Jump to content
Scouter_Chris

Limit for Cub Scout nights of camping

Recommended Posts

On 10/11/2019 at 8:08 PM, yknot said:

Why is anyone making a deal over this? Just do more one night camp outs if you feel your wings are clipped.  Why do people have such a hard time understanding that scouting is not the same as what you do personally. You are part of an organization that has liability issues to consider and is in the public eye. What you do personally you cannot do while camping with scouts.
 

I appreciate the many responses here. Unfortunately, no clear-cut answer. Here's why I posted. Our council (or district) runs a Cub-o-ree which is all-day Saturday with an overnight allowed into Sunday. I personally like two-night campouts so I inquired to the DE running the event if our pack could come Friday night. There is where she explained Cubs only camp for one-night (and then sent me that link previously posted). Because I have set in motion two-night camping for our pack for the last two years I was curious. She even admitted that packs in her own district don't follow that rule, but the rule is why her event is only one night.

Anyway, thank you all. We're going to carry on with our fun (and optional) two-night camping with smores, campfire, hiking, dutch ovens, parent cooking, glow lanterns, and all the fun stuff we do in Pack 59 (www.facebook.com/Pack59nj/).

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

INTERESTING.

I love how councils can have 3 day 2 night events per this

image.thumb.png.8baf3e0fe5c73fc22f79e99fb2ff3659.png

 

But packs, cannot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Eagle94-A1, maybe it's all strategy.

Put more restrictions on autonomous pack camping, open up council-run cub camping opportunities. 

The council doesn't make any money or get any recognition via PPT data to National when a pack camps on its own.  Plus I've noticed that at least in my council, the "cub approved" camping locations are pretty much restricted to council owned camps.  And council staff doesn't entertain discussion about adding other locations to the approved list, even if they meet the requirements.

So funnel everyone to council camps, and walk through the council programming, etc.

Pretty soon, it will be Tiger Cubs BSA...packs, troops, crews, ships included....

Edited by desertrat77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scouter_Chris said:

Yes, that's where the DE said she saw it. Good job tracking it down.

I just don't think those pages should be considered controlling relative to other sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, desertrat77 said:

...Plus I've noticed that at least in my council, the "cub approved" camping locations are pretty much restricted to council owned camps.  And council staff doesn't entertain discussion about adding other locations to the approved list, even if they meet the requirements.

At least your council has an approved list. Mine does not have an official list. So many packs use the OA's WHERE TO GO Camping book to pick places to camp. That book includes a lot of state parks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Eagle94-A1 said:

At least your council has an approved list. Mine does not have an official list. So many packs use the OA's WHERE TO GO Camping book to pick places to camp. That book includes a lot of state parks.

We have some wonderful state parks that are far better than our council camps, by every measure.  But by having the council-approved list limited to council camps, the packs don't have much of a choice officially.  They'd love to camp at state camps but they gotta obey the rules.  And I've tried to engage our council to add more non-BSA camps that more than meet BSA's criteria, but I have not gained one bit of traction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

We have some wonderful state parks that are far better than our council camps, by every measure.  But by having the council-approved list limited to council camps, the packs don't have much of a choice officially.  They'd love to camp at state camps but they gotta obey the rules.  And I've tried to engage our council to add more non-BSA camps that more than meet BSA's criteria, but I have not gained one bit of traction.

Gotta admit - this frustrates me to no end.  What a ridiculous abuse of the rules to control the list of approved sites so that only council approved sites are permitted.  We routinely camped at state parks and they worked great.  If councils are going to abuse the system like this, I really wish someone at national would in turn relax the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

Gotta admit - this frustrates me to no end.  What a ridiculous abuse of the rules to control the list of approved sites so that only council approved sites are permitted.  We routinely camped at state parks and they worked great.  If councils are going to abuse the system like this, I really wish someone at national would in turn relax the rules.

Me too.  Sometimes I think of all of the challenges the BSA is facing.  It would seem that this would be the very moment in our organization's history where councils and National would make a concerted effort to embrace the ideas of the volunteer scouters.  At least entertain suggestions and even if disapproved, provide some sort of meaningful dialogue.  After all, we're the ones in the field, sticking by the BSA through thick and thin.

But no.  With a couple of hiatuses, I've been a scouter since '85, and I've never seen an era in the BSA where council and National staffs have been more tone deaf and resistant to input from adult volunteers as now.  Individually there are some great pros that listen to the folks in the field and work from a position of mutual respect.  But collectively the pros have never been more distant and disconnected.

Edited by desertrat77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

Me too.  Sometimes I think of all of the challenges the BSA is facing.  It would seem that this would be the very moment in our organization's history where councils and National would make a concerted effort to embrace the ideas of the volunteer scouters.  At least entertain suggestions and even if disapproved, provide some sort of meaningful dialogue.  After all, we're the ones in the field, sticking by the BSA through thick and thin.

But no.  With a couple of hiatuses, I've been a scouter since '85, and I've never seen an era in the BSA where council and National staffs have been more tone deaf and resistant to input from adult volunteers as now.  Individually there are some great pros that listen to the folks in the field and work from a position of mutual respect.  But collectively the pros have never been more distant and disconnected.

These councils are not doing themselves any favours.  They think that they are protecting their facilities by forcing people to use them.  But, in turn, all they are doing is eroding the perceived value that units derive from council support.  Councils need to get units to their camp on the merits of their camps - not by making it the only option.

I agree - at this point in the history of Scouting councils need to learn to partner with the units - not try to control the units.  Build bridges to the units, don't put up more obstacles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

These councils are not doing themselves any favours.  They think that they are protecting their facilities by forcing people to use them.  But, in turn, all they are doing is eroding the perceived value that units derive from council support.  Councils need to get units to their camp on the merits of their camps - not by making it the only option.

I agree - at this point in the history of Scouting councils need to learn to partner with the units - not try to control the units.  Build bridges to the units, don't put up more obstacles.

Very true.  Folks know when they've been fenced in.  And yes indeed, camps can get lazy.  An additional drawback to the "let's all gather at Camp ABC yet again" is the burnout factor.  Years ago when I was stationed in the deep South, the small council I was in held every event they could at the council camp.  Monthly district meetings and roundtables, WB, other training courses, conferences, you name it.  The camp wasn't very special after a certain point.  Instead of "hurrah I'm back" it was "here we go again."

I concur, building bridges is just what the BSA needs right now.  More than ever! 

Edited by desertrat77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

Very true.  An additional drawback to the "let's all gather at Camp ABC yet again" is the burnout factor.  Years ago when I was stationed in the deep South, the small council I was in held every event they could at the council camp.  Roundtable, WB, other training courses, conferences, you name it.  The camp wasn't very special after a certain point.  Instead of "hurrah I'm back again" it was "here we go again."

I do feel the plight of these small councils as I know it's getting harder and harder to keep paying for these camps.  But, they've got to find a way here that doesn't involve burning out their members.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I do feel the plight of these small councils as I know it's getting harder and harder to keep paying for these camps.  But, they've got to find a way here that doesn't involve burning out their members.

It must be challenging to keep the camps viable.  More so than in the past.  It's been many a moon ago, but I am thinking of the small council camp in Alaska where I staffed as a scout.  We'd make the journey to the camp several times a year, but only for outdoor-oriented activities.  Summer camp, winter camp out with the troop, OA conclave, ordeal, etc.  All of the sedentary stuff took place in town.  Even after 4 years as a scout in that council, I always enjoyed driving through the front gate of the camp.

Edited by desertrat77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, desertrat77 said:

It must be challenging to keep the camps viable.  More so than in the past.  It's been many a moon ago, but I am thinking of the small camp in Alaska where I staffed as a scout.  We'd make the journey to camp several times a year, but only for outdoor stuff.  Summer camp, winter camp out with the troop, OA conclave, ordeal, etc.  All of the sedentary stuff took place in town.  Even after 4 years as a scout in AK, I always enjoyed driving through the front gate of that camp.

I'm not a wizard on council finances - but I can only imagine that councils are being forced to pay more for upkeep and perhaps leases than years ago.  It would seem to me that with the age of most of our councils, the council camps would all have been long paid for.  Money would just go to pay for staff, upkeep, and future improvements.  Yet, I know that even in my pretty big council summer camp fees don't pay for that.  Maybe when we were kids the level of expectation for a camp was much less and the councils had to sink less money into the,.  Not sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

  Maybe when we were kids the level of expectation for a camp was much less....

Excellent point, I hadn't considered that.  There was a time when camps had boats, a swim area, a nature area, archery range, rifle range, a handicraft area, and a trading post.  Maybe a dining hall.  Many still had patrols cooking all week.  Wall tents were the standard for both campers and staff.  Pretty primitive, actually.  And yet it seemed like the best place in the entire world.

Today?  Much more infrastructure.  Computer labs.  Artificial ski slopes.   Cabins/shacks.   Etc.  The dynamic is indeed different.

Edited by desertrat77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ParkMan said:

 Maybe when we were kids the level of expectation for a camp was much less and the councils had to sink less money into the,.  Not sure.

Yes, back in the day, we looked forward to our annual fall  (Indian Summer) outing at scout camp  - latrine and water at campsite, tent platforms,  a phone up at ranger house.   Luxury. :D

IMO, if all camp fees stayed with the camp ,  say a separate camp cost center,  camps would be self-sustaining.  I remember as ASPL to book the above outing, I called camp ranger and paid fee when we arrived Friday night.  No  council web app, server,... Lean summer camp payroll, still CIT's did not pay for the privilege of working at camp. Thrifty. 

But back to the OP,  for us since Cub camping  is family camping , not "Council organized  family camp",  number of nights is a non-issue.  

My $0.02

Edited by RememberSchiff
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×