no more patrol overnighters?

[shortridge 184]

Shame, shame on National. Bill Hillcourt is shaking his head sadly upstairs.

 

"The experienced Patrol, under a trained Patrol Leader, has its own Patrol Hikes and camps from time to time. Those hikes and camps are the high spots in the Patrol's life. It's around the camp fires of the gang that Patrol spirit reaches its height, where every Scout comes closest to the heart of Scouting." - Scout Field Book, First Edition, 1957 printing

 

"One of the greatest services you can do as a Patrol Leader is to try to turn your Patrol into a Camping Patrol, with each Scout a trained camper. ... On hikes you learn to take care of yourselves, to become self-reliant. You learn fire-building, cooking, axemanship and other camping skills. Now it's a matter of using these skills on an overnight expedition - first with the whole Troop, then later with the patrol out on its own." - Handbook for Patrol Leaders, First Edition (revised), 1952 printing

 

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

 

To answer Engineer61's query:

 

"The chartered organization is responsible for ensuring that sufficient leadership is provided for all activities."

 

I don't have a G2SS hard copy to compare directly, but googling that phrase, it looks like that language has been around for several years.

[Kahuna 172]

I'm truly glad to have been part of Scouting for so many years when it was the real deal. This new crap may not be the end of Scouting, but it's a big signpost. I think last year's FOS will be my last contribution.

[SR540Beaver 116]

Honestly, how many of you thinks this changes anything in the vast majority of troops across the country? I'm not endorsing the change, I think it stinks. I just can't think of any troops I know that this will affect. Heck, most of the troops I know are lucky to have two patrols.

[Lisabob 13]

I am a supporter of more independence for the boys, hands down.

 

On the other hand, I think Eamonn is right and these changes are going to be simply cosmetic in most cases, for most troops.

 

The only troops I've ever heard of where patrols actually meet & camp alone, are troops some of you have written about here on the board. Some troops have more active patrol structures than others and some give the patrols considerably more leeway than others, but again, I know of none who send a patrol off by themselves for a weekend. There are always adults in the background, even if it is rather distantly in the background.

 

So while I share everyone's sentiment here that it is a shame national is getting rid of this, at the same time, I think it will have darn little impact on the way things work out there in the real world for the overwhelming majority of troops.

 

For the troops that it does impact (1 in a 1000?), I guess there is some question about just how close do those adults really need to be? 300 feet? 500 feet? 1000 feet? Within a mile or two? At base camp, with the boys off on their own at sub camp? I see a lot of room for interpretation here.

 

 

And I think it would be a shame to stop supporting scouting because of this change that doesn't actually impact most troops, too - seems like a cop out to me (sorry Kahuna).

 

 

 

 

 

[shortridge 184]

Cosmetic in most cases? Sure, certainly. The topic certainly never came up when I was a youth.

 

But there's no reason at all to get rid of the option for those Scouts who are sufficiently trained and experienced enough to do it.

 

If National can point to even five examples of an independent patrol outing in the last several decades that ended with a severe injury, death or other major problem, I'd be really quite shocked.

 

So with no good rationale behind it, to me the change is yet another indication of the gradual wimpification, indoorization, Cubification and overall dumbing-down of Boy Scouting.

 

======

 

That said, I'd love to see a summer camp or OA lodge file a formal protest over how the new rule restrict their abilities to carry out their program. Two examples of unintended consequences off the top of my head:

 

(1) A resident summer camp offers a Wilderness Survival overnight on its property, under the leadership of the MBC on staff, plus a younger staff instructor (16+). That MBC is 18 years old. That's the setup at most council camps. But under the new rules, you need two adults, one over 21, to do overnights. Does the camp have to send its 21-year-old Scoutcraft area director and its 18-year-old MBC along on the overnight to comply with the requirements?

 

(2) An OA lodge is conducting its inductions process, with small groups of candidates placed under the leadership of under-18 elangomats. That process involves an overnight experience. Do all candidate groups now have to be placed under the leadership of two adults, one over 21, to comply with the new rules?

[Eagle92 110]

My thoughts on this topic, and I am not trying to be an apologist for national.

 

1) I THINK IT'S A SAD DAY FOR SCOUTING THAT PATROLS CAN NO LONGER GO OUT ON THEIR OWN And the caps and bold is not for shouting, but my utter remorse on this loss.

 

2) I do not think this is a reflection on the BSA's leadership, but rather a reflection of our litigious society AND the current trend to keep folks children as long as possible.

 

Let's face it the BSA was sued b/c a bunch of scouts started a forest fire. They didn't have any adult supervision, and to a degree I do see the negligence. After all it was a summer camp wilderness survival class. BUT IT WAS NOT PATROL METHOD THAT CAUSED THIS SITUATIONS ( caps are both for emphasis and shouting at the folks at national on this as I think they forget the following). A patrol goingout on their own must have the permission of the SM and parents involved. In the cases I've read and talked about, usually it is a patrol of experienced scouts who have been together for a period of time and can handle the campout on their own. Again the forest fire was an ad hoc assortment of scouts who may not have known each other before summer camp, and the staff do not know there various KSAs.

 

 

As for keeping folks children, I see it in all levels of society. Let's face it at one time 15-18 yos were working jobs to help support families, or even getting married and starting their own in the case of 18 yos. All of my coworkers said they do not want their kids working except for summer and once they complete college. I'm sorry but having an after school job is a good thing as it gives then some responsibility, gives them some pocket money so they don't keep asking you for it, and gives them some work expereince.

 

Some scientists are also trying to say that humans do not have fully developed brains until age 25, and that is when they should be considered adults. But as have been proven on another thread here, history is replete with folks under 25 who have done astonishing things. And it's not just "great men" like Alexander, Washington, and Franklin, but just look at out vets who have served in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and Gulf War I and our current servicemen who had been or are under 25.

 

Also let's not forget that under the current medical law that will go into effect in 2014, adults up to age 25 can be on their parent's insurance, and in NJ up top age 32! I'm sorry but as 22 my wife got married and at 25 she was pregnant with our first son. BUT if the law was in effect then, or if we lived in NJ, she could still be on her parents insurance! That's crazy.

 

 

Even in academia they do not consider their student adults. Now grant you most parents do play a role in paying for their kids, but not everyone. I did all the paperwork for grants, scholarships, and loans. I'm the one who paid the bills. All my mom did was A) provide me her 1040 so I could fill out FAFSA, and B) buy me a $100 car so that I could go back and forth from home, school, and work. And when it broke, I took out the loan for the next car. Yet there was constant "To the Parents of____" notices

 

And the two grad schools I went to were just as bad. Here I am a 28 yo and 31yo, married grad student paying my own way, but bills and other notifications were sent "To the Parents________"

 

 

And sadly I see it, and experienced it, in Scouting too. As a brand new ASM, I had folks discount my KSAs because I was a young adult. Ok so I was in the 18-25 range, but how many new scout leader had done backpacking, canoeing, orienteering, pioneering, rappelling, etc etc? As I mentioned elsewhere as a 21yo OA chapter adviser, who was active on the lodge executive board as a youth and a Vigil, I was told I knew nothing about OA, and that I was a puppet for the LA. As a 23 year old DE, I had volunteers who thought I knew nothing about scouting and district operations, despite being on the district committee as a volunteer for 2 years. Heck it wasn't until I told someone at an Ordeal, 'A clean arrowman is a lazy arrowman" that I got some respect from some scout leaders.

 

 

So again I think the decision reflects the litigiousness of our society, as well as society's attept to keep folks children as long as possible, and it's refusal to acknowledge the KSAs of our young adults.

 

 

3) In reference to Wilderness Survival overnites at summer camp, unfortunately I think this is what killed patrol camping without adults. Now I do know that some camps do have two adults, either staff or a staffer and a volunteer leader, go out and supervise One camp asked for volunteers, and being the WS nut that I am, I volunteered. Learned some cool tricks from that counselor like not only shaking down, but also just waiting until all contraband is collected; having "supplies" strewn out like a real accident or crash, mock signaling supplies, and emerging scenarios incorporating FA as well (that was very cool IMHO).

 

4) In reference to Ordeals, the way I have seen it work is that the candidates are mixed groups of Scouts and a few adults, under an elangomat and an elangomat adviser. As long as there is an adult candidate, or the elangomat is 18-20, YP is covered.

 

Again I see this as a sad day for scouting.

[moosetracker 132]

Those are good questions shortridge, but if done then neither examples qualified under the patrol outing.. Both are groups of boys that are not only not a patrol, but not even of the same troop... Since this was always for a patrol, and not for troop activity, it most certainly was not something that boys who may never met until that night or that week and are thrown together hodgepodge can use to avoid adult supervision and be considered a scouting activity following G2SS.

 

In our council, with OA inductions, I know that there are several adult leaders in the OA group.. I don't really know what or who is nearby or the supervision of the camping groups doing the wilderness survival MB at scout camp.. But I guess that yes an adult over 21 will need to be willing to take responsibility for the group, and be at a distance that the camp considers sufficient to be available if needed..

[WAKWIB 107]

So with no good rationale behind it, to me the change is yet another indication of the gradual wimpification, indoorization, Cubification and overall dumbing-down of Boy Scouting.

 

This might be a stretch, but I think you could possibly add "coed-ification" to that list. Perhaps this policy change is part of laying the groundwork for that. Would the classic scenario of a patrol outing be able to exist in a coed 11-17 year old program? A patrol of 8 girls hiking 10 miles by themselves to a state park and spending the night with no adult supervision? Or a mixed gender patrol of 14 year olds doing the same?

It just seems that eliminating the unsupervised patrol outing removes an obstacle to the path of coed "Boy Scouts."

[SeattlePioneer 144]

Here's my one experience with "Patrol" camping:

 

 

Circa 1981 I was doing rowboat cruising around Washington State's famed San Juan Islands. I had rowed over to Sucia Island which is a state park with no commercial development other than modest campgrounds (pit toilets and such).

 

 

http://www.google.com/images?rlz=1T4GUEA_enUS381US381&q=sucia+island&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&sa=X&ei=_o1yTYutKpO2sAO00e3aCw&ved=0CEEQsAQ&biw=1003&bih=539

 

 

I was getting my tent set up when a power runabout beaches itself and a family gets out, unloads a two boys cica 12 years old in Scout uniforms and their camping equipment, and then the boat leaves the boys.

 

They set up their camp next to mine. At the time I was a Scoutmaster, and they told me they were Scouts in a troop at Friday Harbor, the County Seat of San Juan County.

 

They did quite creditably in their camping from what I saw, and they were interested observers of my baking a cake in a Ditch Oven ---and sampled the results.

 

I'm not sure if this was a formal patrol outing, but they did fine on that occasion anyway.

[BadenP 93]

It is good to see us all in basic agreement about how wrong this change really is.

 

Even if only a few troops are affected, but I think the number is much higher, they deserve the right to continue this long standing scout tradition. Mazzuca playing his numbers games with hispanic scouting that is nothing more than a soccer league, and his continuing deemphasis of the scouting outdoor program is bringing this organization to the brink of disaster, IMO.

 

The best thing Mazzuca could do is to resign now with his 40 years of service and get someone in there who REALLY understands what boy scouting is all about before its too late.

[Eagle92 110]

One other legal aspect that just hit me. If some jurisdictions will call an OA member tapping a candidate on the shoulder child abuse, what would those jurisdictions think if we left the scouts out on their own?

 

 

Also someone mentioned coed scouting. If you look at Duke of Edinburgh award, it's a coed program and they go out without adults. Forgot what it's called in the US, and i beleive BSA is tryign to partnet with it liek Scout Association did, ut those journeys will be interesting if they water down DoE for the USA.

[Eagle732 27]

Well I've been after my patrols to camp on their own for years now without success. I guess I can quit trying.

When I was a Scout back in the 60's and 70's we didn't do patrol only camping but some of my scout buddies and I would go out on weekends on our own without adult supervision. During the summer we would camp maybe 6 or 8 days a month. This is where we really learned responsibility and teamwork. Everyone survived.

[HICO_Eagle 93]

Ridiculous. Does anyone in Irving actually think or get unit-level feedback before issuing these changes?

[Eagle92 110]

HICO,

 

I honestly believe it's the result of the widlfire the Scouts caused out west.

 

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/595074142/US-and-Utah-sue-Scouts.html

 

I'm going to do some more research as I read somewhere that it was a summer camp program, but it appears that it may have been a troop that did this.

[shortridge 184]

moosetracker,

 

My point was more to the unintended consequences side of things. Yes, those two examples were OK under the old rules, which didn't address those situations at all. But the new rules, in their blanket ban on overnight activities without adult supervision, create the problem.

 

Eagle92,

 

As a W.S. summer camp "merit badge counselor," I took out a group of Scouts, unsupervised, by myself, to the most remote section of camp for their overnight - at age 15. Totally against all sorts of rules. I know most camps haven't been following the regs, but they may have to now.