Too many Council Camps?

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Lets see, we either don't have enough adults to present an exciting program or we have too many adults to present an exciting program.

 

How do we determine what that magic number of adults are? Oh I got it. Its different for every unit based on composition.

 

That and having the adults understand the program. Just because you have 23 youth and 12 adults in camp (our total for the week) does not mean the adults spent the week chasing youth. Many adults took advantage of the training programs that were offered. Others assisted in various program areas and all followed the program (the BSA one)

 

It can happen

[skeptic 1002]

"Scouting is outing"; without camps, fewer opportunities, especially in some areas. A well run camp pays dividends far beyond the apparent, often from attendees from many years before.

 

In our part of the country, while we have many state and federal camps, they too often are in very poor condition, have become very expensive if they are popular, and you are crowded with people, dogs, noise, and too many times, booze and foul language. Not the place to camp, especially in prime seasons.

 

While national places like Philmont, Sea Base, and Boundary Waters, and the soon to be Summit are great facilities that offer something unique in many respects, they are expensive and have long waiting lists. Local camps within a three hour or less drive are important.

 

I feel national needs to play a part in the survival of small camps that cannot stand on their own due to low populations or income issues. They may be the only place for decent activities for cubs and younger scouts in the camping arena. But subsidizing should be tied to a well rounded program and actually learning if a traditional summer camp. ALL camps should be available for simply camping during non-peak seasons.

 

Just some long simmering thoughts.

[Basementdweller 608]

As a volunteer I don't have to do anything and can walk away at any point.

 

An example.....Day camp this year, none of the usually volunteers could get off work to help me take the boys. Parents if you want your boy to go to camp here is what I need. I got my volunteers....

 

Far as choosing who stays home, first come first serve always has worked out.

 

Trainer.....I know a number of adult men that would love to have your husbands job, so count your blessings, they are blessings whether you realize it or not.

 

OGE...brings up a point about Number volunteers. I complain regularly that on the Cub level I never seem to have enough and at the Boy scout level too many. Why is that????

[Tampa Turtle 1011]

re: Adults at Cubs vs. (Boy) Scouts.

 

I have noticed the disparity too. I think Cubs was a lot of hard work; you do a lot of stuff "for" them. Scouts you need the extra adult at times but I think you pick up a few "Man Scouts". Face it, hiking, canoeing, snorkel trips, all sound like a lot of fun so I think a lot of guys come along as an excuse to hang around and get away from home for a weekend.

 

Of course the solution is to put 'em to work!

[Eagle92 110]

Not only is Cub Scouting more labor intensive for the adults, we are running the program not the Scouts, but it is a natural progression to move up with one's sons to the next level, and stay there.

[momof2cubs 10]

Basement, I was the coordinator this year for cub day camp for my pack. District required a 1:4 ratio from each pack. I did actually turned people away when the ratio got over. And guess what, I HATED DOING THAT (caps for emphasis, not yelling)

 

Next year I am actually doing something different. I will give priority to kids whose parents (if they are not volunteering this year) have volunteered for day camp in the recent past, then next are the kids whose parents regularly volunteer to run/help/organize pack activities throughout the year. After that, everyone else on a 1st come, 1st served, based on the available spots.

 

But here's the thing: it's harsh! I am not sure what the solution is..I really don't. But I do know the girls do things VERY differently and the need for volunteers is MUCH MUCH MUCH lower. I am not saying they don't use volunteers, I am just saying they don't need so dang many!

[trainerlady 10]

Basement - We realize we are blessed with hubby's job situation, but it can be a curse too. There is no family life for him at a time when the kids need him most. We wish the company would share the wealth just a bit. Hire 5-6 more guys, give everyone 40-50 hours a week and a life. But our of our control.

 

Shortridge - Our council requires the supervision levels stated claiming that's what National states. They're version of the rules I guess. As to switching out parents the camp was 3.5 hours from everyone's home. Not exactly a drive up and back for an 8 hour supervision shift. Coucnil also requires everyone to be registered and the state of Michigan also requires background checks on all adults staying in camp for more than a short visit. No BSA registration, no background check no staying at camp.

 

I bet if the standards were changed to allow a GS style camping experience for Cubs, if not younger BS, that at least in my area the number of kids going to summer camp would increase tremendously. I still maintain that we aren't filling a niche that needs filling. The GS program even lets girls that aren't members camp - they add the registration fee for membership to the camping fees. Bingo - more girls in camp and higher numbers of girls registered, maybe even more that start going to a local troop after a great time at camp. Heck in GS you can be a member that only camps. They have a new membership scheme going now.

 

Camps, councils, leadership (all levels), and the association as a whole need to change and adapt with the times or we won't make a 150 years.

 

[Eamonn 61]

Trying to make heads or tails of a camp budget, is a real nightmare.

I'll bet most camps have no idea how much money they might be making or might be losing.

Everything seems to be part of some other budget.

Buy a new walk-in refrigerator that comes from the Capital Budget. A new tractor the maintenance budget. camp staff salaries are lumped in with all the other salaries. T-shirts for staff are under the promotions and awards budget.

I don't know of any Scout camp that depreciates things that wear out and will need replaced (Tents and the like.)

I at one time thought this was done on purpose as a way to keep nosy volunteers like myself at bay.

Now I think it's just that no one knows what they are doing.

 

Camps are very expensive to maintain and run.

Even with better book keeping practices in place it would be hard to know what the real costs are.

Mainly because there is so much that can go wrong or need fixed and once fixed no one knows how long it will last.

We spent big buck repairing the filtration system on the camp swimming pool and then five years later had to have the entire pool sand blasted and the filtration system replaced.

We have walk in coolers that are supposed to be 40 years old, but like the antique which has had three new heads and four new handles, just about every part has at some time been replaced.

How well? Or how badly? A camp is doing seems to be mainly based on how many campers attend compared to previous years and the feedback the camp gets from the SM's.

In the area where I live the youth members have little if any say in where they camp or where they will camp next year.

The cost of attending camp?

I don't know but when I brought a Troop of English Scouts over to our local camp in 1980, even paying the out of Council fee we paid $30.00 per person today the cost for Scouts from our own Council is $325.00.

Is that in line with how much other things have gone up?

 

It's kinda sad that no one is ever willing to take the blame for camps that do a bad job.

The food is terrible -Blame the cooks.

Program stinks. -We can't find the staff and this year we had a hard time finding anyone and so the list goes on.

Be nice one year if someone were willing to stick up his paw and say "Hey guys, I'm sorry I messed up, blame me.

Even at the PTC at Philmont when the food wasn't up to par it was due to it being late in the season, the kitchen staff were leaving and the food was being let run down.

Great! Thanks for telling me. Now where's my refund?

I so think that we are going to see bigger camps which very well might be Regional Camps.

National is going to not allow camps that are too small to sustain themselves to carry on.

These bigger camps will have to look for a very big carrot to attract Troops and camper, maybe they will not be so much about Troop camping and more about individuals?

Like it or not everything comes down to cash and finance.

At one time COPE and COPE courses were the carrot, but they have had their day and become old hat.

I'm not sure what's next, but feel when the time comes some will love it, while others not so much.

Ea.

[shortridge 184]

trainerlady,

 

I'm sorry your council lied to you, but that's not a Boy Scouts of America problem - that's a Council X problem.

 

You kept bringing up GS vs BSA camps, so I did a local comparison. My GS council's camp offers a six-day program for high schoolers for between $330 and $360, comparable to the Boy Scout program fee for resident camp, at $370 per Scout. But there are some significant differences.

 

>> At Girl Scouts, there is no pick-from-a-menu program. You attend one of several "theme" program weeks (sailing, horseback riding, cooking, etc.); you don't just get to show up and choose whatever you want to do, like you can at Boy Scout camp. That allows the GS camp to customize its staffing levels early on.

 

>> Girl Scout day camps are run simultaneously alongside the resident camps. That allows the council to bolster its attendance and double the use of its paid staff. In Cub Scouts, day camps in my council are held off-site (at state parks and private campgrounds) and run mostly by volunteers.

 

>> GS camps are open to any girl who registers for camp, and girls don't have to attend with their troops. Boy Scout camps are open only to Scouts, members who generally attend with their troop. (Provo programs in my experience are usually open only to experienced campers.) I think that's just the basic nature of the program. Boy Scouts emphasizes the patrol and troop; Girl Scouts emphasizes the individual, and there can sometimes be very little unit stability.

 

From my own experience: After attending and working at a Boy Scout camp for many years, I got my first exposure to GS camps last summer at a "Me and My Guy" weekend camp with my daughter. I was shocked at the physical condition of the GS camp midway through the season - dilapidated buildings, uncut grass, pigsty showers and poorly marked trails. There clearly had been very little money put into the camp infrastructure - and the program situation was almost as bad, so I'm not sure where the money we paid was going.

 

If I'd been able to take my daughter to Cub Scout resident camp at my old stomping grounds, we'd have been guaranteed a dining hall only a decade old, showers with privacy curtains, trails with markers and signposts all around and grass cut weekly. We'd have done archery with appropriate equipment, not the oversized recurve bows and broken arrows the GS camp foisted on the kids, and we'd have worn PFDs that were properly inspected and stored, not slung all over porch railings to be worn down by the sun.

 

This is not a slam on Girl Scouts, nor am I suggesting that one bad camp experience makes all GS camps bad. I'm just observing that from my experience, the Boy Scout camp was worth the money.

[trainerlady 10]

Eamon - your regional camp idea maybe a reality sooner than you think. Central region Area 2 is discussing this right now. They are talking about how many camps do we really need in Michigan, northern Ohio, and maybe part of northern Indiana. How many coucnils do we really need to serve a declining population of youth. How do we staff these camps, councils and districts. The findings and suggestions are at some level common sense, startling, and inventive.

 

In our area we are closing schools to beat the band, laying off firefighters, police and ambulance staffs, consolidating services. The public sector is realizing that you can't staff for millions when you only have hundreds of thousands. GS here made their adjustments 4 years ago. 21 councils then down to 3 now. I hear they are doing it nation wide from friends around the country.

 

It'll only be a matter of time before the BSA sees the light and right sizes. Or maybe they'll just get hit in the head by the light. Maybe then we'll see good, competent camp staffs. The pool of staff members will only have to service a few regional camps instead of having to service a multitude of smaller council camps. The regional camp would have the cream of the crop of staff members. Maybe this will lead to a cream of the crop camp program. A cream of the crop program could lead to more older scouts wanting to go to camp. If they have a reason to stay in scouts, a good camp program, maybe they'll stay around longer and membership can at least hlod even instead of dropping.

 

amazing how improving one area could lead to increases in other areas.

[shortridge 184]

"Cream of the crop" camp staff members?

 

Sorry, but unless they create full-time, year-round positions, or quintuple their salaries, most BSA summer camps are not going to get the types of people you are demanding. There's not exactly a pool of professional wilderness guides or climbing instructors eager to take a temporary job with no benefits at a Scout camp.

 

I'd estimate the average tenure of a BSA camp staffer is about 2-4 years. They start in high school and continue serving into college. But as soon as they realize they can make more money or become better poised for their careers in other jobs ("I'm an archery instructor, but I want to be a chemist. How does that help me?"), they're gone.

 

Teachers, who have summers off, can swing it for a while - until they start a family and can't justify the time away from home. Few other people, except retirees, can afford to get paid $200 a week to work 12-to-14-hour days and live in a tiny cabin or tent in the middle of the woods.

 

I'd suggest that your point of view is slightly skewed by your perspective. You don't have any real information on whether GS consolidation has led to a cream-of-the-crop camp staff there, because you don't attend along with your daughter. Yet you get to see all the warts at the Boy Scout camp because you are there in person. I'd wager that the GS camp can look fairly sketchy up close, too.

[Basementdweller 608]

Trainer......the niche you say needs filled is babysitting. Ah no thanks.

 

My daughter just returned from a week of GS camp. her activity of choice was backpacking. The program was ridiculous, you would think that for a week of backpacking they would actually backpack more than just one night. Well they day hiked a couple of days, practiced setting up tents, never actually slept in one, swam a bit and canoed one day.

 

In my neck of woods GS camp cost twice what a week at BS camp 185 vs 350 and her program was not worth that much more $$$$$$$

 

 

[BadenP 93]

 

As Eamonn so aptly stated, running and maintaining a camp is a very expensive proposition, which few councils can really afford to do in this day of reduced contributions, rising costs, and a rotten economy. Maybe it is time for a reality check and the council camp becomes a thing of the past. Councils with multiple camps could consolidate into one megacamp, or maybe a regional camp as was suggested.

 

The bottom line is that most SE's do a lousy job administrating their councils finances and the camp is usually the first to go when a financial crisis occurs. About 12 years ago I was visiting the area where I was a DE, and sadly watched the council camp which was over 75 years old, being demolished, since it was sold to pay the councils massive debt. Over 400 scouters, former scouters, and scouts showed up to witness the event, most all were in uniform, but not one of the scouting pro's had the guts to show their face. Each of us were able to take home with us a small momento of the camp. Less than two years later National closed down the council for fiscal mismanagement and merged the districts with another council fifty miles to the south.

[JMHawkins 15]

SeattlePioneer, you were a Commissioner at Camp Pigott for Session 4, right? How'd it go?

 

Perhaps we are blessed in Chief Seattle Council with two largish summer camps - Parsons (the oldest on the West coast?) and Pigott ('brand new' at 8 years old). There is definitely competition between the two camps. Does it help? I don't have any reference for comparison, but I was happy with the experience this year.

 

We went to Pigott, 21 Scouts, 3 adults. We were required to have two adults (2-deep) and the first two adults going with the unit were free. Additional adults were $125 each. Scouts were $225 each (in-council, $275 each out of council). Overall a pretty good value.

 

It was crowded though. 20 troops and nearly 400 people in camp for the week, it was basically at capacity and meals were rather crowded. I wouldn't want to increase the number of Scouts any more - it seems like they have a "capacity" number that is their actual capacity to run a decent program rather than the maximum number of bodies they can cram into camp.

 

 

[SeattlePioneer 144]

Hello JM Hawkins,

 

 

At Camp Pigott week 3 which you were at was at the camp's capacity. I was there for week 4 last week with about 300 Scouts and adults. I was one of three Camp Commissioners.

 

Camp Pigott has been pretty much rebuilt from scratch in recent years due in large part to genrous gifts by the Pigott family (Pacific Car and Foundry and Weyerheuser I believe.

 

The Camp is named for Charles Pigott who was President of the Chief Seattle Council in the 1950s. His Grandson Tom Pigott is the current Council President.

 

I heard a story that the council property shared by Camp Pigott and Camp Brinkley (Cub Scout resident camp) was owned by the Pigott family and donated to Scouting decades ago. I don't know if that is true.

 

This week (week five) will be the last week of Boy Scout Camp. The Camp Brinkley resident camp operates for seven weeks. I visited there and found every Scout and adult gushing with enthusiasm for their program.

 

Camp Brinkley is pretty much flat. Camp Pigott is built on the side of a hill and you are pretty much climbing or descending pretty much anywhere you go.