le Voyageur

http://www.trackofthewolf.com/List/Item.aspx/461/1

ahhhh....okay.. You'll go through Flagstaff on the way to the canyon. In Flagstaff, across the tracks from the Amtrak are two youth hostels. Good place for your crew to hang their hat, get a shower, etc. Much, much cheaper than a motel. Plenty of places to eat, and places to pick up any last minute supplies before heading to the canyon If you got the time, maybe a visit to Walnut Canyon, or drop down and for a visit to Oak Creek Canyon. http://www.nps.gov/waca/index.htm

A link.... http://www.nps.gov/grca/planyourvisit/day-hiking.htm Being new to hiking, the key is to take your time, go slow, and have fun. As stated by another poster, water is key. For myself, when backpacking high desert country, I carry as little gear as possible, and reduce my rations a bit just so tht I can carry extra water.

Good to know, and thanks for being honest about your ablities as a hiker... again, for that age group, and and for you, hiking down into the canyon is a bad ideal. Grand Canyon Council is an excellent resource with their Trails Award Program. Not only does their manual describe the different trails, but there are corresponding patches and segments to document your hikes. http://www.grandcanyonbsa.org/openrosters/view_homepage.asp?orgkey=62

If you're planning to hike into the canyon with that age group, then consider going no futher than Indian Garden, and expect a long, slow slug back up and out.. However, I would elect for hikes along the rim.....

Can't afford the high dollar cost to be on staff. However, am considering hiring on as a raft guide with one of the local outfitters during this time. I'm sure it'll be busy, and they'll be looking for guides...

hmmmm....your not on the same page. The level of risk management that I'm inferring is above the critical thinking, and skill levels of scouts. Yes, the program has rules, training, patches, booklets, and a host of acronyms to help them with the process to start thinking about risks. But, it's a slow process, with a long learning curve before their brains are fully developed, and wired for adult level judgement. Consider, for a high country ski trip, do we send an 11 year out on the slopes to do a shovel test to judge the avalanche risk, instead of a seasoned guide trained, and experienced for that task! It's up to adults to fine tune a scouts outdoor experience with what no scout has in his skill set, which is years of experience, judgement based on those experiences, and perceptions that comes from those experiences. It's why the thread is titled "The Most Dangerous Word in a High Adventure Director's Vocabulary", not "The Most Dangerous Word in a Scout's Vocabulary."

Basement - None of that is a big concern. Our Scout reservation consist of 16000 acres, with few access points controlled by a staff of Rangers. The reservation is also used by the local PD for SWAT training...

I think what I'm seeing here, is the general thinking that this level of Risk Management is to be taught to scouts. Not the case, far from it. Risk Management should be a part of the High Adventure Director, as well as other Scouters skill set to minimize risk levels in the outdoor. Scouts are simply not wired for adult judgement. Risk Management is no more than a tool to manage the activities that Scouts want to engage in. It is also that cold breath of reality that tells us that accidents are normal, and will happen. It serves to make us more circumspect, and conservative by knowing that certain lines cannot be crossed.....

Gunny - First, a big thanks for your inputs, you're covering areas I've not thought of, as well as jogging my memory in others. Thanks again. I elected for the first site due to the ease in which a range could be estabished there. The canopy is masking what is really there (or, in this case, what isn't there). It's a large meadow with excellent backdrops with an access road. Plus,a nearby and established camping area not far away. I've also added another thought to my notes of a adding in a 100 yard tree stand range which could be morphed in...the height off of the ground does not need be that great, no more than a few feet so that the Range Officer can stay in control of the shooters. The big ticket item here, would be teaching the major elements of tree stand safety...

My own thinking is that BSA could be, and should be at the fore front of creating Venture hunting programs that promotes a strong sense of ethics on hunting, and firearms use. However, I would prefer that it stay at the Venture level, and not offered as a MB, unless BSA can put a strict, no exception age limit on the MB, with a fixed number of MBC's that can sign off on the MB, say one per District...

Been looking at Google Earth to get an overview as to where the best area would be on the Reservation for such a range. The best sites are... 36 58 55.05N 80 36 57.78W 36 56 58.54N 80 38 37.66W 36 58 30.47N 80 38 24.92W I'm preferring the first.

When a HA Director uses the word "safe", it sets a mental trap not only in his/her mind, but also in the minds of the Crew. Gives the false impression that there are no risks, no boundries where things can go wrong from the minor to the majors. Both the Director, and his Crew have the potenial to become inattentive, careless, even reckless. Risk Management is about knowing how to hold the reins, Safety isn't. Safety is a gimmick use to promote that which isn't. Before BSA National put Councils on the same sheet of music with NCS Trek Leader training and standards, each Council was free to determine just what level of risk management they could afford, while declaring, and promoting their HA programs as "safe". Often, these early Council HA programs were under funded, under staffed, and ran by poorly trained directors who had no clear chain of command, and often no input on improvements. Equipment would often be selected based on the cheapest items available on the market, donated with questionalbe histories, or just plain worn out, and unuseable. But yet, declared "Safe". Thankfully, that has changed, and those days are no more.

The objective risk is cold weather, and is an element that awaits us when we venture into the backcountry, and away from the safety of those enviroments, such as our homes, that we have direct control over. That is, we don't take the full weight of civilization's technologies of the modern world into the backcountry with us. In this case the heating system used to keep our homes, as well as ourselves warm and toasty. Nor do we take the house with all it's comforts. In the outdoors, and away from this technology, the game changes and we must adapt and confirm to a different set of rules that we have little control over. Thus begins the subjective risks of judgement, preception, experience, and expectations. We have to revert back to the basics of shelter, clothing, fire, water, and food to survive in cold enviroments. Ignoring, or short changing any of those basics, we start the process of declining judgement. When we loose core body heat we get fuzzy headed, which begin the process of getting stupid. What I call slipping into the "umbles". The umbles are, we mumble, we stumble, and we bumble, with the last one being we crumble. When a person hits that last umble, they are unable to care for theirselves, and without help, they die (a great read here on this subject would be Jon Krakauer's "Into Thin Air", and Laurence Gonzales' "Deep Survival - Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why"). I highly suggest reading Deep Survival which will give you insights on the thinking, and actions of your young scouts...for myself, Gonzales' Deep Survival should be manditory reading for everyone who heads out into the back country....

It saddens me to see this thread going negative, but I will say that I hunt. I'm a meat hunter that lives in rural America, and we try to live as close to nature as possible. The reality is, in order for any of us to live, something must die, be it a plant or animal. As such,I elect to hunt, and not use a proxy to do it for me. During deer season, I keep a shotgun in my vehicle, not to hunt but to put down deer that have been injured or maimed by drivers who fail to slow down, leaving an animal along side the road injured and in pain. It's not something that I enjoy doing, but which has to be done; it leaves me angry at how callous and uncaring people can be that would leave an animal to die a slow death. Often times in the field when hunting I'll come back empty handed, the reason is that I hunt black powder using a smooth bore musket. I have to stalk to within 40 yards or less to make a one shot kill. It's not easy. None the less, I also know that there are parents out there who absolutly refuse to allow their sons, and or daughters to handle a firearm. It's there choice, and I can respect that. The only thing I ask, is for the same consideration for those of us who do hunt...

SMT224 - Subjective risks are those risks that we bring with us into the outdoors - the human factor. It is often impossible to separate objective from subjective hazards. We play a role in avoiding, preventing, or sometimes even causing many objective hazards. Human error, in one form or another, contributes to almost every accident in the back country. Often the error precedes the accident by a long period of time, with accidents having complex histories, the so called Sand Pile theory. A short list of subjective hazards could include.... Unsafe acts, improper procedure, inadequate food, water, clothing, or equipment, and unrealistic travel times and goals. Also, errors in judgment, leadership issues, negative attitudes, the desire to please others, sticking to a schedule, the inability to cope effectively with unexpected situations, misperceptions, fatigue, and distractions, hidden or unreported allergies, and medical conditions, poor physical health for the activity

A good day to you OGE.... In Wilderness Risk Management, risks are divided into two broad categories. Objectives, and Subjectives risks. Objectives risk are those that can overwhelm our skills, and experiences. Where as the Subjective risks will cloud our judgement....(This message has been edited by le Voyageur)

That word is "Safe"! Webster defines the word "safe" as being free from harm. The moment a HA Director states he/she runs a "safe" program, the trap is set. In "Normal Accident" Charles Perrow applies the term Normal Accident to "enterprises [that] have catastrophic potential...to take...lives." Perrow writes..."A normal accident typically involves interactions that are "not only unexpected, but are incomprehensible for some critical period of time." The people involved just don't figure out quickly enough what is really going wrong. A normal accident occurs in a complex system, one that has so many parts that it is likely that something is wrong with more than one of them at any given time. A well-designed complex system will include redundancy, so that each fault by itself does not prevent proper operation. However, unexpected interactions, especially with tight coupling, may lead to system failure. System operators must make decisions, even with ambiguous information. The process of making a tentative choice also creates a mental model of the situation. When following through on the initial choice, the visible results are compared to those expected on the basis of that initial mental model. Provided that the first few steps' results are consistent, the fact that the mental model was tentative is likely to be forgotten, even if later results contradict it. They become "mysterious" or "incomprehensible" rather than functioning as clues to the falsity of the earlier tentative choice. This is simply the way the human mind works, and systems designed with contrary expectations of their operators are especially vulnerable to system accidents." The old parable about the kingdom lost because of a thrown horseshoe has its parallel in many normal accidents: the initiating event is often, taken by itself, seemingly quite trivial. Because of the system's complexity and tight coupling, however, events cascade out of control to create a catastrophic outcome.

One step at a time.... first - how to shoot, second - how to hunt, third - how to process game, last - how to prepare and serve game. It's a process of small steps The reason I'm playing around with this ideal is that our Reservation has two of everything including two blackpowder ranges, the only exceptions are the Paint Ball, and Pistol ranges. As I see it, the only range lacking is a extreme distance range, and with 16 000 acres, plenty of room. In a way, it could be made a part of our High Knoll program as an outpost...(This message has been edited by le Voyageur)

I'm getting some great ideals from you folks, so a big thanks your way. The goal is not to train "snipers", but hunters. If one is able to place tight group at, say 500 yards, than it should be possible to hunt deer, and make one shot kills at 100 yards with no problem. Or, if hunting prong horns or muley's in the high desert with shots out to 600 to 800 yards, one would have an understanding of estimating range, and windage. Of knowing when, and when not to take the shot to avoid wounding an animal...

We've now started the planning for the Course. Overall, from the schedule I've seen, it's going to be an intense week of swiftwater training, which will include a day of rafting the New River Gorge...if you've been sitting on the fence thinking about directing your summer camp high adventure canoe trek, nows the time to talk to your Council for a seat with us....

Been slacklining for years as a Climbing director at several differant camps. Done right with spotters it's nothing more than another cope event.....

Having a raging debate with myself, lots of what ifs, and a few concerns....thinking about floating the ideal of a extreme distance shooting range for Ventures to the Council. Steel Targets at distances of 300, 500, and 800 yards. Figure 5 or 6 Mosin Nagants with Scout scopes. Ammo is cheap for this rifle which would keep the cost low for participants Figure off season use only to train Ventures in the basics of hunting at extreme ranges.... thoughts...

In our neck of the woods, we shoot steel plates cut into the shapes of animals... I see this issue as a non issue..

I know going to Jambo is important to a lot of folks, more so with National's new HA base and being a part of the first Jambo there. However, there are Councils that offer HA programs, the equal to, or better than National's. Here's two... Blue Ridge Mountain Councils, Roanoke, Va. They been rafting the New for nearly two decades. And...Maine High Adventure, once a National High Adventure base....(This message has been edited by le Voyageur)