Scout Drowns

[LIBob 10]

Alright so Beavah is right to a degree.

 

I state on the other thread that every single scout drowning was caused by SSD/SA not being followed when in fact that is a very common denominator but it is wrong to assume that happens in every single scout drowning. (mea culpa)

 

That said we should be teaching scouts safe swimming and safe boating and expecting them to follow it in their personal lives as well.

 

Gun Safety should not stop when a scout leaves scout camp and neither should the buddy system.

 

I think we'll find that when a scout drowns (whether at a scouting event or otherwise) there is usually one or more elements of SSD/SA that were not being followed.

[Scoutfish 16]

What is needed is a side course forn a different set of SSD or Sa checks and safety SOP's for when the scout may be alone.

 

Now, it should be stressed that this does not figure in when at scout camp, or during or part of or under the banner of any scout activity while at, on, or represented by a council, district, troop, pack, crew, etc...

 

Have an add on that takes place when a scout is on his own time - and most likely solo - unable to perform any necessary SSD or SA measures.

 

You can't always have a buddy with you. You can't always have 2 lifeguards or responcible people watching you. You don't always plan ahead and carry a life jacket with you on a solo hike.

 

Again, not while at or participating in any BSA function, but when away.

 

Like CPR, as a former firefighter, EMS/ water rescue tech, we used SOP's that called for two man CPR. But If I just happen to be on my own time and run across somebody in distress who needs CRP, I have the knowledge of doing 1 man CPR which is set up, times and different counts from 2 man CPR.

[Engineer61 19]

"Have an add on that takes place when a scout is on his own time - and most likely solo - unable to perform any necessary SSD or SA measures."

 

"You can't always have a buddy with you. You can't always have 2 lifeguards or responcible people watching you. You don't always plan ahead and carry a life jacket with you on a solo hike."

 

"Again, not while at or participating in any BSA function, but when away. "

 

==========================================================================================================

 

I would categorize this as a form of "false sense of security".

 

Because the person performs an activity safely under controlled conditions, there is an inherent mindset to believe that the same activity can be performed under all conditions. Therein lies the danger.

 

My Scout is 12, and in spite of his successful completion of the Scout swimming safety test, he is not allowed to swim alone in my pool, in spite of his argument to the contrary, he is a weak swimmer. As a result of his passing the test, he has become *over* confident in his abilities.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, thanks Scoutfish and E61 for helping us all think through this a bit, eh?

 

A struggle I've always felt with simplistic instituional safety stuff like SSD is that it doesn't really prepare folks for da judgment and skills needed to be safe in da real world, where institutional resources and strictures aren't in place. Da BSA swim check is like that too, eh? It's an institutional mechanism for guaranteeing a minimal level of water skill and comfort that will be safe with institutional supports in place (though even then I get a bit annoyed when most camps ignore da "in a strong manner" piece and credit drowning in a forward direction for 100 yards ).

 

Now yeh could say that everyone in da real world should always operate with full institutional resources and strictures. Every boater must have a buddy boat.

 

Or yeh could say that our job is to prepare kids (and adults) to operate in that real world without institutional support. That our job is to teach Engineer61's son how to swim on his own in his backyard pool ... safely and with good judgment. That we want kids to learn how to boat safely on their own, and climb on their own, and trek on their own - eventually without the guided tour institutional safety of having "Qualified Supeervision". Yah, sure, and have the judgment to know when not to go on their own, too.

 

Sometimes if we focus too much on da points of institutional safety, we forget to teach da real skills and judgment required for actual safety.

 

Beavah

 

 

[LIBob 10]

Scoutfish wrote:

What is needed is a side course forn a different set of SSD or Sa checks and safety SOP's for when the scout may be alone.

 

Well if you change "when the scout may be alone" to "when the scout is on a non-scouting activity" I can concur.

 

 

I don't set up 3 different swim aras in order to swim in some wild area and I don't teach my son to. but I absolutely always have a swim buddy. I (we) never swim in water more than chest deep on an unguarded beach.

 

Souctfish wrote:

You can't always have a buddy with you.

Oh yes you can. And if you don't, don't swim. I don't wwim in a public pool, or a backyard pool or a public (guarde) beach without a swim buddy. I sure as heck am eaching my son to do the same.

 

Heck I will never forget the day when I was in my late 20's and my mother (a GS in her youth a scout leader in her ummm motherly years), was pushing 50 and we were on a well-guarded beach in OC Maryland. I had managed to cut my foot and said "I'm going back to get a band-aid. I'll return in 10 minutes.

 

she reponded "Awww, I as hoping to keep swimming. Can't you just tough it out 15 more minutes?"

 

My mother would never swim wihtout a buddy and neither should you. Never ever swim without a buddy. Just don't do it.

 

 

It's just not that hard once you accept it. Teaching kids that "following basic safety regs are not that hard once you accept them" is a basic and integral part of scouting.

 

 

[LIBob 10]

add to the above

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

Edit to add, today I took two barely 11-year-old scouts on a 2-mile walking tour of the Scout camp where they will spend a week this summer. Josh, the as't camp director, insisted I first tell him what my proposed route is. He also asked me to "check-in" when I am done my hike. It was completely non-intusive. It was not a big deal.

 

Following basic safety regs are not that hard once you accept them.

[LIBob 10]

Beavah wrote:

Now yeh could say that everyone in da real world should always operate with full institutional resources and strictures. Every boater must have a buddy boat.

 

Damn straight we should.

 

Specifically we should teach that under any circumstances besides

- fishing in the local 5-foot deep pond

- a commercial grade fishing boat etc.

every boat should have a buddy boat.

 

Look even Lewis and Clark did not travel alone in the same boat. B-P crossed more than one river in his time and I'd bet my last dollar he never did so using only a single small boat.

 

Heck the smallest unit operations he ever had were in the Zulu campaign and even then he always operated as part of a patrol-sized unit.

 

He lived where others died. He succeeded where others failed. I doubt he did so by throwing caution to the wind and trying to bring his entire patrol across a river in a single canoe (or raft built with lashing.)

 

I'd bet he did so by building two canoes, or lashing together two rafts etc.

 

MEH, I've been wrong before but I'm gonna stick my neck out on this one. Boat safety, swim safety etc. was important to B-P and he probably never once said or implied (This message has been edited by LIBob)

[Scoutfish 16]

 

 

But that's the whole point LIBob !

 

When I worked my crab pots or flounder nets, I did not have a buddy in my boat, nor did I have a buddy boat with me.

Why? Because I was working. So were others. You cannot just ask and expect somebody to follow yo around all day..unless you plan on paying them. And in that case, where do I sign up?

 

 

"under any circumstances besides ...." prety much relates to anything outside scouting. Could be a commercial fisherman, a wildlife resource officer, Marine fisheries officer, any person who makes a living in his boat.

 

As for swimming, no...you cannot make sure there is always somebody with you. It's prefered, but not always possible. I have found myself swimming ( intentionally) although it wasn't in my plans earlier in the day.

 

Drop something( accidentally) valuable off a sea wall, dock, bulkhead, pier, etc....

 

 

 

 

Again, this ia great reference, but applies to a scouting function on scouting time. All the drownings were NOT scouting function nor on scouting time.

 

Had they been, I'm pretty sure there would be no material for the original post!

 

[LIBob 10]

Scoutfish

 

I respectfuly submit that if you EVER swim without a buddy then yoiu are violating one of the basic tenets of scouting.

 

You may tend your lobster pots however you wish. I am going to continue to tach my son and every scout in the troop NEVER to swim without a buddy, and NEVER to operate a small boat without a buddy boat.

 

I sincerely wish you well, but swimming alone and (small) boating alone is 100% completely and totally outside of scouting.

 

Scouts should exhibit gun safety both inside and outside of scout camp, same deal for swim safety, boat safety etc. otherwise they are existing as "non-scouts." The only exception that comes to mind is a 20-foot wide swimming hole.

 

 

God bless you, but if you are gonna set up "exceptions" the rules for swim safety and boat safety are you gonna also set up exceptons for gun safety?

[Eagle92 110]

Actually in his youth BP and two or three of his brothers would go boating by themselves in one boat. it's in GBB Bio of him.

[Beavah 205]

Yah, sorry LIBob, I couldn't disagree more.

 

Institutional safety is where we set up a deliberately "over the top" set of policies and practices to provide safety for people who have very little skill or experience. Summer camp swim areas are da perfect example, eh? Yeh provide a high ratio of lifeguards to swimmers, a very small, very visible swim area, etc. etc.... all because you're dealing with inexperienced children.

 

That's not da real world, though. In the real world, people have experience and no longer need institutionalized over-the-top safety. In fact, we want people to become experienced so that we can dismantle institutionalized safety, which is expensive and very limiting.

 

So yah, sure, we use SSD at camps with a large population of inexperienced swimmers. But if you've got a lad who is a strong swimmer, there's nothing wrong with him competing in the local triathalon, eh? They're very popular around here this time of year, all kinds of scout-aged kids competing along with adults. But in da swim section of a triathalon, yeh break all kinds of SSD rules. No swim buddy (can't since your goal is to leave your buddy behind!). No roped off swim area. Swimming in over 12 feet of water. Lower ratio of lifeguards and safety boats than what NCS calls for.

 

Now, I suppose from what you write that you'd ban all triathalons and swim competitions or at least refuse to participate or let your son participate. That's your choice. I just think that Scouting should instead encourage such stuff, and prepare boys who are interested for such stuff. Make 'em strong swimmers so that they don't need da institutional safety net and can swim in a triathalon or on their own.

 

Yeh mention gun safety, and when we set up an NCS gun range at camp we limit things to .22 bolt-action rifles with a bunch of strict procedures designed for beginners. That doesn't mean that it's right and proper to limit every experienced adult shooter to .22s and controlled ranges, eh?

 

Now me, I'm an experienced paddler. I'm perfectly comfortable paddlin' solo on rivers I'm familiar with when it's well within my ability level. I'm an adult, eh? I'm not bound by institutional safety rules developed for inexperienced children. Thank goodness! That's what we Americans call "Liberty". Nuthin' like it. And nuthin' like the peacefulness yeh get paddling solo down a river at dawn or in the early evening, just you and your fellow Beavers.

 

Of course, in Baden-Powell's day, "scouts" were experienced fellows who could and often did operate solo on behalf of da group, to gather information about da terrain and the enemy. I reckon there's a reason he chose "scouting" rather than "infantry" as his model for a boys' program.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Vicki 11]

"My Scout is 12, and in spite of his successful completion of the Scout swimming safety test, he is not allowed to swim alone in my pool, in spite of his argument to the contrary, he is a weak swimmer. As a result of his passing the test, he has become *over* confident in his abilities."

 

Engineer, you may not have meant to word this quite the way I read it, but this is a "soapbox" issue for me, so here goes.

 

No matter how strong a swimmer may be, he or she should never swim alone. Period. Until the day when we have gills, water is not our friend no matter how much fun it may be. A simple slip and fall on a pool deck can turn into a funeral if there isn't someone there to see it happen. Breathing in water on a stroke and subsequent choking, same result. As noted in a previous post in this thread, just seeing how long you can stay underwater can be disastrous.

 

Vicki

BSA, YMCA, and Red Cross certified lifeguard (at various times in my life)

 

[Scoutfish 16]

LIBob, yes, boating alone is outside scouting. That is my point! Matter of fact, 94% ( if not more) of my life is outside of scouting. That's why we call it the real world, and not "The World According To Scouting Rules".

 

 

Now as for Gun safety, I usually don't have a guin buddy with me. But I do have a nice collection of trophies for shooting. None of them are for "Buddy shooting".

 

Aples to oranges: If I fall out of a boat, I may drown. Just me, nobody else going with me. If I choose to handle my rifle in a careless way, chances are greater that I will hurt/kill somebody besides me.

 

Again, the pont you are missing, with the original post is that outside of scout functions, it is not always easy or practical to follow what you do at a bona fide scout sanctioned, scout type function or program.

 

 

 

[DeanRx 69]

The gun safety analogy is a poor point anyways...

 

per BSA gun safety and G2SS, a scout must be in Boy Scouts before he shoots anything other than a recurve bow or an air-rifle (BB gun). My 9 y/o Webelos scout routinely goes shooting with me. He shoots .22-cal, shotgun, and recently got introduced to black powder. We ALWAYS follow prudent gun safety techniques. According to BSA, he can't touch black powder at a scouting function until he is 14 y/o or older.

 

However, I'd take issue with the assertation that we are living an "unscout-like" existence because we CHOOSE to shoot these types of firearms at non-scout sanctioned outings. Just because BSA legal tells the organization that a boy must be x years old or at x rank level before they can do things at a BSA event (for safety and more often liability reasons), doesn't trump my judgement as a father to determine what is and is not reasonable for my son in a non-scouting event. To claim we are acting unscout-like is poppycock!

 

I'd agree that the "never swim without a buddy" rule is a great one and should appy to ALL swimming situations. However, that stems from the fact that it is a proven way to save lives, not the fact that it a BSA tenent in SSD or safety afloat.

 

The gun safety vs BSA swim safety comparison just doesn't hold water - IMHO.

 

DeanRx

[Beavah 205]

I'd agree that the "never swim without a buddy" rule is a great one and should appy to ALL swimming situations.

 

Yah, so no triathlons (or other swim competitions) for your kid either, eh?