Mt Whitney Webcam
Mt Williamson Webcam
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 155 guests, and 16 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4
Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
#9397 12/05/10 12:44 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 583
AlanK Offline OP
OP Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 583
From the LA Times.
Quote:
For Boy Scouts, trails can lead to danger

In the last five years, 32 Scouts and Scout leaders have died in various outdoor activities. Adult leaders, often inexperienced, can miscalculate risks and difficulties.

By Ralph Vartabedian, Los Angeles Times

December 5, 2010

The Yosemite Falls Trail leads dramatically to the top of North America's highest waterfall. Park rangers and veteran hikers know it as strenuous and a potentially dangerous hike in the winter.

Its steep switchbacks rising 2,700 vertical feet were a big challenge for Luis Alberto Ramirez Jr., a 12-year-old from Modesto who had joined the Boy Scouts months earlier and was on his first big outing with his troop.

Until that day, Feb. 16, 2008, Luis had never set foot in the mountains.

The 11 boys and four adults started at 8:30 a.m. Just one mile from the trail head, most of the troop was already exhausted and decided to turn back.

The scoutmaster pressed ahead with five boys, including Luis. Three hours later the troop was waist-deep in snow. The boys were cold and their feet soaked. Luis was tired, his seventh-grade hiking partner said later.

The group turned back, and soon spread out along the trail, leaving some boys on their own. They began taking dangerous shortcuts between switchbacks. After stepping off the trail, Luis lost his footing and slid out of control over an edge. He plunged 300 feet to his death.

The account of the accident comes from a park investigation, which took statements from the scoutmaster and the other boys.

"They told me they were going to the forest," Marta Anguiano, Luis' mother, recalled in an interview.

"They never told me what they were doing was dangerous," said Anguiano, a field laborer in Modesto.

In an examination of law enforcement reports, lawsuits and news accounts, The Times identified 32 Scouts and Scout leaders who have died in the last five years in various outdoor activities. Investigations by rangers and sheriffs have documented deaths resulting from heatstroke, falls, lightning, drowning, electrocution and burns, among other causes.

In many cases, adult leaders appear to have miscalculated the abilities of individual boys to handle the risks and difficulties of outdoor activities, and failed to follow Scout rules and recommendations on adult supervision, safety equipment and trip planning.

Andrea Lankford, who was a district ranger in Yosemite in the mid-1990s and has worked at national parks across the country, said many adult Scout leaders "are not that physically fit themselves. They are not that knowledgeable. They are complacent. They are naive about the hazards. They bite off more than they can chew. As rangers, we would be extremely concerned. I have seen it time and time again with a gamut of consequences."

The Boy Scouts of America, the parent organization based in Irving, Texas, would not release its own records of the incidents, say how many fatal accidents it knows about or discuss the causes of specific accidents. But the group defended its general practices, saying safety is emphasized. After a rash of deaths in 2005, the Boy Scouts ratcheted up its safety program, including hiring a new safety director and imposing new fitness guidelines.

In the five years prior to 2005, The Times identified 16 fatalities in outdoor Scouting activity, based on news accounts and public records. Boy Scout spokesman Deron Smith said "the overall number of incidents has not increased and does not reflect a trend."

"Thousands of Scouts across the United States safely explore the outdoors every day," Smith said in a statement. "There are just too many variables to be able to predict how an accident might occur."

Paul Moore, the Scouting executive for the Los Angeles Boy Scouts council, said he believed the fatality rate during organized activities for the 1 million boys in Scouting is below the national average for boys going about their daily lives. But Moore also acknowledged that parents have an expectation that the organization knows what it is doing, and that fatal accidents are unacceptable.

No agency tracks outdoor deaths in all the state and federal mountains, forests, lakes and rivers, let alone the fatality rate for Boy Scouts compared with other visitors. The U.S. Interior Department reported 151 fatal accidents in national parks in 2008, including 49 boating and swimming deaths and 33 hiking deaths. There were about 275 million visitors to the parks that year.

Since its founding 100 years ago, the Boy Scouts of America has introduced millions of boys to the wilderness, giving them a unique opportunity to learn outdoor skills. In the process, the organization has promoted an agenda of honesty and good civic conduct. Currently, there are 1 million Boy Scouts, led by thousands of volunteer scoutmasters and assistants.

What concerns outdoor experts is the experience level of many of those volunteers. Local Scout leaders said the only requirement set by the national office for escorting a day hike, for example, is that volunteers take the youth protection program to prevent sexual abuse, and that they file proper tour permits, health forms and other documents.

"I wonder if these adults are qualified, if they are prepared," said Matt Sharper, the statewide search and rescue coordinator for the California Emergency Services Management Agency. "If you don't have the skills, you have a recipe for disaster. Your group is only as strong as your weakest member. You should never let the group separate. You should have a leader at the front and a leader at the back."

The national organization has issued ironclad orders in some cases, such as a ban on paintball play and extensive rules on water safety. But the organization's manual "The Guide to Safe Scouting" contains many nonbinding recommendations that give local councils wide discretion on safety issues. Adding even more rigid rules would increase bureaucracy and make activities even harder to organize, some parents say.

Some councils take the initiative to increase safety. In Orange County, Boy Scouts executive Jeffrie A. Hermann said his organization would "hound volunteers" until they took a number of optional courses that help prepare them to lead hiking and other outdoor activities. He credits Orange County's training program for a safety record untouched by a fatal accident for many years. In other cases, individual troops have created strict rules on physical fitness, equipment and training that exceed national guidelines.

Under Boy Scout rules, two adults are supposed to be present with boys. In the accident involving Luis Ramirez, Yosemite National Park investigators found the scoutmaster was alone in leading the five boys, including his own son, after the other parents turned back. The scoutmaster, who has been involved in Scouting for 36 years, said later that he did not regard the hike as risky or inappropriate for a beginning hiker, noting that he had taken his family on it in the past.

Lankford said even rangers would turn around before getting into waist-deep snow, unless they were carrying snowshoes.

The Scouting safety manual warns leaders to "conservatively" estimate the stamina of a hiking group and match outings to "fitness of unit members." Exhaustion can demoralize hikers and be the first step to a tragic consequence, rescue experts say.

Corey Buxton, a 17-year-old Scout from Las Vegas, disappeared while backpacking last July at Zion National Park. Corey was having a tough time and told an adult leader to leave him alone, according to a National Park Service incident report. The leader hiked 100 yards ahead, the report said; when he turned around, Corey was gone. His body was recovered a day later in thick brush about 225 feet from the trail. His death was blamed on hyperthermia, or unusually high body temperature.

Such mishaps frequently trigger costly public safety responses.

One of the biggest search-and-rescue operations in Southern California history occurred in 1991, when Boy Scout Jared Negrete, 12, became separated at the back of his troop on the strenuous Mt. San Gorgonio trail in the San Bernardino Mountains. Negrete's body was never found after a search that included 2,000 people and went on for 16 days. Forty-four people suffered injuries in the search.

News of the tragedy led Mike Leum to seek a career in mountain rescue, and today he is the reserve chief for mountain rescue at the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, where he preaches outdoor safety to Boy Scout troops. A search and rescue is conducted for lost Scouts at least once a year in the Angeles National Forest, Leum said. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department rescues lost Scouts two or three times each year, officials said.

"Just because you are in Scouting or are a Scout leader doesn't mean you know what you are doing," said Leum, a former Boy Scout. "If somebody calls themselves a leader, I hold them to a high standard."

Some parents think the organization should not depend on local councils and troops to comply with voluntary national safety recommendations.

One such recommendation is that Scouts wear helmets while sledding. But earlier this year on an outing with his troop, Ian Joshua Miller, 12, was allowed to slide down a Pennsylvania ski slope on a plastic dish without a helmet, recalled his father, Ron Miller. Ian flew backward head-first into a ski lift tower and was killed.

Miller is not suing the Scouts, but recently met with Richard Bourlon, a senior safety advisor at the Boy Scouts, to urge that the organization require helmets and ban nonsteerable sleds, such as plastic saucers. In an interview, Bourlon declined to discuss individual accidents but said the organization was always working to improve safety.

The federal government is active with Scouting groups, advising them on outdoor safety.

While the Boy Scout training program is good, it is no substitute for years and decades of experience by adult leaders, said Dean Ross, deputy chief for emergency operations at the National Park Service.

"Training doesn't develop competency," Ross said. "I am not saying they are incompetent, but to reach a level of competency requires not only training but experience."

ralph.vartabedian@latimes.com

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
AlanK #9415 12/06/10 08:05 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
G
Woodsy Guy
Offline
Woodsy Guy
G
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 202
That's a really interesting article. Somebody really should compare those stats to the general population. That many fatalities (and what must also be a higher injury rate behind it) seems really high.

For a few years, I had thought boy scouts were getting better (compared to the 70s & 80s). They had better leadership and usually had taken training hikes in preparation for their multi-day Sierra hikes. The last 2 years, though, I've run into a lot of problems with groups. It's definitely poor leadership.

And, I shouldn't be so naive I guess, but what really pisses me off about these disorganized scout groups I run into is how easily and casually they lie to me about whatever it is I'm contacting them on (group size, permit etc). I mean, if scouts are going to be so self-righteous as to ban gays and non-believers from their lofty moral height, then the least they should do is live by their principals, but they absolutely don't. One day, I had the leaders of 4 seperate groups lie to me. They all got citations, of course, but I was really annoyed with scouting that day.

Happy to see someone take kids out but they really need to work on their leadership.

George


None of the views expressed here in any way represent those of the unidentified agency that I work for or, often, reality. It's just me, fired up by coffee and powerful prose.
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
George #9420 12/06/10 09:43 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
D
DUG Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
In my eight years as a registered leader in Scouts (ever since my son joined in 1st grade) I have seen a lot of leaders - good, bad, studs, out of shape and everything in between.

Some units rarely if ever get into the backcountry (or frontcountry) and some seem to spend all their time there.

There are leaders who will push the envelope, who don't understand the risks and there are afraid to even try.

Mostly it's an outstanding group of volunteer leaders (there are professional, paid scouts, but very few) who want to help mold young men and women (Venture Scouts include young ladies) into productive members of their communities.

I wouldn't know how to figure out what BSA's accident rate is compared to the GP. In my small circle we are far better. I'm sure others are far worse. Bottom line, the leaders are out there spending their time and money trying to help kids.

I've have spent thousands of dollars in cash and lost vacation days to take our boys camping, hiking, etc. I have taken members of our group to several places in and around the Whitney Portal (some to the summit) and done so safely. But I'm just one guy - not everyone has the same training and thought process. BSA does offer plenty of training, but it's up to the leaders (often on their own dime) to get it.

A few bad apples (liars, etc) is NOT a reflection on BSA as a whole. For those who have gotten a bad taste of scouts due to a bad leader encounter, there are many, many others who got a postive impression of scouting because of just my group - multiple that by all the good deeds and I'm guessing (guessing because I have no cold, hard facts) that more people have been touched positively bu scouts than negatively.

I'll be leading a group of new kids on a ten mile hike this weekend. I won't be sitting back hoping someone else does it, I'll be out there. I wish more people could say they were doing the same thing............................DUG

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9423 12/06/10 11:10 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
"A few bad apples (liars, etc) is NOT a reflection on BSA as a whole."

Uhhh....actually, it absolutely IS! These are the people that BSA tolerates, that they consider acceptable as participants, as leaders of youth. And the result is kids dying. It is on BSA's shoulders, and the sooner they accept that, the sooner that they will be in a position to fix the problem. Otherwise, it will never be fixed.

Look at the article's mention of what they did in Orange Co. They did something different, and they got a different result.

BSA would do well to adopt a model similar to what the Sierra Club does in LA (although their national model is very lacking, and produces some pretty embarrassing results, too).

At least the SC has an aggressive program of accumulating and evaluating accidents regionally and nationally. BSA needs to do that. They have an obligation to kids.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9425 12/06/10 11:46 AM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
I have been fairly quiet on the boards over this last year or so (wow... it's been awhile).. however, I feel compelled to speak in regards to this.

Alan... Thank you for posting that article... it's very interesting and something that I will be sharing with my Leaders and Boys.

DUG... you're very right when you say that a few bad apples is NOT a reflection on BSA as a whole. Unfortunatly we all know that those bad apples are often the ones who catch the national media's attention and set the reputation for BSA. For instance when those boys were killed in that tornado a couple of years ago... it was the fact that there was a catastrophic weather event resulting in the tragic death of young men. What wasn't shared was the fact that the surviving Scouts used their Scout gained knowledge and training to be first responders and render first aide and stabilize the situation until medical assistance could arrive... not only to their fellow injured scouts, but to those "civilian" people who were camped nearby. What also didn't get mentioned was that, because of that event, BSA changed part of their training requirements to include a "Hazardous Weather" training mandatory for at least one adult on any outting.

ALL... As unfortunate events happen, BSA is constantly shifting, adjusting, and revamping their training requirements for outdoor activities. For instance, just this year the training required to be a leader on High Adventure activities has been expanded to include a Red Cross/BSA approved Wilderness Survival training, with wilderness 1st Aide and CPR required. If you don't have that training.... your tour permit (permission slip from BSA) doesn't get approved. Do people misrepresent themselves on their tour permit applications... I'm sure they do... does BSA come down on them and deny their tour permits? I'm postive they do.. it's happened to me before (not because I misrepresented myself, but because something I had on the permit didn't abide by the rules). Do some people slip through the system and endanger not only themselves, but their Scouts? Sadly... yes.

I am currently planning my Troops Spring Break trip for April. We will be going to the Grand Canyon and (permits and the Good Lord willing) be spending two nights in camping areas at the bottom of the canyon. As I started my research process to see exactly what needed done in order to get us where we wanted to be, first I read the information on the NPS website for Grand Canyon... then I emailed one of the back country rangers and established a discussion with her regarding the parks rules and regulations. One of the things that struck me the most was that when I identified myself as a Scout leader she was very clear that the established guidelines regarding group size and camping permits were non-negotiable.. for anyone... even for Scouts... and that if I, like Scout groups in the past, misrepresented myself or my Troop in our intentions or actions that there were serious legal ramifications and fines that could and would be incurred by us.

As part of the "uptraining" for my Scouts AND Leaders before Grand Canyon there will be REQUIRED "pre-hikes" and camping trips of increasing difficulty and endurance in order to ensure that any Scout or Leader going with me is capable of the physical and emotional demands that a hike in the Grand Cayon will require of them. If they are not up to par for the down canyon trip there will be alternate activities on the RIM for them to enjoy with leadership enough to supervise. Also as part of our training there will be 15 minute sessions during each of our weekly Troop meetings between now and April where basic knowledge items are introduced, reviewed, tested, and reviewed again. Clothing, weather, GPS, map & compass, foot care.... etc, etc, etc... I have a list of about 30 topics that the boys and leaders will be discussing, reviewing and getting ingrained into their minds before we leave for this trip.

"Youth Protection Guidelines" require 2 adults per group (as referenced in that article)... I require 4 adults per group.. that means if my Troop is going to have 2 groups (one for the canyon and one for the rim) we will have 8 adults on the trip with us. I have cancelled trips in the past where we have not had the leadership necessary... it makes my boys mad, but better safe then sorry.

Have you ever seen the episode of "I Shouldn't Be Alive" where the leader took his older Scouts down into the Grand Canyon and so many of them ended up passing away? That will be used as a training video... and then we will have a discussion as to what went wrong and why.

These steps that I am taking to get ready for the Grand Canyon are the same as I would take to get MY boys ready for any trip that we take. Some things might be slightly adjusted in order to accomodate different circumstances... but through all of it I keep one thing in mind... those horrible, tragic, fatal events are not going to happen on MY watch...

I think part of the problem, other then lack of training, discipline and knowledge, is that once BSA approves the tour permit, some leaders tend to feel as if that means that BSA is taking the responsibility for that trip, trek, whatever... off their shoulders. I view it as just the opposite... when Council or National sends me a confirmed, approved tour permit.... that means that I am the final party responsible for ANYTHING that happens on that trip... and I take that seriously.



-steps off soapbox- Ok... so that went a little further then I intended it to... but I think the point is there somewhere.... BSA, like any organization, has a couple of bad apples floating around in the barrel... but the rest of us good apples do our best to overcome the shadow cast by the bad apples and make BSA the organization the everyone expects us to be....

Last edited by SoCalGirl; 12/06/10 11:47 AM.
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
AlanK #9426 12/06/10 01:05 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Offline
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Everyone I ever talk to from volunteer organizations such as the PCTA or SCA or just individuals that have personal experience all tell me the same thing "they hate the Boy Scouts". I cannot recall a single time someone has expressed a positive attitude towards them and it's always the same theme "they have no regard for wilderness regulations or etiquette" "they engage in very dangerous and mischievous behavior" and "the leaders are idiots".

Things range from the entire troop having their tents set up literally two feet from a lake in a row, kids doing trail work wildly swinging tools over their head with others right next to them and the troop leaders giving every kid an axe and just saying "go have fun".

My dad always laughs at how his troop leaders would pack in tons of beer and get drunk every night.

I personally was never in the Boy Scouts and have not had a chance to work with them personally on trail projects so i'd rather have some personal experience with them before I form my own biased opinion but as I said I have not heard anything good yet...

Last edited by RoguePhotonic; 12/06/10 01:08 PM.
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
RoguePhotonic #9427 12/06/10 01:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
Originally Posted By: RoguePhotonic
Everyone I ever talk to from volunteer organizations such as the PCTA or SCA or just individuals that have personal experience all tell me the same thing "they hate the Boy Scouts". I cannot recall a single time someone has expressed a positive attitude towards them and it's always the same theme "they have no regard for wilderness regulations or etiquette" "they engage in very dangerous and mischievous behavior" and "the leaders are idiots".

Things range from the entire troop having their tents set up literally two feet from a lake in a row, kids doing trail work wildly swinging tools over their head with others right next to them and the troop leaders giving every kid an axe and just saying "go have fun".

My dad always laughs at how his troop leaders would pack in tons of beer and get drunk every night.



We have, in the past, not only asked Leaders to leave our troop for such idiotic, rule breaking, dangerous behavior... but have asked them to leave our District and Council.... not only is behavior such as this unacceptable for an adult who is supposed to be the role model for our future generation of leadership... it's flat out reprehensible...

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Ken #9429 12/06/10 03:09 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
D
DUG Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
Ken - your approach could be applied to ANY organization then.

If the Whitney Zone has a troll it reflects badly on the whole board huh? Must be a leadership issue.

Muslims ALL bad? Catholics?

A hiker ditches a wag bag then ALL hikers are bad?
A soldiers screws up so the whole military is AFU? I'm proud to serve scouting because I'm making a difference. If you want to think less of me - that's your call shipmate...........DUG

A

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Ken #9431 12/06/10 03:25 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
Originally Posted By: Ken
"A few bad apples (liars, etc) is NOT a reflection on BSA as a whole."

Uhhh....actually, it absolutely IS! These are the people that BSA tolerates, that they consider acceptable as participants, as leaders of youth. And the result is kids dying. It is on BSA's shoulders, and the sooner they accept that, the sooner that they will be in a position to fix the problem. Otherwise, it will never be fixed.


Ken... I realize that you posted this while I was typing up my post... but please see the area in my post where spoke to this. BSA does have a culture of changing their methods, rules and regulations when an accident happens that could have been prevented.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9432 12/06/10 03:30 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
D
DUG Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
RP - they ALL tell you they hate scouts? Are you trying to tell me that 100 percent of those you have disussed this with has told you they HATE scouts?

You know what, never mind.

I won't be baited into a pig wrasslin match. I don't want to get my scout uni muddy.

I am just as proud of it as I am my Navy uniform because I'm making a difference while others sit on their hands and complain.

Doug - proud member of Troop 332.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9433 12/06/10 04:08 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
CaT Offline
Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
As one who has never been involved in scouting, and so has no axe to grind (nor interest in grinding one) either way, perhaps you will allow me to be a brief voice of reason here before moving on with this dialog.

DUG - It sounds like you need to introduce to RP some of the folks you know who have some positive scouting stories to tell so his opinion can be more fully balanced between those he's met so far and those he has yet to meet. wink

Ken - Perhaps scouting is going through a particularly soul-searching or rebuilding time at the moment compared to past decades; but I doubt your words were meant to brand the entire organization (and by that, I don't mean just its administration) as corrupt or without merit.


In general, for any organization -- and that includes us here at WZ -- each individual is the "face" of the organization they represent (whether knowingly or not). This is why college football athletes sometimes get booted off the team (or even out of school) for doing things that reflect badly on the school. It's also why we remove offensive posts on the rare occasion they get posted here, so that we also put on a good "face" in representing our Whitney family to the outside world and to newcomers. It's a reputation we've worked to achieve and continue to work at maintaining. But I digress.... whistle

So like any other organization, I'm sure BSA has those in its ranks who, for whatever reason, aren't putting on a very good "face" for BSA and are thus, unfortunately, making a bad name for BSA when that happens. However, I don't doubt that it's equally true that there are those in that organization who go out of their way to represent it honorably and responsibly in every way possible. I would guess that DUG and SoCalGirl are two such people. In a diverse group such as ours, I'll bet there are others. No doubt they can both tell us stories from either side of the good face/bad face equation.

In the long run, the greater organization at the national level will probably prosper (or not) depending on how they handle those who don't represent them well. Not being in scouting myself, I can only surmise from what I've heard here that it sounds like there might be some "squeaks" that need "oiling" even though, at the same time, things are running just fine elsewhere in the organization.

Just my observations.

CaT


If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracle of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it.
- Lyndon Johnson, on signing the Wilderness Act into law (1964)
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
AlanK #9436 12/06/10 05:54 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 2
Offline
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 2
Originally Posted By: AlanK
"Training doesn't develop competency," Ross said. "I am not saying they are incompetent, but to reach a level of competency requires not only training but experience."


To me, that final line in the article sums up the whole problem. There are too few backcountry-experienced troop leaders in scouting, and that's a recipe for disaster at times. It's been a lotta years since I was a Scout, but I recall that all of our adult leaders were parents of boys in the troop. If that's still the case today then it's no wonder that these situations arise from bad judgment in the field, lack of proper preparation, poor planning, or all three. Being a kid's parent carries zero qualifications in taking a group of kids on an adventure in dangerous territory or conditions. A degree of required training improves things somewhat, but I suspect that varies greatly from adult to adult.

For every truly experienced troop leader out there who knows what they're doing in the backcountry - especially with young kids - there are other adult leaders whose skills are overmatched by their own backyard, but would never admit it, and present themselves to their troop as a reincarnated Grizzly Adams (I'm thinking here of a specific blowhard neighbor who is bound to get himself, and possibly some of his troop, killed one day with his testosterone-fueled bravado).

I thank God there are committed and experienced adults like Doug and Chris that volunteer their time and abilities to bring the wonders of the backcountry to our kids through BSA, perpetuating that fascination for the next generation. Thank you both. We need many more like them in an organization that is almost totally dependent on volunteers but has no real vetting capability for solid skills. People like - well, actually . . . like most of us on these boards. Definitely food for thought.

Let's face it - if Scouting (and all of it's variations) doesn't get these kids outdoors, who will?

Last edited by Bulldog34; 12/07/10 11:16 AM. Reason: Sorry Chris! Brain freeze! I had just responded to BiletChick a moment earlier and she was still in my mind.
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
CaT #9437 12/06/10 06:04 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 6
H
Offline
H
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 6
I was an assistant Scoutmaster for 16 years.

I learned tons from my highly experienced Head Scoutmaster about winter camping in the Virginia Mts and expanded that to keep myself alive at over 20,000 ft several times.

That said...I learned this from him, not Scouts. I was fortunate to learn under him rather than some fat guy who takes his Troop to sleep in the gym somewhere and calls that camping! Many, many troops have no real outdoor experience for their kids.

My official scoutmaster training (1994) was more concerned with drug abuse (by kids) and sexual abuse(by leaders) than anything else. I was taught absolutely zero about the outdoors from my scoutmaster training classes. The organization is volunteer and as such has limitations.

To upgrade the average male (and now female) leader to be proficient in First Aid, Orienteering, Weather Forecasting, Rock climbing, etc, etc, and especially "Outdoor Common Sense" cannot be done to the level of Navy Seals.

From a statistical standpoint, the number of deaths in the article must be seen in light of the number of person/days in the woods/fields/hills to make a comparison to non-scout statistics.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Bulldog34 #9438 12/06/10 06:05 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 595
Offline
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 595
Originally Posted By: Bulldog34
...Let's face it - if Scouting (and all of it's variations) doesn't get these kids outdoors, who will?


Hopefully their parents -

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
KevinR #9439 12/06/10 06:12 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 2
Offline
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 2
Originally Posted By: KevinR
Originally Posted By: Bulldog34
...Let's face it - if Scouting (and all of it's variations) doesn't get these kids outdoors, who will?


Hopefully their parents -


We're doomed.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
AlanK #9440 12/06/10 08:42 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Offline
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Quote:
RP - they ALL tell you they hate scouts? Are you trying to tell me that 100 percent of those you have disussed this with has told you they HATE scouts?


Actually yes. Hate is a strong word perhaps too much so as not all the people I have talked to said they "hate" the scouts although many did but never have I talked to anyone who had anything positive to say.

I think sometimes we have to accept that we can't use the term "a few bad apples" in an organization that is better defended by saying there are "a few good apples". I don't mean to apply this to the scouts because it would be too large of a generalization of an organization I don't know all that much about but since trying to apply it in context of other examples I think it's worth noting.

No need to get so upset either. I value your inputs and experiences to give a better balance for what I have heard.

Quote:
DUG - It sounds like you need to introduce to RP some of the folks you know who have some positive scouting stories to tell so his opinion can be more fully balanced between those he's met so far and those he has yet to meet.


Exactly, wrote that above then read this.

Actually though now that I think about it the only person I have talked to that didn't say anything bad about the scouts is my dad. He will tell story after story of like I said the leaders getting drunk and driving crazy and kids passed out on the trail and on and on but he loved it all and stayed in and became an Eagle Scout.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9444 12/07/10 07:56 AM
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 648
Likes: 52
Offline
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 648
Likes: 52
Despite the "be prepared" motto, some of the most unprepared clowns I've ever seen in the wilderness were Scouts. Too many Scout Leaders are fat dads who haven't picked up a pack or hiked a trail since they were Scouts.

DUG's defense of Scouting points out that we shouldn't hate all Muslims, Catholics, or soldiers just because a few bad apples screw up. However, Scouts won't allow atheists to participate. It's hard for me to endorse a group whose lofty standards include bigotry against me.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
bobpickering #9445 12/07/10 09:25 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
D
DUG Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
I see no reason for me to hang around any longer to be insulted by the haters and the misinformed. I could argue point by point for years, but really, the people dogging on the scouts just aren't worth it.

Since this is a Whitney board, I will point out that a majority of those unprepared ass clowns on the trail and headed to the peak ARE NOT scouts. A majority of the dumbshits who died doing something stupid in the back country are not scouts.

A mojority of those ticketed by George are not scouts. Again, I could go on and on, but the people I'm trying to sell my point to just aren't worth my time.

My "day job" of nearly 26 years has helped ensure you have the freedom to insult me and BSA, but it doesn't mean I need to stay here and listen to it.

I would also hope that those talking the loudest aren't suffering from a case of "keyboard commando". Please feel free to share your same thoughts when you see me on the summit, on the trail or having a burger at the store. My feeling is you won't.

No need to reply.

ASCS (AW)Douglas Ames
Installs LCPO/Team Lead

Troop 332 Outdoor Chair

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9447 12/07/10 10:04 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 511
T
Offline
T
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 511
I would never have guessed that the BSA would be such a controversial topic.

I am agnostic, but I wanted my son to join the scouts. Unfortunately, he wasn't interested. I have no problem with an organization defining membership based on whatever criteria they choose. If the faith thing bothers someone...why not start Secular Scouts of America?

As someone who does a lot of volunteering in my son's activities (school and little league), I don't like being painted by the same brush as some of the lesser qualified or more obnoxious volunteers in the same organizations. And trust me, we do get some obnoxious and ill qualified coaches volunteering. But one of the key things is that volunteers are at least giving of themselves to help others.

It sounds like maybe the BSA needs to have a more uniform backcountry training program. But I find it hard to vilify an organization that has the following goals (from wikipedia):

"The BSA goal is to train youth in responsible citizenship, character development, and self-reliance through participation in a wide range of outdoor activities, educational programs, and, at older age levels, career-oriented programs in partnership with community organizations. For younger members, the Scout method is part of the program to inculcate typical Scouting values such as trustworthiness, good citizenship, and outdoors skills, through a variety of activities such as camping, aquatics, and hiking"

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9448 12/07/10 10:10 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
S
Offline
S
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
DUG, Nobody is aiming their complaints at you at all! Please don't take those complaints personally!!!

Boy scouts has been a lightning rod because they have taken on the goal of providing wholesome life-building experiences and training for boys and girls during their most important growing years. Since BSA is involved with such an influential role, the organization and their policies become targets of organizations and people from all political and religious angles.

And they become a lightning rod for attention and negative publicity when things go awry. You and Chris have both seen examples of adults who were turned away due to their being inadequately prepared to lead scouts. Apparently and unfortunately, other groups within the organization have been more lax with their standards and training.

And it just happened that in this thread, a number of people have shared their less than positive experiences regarding the organization. I don't think anyone here would have ANY reason to say anything negative about you or the fine scout group you lead. From everything I've read about your trips, both from the planning and the actual trip, your group should be held up as a prime example of how every scout troupe should operate. My son was in scouting, and they NEVER went on backpacking trips (you can picture the condition of the leaders.)

And with all the negative publicity, I have to tell about my experience. Hiking over Silver Pass to Blainey Hot Springs (across the San Joaquin river from Muir Trail Ranch), I encountered about 10 teenage boys relaxing in and around the hot springs. They were the best behaved group of teenage boys I have EVER encountered -- clean language, friendly and respectful of each other and everyone else. So I had to inquire what group they were. It was a scouting group from So California!

It could very well have been your group.

So there are some really fantastic groups in the BSA. And I hope you will continue to participate here with your planning and reporting on your group's activities. It would be good if all scouting groups participated in planning -- we could help educate and inform those less prepared.

Everyone here appreciates what you do. Please keep it up.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Steve C #9449 12/07/10 10:37 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
CaT Offline
Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
Originally Posted By: DUG
No need to reply.

Of course, you know we will.

I would echo Steve's sentiments completely. I haven't seen anything here that is against you or your scouting groups personally; and your most recent post, which seemed to overlook some of the more positive comments in this thread, really took me by surprise. But rather than run off, why not stick around and continue to promote the good stories being told about BSA, among other things, so the rest of us can benefit from your experiences. Isn't that what this MB is about? Isn't that what scouting is about -- teaching others from your experience and by your example? Sadly, not all of us live close enough to Whitney in order to take you up on your challenge of talking to you on the trail, at the Portal, etc. So until that changes, this MB is our window into each others' worlds. I hope you don't close yours merely over one thread.

CaT


If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracle of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it.
- Lyndon Johnson, on signing the Wilderness Act into law (1964)
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
CaT #9450 12/07/10 10:55 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
CaT, you wrote:
"Ken - Perhaps scouting is going through a particularly soul-searching or rebuilding time at the moment compared to past decades; but I doubt your words were meant to brand the entire organization (and by that, I don't mean just its administration) as corrupt or without merit."

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT! I actually think well of scouting, in spite of their various faults, and I think they do a lot of good. You've obviously gotten a sense of me by my writing, and I thank you for your giving me the latitute.

Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9452 12/07/10 11:48 AM
B
Burchey
Unregistered
Burchey
Unregistered
B
Just to make sure I'm not confused, did DUG leave the board completely because of this topic?

If not, skip to part B:
If so...

I may be wrong, but I've noticed a negative correlation between those who hang out on message boards and thickness of skin. Leave the board because a few people don't like the scouts or make points(valid or not) that disagree or possibly go against something you happen to do or agree with? When did we become such wimps? Also, it seems like it doesn't take much to lock a thread, which also points to the supercharged PC wimpy atmosphere these days.

Part B:
I was in the scouts until age 14, my younger brother got his Eagle. I saw a huge range of leaders in our troop alone: from rugged outdoorsman to this perverted guy named Herb who frequented nudist colonies. I left my troop and scouts when I realized it was a dumping ground for the socially retarded. We had guys who crapped their pants at age 14, a kid with webbed fingers and toes, and a myriad of others that the general public might consider "undesirable". I'm from Ohio - so things might be differenct out here, but I doubt it. Although I was lucky enough to be in a troop that took a great trip once a month or so (whitewater rafting, backpacking trips, etc), I decided my time was better spent elsewhere - for many reasons.

If I had to bet, I would guess the majority of folks that take issue with the Scouts for any reason do so because of an underlying feeling of rejection - i.e. they are gay or athiest or whatever it is the Scouts are claiming to reject. Of course, they won't admit it, but it rings true if you consider the source of many of these arguements. This really has nothing to do with kids dying on the trail, it's just another jumping off point for arguing about the boyscouts...reminds me of how everything goes to illegal immigration on Signonsandiego comment sections, hilarious.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Steve C #9453 12/07/10 12:18 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 583
AlanK Offline OP
OP Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 583
FWIW, I posted the article because it was interesting. It got more reaction than I might have anticipated.

My $0.02 worth: My son was in Cub Scouts but bailed out before hitting the Boy Scouts because he wanted to be outdoors all the time and our local troop was not so inclined. We ended up hitting the trails and having many great adventures together -- and still do on occasion (he's 21 and not as available as he once was). In our many outings, we ran into scouts on many occasions. Our impressions were generally positive. We did tend to think that the average troop was over-prepared (huge packs, etc.). But, it you are going to err, better too much than not enough!

As for DUG et al. -- you are doing a great thing!

That said, there is obviously room for criticism in some cases. One should be careful of judging by newspaper articles, but it seems clear enough that the Yosemite incident in the article I posted should never have happened.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Ken #9454 12/07/10 01:56 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
CaT Offline
Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
Originally Posted By: Ken
You've obviously gotten a sense of me by my writing, and I thank you for your giving me the latitude.

Thanks. I try. I feel like my niche on this MB is to try and help people do that with each other here.

Originally Posted By: Burchey
Just to make sure I'm not confused, did DUG leave the board completely because of this topic?

Hopefully not. It would be a real loss to all of us. And DUG, if you're reading all this (which I hope you are), I think you left the conversation prematurely. I thought it would be worth reprinting a line from Ken's most recent post: "I actually think well of scouting, in spite of their various faults, and I think they do a lot of good."

CaT


If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracle of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it.
- Lyndon Johnson, on signing the Wilderness Act into law (1964)
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
#9456 12/07/10 02:24 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
Burchey said:

"If I had to bet, I would guess the majority of folks that take issue with the Scouts for any reason do so because of an underlying feeling of rejection - i.e. they are gay or athiest or whatever it is the Scouts are claiming to reject. Of course, they won't admit it, but it rings true if you consider the source of many of these arguements."

Interesting perspective. I'm not clear as to "the source" to which you are referring?

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Ken #9458 12/07/10 02:34 PM
B
Burchey
Unregistered
Burchey
Unregistered
B
Hey Ken. By source, I mean the person bagging on the Scouts. Perhaps they have a gay brother, or are an athiest themselves, etc. You'll find most folks don't argue without bias, and often that bias will cloud judgment and skew perspective. It's impossible to remove our personal experiences/standing from our ability to analyze a situation, but a wise person will consider all perspectives, and then try to judge accordingly. Easier said than done.

example: A person might be quick to criticize a bill from the Oval Office just based on the person sending it, not the specifics of the bill

Originally Posted By: Ken
Burchey said:

"If I had to bet, I would guess the majority of folks that take issue with the Scouts for any reason do so because of an underlying feeling of rejection - i.e. they are gay or athiest or whatever it is the Scouts are claiming to reject. Of course, they won't admit it, but it rings true if you consider the source of many of these arguements."

Interesting perspective. I'm not clear as to "the source" to which you are referring?

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
#9459 12/07/10 02:49 PM
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9
M
MTN Offline
Offline
M
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 9
Over the past year my son's Boy Scout troop has done the following terrible things:

Painted the High School Baseball Bleachers
Built a Cement walkway at the elementary school.
Built 18 4'x8' gardening boxes at another elementary school.
Painted an iron fence at the local park.
volunteered at the homeless shelter.

A 4 day trip to the Sierras.
slept in Snow Caves that they built.
and Several hikes.

Most of the Dads would not have their kids involved in these activities without the Boy Scouts.

Sorry but, this is something I want my son involved in.

I am sorry to hear of the accident.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9460 12/07/10 02:55 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
Originally Posted By: DUG
Ken - your approach could be applied to ANY organization then.

If the Whitney Zone has a troll it reflects badly on the whole board huh? Must be a leadership issue.

Muslims ALL bad? Catholics?

A hiker ditches a wag bag then ALL hikers are bad?
A soldiers screws up so the whole military is AFU? I'm proud to serve scouting because I'm making a difference. If you want to think less of me - that's your call shipmate...........DUG

A


I wanted to respond to DUG's post, above, not as a debate point, but to contrast what I'm trying to say, with what he took from what I'd said.

First, his point about any organization: I agree.
Second, I also agree. We only have to think back to how bad the WPS board used to be, before it was actively moderated. That was an issue of moderation, and what was acceptable.
Third, Muslims and Catholics who are not acting as part of an organization, no.
But part of an organization, yes, they reflect on that organization, as the Catholic Church is finding.
Fourth, "a hiker" is not part of an organization.
Fifth, "a soldier" IS part of an organization. if they screw up, and are not held accountable, YES. If multiple soldiers screw up, indicating poor training, YES.

I greatly respect the military. The military academies operate according to an honor code: "I will not lie, cheat or steal, nor tolerate those that do"

The BSA TRY to take care of the first half, but I think they fall down a bit on the second.

When bad things happen, and the response, AS AN ORGANIZATION, is, well, that's just the way it is......that's not good. There are too many of us who work in too many fields that constantly work towards trying to achieving perfection, knowing that we never will.

I am simply disappointed by the BSA response. I would expect every leader in the movement to be outraged, not by outside criticism of the BSA, but by the needless death of children. What the hell is the priority? How about a grass-roots initiative by the leaders who know what they are doing, to eliminate all avoidable deaths. I am reminded of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative's motto:

EVERY * LAST * CHILD

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
#9461 12/07/10 03:39 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 583
AlanK Offline OP
OP Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 583
Originally Posted By: Burchey
Hey Ken. By source, I mean the person bagging on the Scouts. Perhaps they have a gay brother, or are an athiest themselves, etc. You'll find most folks don't argue without bias, and often that bias will cloud judgment and skew perspective. It's impossible to remove our personal experiences/standing from our ability to analyze a situation, but a wise person will consider all perspectives, and then try to judge accordingly. Easier said than done.

example: A person might be quick to criticize a bill from the Oval Office just based on the person sending it, not the specifics of the bill

I do not disagree with these statements. On the other hand, I get irritated when people assume that they know the motives of someone making a statement based on the content of the statement. It is better to try to discuss the subject rather than being lazy and judging the source in the absence of knowledge of the source.

In the case of the Boy Scouts, the organization has a right to discriminate in various ways because it is private. On the other hand, people who do not like the discrimination have every right to object to it. It does not matter if they are actually victims of discrimination, have a brother who is, etc.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
AlanK #9463 12/07/10 04:18 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Offline
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
I'm not sure why DUG felt so threatened when we are just sharing our opinions and experiences. I was just sharing what I have heard and my experiences have always been positive as I have had nice chats with boyscout troops on the trail many times.

My only opinion that has now gone south is if it's true that the Boy Scouts will not allow an Atheist in the group. To me that is highly offensive, what exactly does any religion or lack of have to do with the values and activities that they promote? Infact that very idea is anti first amendment and down right unamerican.

That aside sometimes people just have bad experiences. I talked to this guy that absolutely hates Rangers and has one horror story after another such as them abandoning him in the back country while he had a broken leg being told to hike out and then once he managed the Rangers at the parking area refused to give him a ride to the hospital. But for myself I have had almost all good experiences with them so you never know.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
RoguePhotonic #9464 12/07/10 04:35 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,261
Bee Offline
Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,261
Originally Posted By: RoguePhotonic
I'm not sure why DUG felt so threatened when we are just sharing our opinions and experiences.


When confronted with the steady stream of negative responses, it is not hard to feel defensive about something one believes in, supports, and whitnesses the positive results of. It is just human nature. I say this on purely generic terms, meaning that this would provoke the same response by a Marine if the Corps was "under fire", a congregant, a little league coach -- a FAN (have you ever seen a fan defend his team?)

Originally Posted By: RoguePhotonic
I was just sharing what I have heard and my experiences have always been positive as I have had nice chats with boyscout troops on the trail many times.


Well, ummm, that is nice to hear, but it is after-the-fact, so hopefully, DUG has not wandered too far away to read it.

Originally Posted By: Burchey
This really has nothing to do with kids dying on the trail, it's just another jumping off point for arguing about the boyscouts...reminds me of how everything goes to illegal immigration on Signonsandiego comment sections, hilarious.


Yessir, I would say that accurately sums it up.


B


The body betrays and the weather conspires, hopefully, not on the same day.
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
RoguePhotonic #9466 12/07/10 05:09 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
Originally Posted By: RoguePhotonic

My only opinion that has now gone south is if it's true that the Boy Scouts will not allow an Atheist in the group. To me that is highly offensive, what exactly does any religion or lack of have to do with the values and activities that they promote? Infact that very idea is anti first amendment and down right unamerican.


http://hubpages.com/hub/Religion-and-Scouting-Do-They-Have-to-Go-Together
or

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Scouting

Boy Scouts of America

The Boy Scouts of America (BSA) in the United States takes a hard-line position, excluding atheists and agnostics.[10] The BSA has come under strong criticism over the past years due to their religious policy and stance against agnostics and atheists:


"Declaration of Religious Principle. The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognising an obligation to God. In the first part of the Scout Oath or Promise the member declares, 'On my honour I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law.' The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of his favours and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members."[10]

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Ken #9467 12/07/10 05:45 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
D
DUG Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
Let's just clear a few thngs up here, shall we?

I am NOT "running away" from this BSA bashing board. I am choosing where I spend my time. I have that right don't I? I'm sure that any one of you would leave some place that did not support what you beleived in.

I am NOT being a "wimp" about it. I strongly disagree with almost every part of this worthless thread so I am deciding to limit my replies and possibly my participation on this BSA bashing board.

I damn sure do NOT feel "threatened". At least not by any of the posts or posters here.

I would encourage those who post to only write what they would be willing to say face to face. You'll come off a lot less keyboard commando that way.

The original post was about the tragic deaths of unprepared scouts. Now it's evolved into a BSA bash fest because they won't accept atheists or gays. Here's a newsflash - your AMERICAN military refuses to openly accept gays, but no one wants to stand up and bash the military that is at war.

George has had bad run ins with lying scouts. I have had run ins with worthless, overbearing rangers, but that does NOT in any way reflect poorly on George. I know there are crap rangers out there and I know there are many more good ones. Even some heroic and great ones.

RP says EVERYONE he has ever talked to about Scouts say they HATE them. Um, maybe you should scroll up a few posts - I never said I hate them and you're talking to me. When people start using words like ALL and everyone when it's obvious that's not the case they lose credibility.

I stand firm that I don't want to argue point by point with the BSA bashers here. Not worth my time. I'm not a wimp, I'm not running away and no one here makes me feel threatened. If I take my ball and go elsewhere it's simply because I want to hang out where people don't trash talk what I beleive in.

I'm not some Whitney wanna be who posts and posts and never does anything. 18 summits is more than some people here I would guess. My main trail summit this year I put a Boy Scout, a Venture Scout and two leaders on top and did it SAFELY.

I feel bad when other leaders can't get the job done safely, but even paid guide services get people killed with their screw ups.

If you have first hand knowledge of a screwed up leader - post it up. Don't attack the entire organization because of a few bad apples. BSA is doing a tremendous amount of good in the local communities. Outdoor activities are only 1/4 of what my unit does.

If you want to keep bashing - go for it. I helped earn your freedom to do that. Just don't expect me to stand here getting pissed on while you tell me it's raining.

If you have a comment meant just for me - take it to PM or hook up with me at the WPS for a burger. There won't be any wimp talk there.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
AlanK #9468 12/07/10 05:52 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Offline
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Interesting an educational for sure. Changes my whole out look on the Boy Scouts, not in a negative way but I now look at it more like a religious group which I like because then I don't hold the first amendment against them like I said.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
AlanK #9469 12/07/10 06:01 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Offline
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Quote:
I would encourage those who post to only write what they would be willing to say face to face. You'll come off a lot less keyboard commando that way.


I certainly don't communicate anything on a forum I wouldn't say face to face.

Quote:
your AMERICAN military refuses to openly accept gays, but no one wants to stand up and bash the military that is at war.


I certainly bash the military for anything it engages in that is illegal, immoral or I find offensive. War time is irrelevant in the matter.

Quote:
RP says EVERYONE he has ever talked to about Scouts say they HATE them. Um, maybe you should scroll up a few posts - I never said I hate them and you're talking to me. When people start using words like ALL and everyone when it's obvious that's not the case they lose credibility.


I think your point is a bit harsh as I clearly was referring to people I have talked to before this thread. Of course "now" I have talked to people that speak highly about the scouts.

I think your just getting way too defensive and angry when we were simply trying to discuss the ups and downs of the organization.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
RoguePhotonic #9470 12/07/10 06:19 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 511
T
Offline
T
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 511
for the record, the first amendment applies to the government. Not private organizations or individuals.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9471 12/07/10 06:30 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1
Offline
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1
RIGHT ON DUG! I cannot write as eloquently as ye; thanks for being my spokesman! I owe a great deal of what I've become and accomplished in the many chapters of my life to the foundation that the BSA gave me. I did not have a father so I found a father-figure through the BSA. The BSA afforded me the opportunity to experience so many things and see so many places I will never be able to express my appreciation for. I was a Sea-Scout, Air-Explorer and finally an Eagle-Scout. OH the experiences a poor country hick had thanks to the BSA. I got to build working model rockets, learn how to fly a C-119 and race Flying Dutchmen; not bad for a kid that grew up living in shacks with dirt floors.
Yes, there are inexperienced leaders that should not be responsible for our kids; but maybe part of the problem is there are a lot of inexperienced and disinterested parents that should take a more active interest in their children's lives. If parents were assistant leaders they would be able to monitor the leaders and, if nothing else, extract their children if they felt they were in harm's way. It's kind of like politics; since we don't really control our "representatives" they are allowed to run amuck; and we can't really blame them; we should be blaming ourselves.
One other little note, DUG said it right; don't make such broad, general statements. I am sure that "all the people" were not interviewed about this subject; DUG and I weren't interviewed; I'd guess there was a very select group surveyed on this subject to have "all" of them express the same opinion. That's kind of like only asking people exiting Starbucks if they like coffee and not asking folks coming out of Jamba Juice.


Remember it is not a Mission; it is a hike (don't hesitate to abort)!
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
tdtz #9472 12/07/10 06:40 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 595
Offline
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 595
Originally Posted By: tdtz
for the record, the first amendment applies to the government. Not private organizations or individuals.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."


Hmm ... that's a new interpretation.

Maybe we should stick to hiking and mountain climbing.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
AlanK #9473 12/07/10 06:47 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Offline
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 558
Quote:
for the record, the first amendment applies to the government. Not private organizations or individuals.


Agreed, I had a different outlook on what BSA is which I am glad is corrected.

Quote:
I'd guess there was a very select group surveyed on this subject to have "all" of them express the same opinion.


If your referring to me it really wasn't, it ranged from Rangers in the back country, co-workers on job sites, a diverse group of trail worker volunteers I have met and representatives of organizations that often work with BSA.

I have to admit it's nice to hear positive opinions and stories about the BSA and how they have effected others lives, hearing nothing but negative things becomes a bit taxing.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
KevinR #9474 12/07/10 06:54 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 511
T
Offline
T
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 511
"Hmm ... that's a new interpretation.

Maybe we should stick to hiking and mountain climbing."


Those are the actual words to the first amendment. Not an interpretation.

It doesn't say "nobody will abridge freedom of speech" or "corporations will not abridge freedom of speech" or "private organizations will not abridge freedom of speech" it says "congress shall make no law....."

Later it was extended to include state and local governments as well.

yes, perhaps we should stick with hiking

Last edited by tdtz; 12/07/10 07:02 PM.
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
tdtz #9477 12/07/10 10:16 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
I had every intention of responding to this thread earlier today and actually had a rather long post prepared... then I thought to edit it and, just as I got it perfect, ended up with a "you waited to long and got timed out" message.... thats probably a good thing because it gave me time to reflect and rethink what I was originally going to say....


Scout Leaders like DUG and I devote huge amounts of our time to the Scouting program. We were told "one hour a week" of volunteer time would be all the commitment required of us. What we weren't initially told was that the "one hour a week" was per child we would touch the lives of. So... take the 15 or so boys in our separate troops... thats 15 hours a week each for us... now take what we teach those boys and then they take it and teach.. lets say two friends each. So now we've taken the 15 boys (hours) a week and multiplied it to 60 boys (hours) per week... thats more time then I spend at the office (and not really an exaggeration most weeks).

Do we do it because we enjoy spending all of our vacation time and spare money on other peoples children? No.

Do we do it because we get paid to do it? No...

We do it "for the boys" because no one else seems willing to step up and do it. The culture of todays youth tends to revolve around electronic entertainment and a near complete lack of physical activities (and no... the WII Sports doesn't count. Sorry) and most parents/adults seem to be Ok with that. Childhood obesity is at an all time high... and National Park visitation by people under 20 is at an all time low. Programs like the Girl Scouts and the Boy Scouts work to combat both of those problems.People like DUG and I (and the other leaders I've spoken to on this board, within my community, and in my travels) are the instruments of that combat.

I don't know how many of you followed the link at the bottom of that LA Times article to the list of the 32 "Scouting" related deaths in the last 5 years... but I did. Then I spent two hours researching articles and specifics (as much as I could find) on each of those deaths. Everyone on this board is right... some of those deaths were completely preventable and should never have happened. BSA looks at each and every incident and accident with a finely focused microscope and does its best to learn from them...

In January of 2010 Ian Miller was killed when sledding. He was not wearing head gear and fell backwards off his sled, hitting his head in the process. After this happened BSA, having previously "suggested" helmets for such activities, made them mandatory.

In 2008 4 boys were killed by a tornado while camping in Iowa. It happened in the middle of the night, struck them completely unawares, and there were no sirens because of teh remote area where they were camping. The surviving Scouts rendered first response to the injured and dying, possibly saving lives. After this incident the BSA instituted a training called the Hazardous Weather training. It is mandatory for at least one Leader on each outing to have this training.

Sean Whitley died as a result of burns suffered from something called a "fire ring" in 2008. One of his buddies was messing around with alcohol, a type of fuel allowed at the time for backpacking stoves, and poured the fuel directly on the the fire. The flame backtracked up the bottle and the boy panicked, throwing the now flaming bottle. Sean and one other Scout were injured, Sean succumbed to his injuries three days later. BSA no longer allows the use of that type of fuel within our organization.

Going down the rest of the list there is everything from river raft drownings to lightening strikes, tree falls to being ran over by a parade float. Were every single one of these deaths preventable? No... there were some that were complete flukes of nature and some that were health related and beyond anyones control.

In most of them the leaders did absolutely nothing wrong and actually did everything they could to prevent the accidents. But accidents do happen. The girls in 2005 were sitting 15 feet away from the base of a tree, in the shade, when the trunk suddenly split and fell on their picnic table, striking and killing 8 year old Kelly.

Some of them were completely preventable... and lessons were learned from them.

I guess what this rambling monologue is actually trying to say is this.... people like DUG and I devote our everything to our Scouts and others. I don't know about DUG but I, personally, am not only involved with my Scouts at a Troop level... but am on the District AND Council level training teams to share my knowledge and experiences with other Leaders. We all take what we do very seriously and, even if no insult is intended... tend to get defensive when someone has something negative to say about something that is so much a part of us.

It's like I tell my boys whenever we're out in the community. You are a representative of not only your Troop and Council... but of Boy Scouts of America as a whole. If you're out there messing around and doing something that you aren't supposed to be doing then it reflects badly on all of us... not just on you. People aren't going to look at you and say "What a little brat" ... they're going to look at you and say "Man... he's supposed to be a Scout???"

The same goes for the leadership... people look at that leader that took his Scouts through chest deep snow and split his troop... or the leader who let his Boys go climbing on some natural arches and try to leap a 6' gap between them... and they say "Thats supposed to be a Scout Leader.... Wow....". I take it personally when someone does something stupid that I have to be held accountable for... because that is what happens whenever a leader makes a mistake or does something dumb that results in something tragic. Every single leader in the entire organization is held liable for that childs injury/death, because we are every leader...

When something negative happens it overshadows every positive thing that the Scouts have ever done. No one thinks about the Sea Scouts who save the life of the abandoned diver off the L.A. coast. Or the Scouts who rescued the severely injured hiker in the Appalachians and took them to safety. Or the Eagle Scouts who have been Military Leaders, Presidents, or walked on the Moon....

I seem to be running out of steam.. but I think I got out everything I wanted to say. No... we were not personally responsible for that childs death on that snowy cliff. Yes... we will bristle up when we feel our organization is being unjustly judged. Yes... we will continue to do what we do... despite what anyone else thinks of us...

Just my two cents worth...
Chris... aka SoCalGirl
Troop 363 Assistant Scoutmaster
Troop 363 Outdoor Chairman
Crew 363 Assistant Advisor
Crew 1833 Adult Support Member
Heartland District Training Team
San Diego-Imperial County Council Training Team
Proud Mother of a Life ranked Boy Scout
Proud Mother of a female Venture Crew Scout....

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
tdtz #9478 12/07/10 10:20 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
Hey, if you want to get into serious political discussions on mountaineering forums, SuperTopo is the place! I believe the thread titled "Why are those Republicans so wrong about everything" has something over 33 THOUSAND posts.

But seriously, I think there have been some good things brought up in this thread. I would hope that everyone has learned something of which they were unaware....that those who are not involved with the Scouts, about how much good they do, in so many things. For those who are, that their public reputations in wilderness settings are not what they might be, in spite of all the hard work and dedication that goes into the Scouts by some. Some have learned things about the nature of Scouting they didn't know.

I don't know what more you could want from a meeting of minds?

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Ken #9479 12/07/10 10:27 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
Originally Posted By: Ken
with the Scouts, about how much good they do, in so many things. For those who are, that their public reputations in wilderness settings are not what they might be, in spite of all the hard work and dedication that goes into the Scouts by some.


Oh believe me Ken.. those of us involved in the program are very well aware of the reputation that some have of us in the wilderness. Then again... alot of those who aren't involved in Scouts get their opinions of our backcountry "ethics" and "behavior" through the media and "I Shouldn't Be Alive"....

And you're right... this thread has been a rather... interesting... discussion...

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9480 12/07/10 10:49 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
Hey, Chris, that was just an outstanding post!

You obviously look at it the way that I'd intended my remarks to reflect. The bad always, always drowns out the good. It is sad that it is so, but that is human nature, I suppose.

However, I'd point out that you typify the problem pointed out in the article: you and the others that you work with find the national "guidelines" inadequate for safe conduct of these activities, which they seemed to document. This would go along with your and DUG's personal experiences.

And that would be the issue, not what local leaders, like yourselves, and the people in Orange Co cited in the article, who have chosen to lead at a higher standard, but what is allowed to happen based upon who happens to become a leader locally. As the article said:

"Some parents think the organization should not depend on local councils and troops to comply with voluntary national safety recommendations."

When I read "Adding even more rigid rules would increase bureaucracy and make activities even harder to organize, some parents say."---I think, Oh, my God...we are back to priorities.

The response from the organization just didn't seem quite on point, in the article.

I suppose that is the problem with guidelines: you are then going to be at the level of the least skilled, least experienced, for the entire organization.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Ken #9481 12/07/10 11:00 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 511
T
Offline
T
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 511
Originally Posted By: Ken
Hey, if you want to get into serious political discussions on mountaineering forums, SuperTopo is the place! I believe the thread titled "Why are those Republicans so wrong about everything" has something over 33 THOUSAND posts.


Nah, I want to like the people on this board. I might actually meet some of y'all on the trail someday.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
tdtz #9482 12/07/10 11:49 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
S
Offline
S
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
> Nah, I want to like the people on this board.

I agree.

> has something over 33 THOUSAND posts.

That would bury wagga's Jessica/Laura thread in a few days. Say, wagga, where are those sailing girls?

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9483 12/08/10 05:24 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
CaT Offline
Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
Excellent post, Chris! Thanks.

CaT


If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracle of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it.
- Lyndon Johnson, on signing the Wilderness Act into law (1964)
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9485 12/08/10 05:33 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 2
Offline
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 2
Chris, that post was just exceptional. I couldn't agree more about the direction our youth as a whole has been headed for years (as in, away from the outdoors and an active lifestyle), and what the broad range of scouting organizations do to try and stem this depressing tide. As I said earlier, if not scouting, then who? Far, far too many of today's parents just don't have the inclination to lead their kids into such a lifestyle - I shudder to think what the eventual outcome would be if the millions of kids in scouting today didn't have that experience and diversion available to them.

As others have pointed out, the outdoor adventures are just a fraction of the good work done by scout troops across this country, and I think that fact gets lost among the this-shouldn't-have-happened wilderness stories that grab the headlines. Before the BSA in particular is dismissed by some folks as a haven for bigotry and ineptness, the totality of it's efforts should be considered. Organizations the size of BSA - who are hugely dependent on un-paid volunteers to present the face and culture of said organization - are bound to have blemishes and pimples. It's unavoidable, regardless of the vetting, training and compliance standards that may be in place. Not to get political, but take a look at ACORN as a glaring example of the challenges of managing volunteerism and the trouble that can come from it.

When you consider the millions of kids involved in scouting in the US, and the tens of thousands of volunteer troop leaders, moms, dads, et al, it's a wonder that there aren't a lot more newsworthy incidents. I view that as a testament to the vitality and responsiveness of the scouting organizations. Are they perfect? Of course not, but it's folks like you and Doug who keep pushing toward that goal of perfection that Ken mentioned, and you both deserve our gratitude and respect.

The biggest challenge these organizations face is cultural, though. At some point in the early teen experience, scouting becomes un-cool to be involved in. Burchey called his troop a "dumping ground for the socially retarded", and he felt the need to get out. While that is an extreme characterization, there's no getting around the fact that negative peer pressure about scouting drives a lot of boys and girls out of their organizations during very critical formative years. I don't know how that gets improved, but I think it's a priority that we find a way. Maybe a super-popular Boy Scout Rap will come out of nowhere and turn the tide, but I doubt it.

Our 11 YO daughter is in her 3rd year of Girl Scouts and my wife is a troop volunteer. A couple of years ago she came home from a GSA training session and told me that the organization has a bundle of money dedicated to college scholarships that goes partly unused each year for lack of enough girls to endow. After I picked my jaw up off the floor I grabbed our daughter and explained to her in no uncertain terms that, cool or not, she would be a Girl Scout at least till the age of 22 . . .

Again, kudos to both you and Doug. We should all have that degree of commitment to the kids who will be running things 20 years from now.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Bulldog34 #9490 12/08/10 08:11 AM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
Originally Posted By: Ken
However, I'd point out that you typify the problem pointed out in the article: you and the others that you work with find the national "guidelines" inadequate for safe conduct of these activities, which they seemed to document. This would go along with your and DUG's personal experiences.

I have found that the intention of the guidelines and the actual letter of the "guidelines" are often times open to completely different intrepretations. This is where the issue needs resolved on the national level. If a leader, district or council looks at the rule and abides by the intention behind it things are usually Ok. If they look at that same set of words and say "it says (insert verbage here) and this is what it means (repeat previously inserted verbage)" then something gets missed.

Originally Posted By: Ken
"Some parents think the organization should not depend on local councils and troops to comply with voluntary national safety recommendations."


I think that the key word in that statement is "voluntary" and that is where an outsiders misinterpretation might lie... most of the trainings issued by the BSA National level are NOT voluntary for Troops wanting to explore the outdoors. Before a group is allowed to go on anything longer then a dayhike, leaders MUST attend certain trainings. Now... to be fair it is not necessary for EVERY leader to have the trainings, but at least one leader on the outing must. These include, but are not limited to the IOLS (Introduction to Outdoor Leadership Skills), Hazardous Weather Training, Swim on Safely, Boating Safely... etc. A new regulation passed this year requires all "high adventure" activities to be accompanied by a leader certified in Wilderness First Aide (guess what my next training is?)

Before climbing activities happen there MUST be a certified climbing instructor present and you should see the list of restrictions and specifications that the gear must meet before teh boys can use it.

Before a swimming activity (or any activity involving water) happens, there are certain guidelines and requirements that must be met including having a CPR trained person present and a certified lifeguard.

There are some trainings that are voluntary and can be cost prohibitive.. PowderHorn and Woodbadge to name a couple. However, these specific trainings focus more on the program itself and what a leaders role is in working with the boys and shaping the troop and leadership skills on interacting with the youth.... and not in preparing us, as leaders, for teh outdoor part of the program.

Originally Posted By: Ken
When I read "Adding even more rigid rules would increase bureaucracy and make activities even harder to organize, some parents say."---I think, Oh, my God...we are back to priorities.


I agree with you here... and disagree with the statement. More rigid rules could possibly make activities harder to organize in that we would have to ensure that all fo the training requirements are met. Last year when I started planning our Spring Break trip for this year I had ALL of the training requirements necessary... then this summer National added the requirement of Wilderness First Aide before any "high adventure" activity. That threw a wrench in my works and made me have to change my plans slightly. Am I saying that I canceled the trip or changed the venue? No... I'm saying that now, in addition to all the other planning, reservations and organization required for a trip like this... I have to schedule a training and get as many of my leaders as possible to attend it.


Originally Posted By: Bulldog34
The biggest challenge these organizations face is cultural, though. At some point in the early teen experience, scouting becomes un-cool to be involved in. Burchey called his troop a "dumping ground for the socially retarded", and he felt the need to get out. While that is an extreme characterization, there's no getting around the fact that negative peer pressure about scouting drives a lot of boys and girls out of their organizations during very critical formative years. I don't know how that gets improved, but I think it's a priority that we find a way. Maybe a super-popular Boy Scout Rap will come out of nowhere and turn the tide, but I doubt it.


I don't know about the "dumping ground" thing... my Troop was chartered with a mission statement specific to including physically, mentally and emotionally handicapped and disabled youth in our program. The boys in my troop who do not live wiht disabilities are shown how to work with the youth who do and are guided in how to work with these other children to help them succeed to the best of their abilities within the scouting program. They interact with the all the youth in our troop at as much the same level as possible and all of our activities, to the best of our ability, include some sort of adapted program for the boys unable to participate in the full activity with the rest of the boys.

I've seen this strange phenomenom of social akwardness though. It's kind of like when a child hits that age where it is no longer "cool" to tell their parent "I love you" in front of their friends... and the parent, instead, gets some mumbled gobbldygook under the childs breath as they turn away.

How to fix that is, indeed, a dilemma. Last year when we went to Zion National Park for Spring Break we stopped in Mesquite, NV for gas, restroom and snacks. When we travel it is required that the boys and leaders all wear their Class "A" uniform shirts. You know the ones.. the khaki colored ones with the BSA emblem patches and all that cool stuff? Well... we went into the gas statoin mini market and there were some teenage girls there... one of my older boys automatically took his uniform shirt off and shoved it under his arm (he had a t-shirt) on underneath. I, of course, couldn't let this pass. So I strolled up to him (in my full uniform) and confronted him... "Not cool enough to be a Boy Scout?" in front of the girls... He just grinned at me and put his uniform back on.. the girls laughed and still talked to him...

As leaders we have a struggle on our hands to not only overcome the stigma of "nerdiness" associated with Scouts... but to help these youth (girls and boys alike) through the formidable teen years. The good news though is that, like the saying "I love you" to a parent, the kids seem to outgrow the embarrasment of admitting that they're Scouts as they get a little older and most of them learn to take pride in what they've done.

These are the youth who go on to get their Eagle Scout (or the Venturing Gold Award for females) and become the military leaders, the astronauts and the Presidents, and the heros of our future.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9492 12/08/10 08:18 AM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
I forgot to add this link... for any interested in some reading material... this is the "Guide to Safe Scouting" that we use as a basic handbook when planning activities.

http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34416.pdf

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9499 12/08/10 10:06 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
Once again, Chris, great post. I love the clarity of your thinking.

It must be frustrating to try to hit "moving requirements". You'd think that there'd be significant lead times.

I shudder to think about the requirements for mortar and cannons! eek

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Ken #9500 12/08/10 10:17 AM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
Originally Posted By: Ken
It must be frustrating to try to hit "moving requirements". You'd think that there'd be significant lead times.


It really is frustrating at times... but we, for the most part, understand the necessity of the constantly shifting regulations.

I have heard quite a few leaders fight and argue against the new "constraints"... and have actually gone toe-to-toe with one or two of them. Usually those who either 1-aren't going to abide by them anyways, or 2- suddenly have to cram something in because they've got a trip planned in a month or so.

I try very hard to just take it in stride and go with the flow. If I wanted to take my Scouts someplace where I didn't have to worry about anything.... I'd take them to the movies... wink

Oh... and regarding the cannons and mortars... please refer to Chapter VIII of the Guide to Safe Scouting...

Last edited by SoCalGirl; 12/08/10 10:20 AM.
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9504 12/08/10 11:18 AM
B
Burchey
Unregistered
Burchey
Unregistered
B
Originally Posted By: SoCalGirl
Originally Posted By: Bulldog34
The biggest challenge these organizations face is cultural, though. At some point in the early teen experience, scouting becomes un-cool to be involved in. Burchey called his troop a "dumping ground for the socially retarded", and he felt the need to get out. While that is an extreme characterization, there's no getting around the fact that negative peer pressure about scouting drives a lot of boys and girls out of their organizations during very critical formative years. I don't know how that gets improved, but I think it's a priority that we find a way. Maybe a super-popular Boy Scout Rap will come out of nowhere and turn the tide, but I doubt it.


I don't know about the "dumping ground" thing... my Troop was chartered with a mission statement specific to including physically, mentally and emotionally handicapped and disabled youth in our program. The boys in my troop who do not live wiht disabilities are shown how to work with the youth who do and are guided in how to work with these other children to help them succeed to the best of their abilities within the scouting program. They interact with the all the youth in our troop at as much the same level as possible and all of our activities, to the best of our ability, include some sort of adapted program for the boys unable to participate in the full activity with the rest of the boys.

I've seen this strange phenomenom of social akwardness though. It's kind of like when a child hits that age where it is no longer "cool" to tell their parent "I love you" in front of their friends... and the parent, instead, gets some mumbled gobbldygook under the childs breath as they turn away.


Just to clarify the dumping ground thing...our troop had a few disabled kids, but the majority were not disabled. The majority were just socially awkward and under-developed. These kids were not "cool" by any stretch of the imagination. That being said - I fit right in. We were a motley crew of dorks, to simplify things, but is that really such a bad thing? How often do the "cool" kids in school amount to much? My experience is that the majority (not all) peak in high school, and then it's all downhill from there.

I'm not sure about the rest of the troops of then or now, but here's a little taste of what we did while in the Scouts - this is what our leaders had to deal with in addition to trying to instill values and the love of the outdoors.

- flaming arrows above the methane vents of the campground outhouses
- carving wood pipes with our pocket knives to smoke chewing tobacco in
- number 2 off the side of an aircraft carrier
- elaborate summer camp snare systems to catch raccoons (who would then be killed)
- flying action figures from the back of the van on the freeway using fishing line and our neckerchief for the parachute
- osage-orange fights in the woods (two kids knocked out, one wandered off and had no idea where he was)
- Upper echelon nerds CONSTANTLY berating/abusing the lower tier
- night-swims out to boats anchored in the lake, lifting and tying off the anchors so they drift a mile away
- slingshots, slingshots, slingshots
- slitting a screen on the mess hall window, inserting captured raccoon for a night, chaos ensued

While typing this list, I'm smiling in amazement that more of us didn't die during those years. We were idiots, as most pre-teen and teenage boys are.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
#9506 12/08/10 12:15 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
Originally Posted By: Burchey
Just to clarify the dumping ground thing...our troop had a few disabled kids, but the majority were not disabled. The majority were just socially awkward and under-developed. These kids were not "cool" by any stretch of the imagination. That being said - I fit right in. We were a motley crew of dorks, to simplify things, but is that really such a bad thing? How often do the "cool" kids in school amount to much? My experience is that the majority (not all) peak in high school, and then it's all downhill from there. ...
While typing this list, I'm smiling in amazement that more of us didn't die during those years. We were idiots, as most pre-teen and teenage boys are.


As my teenage daughter would say... O....M....G.... lol.

In our Troop the absolute upper echelon "nerds" in our group consist of the Leaders... we sit around campfires during campouts and throw Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, and Princess Bride movie quotes at each other. The "bring with you" list for our last leader meeting included "Sorting Hat, magic wands, and poly-juice potion". Some of our leaders have been known to, on occassion, band together for non-scouting events such as Dungeons and Dragons role-playing parties.

That being said... I probably would have been forced to throttle the living daylights out of one of you boys. Oh wait... thats against the BSA's "Youth Protection Guidelines"... well then... you would have been dismissed from our trip... and if necessary other trips... and yes.. I really will call your Mother from our campsite in Utah to drive all the way from San Diego to come get you... and I don't care if you're Aunt lives just in the next town or county... I will only release you to your Mother or Father....

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9507 12/08/10 12:50 PM
B
Burchey
Unregistered
Burchey
Unregistered
B
Good stuff, SoCalGirl, sounds like the nerds never actually grow up. Speaking of, did you enjoy the latest Harry Potter as much as I did?

I wonder if our insanity as a troop had anything to do with the lack of a female leader in the group? We spent less time dorking around the fire, and more time making bets on how long it would take for the skunks to smell the peanut M&Ms we put in Richie's sleeping bag.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9508 12/08/10 12:57 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 1
Offline
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,251
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: SoCalGirl

Oh... and regarding the cannons and mortars... please refer to Chapter VIII of the Guide to Safe Scouting...


I resolutely refuse to have anything to do with any organization that explicitly prohibits the recreational use of large bore cannons. Or large bore canons, either.


Verum audaces non gerunt indusia alba. - Ipsi dixit MCMLXXII
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
#9509 12/08/10 12:59 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
Originally Posted By: Burchey
Good stuff, SoCalGirl, sounds like the nerds never actually grow up. Speaking of, did you enjoy the latest Harry Potter as much as I did?

I wonder if our insanity as a troop had anything to do with the lack of a female leader in the group? We spent less time dorking around the fire, and more time making bets on how long it would take for the skunks to smell the peanut M&Ms we put in Richie's sleeping bag.


Burchey... I can honestly say that there are times when being the Bearer of Estrogen in such a Testosterone Saturated enviornment is a definite drawback... "Gee Mrs. S... did you know that your tent is see through?" (At which point in time I quickly adapted to changing INSIDE my sleeping bag)... or the ever popular (and wrong) theory of "If I can't see you.. you can't see me".... please, please, please make sure you're completely out of sight of the trail before you drop trow to do your thing...

Poor Richie... did he get any sleep that night?

Oh.. and I haven't seen the latest Harry Potter yet... it keeps getting bumped down my "to do" list..

Originally Posted By: wagga
I resolutely refuse to have anything to do with any organization that explicitly prohibits the recreational use of large bore cannons. Or large bore canons, either.


Well Wagga... BSA just has to draw the line somewhere.. it saddens me to know that your knowledge and vast reseviour of experience are going to be on the opposite side of the line then those of us in the Scouting World... wink

Last edited by SoCalGirl; 12/08/10 01:01 PM.
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9510 12/08/10 02:35 PM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
K
Ken Offline
Offline
K
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 742
And just so that DUG doesn't think that I don't understand what it means to be on the other side of the fence.....

One or two years back, George made a comment in one of the threads about PCT through hikers leaving messes in bear boxes and fire rings in the wilderness...I was mortified. I identify with that community, and I speak yearly to about half that group leaving from the southern terminus about mountaineering techniques.

So, if they are doing bad things, it is MY FAULT. I spoke at length with another partipant, AsABat. We went through the typical 5 stages of grief:
-Denial "it can't be the thru hikers"
-Anger "what are those idiots doing, and who is it"
-Bargaining "I know it is wrong, but the challenges are so great"
-Depression "I'm so sad, why bother with anything"
-Acceptance "I can't control people, but I can at least educate people as to how their actions ARE noticed, and affect others

Are things better? I dunno. I hope so. It is not an organization, with hierarchy and responsibility, but I hope that some people find that knowing things alters their actions.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9522 12/09/10 05:19 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3
L
Offline
L
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3
Just to clarify - You stated that in Sean Whitley's death,
"BSA no longer allows the use of that type of fuel". That is incorrect. BSA never changed their rules about rubbing alcohol. Sean's death was caused by his supervisor purchasing a large bottle of rubbing alcohol on his day off to play with by lighting it on fire on a table. All the boys involved were camp counselors, and three boys were burned including Sean's twin brother. Except for the supervisor who lit the fire, the rest of the boys were minors. The camp directors were well aware of the continuous fireplay at Citta. BSA did NOT ban rubbing alcohol and it was not used as fuel at this camp. The supervisor was charged for third degree aggravated assault.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Laurie #9523 12/09/10 05:50 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
D
DUG Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
DUG #9524 12/10/10 06:55 AM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
Thanks DUG... I try very hard not to spout of information without researching it or knowing what I'm talking about first.

I knew that documentation was out there, just hadn't dug it up yet. Thanks for doing my "leg work"...

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9528 12/10/10 12:01 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3
L
Offline
L
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3
The document states that the fuel (rubbing alcohol) is NOT RECOMMENDED. It does not state that it is banned.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Laurie #9529 12/10/10 12:16 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
D
DUG Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
Originally Posted By: Laurie
The document states that the fuel (rubbing alcohol) is NOT RECOMMENDED. It does not state that it is banned.



Last edited by DUG; 12/10/10 02:58 PM. Reason: Unauthorized edit
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Laurie #9530 12/10/10 12:37 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
Originally Posted By: Laurie
The document states that the fuel (rubbing alcohol) is NOT RECOMMENDED. It does not state that it is banned.


Laurie... having done further research (up to and including speaking with a live person at my local Council) I can assure you that anything on the "not recommended" list is prohibited from being used while on a Scout outing. Period.

Page 31 in the Guide to Safe Scouting contains the list, as does the link posted earlier by DUG.

I'm sorry if you don't agree with the information I am posting. If you have questions about the truthfulness or accuracy please feel free to refer to the Guide to Safe Scouting "Fuels and Fire Prevention", call your local Boy Scout Council, or better yet... call the National Boy Scout Headquarters in Irvine, TX... 972-580-2000

The gentleman at National wasn't avaliable when I called... but I left him a message and sent him an email.... I'll post his response when I recieve it.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
SoCalGirl #9531 12/10/10 01:45 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3
L
Offline
L
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3
Wow-nothing like jumping down someone's throat. My point was not to argue about the fuel, it was to make my point to the person that posted about Sean Whitley's death. They said that BSA no longer allows the use of rubbing alcohol - did they ever allow it? No, I am not a person who has been on this site before nor am I bashing the scouts. I was led to this site by an article that had mentioned my son's death. Just so all of you understand, my twin boys absolutely loved the scouts and worked for the camp for a few years. They lived for the scouts - in fact, I buried Sean in his scout uniform. Sean's death was caused by an Eagle scout playing with rubbing alcohol that he went out and purchased (not used as fuel) while he was supervising minors at the camp. Fireplay with bug spray, etc was also used to play with. His death was due more to a lack of supervision by the camp directors, as it was proven that they knew about it and sometimes participated. If I had to do it over, I still would have let him work at the camp he loved so much, but maybe I should have not put so much trust in the camp's supervision. His twin brother Ken did go on to receive his Eagle Scout honor that summer. Please, now make all your comments - I am not and won't be a regular on this discussion board, just wanted to clarify that alcohol was not banned because of Sean's death - it had never been allowed to begin with.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Laurie #9534 12/10/10 02:12 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
S
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 225
Laurie... it was not my intention to jump down your throat.. and I offer my most sincere apologies. I misunderstood your intentions and thought you were argueing with me over the allowability of fuels such as alcohol during scouting events. I have argued vehemently with Scout Leaders and other adults who have taken the "letter of the law" over the "intent of the law".. using guidelines such as the Guide to Safe Scouting as loose intrepretations of possible suggestions on how to conduct their behavior and supervision of their boys. I, mistakenly, thought you were one of those adults.

My motto is "Not on my Watch"... I refuse to let my troop turn into a headline while my name is in the leader section of the Tour Permit or while my boys are on an outing that I have painstakingly planned. I also fight hard to ensure that no boy in my council, that I have the ability to affect, is injured or worse on an outing. I participate as a trainer in most of the outdoor leadership and training classes conducted by my local council and actively go to troop and leadership trainings on smaller levels as well in order to ensure the safety of all of our sons (and daughters) out there....

Originally Posted By: Laurie
They said that BSA no longer allows the use of rubbing alcohol - did they ever allow it?

To answer this part of the question... yes.. BSA did allow rubbing (isopropyl)alcohol as a source of fuel in homemade backpacking stoves such as the "alcohol-can" stove. These widely used stoves were banned after the tragedy that claimed your sons life (in May of 2010 I believe).

I am truely sorry for your loss and meant, in no way whatsoever, to trivialize Seans death or his love for Scouting. My original post was merely trying to show what the BSA National levels reaction to some of the accidents suffered by Scouts has been over the last 5 years.

Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Laurie #9536 12/10/10 02:20 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
S
Offline
S
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
Laurie, I think I can speak everyone here and say we are extremely sorry about your son's terribly unfortunate death!

And I apologize for the wording used above. As Chris wrote, she thought you were arguing with her, and I think DUG believed the same.

We did not know you are the unfortunate mother who has to go through life remembering a son lost in such an awful tragedy. We are truly sorry.

Last edited by Steve C; 12/10/10 02:28 PM.
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
Laurie #9539 12/10/10 03:20 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
CaT Offline
Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 695
Laurie,

Thanks very much for sharing.

I can assure you that this is not the norm on this MB, and I truly hope you'll give the rest of us a second chance. For whatever reason, I think this particular topic has hit an unusually raw nerve in one or two people, and a lot of that was already going on before you jumped in.

CaT (David)


If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracle of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it.
- Lyndon Johnson, on signing the Wilderness Act into law (1964)
Re: Boy Scouts, outdoors, and danger
CaT #9541 12/10/10 04:13 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
S
Offline
S
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
I think that it is time to lock this thread.

Unfortunately it has hit too many raw nerves, generated too many hostilities, and hurt too many people.

May this thread rest in peace. And so too, every scout who may have been hurt or worse in a scouting accident.


Edit: DUG wrote this just as the thread was locked. I'm adding it here:

Quote:
Well I think this thread has officially gone off the deep end.

Of course it goes without saying that I am deeply sorry for Laurie's loss. As a parent of a Life scout I can not imagine losing him or what it must feel like.

This thread started as simple post about some needless scouting deaths. Quickly other old timers started posting their negative interactions with scouts.

In the middle of this we were visited by a troll who the mods suspected was someone who has harassed other hiking boards. His comments were removed and the discussion continued with Chris offering up some positives.

Since it was Laurie's 1st post ever and it occurred in the middle of a volatile thread, I incorrectly assumed she was trying to stir up trouble.

That being said, I stand by my comment that the fuel in question was used in scouting until early 2010 when it was placed on the "not recommended list". I think the point Chris was trying to make was scouting did learn from mistakes and trying to make things safer.

So do hope that "the rest of you" get a second chance.


Last edited by Steve C; 12/11/10 08:16 AM.
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4
(Release build 20200307)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.4.33 Page Time: 0.228s Queries: 154 (0.210s) Memory: 1.0308 MB (Peak: 1.4918 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-29 01:04:02 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS