when will we ever form patrols?

[eagle90]

Fuzzy, Imust disagree with your comment about High Adventure trips (Philmont, BWCA, etc.). These activities are NOT for the purpose of "purchasing members" but is the best tool we have available for the retention of scouts. Eventually you run out of local alternatives, and summer camp becomes old hat to the scouts. They want something new and challenging.

I have done over 25 Scoutmaster Conferences for Eagle, and when I ask what is their favoite Scouting memory or experience, I would say 95% of them talk about a High Adventure trip, not a weekend campout or Summer camp. Our troop has run the gamut from 12 members to 35 members and everywhere in between, and we have had a High Adventure trip every year for the past 30 years. It has kept us alive during the down years, and gives a spark every year. We have new crossovers who have seen our videos and are already saving up for when they can go on a special trip. SO please, don't bypass those High Adventure trips!

[Stosh]

I would tend to agree with Eagle. High Adventure is the key to older boy retention and success. If you only offer the same summer camp for the fifth year in a row for a boy, I would not blame him if he would take a pass and try something else.

 

Summer Camp in Utah is the same cost as summer camp in Virginia. The only variable is the gas money and in the scope of the whole project, relatively quite low. The variety and novelty is definitely worth the cost.

 

BWCA for 9 days cost us less than 5 days in summer camp. One doesn't have to break the bank to get to high adventure.

 

Units that are active seem to find new and different ways to excite the boys year after year. If it were the same old thing every year, I as a leader would have left a long time ago.

 

As far as expensive. All the boys are given ample opportunity to raise money through the troop to pay for any and all of these activities. Bake sales, popcorn, wreaths, chili suppers, etc. all contribute to the boys' expenses.

 

As far as the cost is concern, so far, I haven't heard any negative comments from the boys. If the parent's complain about the cost, we get on the boy's case about the fund raising they are doing and that usually clears up the problem.

 

Anyone who restricts high adventure programming, will see a relative correlation to the retention of the older scouts.

[SR540Beaver]

jblake,

 

I have to assume one of two things or both. Either you have some pretty darned expensive summer camps in your area or your close proxemity to BWCA cut your costs and you did your own thing instead of utilize Northern Tier. Around here in Oklahoma, summer camp is anywhere from $175 to $200 for the week. When our troop took two crews to Atikokan this past summer, the cost was about $875 per head.....with gear costs on top of that. Just the Northern Tier part was something like $500 I believe.

[Eagledad]

I having a little trouble here: Scouting is an adventure...but only on high adventure treks?

 

I understand what you are saying, but may I suggest another direction of thinking. I know a lot of folks think adventure is the only attraction for older scouts, but I disagree. Scouts go were they feel good about themselves and leading a bunch of younger scouts in different adventures is very also rewarding for young men.

 

I hate these whole older scout younger scout discussions because I think many adults unintentionally hold adventure back from the younger scouts. We once had a new 10 year old bike racer. Should he be held back on a high adventure bike trek planned to cross the state of Oklahoma?

 

Troops should be an adventure. In one years time, our older scouts lead the troop to a mountain bike campout, shooting sports campout, backpacking campout, water sports campout and visit to a Civil War reenactment. We did more but I dont remember.

 

Maybe there needs to be some thinking out of the box here.

 

Barry

 

[Fuzzy Bear]

If the only thing anyone disagreed with me about was not attending a high adventure camp yearly, then there is not much of an argument. When I took over as SM, the Scouts had been to one local camp 10 times in the past year. The camp was close by our hut and little planning was needed. The Scouts made our own Where to go Camping guide and for the next three years we never returned to the camp of many outings. Finally the Scouts requested a return to the local camp because it really was a great place. We always had young Scouts and older Scouts mainly because we allowed them to plan and lead the program and the program content was generally boosted by adult support. We had more camping spots to go to than we had weekends.

 

We canoed, we repelled, we climbed mountains, we sailed small boats, we hiked, we cooked off of rocks, we followed compass directions to camps, built signal towers, had campfires during meetings, we challenged other Troops to competitions, had our own competitions, yearly training and Troop outings, yearly Troop dinner and recognition ceremonies.. on an on. We didnt skimp on the fun either. Our numbers were always great. We had long standing patrols with flags and yells. If someone else does it more expensively, then they need to know that someone else did it differently. It is a big world. fb

 

[eagle90]

I am not saying High Adventure trips are the only adventure our troop does. We still have 10-12 campouts per year, and have done weekend canoe trips, bike trips, with our older scouts deciding what to do and mentoring the younger scouts. But there is a time when the older scouts like to do something by themselves over and above the young scouts. And while the ten year old bike racer may be qualified, he is surely the exception. I have personally seen some adventures almost ruined when scouts who were too young or too physically immature attempt to come along with the older scouts. You need a balance of adventures for both older and younger scouts.

[Stosh]

One of the things about high adventure is not the actual trip but the energy expended getting there. If one is going to go to BWCA and have someone else do the planning, organizing, and such and that all the scouts do is show up and have fun, you have defeated 95% of what a trip like that can provide programatically for the boys.

 

Planning out 9 days of meals for X amount of people, shopping it, and packaging it down to portagable proportions/weight takes planning. Organizing camp equipment down to functionable amounts with weight in mind takes planning. Preplanning the permit/entry coordination and then planning out a reasonable trek, purchasing maps, etc. takes planning. Needless to say there's a years worth of prep time to cut the costs down to less than summer camp costs but it can happen. If all you're going to do is show up at the door at Northern Tier and pay for their expertise, not only is it going to be expensive, but totally useless for educational/programatic benefits of doing it on your own. That's not high adventure, any tenderfoot can go with someone else doing all the work.

 

And while we may be within 600 miles of BWCA, we summer camp 1000 miles away in Utah this year. We figure the cost of gas along with the $210 cost of camp. Because someone else does all the work for Summer Camp, it's not really high adventure, but it sure get's a ton of boys wanting to go when it's going to be right next door to Yellowstone.

 

How much prep work is done for summer camp? two days of driving, with camping, meals, etc. Sightseeing with more meals and camping while out there and then the trip back. Is there an opportunity for the younger boys to learn how to menu/plan/route out the trip? Yep.

 

Again 95% of the benefit of high adventure is not in the trip, it's in the planning. Our program for the troop is designed around such planning.

 

By the way, we have scouts who have reached the rank of Star who cannot go on some of our high adventure trips because they are not old enough. Are they involved in the planning? You bet, they know their turn will come quick enough.

[Stosh]

As far as age is concerned, the only time we have run into problem with age and high adventure is when we use scout supported activities such as Sea Base, Northern Tier and Philmont and other smaller activities that have a minimum age requirement. This is yet another reason why we develop, plan and execute our own programs of high adventure. We can set the standards. For example, if one does not have first aid, swimming, canoeing, and a partial on camping they are not qualified for BWCA, regardless of age or rank.

 

Canoeing merit badge is worked on while we are on a whitewater canoe outing we take every spring coupled with a couple of weekends of wilderness camping experiences on a lake. Those camps are primitive and canoe accessable only, where no-trace lessons are taught along with canoeing.

 

The boys know that every activity we do regularly during the year is preparing them for the bigger events that are yet to come. Without high adventure, it would be like reading all kinds of library books except for the last chapter.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I doubt anyone here is against going to Scout high adventure camps or planning high adventure activities or having the older boys do special things. My vote (and experience) is for limiting activities that are labor intensive with high costs. Watching a budget, being thrifty, and using your resources to have an outstanding program has been demonstrated as a way to attract and keep Scouts, both younger and older.

 

For example, one unit nearby vied successfully for years in getting and keeping Scouts until we came along with a somewhat different program. Their program was based solely on backpacking. They did individual cooking and emphasized all things backpacking. They limited percentages and ranges of travel, as we did, but accessed many great places to hike. They had both younger and older Scouts. They had several adults help with their program and they grew their own adult leadership over the years using their own traditions.

 

Another unit in town was also successful in getting and keeping Scouts. They had their own building with individual Patrol rooms built by their CO and they had their own bus, all maintained by the CO. They had trophy cases where they proudly displayed their rich heritage. They had the money to be able to plan and execute any program they desired. As far as program was concerned, they were limited by the adult leaders time off from work. They did little hiking since everything was generally loaded on their bus and they drove to the camping spot(s).

 

Each unit was successful in recruiting and keeping Scouts. My own feeling regarding program is that the best programs allow the Scouts more room to plan and lead but also has strong adult backing and regulates the percentages and ranges of travel. fb