Patrol camping - Scouts only - where?

[Bob White]

Sorry but I'm not familiar with that old saying. Is it from the same person who said "Personally, I agree with not letting patrols go on campouts without the Troop. ....If a patrol starts camping on their own, then why even belong to a troop?"

Evmori 3/2002

 

Is it really legitimate to discourage others from experiencing an element of the scouting program that you haven't even tried?

 

Bob White

[saltheart]

Perhaps I'm missing something here. Perhaps others are still scratching their heads, too. But I still don't see a good crystal clear answer to the question 'why the BSA will not allow Patrol camping on their own property' as BW has indicated is their policy, while BSA publications promote that very thing - patrol camping. If that is, indeed, the policy, it would seem to smack of a double speak and double standard.

[Bob White]

Patrol activities have existed in and out of scouting for almost a hundred years without the use of scout camps. Why the sudden need for them? Do you really believe that the boys cannot find anywhere to go?

 

Why do you want to create hurdles? Anybody can find excuses not to do something. Shouldn't we be setting the example to scouts on how to make things happen?

 

State and national parks have campgrounds, but the state and federal employees cannot send kids to camp there without adults. So do you think they never camp on private property?

 

Please do not dwell on where you can't go, and focus on developing the patrols to be independent. Believe me they will find places to go.

 

 

[saltheart]

With all due respect, I think an answer to the question is in order, and you simply seem to be trying to avoid answering it by telling us not to seek an answer. Your statement was...

 

"BSA properties, State, and National parks all require that youth be under the supervision of adults."

 

Exactly why is that? Why does the BSA expound on the good things about patrol camping, yet not allow it on their own properties? The BSA requires adult supervision on their own properties but tells us all that the Scouts should be allowed to camp on their own without adult supervision? That, if it is BSA policy, is double speak and double standard if I ever heard it, and hardly speaks to the virtues that the BSA expounds upon.

 

Care to give us a clear and concise answer?

[evmori]

Gotta agreee with others, Bob. If the BSA encourages Patrol outings without adult supervision then why can't these Patrols use BSA property?

 

BTW, the old saying goes "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink". I just modified it to fit this discussion. Sorry to confuse you.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[Hunt]

It seems pretty obvious that liability concerns are the reason behind this restriction. OGE is right to ask what are the liability considerations for a private landowner allowing this activity on his land. While I'm certain BSA would defend the troop leaders for allowing patrol camping, I'm not so certain it would defend a landowner, especially if he is not a BSA member.

I'd be interested in seeing some answers to the original question in this thread--where have patrols actually camped? How did you convince today's parents that it would be safe enough?

[Bob White]

Saltheart, have you ever asked a State Park why you need an adult in the campsite? Or why is Quiet Time at 10PM and not 9:45 or 10:15? Why in my state can you only have two tents in a site?

 

I have never asked, I never cared, It never stopped me from camping. Every place has rules to follow.

 

What I find funny is that the ability for Patrol Activities, without adult supervision, has been in every BSA Scout Handbook since 1910, it's mentioned in YP training, Adult leader training, the SM handbook and the G2SS. Yet the vast majority on this board never knew it until just recently, despite years of experience as a Scoutleaders. Why is that? How could something that publicized have gone unnoticed leaders for so long?

 

Now that you know, all you can talk about is "why can't we go to scout camps". Why do you even care, a short time ago you never even considered letting patrols do the activities that their handbook said thay could do. Now all you want to do is gripe about not being able to go to a specific place.

 

Don't let the curmudgeons of the forum sidetrack you from the real issue. Has the troop program in the unit you serve prepared patrols for independent activities? Forget about the rules of camp, have you done your job? That is the only issue that should concern you.

 

My guess would be that insurance companies do not concern themselves with the patrol method when they set premiums for scout councils. By the way does your camp have the resources to have rangers always traveling in pairs to avoid situations that could viloate YP regs. They are scouters too you know.

 

What if your council did not have a scout camp? Would you quit going outdoors? As I said before, why not use the scout camps for patrol activity but have a couple adults camp a couple sites over. Nothing says they have to interact with the scouts. We are scout leaders, we are supposed to be positive role models not whiners.

 

Bob White

 

 

 

 

 

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[saltheart]

Well, Bob...I think it's probably fair to say that you really don't know why the BSA will not allow patrol camping on BSA property, correct? You've made a statement, and apparently can not support it. And yes, it is indeed a curiosity for adult leaders to learn that the BSA may have that policy. I say 'may have' for your inability to provide more information about the policy and the reasons behind it makes me think you know only that it exists, but not why, like the rest of us. And now that we hear this, we are, at least I am, very curious as to why the BSA says one thing, and apparently practices another. I'd like to know if it's true, and why.

 

It may be a fair guess that insurance concerns for the BSA and YP concerns play a major factor in disallowing patrol camping on BSA property. It may not be. But if they are major players in the rules, then that speaks very uncomfortably to the issue of coverage and liability outside BSA property should an scenario such as OGE portrayed actually happen. Seems to be a tad more than a 'good for the goose, good for the gander' issue.

 

And I'm not letting the " curmudgeons of the forum" sidetrack me from any real issue. The issue is, indeed, the very statement you made right up front, not this overall patrol camping thing you're trying to focus it on. You made a statement that was quite startling for some of us, and I think I'd like to know if that is the BSA policy, and why. Your statement was...well, you can read it above as well as I. Since making that statement, you seem to be trying to shuffle the focus of the conversation elsewhere...like 'forget I said that and focus on this part...' Your statement was a revelation, even for me after a great many years in Scouting. I've never had anyone in the troop attempt patrol camping on BSA land, but it would seem an ideal place. We're just a little too far away for a quick trip like that. Nonetheless, if someone wanted to, why not? State and Federal land issues aside, for they are quite different, BSA rules should, I think, be in keeping with the program they publish and provide. Not allowing patrol camping on BSA lands due to YP concerns, insurance and liability concerns, or any concern, seems diametrically opposed to the published program. I'm uncomfortable with the notion that they might see things that way.

 

Now...I've tried to explain myself as clear as I can. Can you provide back-up for your statement such that we can all learn if the policy is actually what you stated? And can you provide reasoning for that ruling that seems so opposed to what the BSA expounds upon?

[OldGreyEagle]

Bob, I am surprised at the whole direction we have gone here, normally I support 100% what you say. I can in no way imagine why I am having trouble explaining my position. I support the idea of Patrol Outings, I find it curious that the BSA which supports Patrol Outings wont allow it on their own property.

 

I agree with you 100 percent, that as adult scouters we are indeed role models. In fact, I will take one last stab at explaining my position:

 

To me having the BSA support Patrol Outings and then not allow them on BSA property is like:

 

1. Telling scouts to go out and sell all the popcorn they can, and then the scoutmaster doesn't buy a single unit.

 

2. Telling the scouts to be sure they always wear a full and complete uniform, and then always show up in jeans and a NIKE sweat shirt

 

Telling scouts to do what I say, not what I do

 

Thats the issue, to me this is like the local Cable company telling me all about the greatest features of On Demand Pay per View, and then say, of course, we dont offer it in your area.

 

 

 

[scoutingagain]

I don't wish to rehash the obvious conflict in the BSA policies, but I would like to encourage at least some of our scouts to undertake a youth led activity without adult supervision.

 

But before I do, I would like to hear some answers to the original question. Where do scouters allow patrols to camp without adult supervision and under what circumstances? Are there other activities done by patrols without adult supervision? Do you get permits for these activities?

 

The local tour permit states, "Boy Scouts of America policy requires at least two adult leaders on all camping trips and tours." Is it possible to get an approved permit from a council leaving this area of the permit blank?

 

SA

[captnkirk]

First off, I resent the implication that none of us on this forum (with the exeception of BW) had any idea that patrols could go camping. I think at least most of us knew that, and that patrol camping is encouraged as well. What has been a revelation to many of us is that adults are not required on these outings.

 

Second, I know for a fact that we have been trying to encourage the patrols in our troop to start doing patrol activites for years now. Unfortunately, there is no precedent for it within the troop, and many of the boys are too busy (or in some cases too apathetic) to plan their own camping trip. If you find this hard to swallow, either you've been blessed with a troop of extraordinary Scouts, or you haven't spent much time around teenage boys.

 

On the matter of BSA properties, if BSA insurance truly won't cover an unsupervised patrol in a Scout camp, why should BSA pay "all court costs and fines against you" for a private land-owner?

 

Bob, I don't think any of us mean to say that if we can't send patrols to Scout camps they won't camp at all. We're just still trying to draw the line of what activities should be supervised and which shouldn't, and this BSA policy has us confused.

[Bob White]

So many things to cover...

 

Tour permits are for Troops, Packs, Webelos Dens and Crews, not Patrols. Patrols are unique because they are the only scout unit that is not adult lead. Their plan needs to be approved by the parents and the Scoutmaster ONLY.

 

I never said that none of the leaders here used patrol activities, I said "many".

 

Patrol overnighters are the sandlot baseball of scouting. It is designed for the boys to do all the arrangements. Let them find private property they can stay on.

 

A short time ago many of you would not even consider letting patrols camp, now you still don't have anyone going and your complaining about not getting to use a facility for something you have never done.

 

I wouldn't want a patrol in a scout camp in proximity with adults who do not know or use the scouting program. I want to see the patrol on private property "on their own" were they can develop as a patrol without interference from outside influences. So even if a Scout camp alllowed it I would discourage its use.

 

Can you imagine the hassle a patrol would have to combat if they ran into some leaders who didn't know patrols could camp. They would spend their entire weekend having to defend their right to the activity.

 

Focus on the training and let the boys them find private property were they can be "on their own".

 

OGE I'm sorry I cannot give you an answer that I do not have. Nor am I interested in either the question or the answer. Not using council property has never hindered our Patrol Activities and I do not anticipate that it ever will. Kids who have never been scouts find places to camp with thier buddies all the time. I have nor reason or experience that leads be to believe that scouts could not do so as well.

 

This is a lot of waving of hands and gnashing of teeth over nothing.

 

Bob White

[mk9750]

Bob,

 

you know I love ya, man, but I think you bit off more than you can chew here.

 

I am 100% on the side that says we should encourage and allow properly planned Patrol events without adult supervision. but if the BSA doesn't allow them on its own property, my assumption is that they must have a reason. And knowing the BSA, it's probably a good reason. I'd like to hear what it is and consider it before I allowed one of our Patrols to go, if I were the SM. It's just another bit of backround info that would help make a good decision.

 

I don't mean to say that their policy would keep me from allowing it. I can cetrainly fathom in my mind some very valid reasons to disallow it on Scout property while still encouraging it elsewhere. But I'd like the oppurtunity to consider the reasons.

 

As I remember a really funny T.V. show in the 60s saying, "You got some 'splainin' to do, Lucy!"

 

As to the original question, I can't offer anything from experience, because we still have not done it. My son, a PL, is trying to develop a one night outing on some property an ASM has. His sticking point right now is that it is too far to hike to, and he is trying to avoid needing adults. Every other idea he has had has been nixed by parents of some of the guys in the Patrol.

 

Mark

[Fat Old Guy]

"That is the pessimism of unhappy adults not the nature of children who are scout age."

 

Nope, that's the realism of a grumpy adult who deals with kids who don't want to do anything that isn't pre-organized.

 

Many of the kids in my son's patrol live fairly close by. All summer long I heard, "there's nothing to do." I'd say, "why don't you guys get the patrol together, pack some lunches and hike out to the park (5 miles) and spend the day exploring the park?" "Nah, that's too far." "Want me to drive you?" "Nah, it's too hot."

 

"Why don't you guys go on a bike hike, finish off the cycling merit badge, and see what's out there?" "Nah . . . we'd rather sit here but we're bored. Can we watch a movie?"

 

"Hey FOG, can you drive us to the pool?" "Ride your bikes, it's only a mile." "Nah . . ."

 

"Is there anything that you'd like to do that doesn't require me to drive you someplace? Fishing? Basketball? Tennis?" "Nah, we'll just sit here. . . . we're bored."

 

I don't remember being very bored during the summer when I was a youngster. We usually had some mischief to cook up. Baseball, football, making explosives. A considerable amount of time was spent trying to get the attention of girls our age, usually by doing stupid things like belching or throwing crab apples at them. We didn't figure out what we were doing wrong for many years.

 

Maybe kids are different in your part of the world, Bob Whit. Maybe the culture is that different.

 

 

 

 

 

[Bob White]

Mark, Why would knowing why you cannot go to property X, have any bearing as to why you would not let scouts go to private property A, B C, D, E, F, G, H, I, etc. etc..

 

It seems to me that leaders are using this a a self imposed crutch. You should be celebrating this program revelation not looking for reasons to squash it. For decades patrols have camped without letting this bother them. Why now is it such a big deal?

 

I already told you haow to handle it with adults in a nearby but separate site. Plus there are lots of other places to go. Not to mention starting off eith day activities. Fishing, hiking, x-country skiing, bowling, swimming at a public pool. Etc.

 

Bob