au letters.

NAVA News 35/3 - #175

—12—

showed the wide disparity among thejudges’ opinions. While I would haveeliminated a third of the remaining flagsfor using lettering or for their similarityto other existing flags, the rest all quali-fied as good designs, and each hadstrong supporters. At this impasse, weadjourned until the next morning.

I realized that we had moved beyondflag design and into a process of inter-personal dynamics and group decision-making. Unlike a civil/criminal jurybrought together for one trial, these “ju-rors” all knew they might well interactagain—thus they were less willing to for-mally challenge one another. They were

voted, those would probably have beeneliminated.

While the “let’s retain lettering” pro-ponents were outnumbered, they wereemphatic. They raised the valid concernthat an organization as narrowly focusedas LASD could not be sufficiently sym-bolized to the general public without theletters “LASD”. Finally one judge, thefemale captain who commanded one ofLASD’s prisons, summarized—in termsall could understand—why words onflags are unnecessary, saying: “It’s justlike a hooker—we all know what a hookerlooks like, she doesn’t need a sign onher back saying ‘HOOKER’!”.

on making changes to each of the finaldesigns, such as altering color shades,transposing colors, removing lettering,substituting badge/bear designs fromother entries, and shifting the positionof the charge. The judges especially fa-vored a specific stylized badge from oneset of entries and wanted that badge onall finalists. One design had supportfrom most judges (and a version of it in-deed became the final flag), but somejudges were reticent to choose their fa-vorites until all designs could be alteredto reflect the judges’ changes and ren-dered in consistent size, color, and styleby a graphic artist.

The judges departed, leaving Lt. Wa-ters to find and instruct the artist, con-sult the judges on their final opinions,brief the sheriff, finalize the design, an-nounce the winner(s), and contract forflag manufacture. He and I visited LASDheadquarters to inspect its flagpoles (theLASD flag would replace the county flag),where we observed the U.S. flag flyingon its own left. I met Sheriff Baca briefly,and gave him the one-minute pitch forsimplicity and no lettering. He under-stood, and said he enthusiasticallyawaited the judges’ results. As a rewardfor my services I rode along on an excit-ing 90-minute helicopter patrol over LosAngeles County that evening before leav-ing California.

In the days that followed, Lt. Watersprepared the final designs and some vari-ants for the judges’ and then the sheriff’sconsideration. The judges conferred bye-mail and kept me posted on their de-liberations. The sheriff selected one, andgoing beyond the initial plan, made hisown changes to it (changing the tan por-tion to black).

The winning design combined the wavycenter stripe from one entry, the styl-ized badge from another entry, and col-ors as modified by the sheriff. The wavedesign was submitted by Deputy An-thony Morga; the badge design wasjointly submitted by Sergeant BrianMoriguchi and Lieutenant RichardShaw. These entrants divided the prizemoney, to my knowledge the largestamount ever offered in a flag design con-test. The upward-curving stripe symbol-ized to the judges “continuous progressinto the future”, while the colors repre-sented the standard uniform and thebadge uniquely identified the depart-

also keenly aware that their colleaguesin the department would hold them per-sonally responsible for the flag—espe-cially if any problems arose, leading themto additional caution. This went beyondmy experience, so I refrained from push-ing for votes.

One juror, a veteran homicide detec-tive who had actually run against theincumbent sheriff in an earlier electionand now served in the Office of the Sher-iff, challenged the “no lettering” principle:“If it’s good enough for the Marine Corps[to have lettering on its flag], it’s goodenough for us”. He believed he spoke forlongtime department members, if not forthe majority of the judges, in insistingthat the flag should say “LASD” or even“Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department”. Athome, he actually had the large letters“LASD” set in tile on the bottom of hisswimming pool so that the aero patrolcould recognize his house. His persis-tence kept several designs with letteringin the running, although if judges had

The next morning, the homicide de-tective and leader of the “keep lettering”effort began the session by announcinghis willingness to abandon that position.While he still would advocate for designswith letters, he would not oppose flagswithout them. Another judge mentionedpassing by a McDonald’s restaurant thatmorning and noting that the lettering onthe flag was completely redundant withthe golden arches. This broke the log-jam and enabled the judges to proceedto winnow down the 18 semi-finalists.

Some were eliminated as resemblingtoo closely other well-known flags (es-pecially in black-and-white versions),such as Cuba, Trinidad & Tobago, andThe Philippines. Others were discardedas less-worthy variations on a finalist.We continued the “keeper” method,where all judges had a say and any couldvoice support for keeping a design.

The judges quickly reduced the packto 6 finalists, but often saying “I wouldvote for that if it were…”. They insisted

Members of the jury examine some of the entries.

July — September 2002

—13—

ment, with the bear additionally repre-senting California.

AAA Flags of Los Angeles fabricated thefirst LASD flag, which debuted at Sher-iff Baca’s re-election victory party thefollowing week. A ceremony is plannedfor its hoisting at LASD headquarterslater this year, with the flag delivered bythe mounted enforcement detail colorguard, who will hand it off to the colorguard on foot; it will then be raised offi-cially. LASD has ordered hundreds offlags for use throughout the county andfor sale to raise money for its charitableactivities. LASD attorneys have followedup having all the participants sign anotarized “Quitclaim of Copyright” con-firming that we renounced any “rights,title, or interest of any kind whatsoever”in the flag’s design.

This exercise taught me several les-sons: Neophytes have an innate under-standing of good flag design, and a mo-dicum of instruction will enable them toapply it. The principles of Good Flag, BadFlag apply well to the broad spectrum ofentries such as found in a large contest,but individual judgment remains thebest selector of final designs. I found thatby educating the judges, they couldquickly discard the majority of the en-tries without needing any formal scor-ing mechanism. That way they could fo-cus quickly on the best designs. I sawthe benefit that real-time electronic ma-nipulation of flag images could have de-livered to the proceedings—to have thejudges watch an electronic display of agraphics program while an artist testedpotential changes to a design wouldgreatly enhance the speed and effective-ness of future deliberations. A final les-son learned: with trained judges, the fi-nal stages of the process require not flagdesign knowledge but group consensus-building skills.

NAVA Flag Conservation Committee Activeby Richard T. Clark

Board Approves Museum of theConfederacy as First Flag

Conservation ProjectThe NAVA Board of Directors, at

its August 30, 2002 meeting in Den-ver, Colorado, ratified the recom-mendations of last October’s AnnualConvention as well as the Flag Con-servation Committee to adopt theflag conservation program of theMuseum of the Confederacy as itsfirst project in historic flag preser-vation.

In making its recommendation, theFlag Conservation Committee exam-ined both the quality as well as thequantity of the MOC’s efforts to pre-serve historic confederate flags. Italso looked into the outreach activi-ties at the Museum, including thedisplay of restored items and its abil-ity to educate the public on the his-tory of the flags and how they wererestored.

Since the solicitation of donations,which began in October of 2001,NAVA’s Flag Conservation Programhas raised US$337.00. A check inthis amount has been forwarded tothe Museum’s curator, RebeccaRose. NAVA members will be keptapprised of how our donation wasused so that everyone understandsthe importance for our undertakingthis program. We encourage mem-bers to donate to our new project for2002-2003, the Bedford SouthsideDragoons Flag.

Bedford Southside DragoonsBanner Chosen for Next ProjectThe Bedford Southside Dragoons

Flag has been chosen as NAVA’s his-toric flag conservation project for thecoming year. While most of theUS$7,250 has already been raised forits restoration, a significant amountof money is still needed to providefor the banner’s proper display, andfor the development of educationalmaterials relating to the history andconservation process of the flag.

The Bedford Dragoons organized1 year before the Civil War began. In1861, the Dragoons joined CompanyF of the Virginia Cavalry. Just be-fore they headed off to battle, the

wives, mothers, and daughters of the100 volunteers of the BedfordSouthside Dragoons created a com-pany flag from the silk of a woman’sblue dress. It features, on the ob-verse, the image of George Washing-ton. Above him is the slogan “Pre-sented by the Ladies”. Under Wash-ington are the words “BedfordSouthside Dragoons”.

On the reverse appears the slogan“States Rights” above the Virginiastate seal. Below, is the state motto“Sic Semper Tyrannis”. In additionto being used at the Battle of FirstManassas and Sharpsburg, the flagwas also used during the Battle ofGettysburg in July of 1863, thoughas a secondary color, not thecompany’s battle flag. Union soldierscaptured it following the battle as theDragoons retreated back to Virginia.

In 1919, Major William Graves, anex-Dragoon recovered the flag inTrenton, N.J., and turned it over tothe William Terry Chapter of theUnited Daughters of the Confed-eracy, based in Bedford, Va. In 1932,the UDC donated the banner to theBedford City-County Museum,where it resides today.

The restoration of the flag is beingconducted by Fonda Thomsen andher company, Textile PreservationAssociates, Inc., of Sharpsburg, MD.As a part of the process, Ms.Thomsen’s company will humidifythe flag with distilled water and dryit under glass with weights after thefabric has “relaxed”. To prevent fur-ther stress, the flag will then be cov-ered with a sheer, transparent poly-ester fabric and attached to a pad-ded backing. It will then be enclosedin treated Plexiglas to filter out ul-traviolet light.

If you are interested in participat-ing in this year’s flag conservationproject, no donation is too small.Please make your check payable toNAVA and indicate on the “memo”section that it is to be used for theFlag Conservation Program.

Mail your tax-deductible contribu-tion to: NAVA Treasurer, PMB 225 ,1977 N. Olden Ave. Ext., Trenton,N.J. 08618-2193 USA.

NAVA Member Harry Oswald helps hoist the newflag of the Los Angeles Sheriff ’s Department.

NAVA News 35/3 - #175

—14—

Portland Gets a New Flag Thanks to NAVA MembersOn September 4, 2002, Portland’s

city council voted unanimously toadopt the new flag for Portland pro-posed a week earlier by the PortlandFlag Association, led by NAVA mem-ber Harry Oswald.

Portland, Oregon has had severalflags in the past. The most recentwas adopted in 1969 and created bygraphic designer Douglas Lynch. Itconsisted of light blue offset crossedbars representing the confluence ofthe Willamette and Columbia Riverswhere Portland is located, on a greenbackground representing Portland’sforested surroundings. A four-pointed star, symbolizing the city,was formed by the intersection of thebars. The blue bars were borderedby white-gold-white fimbriations, thegold representing wheat and com-merce. The canton of the flag wasdark blue, bearing the city seal. Theseal was not originally part ofLynch’s design, but the city commis-sioners had added it to the flag atthe last minute, reflecting their ownconservative tastes. Art commissionmembers strongly opposed the cityseal as an element of the flag, but tono avail.

The new flag changes four compo-nents of the 1969 flag. First, the bluestripes doubled in width, makingthem much more significant com-pared to their fimbriations. The four-

pointed star became nine timeslarger, converting it from a minorblur to a major graphic element. Thecity seal was removed. The canton’sdark blue background changed tothe green of the rest of the flag’s field.

Doug Lynch, 89, recently joined

NAVA. He is the long-time dean ofgraphic arts in Portland, and formerchair of the Portland Art Commis-sion. He joined the Portland FlagAssociation two years ago, and af-ter sharing his experience of design-ing the city’s flag in 1969, PFA mem-bers encouraged him to push for arevised design. He welcomed the op-portunity to address some weak-nesses and political compromisesembodied in his 1969 design.

On August 28, 2002, Doug Lynch,Mike Hale, my father (Ted Kaye),and I all testified before the citycouncil. Doug recounted the storyof the previous flag’s design, Mikespoke of the cost savings to the cityof the simpler version, my fathersupported the new design in termsof the five basic principles fromGood Flag, Bad Flag, and I gave thehistorical background of Portland’sprevious flags. Each commissionerwas excited about the new design.Mayor Vera Katz asked that a realflag be ready the next week for thevote on the ordinance. Mike’s com-pany, Elmer’s Flag & Banner,quickly manufactured one to Doug’snew specifications.

The Mayor’s chief of staff, SamAdams, had already tested the de-sign with all of the commissioners.Doug Lynch and Sam Adams liveacross the street from one anotherin Northwest Portland, and workedtogether to develop the new flag or-dinance.

A week later, NAVA member JohnHood picked up the new flag fromElmer’s and mounted it on the pole

in the city council’s chambers.Mayor Katz asked that the old flaggo into the city archives, before call-ing for the vote which amended theCity Code and made Portland’s newflag official. PFA members applaudedas her gavel marked the council’sunanimous approval.

I hope to deliver a paper on thecomplete history of Portland’s flagsat 20 ICV next year in Stockholm. Ihave appreciated the opportunity toachieve the status of “vexillonnaire”as well as researcher and reporteron the flags of my city.

An issue arises: Doug Lynch is al-ways careful to describe the newdesign as an update or alteration ofthe flag, rather than as a change ora replacement. His long political ex-perience has taught him that mini-mizing the extent of change makesit more achievable. But tovexillologists, is the current versiondifferent enough to be considered anew flag?

Portland Flag adopted in 1969. Same colorsas the present flag with the first quarter bluebearing the City Seal.

Portland’snew flagadoptedin 2002.

Seearticle

forcolors.

Members of the Portland Flag Associationand of NAVA with the new flag. Left to right,Ted Kaye, Mason Kaye, Doug Lynch, JohnHood. Kneeling is Fred Paltridge.

Mason Kaye

July — September 2002

—15—

Chumley the Vexi-Gorilla™... Is the creation of Michael Faul, Editor of

Flagmaster, the distinguished journal of The FlagInstitute in the United Kingdom. To a field not

often blessed by humor’s grace, Mr Faul brings adelightfully light touch, deep vexillological roots,and sparkling whimsy.

�

�

CLASSIFIEDSNAVA Membership entitles you toone free classified ad per year. Addi-tional ads are US$2.00 plus 10¢ perword above 21 words. Address,email, etc. doesn’t count. Send adinformation to NAVA NEWS ADS,240 Calderwood Rd, Washington ME04574-3440 or email them to<navanews@nava.org>. Checks/money orders should be made pay-able to NAVA. Sorry, no cash, please.

NAVA NewsPublished quarterly by the North

American Vexillological Association(NAVA), PMB 225, 1977 N Olden Ave Ext,Trenton NJ 08618-2193 USA. ISSN1053-3338. Material appearing in NAVANews does not necessarily reflect thepolicy or opinion of NAVA, the executiveboard, or the editor.

Please send articles, letters to the edi-tor and inquiries concerning advertisingrates and permission to reprint articlesto:

David Martucci, Editor240 Calderwood Rd

Washington ME 04574-3440 USA(207) 845-2857

navanews@nava.orgArticles may be submitted in hard copy

or in any Macintosh or PC format (ex-cepting Lotus Word Pro) on 3.5” diskettesor Zip disks. A hard copy showing allformatting preferences should accom-pany the disk. Articles and/or disks ac-companied by a SASE will be returned.

NAVA is soliciting annual bids for for-matting, layout and printing of its pub-lications. Please write to the addressbelow for more information.

Please send copies or originals of anyflag-related newspaper and magazineclippings and all non-NAVA News relatedcorrespondence, including change ofaddress or changes in email status tothe Association’s permanent address:

NAVAPMB 225

1977 N Olden Ave ExtTrenton NJ 08618-2193 USA

treas@nava.org

Visit NAVA on the web athttp://www.nava.org/

©2002 NAVA - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

The late Jim White, a long timeNAVA member, from Medford, OR,generously donated his collection offlag materials to the NAVA Shopper.It includes various books, periodi-cals, ephemera, and over 300 4"x6"flags. For a complete listing, con-tact the NAVA Shopper atshopper@nava.org, or Mason Kaye,2235 NW Aspen, Portland, OR97210.

Raven Contract OpportunityVolume 9/10 of NAVA’s journal, Raven, iscurrently in preparation. While many aspectsof its production are provided by volunteers,NAVA has found it necessary to contract forformatting and typesetting services. In pastyears NAVA has received the services froman outside firm or a NAVA member (at areduced rate). If you are interested in biddingon Raven 9/10, contact raven@nava.org orwrite the Raven editor at NAVA for a bidpackage. The bidding will close on 11/30/02.

Condensed from globeandmail.com,Wednesday, October 2, 2002

Historian designedCanada’s flag

by Jane DoucetThe man whose design made the Ca-

nadian flag into one of the world’s in-stantly recognizable national ensigns diedin Sackville, N.B. on Sept. 13, 2002. His-torian, educator, author and former pro-vincial lieutenant-governor, GeorgeStanley was 95.

Born in Calgary in 1907, Dr. Stanleywas the only child of John and Della(Lillywhite) Stanley. From 1947 to 1949,Dr. Stanley held the first chair in Cana-dian history at the University of BritishColumbia. Awarded a Guggenheim Fel-lowship, he went to Ottawa in 1949 toresearch the history of Canadian govern-ment policy dealing with native people.He taught the first undergraduate coursein military history ever given in Canada.

One of Dr. Stanley’s most memorableand lasting achievements was his involve-ment in the design of the Canadian flag.In 1964, John Matheson, the parliamen-tary secretary for Prime Minister LesterPearson, was in charge of the flag com-mittee. Mr. Matheson sought out Dr.Stanley’s opinion on a unique design forthe flag, which the prime minister hadpromised Canadians by the end of 1965.

“Dad wanted it to be something simplethat a schoolchild could remember anddraw easily,” said Ms. Stanley. “He alsothought it should have a national sym-bol and incorporate Canada’s officialcolours.”

At the bottom of a memo that he sentto Mr. Matheson, he drew a rough sketchof the design he had in mind, which hebased on the RMC flag. After receivingthousands of design submissions fromthe Canadian public, Mr. Matheson pre-sented Dr. Stanley’s sketch to the com-mittee, which unanimously approved it.On Feb. 15, 1965, the first official Cana-dian flag was raised in Ottawa.

“What many people don’t realize is thatthere was a lot of political tension tiedup with cultural differences in Canada,”Ms. Stanley said. “[He] received deaththreats because some people were angrythat his design had political meaning.”

For his part, Dr. Stanley believed theflag symbolized both French and EnglishCanada, she said. “He had a very strongsense of duty to his country.”

Dr. Stanley leaves his wife of 56 years,Ruth; and daughters Della, Marietta andLaurie.

Copyright 2002 | Bell GlobemediaInteractive Inc.

NAVA News 35/3 - #175

—16—

http://www.fiav2003.com/

Make your plans now!

Visit NAVA’s Award-winning Web Sitehttp://www.nava.org

Question at NAVA-36The question concerned the pro-

tocol of wearing American Flagpatches on uniforms and how did theAir Force do it. I’ve checked with ourfolks who monitor and establish poli-cies for the wearing of uniforms andhave the following. This command,Air Force Space Command (AFSPC),has published its own guidance onhow to wear a flag patch. The AirForce overall has not addressed theflag patch specifically and othermajor commands like us may havealso issued guidance on it.

The rule: AFSPC specifies that,when worn (it’s optional), the flagpatch should be on the left shoul-der.

The logic: The flag patch is to beworn such that it satisfies the flagprotocol requirement that the can-ton be to the viewer’s left. Also, theflag patch should be worn so thatthe flag appears to be “flying” prop-erly as the wearer walks forward, i.e.,the stripes should be to the rear. Theleft shoulder is the only place whereboth conditions are satisfied.

Note: The flag patch may only beworn on the “Flight Dress Uniform”(FDU) which, to the layman, is thegreen, single piece uniform you seepilots wearing - they call it a “bag.”It can’t be worn on the blue uniformnor on the “Battle Dress Uniform”(BDU) which is the mottled,camoflage-type pants and overshirteveryone wears when they’re doing“dirty” work.

It was good to meet everyone inDenver last month and I hope to at-tend future meetings.

John King

FLAG DESIGNCOMPETITION

� NAVA 37 � Montréal, Québec � October 10 – 12, 2003 �Please help design a flag for NAVA’s 37th Annual Meeting

Each NAVA meeting displays a unique flag, distributed as a 4” x 6”souvenir to attendees and flown as a full-size flag at the meeting. Thehost committee invites NAVA members to enter the competition forthe best design. The entry may symbolize or recall some or all of thefollowing: the city, province, and/or country of the meeting, thenumber 37, NAVA, and vexillology. The designer of the winning entrywill be recognized in NAVA News.Rules:1� Submit each entry indicating colors on a sheet of 8!/2” x 11”

paper, a floppy disk, or an electronic .jpg or .gif file in FOTWformat (216 pixels high, 16 color Browser Safe pallette).

2� The flag’s proportions should be 1 to 1.x, but adaptable to 3 x 5.3� Clear descriptions or Pantone numbers of the colors should

accompany the entry.4� Individuals may submit up to 10 designs. Any beyond that

number will be discarded.5� This competition is open solely to NAVA members in good stand-

ing. Put your name and address on the back.6� The competition closes MARCH 1, 2003: paper entries must be

postmarked by MARCH 1; electronic entries must be sent by 3/1.7� The entries will be judged by some members of the flag design

committee, whose decision will be final.8� Judges retain the right to combine or alter entries, while continu-

ing to recognize their designers.

Send entries to:James A. CroftP O Box 365Northampton MA 01061-0365

or e-mail your design todesign@nava.org

Please note the following correction: The Flag Design Contest deadline isMARCH 1, 2003. The editor apologizes for the error in the last issue.