High Adventure trips: To Buy or not to Buy.

[johnmbowen 10]

Good Point Bob.

 

Of course all of my Scout boatmen (the older guys) are trained with the same curriculum as my professional guides. They all have this specialized safety and rescue training. All of the Scouts that go on these trips do pass the swim tests, are trained in some swiftwater safety before they can go (they get real interested in learning in order to get to go) as well. Included in the training are extensive throw bag experience, scenarios, and even a requirement for the boatmen...to successfully swim a rapid (and be targets for the throwbag rescuers).

 

In order to do this kind of stuff a great deal of training and learning is required. I use as many "outside" experts as possible (who get listened to more than me), and this helps fill in the gaps in the meetings. The Scouts tend to want to attend the meetings so they can get at the instruction (...well, mostly). We also concentrate hard on first aid, with scenarios (a holdover from WFA) to meet the requirements of our outings schedule. It takes lots of time, but the kids seem to eat it up, and seldom question the why of doing this preparation. We also cover the items that are required for advancement within this training.

 

The point of requiring the BSA training, minimal as it is, seems apparent when working with other Troops that come along with ours.

 

 

 

[le Voyageur 72]

The problem with BSA High Adventure from my perspective is this...

 

In the rush to create the Venture program National forgot the finer details.

 

What is needed is the development for a new section in the Guide for Safe Scouting that deals with directly with High Adventure. This would include key elements in the guidelines used by C.O.P.E., Climbing, Aquatics, and Shooting Sports Directors.

 

The creation at the Council and District level, High Adventure Committees that supports Venture Crews, and Units with older boy programs.

 

A minimum level of Trek Leader training for Unit Leaders.

 

Reformatting the BSA Lifeguard program into three different levels (Basic, Intermediate, and Advanced). Basic would be as is with few changes, Intermediate would deal more with waterfronts and openwater, and Advance would cover moving and swift water.

 

At the National level, bifurcating DE's into two seperate career paths, Admin (those that deal with money and bodies, ie. the traditional DE), and Program, who's training, until BSA can catch up, would be, or akin to NOLS. And who's primary responsibilty would be to direct a council's High Adventure program.

 

Any other thoughts????

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bob White 20]

le Voyager,

I share your enjoyment of the outdoors and the fun of high adventure. However I do not forsee the BSA ever putting the emphasis you suggest on the HA program.

 

The main reason being, that even in the Venture program and certainly in the troop program, outdoor activities and high adventure are tools not the goal of the program. A scout who leaves the program as a good citizen and decision maker has achieved the program mission even if he has never experienced a high adventure activity. However the reverse would not be true.

 

High Adventure is just one of many tools in the BSA tool box. I don't think it is any less important than the others nor is it any more important. For that reason I see it as always being a part of scouting but not having the administrative emphasis you suggest.

 

Bob(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[le Voyageur 72]

Bob

 

I agree 100 per cent with what you're saying.

 

However, here's the problem. The Venture/Older Boy programs are the BSA's promises of opportunities to Scouts to be involved in high adventure activities.

 

We need the infastructure to deliver that promise not only to our youth, but also, as a means to support the unit and crew leaders that are trying to deliver that promise.

 

That's the soap box I'm standing on...do we keep our word, or do we pay lip service to the concept, and wonder why older boy retention in Scouting is a problem...

 

 

[Quixote 10]

lV - I also agree - my scouting career is an example of that from the other extreme - didn't want to stay in scouts beyond 1st class because there was a local Explorer (mid 70's) post that was co-ed and did nothing but backpacking, whitewater canoeing, climbing, etc..

 

While there were some of my friends that stayed in Scouts (most actually), I most fondly remember my scouting years as those spent doing HA activities in the Post (and being on Indian George's dance team when I was in scouts).

[johnmbowen 10]

HI guys, great comments.

 

Too true about the point of the BSA from Bob. However, as Quixote said, a very fast way to achieve it is through the outings. This works extremely well with our little Troop.

 

One thing that le Voyager has well stated is the increasing bureaucracy that may or may not be required for running these trips. Sure we have highly padded resumes for this kind of thing, but these certifications also pose a big problem...perhaps an unsurmountable activation barrier to the goal of doing the outings for the average Scoutmaster or Assistant. If we get too specialized, maybe our place is only at the "high adventure camps" where only those with bucks can get it there.

 

Somewhere in these threads, I saw mentioned the 'Powderhorn' system which may or may not achieve the goals he set. However, I remember that it was a long course and the closest to me was San Francisco...which is not even close. With my program going, I am not really interested in further certification anyway, unless the bureaucracy forces me to get it. I feel I have already paid my dues, and have spent 30 years getting to where I am now. What do I have to prove to BSA? Like le Voyager, I have been turned down by Scouters who may think I am just another blowhard, making me not wish to ask them twice, which I don't.

 

Well, this is why this is such a hard thing to figure out. We can kill kids if we're not careful, but perhaps another way may be found? Something that can rapidly spread the benefits of HA to as many groups as possible.

 

Well, perhaps a suggestion...One method that I have used very effectively is to make people who are already expert in a recreational skill into an ASM and call them a "specialist" meaning that the only time we call on them is when the Scouts want to train for and go on that kind of trip. How do I know that they are qualified?? Well, I am in an enviable position...I cheat. I just go on a climb or trip with them a couple of times and size them up. Then if the thought of working with boys doesn't make them twitch...I ask them. Yes, we do go through some specialized training with them, but we try not to burden them. I realize that this will probably not work for everyone.

 

...so here is the hard part.

 

Buckets of certifications to satisfy the organizations (and from what I have seen, surely needed)

...or...smething else. But, is the something else leading to danger? Nothing beats extensive training, exhaustive planning and good qualifications.

 

(well, this is why they pay us the big bucks)

 

JB