Sleeping in Cars

[boomerscout]

Sometimes it's car camping or no camping if it's hard to get volunteer Scouters willing to hike.

[Stosh]

Sometimes it's car camping or no camping if it's hard to get volunteer Scouters willing to hike.

 

The two are not mutually exclusive. One can "car" camp very nicely and still not have to hike to the site. One can stay at the council camp and not have to sleep in cars. Also, a good boy-led program can cut the needed number of adults down to two on any and all patrol-method outings. While my troops tend to be small, I have never had the need for more than two adults on any outing.

 

Stosh

[cnew2]

Several years ago my husband and I went with our boys on a cub scout overnight outing to a WWII submarine that is docked in Muskegon, MI on Lake Michigan. What an incredible outing! So informative ... and really quite moving. We slept on the submarine and marveled at the tiny space the men had. We felt sorry for the newbie sailor that had to sleep on the bunk inches from pipes that dripped condensation all the time. Again, incredible outing.

 

My hubby, while he enjoyed the tour, could NOT overcome his claustrophobia and sleep inside the sub. He spent a lonely night in the car.

[King Ding Dong]

A sub is a lot bigger than a car! But I get the point, I like big tents.

[Horizon]

 

The two are not mutually exclusive. One can "car" camp very nicely and still not have to hike to the site. One can stay at the council camp and not have to sleep in cars. Also, a good boy-led program can cut the needed number of adults down to two on any and all patrol-method outings. While my troops tend to be small, I have never had the need for more than two adults on any outing.

 

Stosh

 

Are your camps close enough to do a drop off and pick up? Ours are often 2+ hours away, so any adult who drives tends to stick around and camp. We try to limit adults to just those necessary to provide sufficient seat belts to and from.

[gsdad]

 

The two are not mutually exclusive. One can "car" camp very nicely and still not have to hike to the site. One can stay at the council camp and not have to sleep in cars. Also, a good boy-led program can cut the needed number of adults down to two on any and all patrol-method outings. While my troops tend to be small, I have never had the need for more than two adults on any outing.

 

Stosh

 

Not all troops are led by Green Bar Incarnate, my boyhood troop regurlay took 50 kids on a weekend campout. Two leaders just didn't cut it. I am currently a CM and we take 30 kids camping, two leaders for 30 Cubs, not gonna happen.

[Peregrinator]

I would think one adult leader plus 1 leader per 2 patrols should suffice. Fifty kids = 6 patrols = 4 leaders.

 

 

Thirty cubs is another thing entirely. I would think you would want at least 6 leaders in that case.

[LeCastor]

While I was at the OA Ordeal this past weekend I helped out with the ceremonies team. One of the Arrowmen said he was planning to sleep in his car! (Obviously, I couldn't help but think of this thread...) I think it's a sad day when youth Arrowmen opt out of tenting or meadow-crashing in favor of sleeping in a car..."We who love the woods and camping..."

 

@JBlake47, gsdad just equated you to Green Bar Bill! I think you should thank him for that lovely compliment!

[Stosh]

 

Not all troops are led by Green Bar Incarnate, my boyhood troop regurlay took 50 kids on a weekend campout. Two leaders just didn't cut it. I am currently a CM and we take 30 kids camping, two leaders for 30 Cubs, not gonna happen.

 

If 50 kids equates to 50 kids with no leadership skills then having two adult scouters is not going to be enough.

 

Let's say the 50 kids are using the patrol-method and have say 5 patrols. That's 10 youth leaders to start with (PL/APL), that's 20% of the group. Okay, with that many scouts, one would probably have an SPL/ASPL combo. 10 youth leaders. I'm sure there's a QM with that many, maybe a Scribe, TG for the new guys, etc. I'm thinking one could tally maybe 25-30% of the troop are leaders. Add in the two adult leaders, solid 30%.

 

Okay, now where's the justification for adding more adult leaders? One is already heavy with a substantial percent of leaders already.

 

Oh? The boys don't count? They're really not leaders? They haven't been Trained? They can't be trusted to lead?

 

Let's just say I'm assuming that I'm not GBB incarnate, but just running the BSA program as prescribed. Boy-led, patrol-method.

 

My ASM and I do very nicely if done according to the BSA training for adult leaders.

 

Otherwise, I would strongly suggest the Cub Scout model and have every scout accompanied by their parent. That way one doesn't need training, they don't need to train the boys in leadership skills, and the added expense of artificial POR patches can be saved for a bigger camp trailer and more gear.

 

Once a troop hits the woods, it become very obvious, very quickly, what group dynamics they operate under. It's an enjoyable event to watch. Pull up a chair and just sit and watch the troop next to you for say maybe 15 minutes. Oh? The SPL and ASPL are first out of the vehicles, the QM heads for the trailer, the boys packline their equipment and PL's are staking out their sites? And the SM and ASM are still sitting in the vehicles finishing off their coffee? If they are going to be that useless, why in the world did they even come?

 

The troop on the other side, the SM and ASM are the first out directing the PL's to their sites while the QM is dragging all the equipment out 300' to each of the patrol site because some goof-ball told the SM it would be good to have 300' between patrols. The troop trailer gets dropped off by the adults site of which there are at least a dozen adults standing around looking for their packs. Then they drive around to all the patrol sites and drop off the scouts gear. If the 300' suggestion isn't followed, then it saves a lot on gas because then the boys just drag their gear out of the vehicles parked over by the adult site. Of course the dads are then close enough to help their boy drag is load to his tent site which is even better. The adults start putting up the dining fly, the big one, the weather is threatening and the boys are gonna need shelter.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, But yes, some troops need more than 2 adults along on an activity.....and you don't need to be GBB to figure out why.

 

Stosh

[gsdad]

What is your hang up with having more than two adult leaders? Your way is not necessarily the right way, it is your way. If you think you can take safely 50 Scouts on a camping trip with only two adult leaders, you are delusional. A troop can have adult leadership in camp and still function as a patrol based, boy led unit. Especially today with the emphasis on YPT, sticking to to your two man crew is reckless and irresponsible.

[Stosh]

What is your hang up with having more than two adult leaders? Your way is not necessarily the right way' date=' it is your way. If you think you can take safely 50 Scouts on a camping trip with only two adult leaders, you are delusional. A troop can have adult leadership in camp and still function as a patrol based, boy led unit. Especially today with the emphasis on YPT, sticking to to your two man crew is reckless and irresponsible.[/quote']

 

Okay, let's try this one on. 50 boys - 6 patrols. That means 300' apart, okay SM and ASM, but 300' in six different directions is impossible. Okay one adult, oops, 2 adults (YPT 2-deep) per patrol. Of course, they will need to sleep at or near the patrols, 300' is too far away to monitor responsibly.

 

So 50 boy, 14 adults. That's about 3.5 boys per adult. Sound about right, I think they'll be safe.

 

Oh, wait a minute, there's the SPL/ASPL and PL/APL combos, so now we're at 28 leaders on this outing of 50 boys. Do we give full leadership tally counts to the boys or is that different than real leaders, aka adults? With 2 adults at every patrol site, I'm thinking the PL/APL can be titular only, but we'll give them credit at their BOR anyway. It will be good to have those adults mentoring the boys over their shoulders every step of the way so they can get some good leadership tips, too.

 

Nope, It's all clear to me know, your way is a lot better, it totally guarantees enough leadership that no court of law or even irate parent would think me to be reckless and/or irresponsible. After all, they may be just a bunch of boys, but that leader to scout ratio seems like it would even work for the Webelos boys. One doesn't have to treat these boys like they're adults until they turn 18. Better to be safe than to be sorry.

 

By the way, this is not my hang up or my delusion. I do believe it is the goal of the BSA, at least in theory, that's what they have been giving lip-service to. Well, at least in the past, that was the goal.

 

But in all fairness, I have never taken a group of youth of 50 out with just two adults leaders. Oh, wait, I stand corrected, I do it all the time. It's only in the BSA program that says I can't.

 

I have found the woods to be a far safer place for kids than downtown Minneapolis, Chicago, New Orleans, Kansas City, or Cleveland, five of the places I have taken co-ed groups of greater than 50 with only two adults.

 

Stosh

[Rick_in_CA]

Especially today with the emphasis on YPT' date=' sticking to to your two man crew is reckless and irresponsible.[/quote']

I'm curious about this. How is it reckless and irresponsible?

 

[MattR]

I wouldn't say he's delusional. It probably depends on the maturity of the boys. We just went to camporee and had 40 boys with 4 or 5 trained adults and enough other parents to drive. The trained adults ate very well, didn't do much other than keep a watch on the new parents, and had a good time. There were a couple of small issues but nothing a couple of adults couldn't handle. We are by no means close to GBB status and I want to get there, but we are at the point where I trust the PLC to keep things safe.

 

The problem with only having two adults with 50 boys is that if one boy gets sick then everyone has to go home. With 50 boys it seems to happen too often. The other issue is rides to and from camp. As others have said, why drive back and forth twice when you can do it once and enjoy the outdoors?

[Stosh]

 

The two are not mutually exclusive. One can "car" camp very nicely and still not have to hike to the site. One can stay at the council camp and not have to sleep in cars. Also, a good boy-led program can cut the needed number of adults down to two on any and all patrol-method outings. While my troops tend to be small, I have never had the need for more than two adults on any outing.

 

Stosh

 

MattR, I think you finally see the point. Even with a troop that is not even close to GBB status, you are at the point where you actually TRUST your boy leadership and can as an option reduce the real NEED of having to have a ton of adults there. I didn't say one can't HAVE more adults, I'm just saying they aren't NEEDED! I have never had the need for more than two adults on any outing doesn't mean other adults weren't there, they just hung around like screen doors on submarines and ash trays on motorcycles. They weren't needed until it was time to go home and then they were helpful in driving vehicles.

 

50 boys 2 adults, the 850 other adults that brought the boys and the gear up, head off to the Holiday Inn and hot tub 30 miles further down the road. There they can enjoy wine with their steak dinner and relax around the pool if they wish. Why? BECAUSE THEY AREN'T NEEDED. The boys are doing just fine with a couple of adults hanging around drinking coffee in case of an emergency, they will call 911 because none of the other boys are capable of doing that.

 

One does not need to be Nazi GBB to run a program where the boy are trusted leaders and are trained to the level of being able to take care of themselves in the woods. As a matter of fact, every FC scout should easily fit that definition. If not, I would question the Eagle Mill mentality of the troop. T-FC in the first year is not an ideal for all boys. No wonder the adults don't trust the boys especially when they realize they haven't trained them well enough to be trusted.

 

I definitely count boys when I count leadership heads in my troops.

 

Summer camp - 2 adults grab a freebie week in the woods! 15-25 boys, all trained and can handle themselves in the woods. Camp staff coming out of your ears, programs galore, What's the need for SM and ASM? NOTHING! except the camp made them come!

 

I get a lot of reading done that week.

 

Stosh

[MattR]

I figured out the importance of respect about a year ago. Since then I've been trying to develop it. At tonight's ASM meeting I was training the adults on respect and part of it was defining the line between adult and scout responsibilities. Most of the ASMs like it but one of them is a problem. The boys flags aren't good enough so let's make them re do the flags. Their patrol names are no good. Their cheers aren't the right length so let's get the SPL to make them change it. I reminded him that the patrol he is most upset with just won all the team based competitions at the camporee last weekend (camp wide). They are a bunch of misfits but they were a team. One of their scouts ages out in a month and he's still a Tenderfoot. But he likes scouts. The PL asked for help on teamwork and I spent the entire month working with him and his patrol. (Yes, eventually it will be the SPL doing this but I have to figure it out myself first) In the meantime, another PL saw the results and asked me if I could help him out with getting scouts to listen to him. We started talking about respect and servant leadership. The other thing I just learned is scouts are a lot more receptive to new ideas when they have a problem they want to solve.