YoungBlood

I just had to post because I remember as a young scout being shocked when reading recipes out of a SCOUT cooking book. My patrol and myself immeditately found a recipe that called for wine in the making of the sauce. I can't remember the exact scout cooking book but I am looking around now to see if I can find it again. I would have to agree with acco40, aslong as the parents were fine with it, then I wouldn't see any problem aslong as the bottle was kept with an adult untill cooking time.

Boys always react different ways to letters from home and phone calls home. I know that when I was a scout at summer camp that I called home generally twice during the week. I would call to tell my parents how I was doing and describe my week thus far. I know that I would get a little homesick but the call only made me feel better and reassured me that I would make it through the week. Are camp chaplain who deals with homesick kids at all hours of the night would persuade the kids to spend 24 more hours in camp and if they wanted to after that they could call their parents and ask them to pick them up. Amazingly it was rare for the boy to still want to go home after that. After all, most kids seem to get homesick after the first day before they even get to spend time at camp and have any real fun. Whatever strategy works best for you than go for it. I think a general rule is the longer you get them to stay the less homesick they get.

A variation to the build a fire and burn a string race is to give each patrol a cup of water and an egg. Time each patrol and see who can build a fire and hard boil their egg in the quickest time. Then once the patrol has finished and claims that their egg is hard boiled, you can then ask them to crack it over the patrol leader to find out for sure;-)

"White Squall" is a great movie. It is going to be the first movie we play for "aquatic staff movie night" this summer!

My troop runs a recycling drive once a month. Every patrol takes turns manning the the recycling station. We advertise to the residents that we will be collecting papers, cans, plastic etc. They drive up to the station pop their trunks and the boys grab all the goods and sort. The troop earns a lot of money with this project. It allows the troop many luxuries including camperships. Plus, as a boy in the troop you are credited something like 2 cents for every inch of paper you personally bring in and a penny for every can into an account. After several months it can really add up. A lot of boys can pay their way to summer camp with their credited account alone.

FirstPusk, I never claimed that it was a specific BSA policy and that camps were wrong to pass boy's who used those aids. I have argued what my own personal belief is in the matter and my right to enforce a policy in the waterfront area I supervised. As far as not understanding people who didn't agree with me, I didn't understand how they could not appreciate my concern and my right to enforce such policy. I still don't know why you are fighting so hard to supposely prove that aquatics director cannot create a policy if he is uncomfortable with who he allows in the water and the boy's safety in mind.(This message has been edited by YoungBlood)

Ed, I do not doubt that you have experienced boys on the waterfront. I know that most boys can swim without goggles and nose clips if they have too. I still stand firm when I tell you that some boys simply can not swim with out them. Keep in my mind that I watch over 3,000 boys take the swim test a summer and have been doing so for the last 5 summers. I know that what I speak of is true and happens.

Firstpusk, I doubt that you have ever heard of the BSA publication of "Camp Program and Property Management". It is a very comprehensive guide to running summer camp program. Section IV is titled aquatics. Page 24 is specifically about Aquatics Administration. There is a list of the Qualifications and Duties of the Aquatics director. I will quote exactly out of the book I was given at camp school, " b. Policy determination and application". Like I have always been told, the aquatics director has the ability and duty to determine, not just interpret, policy at his or her waterfront area. It is with this duty listed in the BSA publication that allows me to insist that boys demonstrate their ability to swim without wearing goggles and a nose clip.(This message has been edited by YoungBlood)

Kwc57, I can only tell that I have seen this happen before, not just once either. I can tell you that it is generally boys who have just really started to swim and when they were taught to swim they were always allowed to use a mask that covers the nose and eyes or goggles and a nose clip. It takes a while to learn how to breathe properly when swimming as many as you may remember and it very easy for begginers to choke and panic immediately. Generally it is a mental problem, just a fear that they need to conquer and sometimes it is just learning how to breathe and not suck in water. You are right when you say that most boys that use them can swim without them. That is why I have a hard time understanding why anybody would be opposed to me asking a boy to take his swim test with out them. It seems to me the only boy that this requirement puts stress under is the boy who needs those aids and should not be a swimmer.

"So...when are we going to hear about the way YMCA and Red Cross address this issue?" As far as I know, the YMCA and Red Cross don't have anything close to swimming ability groups. They don't test people before they allow them into the pool so I don't what kinda answer you want from them.

Packsaddle, my point is that I don't allow the boy to take the test with the goggles and noseclip on in the first place. When he gets in line and I see he has the goggles and nose clip in hand, I ask him if he can take the swim test without them. If he says yes, then he takes the swim test and is classified whatever ability he achieves. If he refuses to take the test without them, he obvisouly has some sort of fear and or reliance upon the aid of the nose clip and goggles. We will do everything we can to get him over that fear and or reliance and generally have him a swimmer after a few days if even that long.

Spluttering and spitting and wiping eyes is an indication of not being a strong swimmer? I never said that. If the kid can pass the swim test and he is sputtering, spitting and wiping his eyes the whole time than I would pass him. My question is, what if the kid CANNOT swim with out his goggles and nose clip. I am not talking about a kid who has to just wipe his eyes and chokes on some water with out them. I am talking about a kid, who panics to the point of going to the bottom of the pool. I have been a lifeguard at camp for the last 6 years and I have seen this happen. Granted it does not happen a lot and it is mainly with the brand new first year scouts. However, I have seen kids insist on using the goggles and nose clip and when asked to do the swim test without them they panic and barely make begginer if that. If I did not ask boys to please just swim around the pool once with out them and then feel free to use them after that, I may never catch the few boys that are entirely reliant upon them. Now please answer me again, if a boy cannot swim without his goggles and nose clip and I mean CANNOT swim are you going classify him a swimmer?

I will ask this question once more. I address this question to anyone in opposition to AquatDir and my policy on the issue. If you discover that a boy cannot pass the swim test unless he is wearing goggles and a nose clip, are you going to classify him as a swimmer and permit the boy to participate in all aquatic activites(boating, sailing, waterskiing, swimming in crowded areas, etc...) at camp?(This message has been edited by YoungBlood)

Packsaddle, I have come to the conclusion that for whatever reason, you are not truly concerned about the boy's safety in the water. If you really were concerned for their safety you would have to agree with us on this or atleast better understand why we feel as we do. For this reason I am no longer replying to your post since I find them to be frivolous and containing no real merit.

The reason the BSA has a little ambiguity in these requirements (i.e., "in a strong manner") is because they do not want the "in charge" types (i.e., "qualified supervision") to be forced to do something by a disgruntled Scoutmaster (or some other "not in charge" type), such as allow a boy to be classified as a swimmer, when in fact the "in charge" type feels this is not a safe action for the boy and/or for those around him.