How do we build true, independent patrol camping?

[Stosh 3452]

Here's where I find the 300' thingy a little too regulatory.

 

It is my premise that if a patrol doesn't want to go to summer camp and decides instead to go whitewater canoeing for a whole week 300 miles away, the 300' mark sounds a little strange. An independent patrol should be able to under adverse conditions be able to tolerate distances less than 300' to get by, but not the ideal situation. If they get the 300' then it's great, but if not, they should be able to adapt for a short period of time.

 

I'm not only an advocate of 300'+ but also an advocate that says a PLC cannot decide for a patrol it has to conform to the other patrols and their voted on activity of the month. If 9 patrols want to go to Camp A and 1 patrol wants to go to Camp B, then they go their separate ways. In this case it is up to the PLC to work with the patrols to assist both trips with the resources available and make it work for everyone, rather than overriding the decision of a patrol and telling them they can't make independent decisions, but must conform to a troop vote (Troop-Method!!)

 

It is at this point that I deviate from the prescribed org chart of BSA that says the troop PLC dictates to the patrols. This is NOT patrol-method in my book. Independent, self-sufficient, self-directed patrols are what I'm working towards, not sub-groups that are directed by some troop-method overseers whether they be adult or boy based.

 

The patrol is its own highest authority and the PLC is there to assist them only in support of the accomplishing their goals or enabling any necessary inter-patrol dynamics, such as 5 patrols all want to go to Camp A, and the PLC assists in this preparation so as to not duplicate the same effort 5 times.

 

Once these boys work together independent of any other adult or troop contrived interference, they should be in 3-4 years (14-18 years of age) ready for some extensive non-adult activities. I have a 14 year old finishing up on his Eagle requirements (project is done) that can easily take his NSP out on a day hike with a cooking lunch planned without having to have me tag along.

 

I have told my older boys (PLC) that if they decide on their own to go whitewater canoeing without adult supervision, it doesn't mean they can't and shouldn't invite me along. After all, I don't want to miss out on any fun either!

 

Stosh

[eagle90 125]

Stosh -

I hate top throw water (!) on your Whitewater canoeing example of a patrol activity, but don't forget the first point in Safety Afloat is "Qualified Adult Supervision", someone over 21 accompanying the group in a 1:10 ration.

 

 

[Bob White 20]

Also if you have more than one patrol on a trip it is no longer a patrol activity. When patrols gather it is a troop. And troop outings (even if the patrols are doing different things in different sites) requires two deep adult leadership.

 

For it to be a "Patrol Activity with no adults present" it can only be ONE patrol from the troop on the outing.

 

Do not confuse a troop activity with patrols being in separate camp sites under their own leadership, with a Patrol Activity where they go totally without adult supervision. These are two different types of activities.

[Eagledad 2784]

>>Stosh -

I hate top throw water (!) on your Whitewater canoeing example of a patrol activity, but don't forget the first point in Safety Afloat is "Qualified Adult Supervision", someone over 21 accompanying the group in a 1:10 ration.

[Stosh 3452]

Please feel free to inject the words "Trip to Oz" instead of whitewater canoeing. It was an off the cuff example to distinguish between a routine camp experience and a "Trip to Oz" that would offer a more challenging and exciting experience for a more experienced patrol that would be capable of doing an independent patrol activity. (One may feel free to loosen their undies and relax at this point, the panic is over.)

 

I also indicated in the third paragraph of my comment, 9 patrols going to Camp A (needs adult supervision) and 1 patrol going to Camp B (single patrol activity, doesn't need adult supervision). I don't see this as a problem with BSA guidelines, so I'm confused by BW's comment (which is normal).

 

As far as 8 boys going off by themselves for an outing they may do so with/without their parents permission, do whitewater canoeing (i.e. Trip to Oz) and fill out no forms, take no adults along, get no permission from the SM and leave the uniforms home. BSA is off the hook for any legal liability, everyone sleeps easy at night and if the SM has done a good job of training these boys, developing independence and leadership, instilling the values of Safety Afloat and Safe Swim (there might be some rivers in Oz), the boys are mature and responsible, I guess they can go off and do their canoe (Trip to Oz) thingy. Every parent (and SM) must pass this "test" sooner or later. There comes a time when all the training, nurturing and guidance must come to and end and the boys need to take their plunge from the nest. If one has done their job correctly as SM, these boys should be able to handle any situation that comes their way whether there's an adult there or not. As a matter of fact, I have experienced some boys that were more mature and responsible than the 21+ adults with them. Age is just an arbitrary number that holds sway in a court of law. Period.

 

Stosh

[shortridge 184]

My daughter (age 4) has latched on to the Berenstain Bear books, and demands new ones at each visit to the local library.

 

I recently came home with "Bear Scouts," a rhyming tome that pits a Bear Scout patrol hiking on their own against a know-it-all Papa Bear who wants to share his backcountry "knowledge." Papa, of course, is always wrong, to comic effect, and the Scouts - following their Bear Scout Handbook - end up carrying him out of the wilderness, bandaged up on a sled.

 

In light of this forum discussion, it was a fascinating and oh-so-simple illustration of why adults should keep their paws off.

 

(Sorry if this is too whimsical for this topic, but I couldn't resist.)(This message has been edited by shortridge)