What does BSA classify as 'High Adventure' for Heath Forms?

[Tampa Turtle]

My reading is IF you go to one of the official BSA High Adventure programs but NOT if you are going on an equally arduous Troop planned activity. While I may question the logic is that correct?

[Stosh]

From my reading of the paragraph on the health form, High Adventure is for the 4 national bases. In other, words if you do not outfit through Northern Tier and instead just go to the BWCA it is not high adventure. If you wish to backpack Estes Park or Yellowstone on your own and not go to Philmont, it is not high adventure.

 

Makes perfectly logical sense when viewed through the eyes of national where the emphasis, probably for legal and medical reasons don't want the PR hassle of some overweight, aged, SM croaking on BSA property. They can do it a mile down the road, just not on BSA property.

 

Stosh

[Tampa Turtle]

That is what I thought. CYA Hypocritical. I guess I shouldn't complain too loud or lord knows what the next G2SS will be like...

 

Thanks.

[qwazse]

Another guide might require a different medical form (or none at all). But, the general principle remains the same ...

 

http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/...k_factors.aspx

[Tampa Turtle]

Yes I am aware of the risk/principles for (myself) and various activities. It just seems inconsistent for BSA to care about events on their property vs. events off-property...

[qwazse]

What you are arguing over is documentation. What if all of your boys decided not to go to a BSA facility this year, but they all got comprehensive sports physicals? Or, maybe the practice they go to has a doc that waives his fee for scouts if he can just print pertinent medical info from his database, set aside an evening for each patrol, review and updates each boys status, clears them to participate in whatever, and with parents' consent, prints everything in a binder for you -- with a separate sheet of med schedules for your contingent's health officer?

 

Would you still want national to require you to jot everything down on their form as well, just because whatever you are doing is as strenuous as BSA's training bases?

[Scouter99]

From Bryan at the blog explaining the change:

Someone asked

"...it raises a question for me. If the idea is to make it easier to determine which form is needed by labeling them by location rather than activity, you’ve neglected Troop HA. Many (most?) troops don’t depend on national bases for HA, and many don’t depend on council programs (which would indicate which forms to use) either.

Does National care if unit HA participants have a health evaluation at or beyond X level? Then national needs to indicate which on the AHMR web page.

Where I’m defining unit HA based on the definition in the National Outdoor Awards: Adventure badge.

That being “A backpacking trip lasting three or more days and covering more than 20 miles without food resupply

“A canoeing, rowing, or sailing trip lasting three or more days and covering more than 50 miles without food resupply

“A whitewater trip lasting two or more days and covering more than 20 miles without food resupply

“A climbing activity on open rock . . . that includes camping overnight “"

 

Bryan's answer was:

"Unit high adventure greater than 72 hours would be the decision point for completing a pre-participation physical. Check out the Sweet 16 of BSA Safety for more planning guidance."

[Tampa Turtle]

I am arguing over documentation. The emphasis on covering Nationals backside over an emphasis on making sure Scout and Scouters are physically ready for more strenuous activity. However I DO have serious misgivings about National taking this on without screwing this up. In our Troop we usually stage practice hikes, canoeing training, etc before challenging trips to help determine activity fitness.