Am I Over Reacting?

[DiscGo]

Our scout troop was supposed to go to Havasupai next week, but we were told that we needed to find something else to do because of budgetary problems. I server in scouting with 4 awesome guys but none of whom are really avid outdoors-men. One of their brothers has offered to come down and teach the boys how to repel in Zion and take them down a 70 foot cliff.

So the current plan is to hike up to the Subway and back in a day (no canyoneering). Then another day hike up about as far as they can up the Narrows.
Repel another day, and then bike down Brian Head another.

To me it seems like a horrible idea to train 20 boys between the ages of 14 and 18 on site in the canyon how to repel (no previous experience) due to the amount of distractions, and lack of skilled leadership.

I also am unsure of hiking up on the Narrows and the Subway.

What do you guys think? Am I over worrying or is this another prime example of scouts not being careful enough?

[DiscGo]

For the record, my first option on the poll about mormon boy scouts being invincible was just a joke. An interesting side note is that 25% of all scouts are Mormons but 50% of all scouting deaths are Mormon (because Mormons are at least statistically less careful).


P.S. Kev- I know you dislike scouts, so sorry if my post offends. I would be interested in your opinion though.

[theking648]

Only thing I can say is good luck trying to bike brian head. its not snow patches, its SNOW. and tons of it. cedar breaks just opened last wednesday.

you have a better chance skiing than biking




Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

[denaliguide]

provided your guys brother is an experienced climber/guide/instructor type, i see no problem with learning on site, on a 70' cliff. what would be better? i can't think of better venue to teach rappelling than outdoors on a cliff (provided it's not overhanging). the cliff is kind of a neccessity in my opinion.

as far as distractions, what would they be? i doubt that loud music or girls will be much of a distraction. it shouldn't be that hard to keep the kids focused on the task at hand. i mean really, a 70' cliff is not that big. i would assume that every one of the boys would be belayed while on rappel, and that adults would be on top and on the bottom of the cliff to supervise. so bombproof your anchors and go for it.

i worked for the outward bound program in the early 80's and we taught rappelling on a suitable cliff in the middle of the wilderness. miles from help.

i don't think i would get too worked up and worried about it. just be vigilant and don't allow any horseplay. or, instead stay home, and they could work on their video gaming merit badges.

[Scott P]

1. Taking a group of 20 scouts into the Subway would be highly illegal unless you split up the group into smaller groups and stayed at least a mile apart.

2. Unless you already have your permit, your chances of getting one for all of you are slim. Only 20 walk in permits are given, so you would have to take every single spot (which even if you did [extremely unlikely], wouldn't be fair to everyone else)

3. There is a 40% chance of thunderstorms this weekend. I've already canceled my planned canyoneering trip.

4. The Virgin River is running high and the Narrows have been closed. Hiking from the bottom is still permitted though, but you would be a fool to go very far.

5. Brian Head is usually snowy in this time of year. You can still go there, but be prepared.

I guess that's it for now. Personally, I would plan something else.



50% of all scouting deaths are Mormon (because Mormons are at least statistically less careful).


I don't think they are less careful. I think it stems from the fact that in the LDS Church, that a scout leader is a calling and the people chosen may or may not have outdoor experience. For example, in my parent's ward, the scout leader chosen had never even been on a hike before. My dad took them to Lake Blanch, but the leader acted like he would die and refuses to go on any more hikes. Needless to say, none of those scouts will ever get their hiking merit badge.

[DiscGo]

Thanks guys.

[DiscGo]

Do any of you guys have any suggestions?

[asdf]

Chuck-e-cheese is nice this time of year :lol8:

What about Capitol Reef and/or Escalante?
Sulphur Creek is one of the best hikes in Utah ... I bet you could drive from Torrey to Calf Creek in a little over an hour.

[mtthwlw]

Do any of you guys have any suggestions?

Oh no. Diatribe ahead. Believe me, nothing that I am about to say is meant to insult. I've been in your shoes in the past and I wouldn't want to go back to that.

I'm a Scouter as well... and I've got some suggestions, but they won't help for next week.

#1-- Get Trained.
You live in Provo so you have the same problem as me: the National Parks Boy Scout Council provides very little training for climbing or canyoneering. The Great Salt Lake Council does. They have great climbing leadership and offer great classes. With a little hook-up, I've been able to attend two multi-day canyoneering workshops and a three-day climbing instructor class. (I'm also giving back by helping lead a few groups of Salt Lake Council boys through Canyons this summer.) Our council does require the classes and certification, but they don't do the training in-house, so have all your leaders go to Clas Ropes or whoever else does BSA training four our council and GET TRAINED-- and then, after you have been trained take the boys out with plenty of qualified supervision. (1 trained leader per 6 boys.)

#2 Follow the Guidelines:
If someone is saying that you should go to Zion and do canyoneering without a qualified BSA Climbing Instructor or a professional guide, they are saying that it is ok to take unnecessary risks and risk injury or death. I'm not saying that someone who hasn't gone through the BSA's 3-day class is unable to lead a group safely, but I am saying that it is against the rules and if someone does get hurt (or worse) YOU as the group leader will have to justify everything that you did or didn't do to prevent the accident. I wouldn't do it.

#3-- Check out the BSA Canyoneers discussion board at Yahoo (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bsacanyoneers/). There isn't a lot of activity there, but if you join and post questions about safe BSA canyoneering practices and locations, you'll get a lot of help.

I suggest that you don't do anything that you're uncomfortable with or you don't have the training to do. I've heard that statistic before about 50% of the deaths... and I don't know if it's a true stat or not. It seems about right. Most of our leaders (meaning Mormon Scouters) are in the position as Scoutmaster for a year or two and then gone... not enough time to get fully trained-- and they often have a lot of other responsibilities and few trained assistant scoutmasters to help share the load. Take the initiative and get the required training.

If you're doing something without the proper permits or training to save money... you're risking a whole lot more than the trip to Havasupai would be. If the plans change a week before the event and are still in the air at this point I would plan a flyfishing trip or a hiking trip (without ropes) or anything else.

Best of luck to you. I don't envy you this situation. PM me with your phone # and I'll give you a call. Maybe I can help with something. I'm not available next week, but if things got postponed...

[DiscGo]

mtthwlw- Thanks a lot.

I am by far the most outdoorsy of my troop, and I can't go with them. I have been telling them that I think this is wreck-less of them but they keep pushing ahead because they "want the boys to be challenged". I also want the boys to be challenged but some of these kids would be challenged by walking to the store :). Anyway, I am being told that I am worrying over nothing on this but it doesn't feel like it. So I thought I'd turn to you guys and see what you thought. I didn't know that it was against BSA rules to go Canyoneering without being BSA certified and I will try and work that angle.

[Cirrus2000]

Provided the weather forecast was good and all:

I mostly agree with Les. A cliff is as good as anyplace else to learn rappelling. (Not repelling, though - that's a whole different activity, and something at which teenage boys - particularly teenage Mormon boys - excel. Hey, hey, easy - I'm kidding!)

The only reservation that I have is the instructor to student ratio - one guy who knows what he is doing, to 20 kids. Tough to get quality instruction time, or provide adequate supervision. The instructor can only work with one or two kids at a time, leading to a whole lot of boredom on the part of the others.

Just to clear something up: I don't "dislike scouts" - I just don't like that fact that one must be religious to take part. For a group that espouses teamwork and that kind of thing, I think it's a really crappy sort of exclusivity. I don't like the way it's become an outreach arm of the LDS for youth, either. The scouting movement itself, I think is fantastic. (I also don't like the implied masculine domination. Girls wouldn't want to do this sort of thing - "the boys" this, "the boys" that. I know, I know, there are groups for girls to join, but it would be nice if the "powers that be" would put as much emphasis on equal opportunities for women. But it seems than in this patriarchal society, the women are mostly there to keep the house clean, their husbands fed, and produce a kid every 14 months.) I don't want to get into a big argument about this stuff, I just don't want to leave Dan's statement hanging out there: "I know you dislike scouts". It's very much a misrepresentation.

[Deathcricket]

4. The Virgin River is running high and the Narrows have been closed. Hiking from the bottom is still permitted though, but you would be a fool to go very far.


Ahh beat me to it. Although I would have said "insanely high", I would not even kayak down that raging torrent. The hike up the paved trail is nice though, think it's like a mile. And yeah Subway with that many people is not feasible. Instead of hiking up narrows I would go up hidden canyon as far as you can get. No permits and its "adventurous" when you start hitting the giant bouldering problems and tree obstacles. Also if you run into any people not in peak shape you can split the group up or just turn around at any point. Or you could do Observation point, that's a nice paved walk with a great view.

I like the rapelling idea. It sounds great and would be very safe. Yankee Doodle?

[ststephen]

Provided the weather forecast was good and all:

I mostly agree with Les. A cliff is as good as anyplace else to learn rappelling. (Not repelling, though - that's a whole different activity, and something at which teenage boys - particularly teenage Mormon boys - excel. Hey, hey, easy - I'm kidding!)

The only reservation that I have is the instructor to student ratio - one guy who knows what he is doing, to 20 kids. Tough to get quality instruction time, or provide adequate supervision. The instructor can only work with one or two kids at a time, leading to a whole lot of boredom on the part of the others.

Just to clear something up: I don't "dislike scouts" - I just don't like that fact that one must be religious to take part. For a group that espouses teamwork and that kind of thing, I think it's a really crappy sort of exclusivity. I don't like the way it's become an outreach arm of the LDS for youth, either. The scouting movement itself, I think is fantastic. (I also don't like the implied masculine domination. Girls wouldn't want to do this sort of thing - "the boys" this, "the boys" that. I know, I know, there are groups for girls to join, but it would be nice if the "powers that be" would put as much emphasis on equal opportunities for women. But it seems than in this patriarchal society, the women are mostly there to keep the house clean, their husbands fed, and produce a kid every 14 months.) I don't want to get into a big argument about this stuff, I just don't want to leave Dan's statement hanging out there: "I know you dislike scouts". It's very much a misrepresentation.

Our troop has little to no religious emphasis.

I also don't think of the all-boy thing so much as being patriarchal as providing opportunities for male-bonding in a non-competitive supportive environment. Things like mentoring the younger boys is wonderful and would be a different dynamic if there were girls present (trying to impress the girls, etc.). It's interesting how young boys will take advice and lessons from older boys much more readily than adults and it's nice to give older boys the chance to lead younger ones.

[Cirrus2000]

Our troop has little to no religious emphasis.

I also don't think of the all-boy thing so much as being patriarchal as providing opportunities for male-bonding in a non-competitive supportive environment. Things like mentoring the younger boys is wonderful and would be a different dynamic if there were girls present (trying to impress the girls, etc.). It's interesting how young boys will take advice and lessons from older boys much more readily than adults and it's nice to give older boys the chance to lead younger ones.

I don't honestly believe that any troops have much religious emphasis. But if a country club refuses admission to Jews, and you don't look Jewish, or have a Jewish name, and you don't tell them you're Jewish, would you still feel right about joining, if you were? Maybe it's stretching the metaphor, but I don't want to be a part of an organization that discriminates based on that sort of thing.

I don't think of the all boys thing as patriarchal at all. Maybe I didn't explain it well. Mormonism is patriarchal, not scouts. The fact that there is no real female counterpart to scouts (in the sense of energy, time, and money commitment) is symptomatic of that bias in society in general, and in Mormonism in particular. The idea of scouts, boys learning in a mentorship situation - that's fantastic.

This really is another topic for another thread, though, and even if it were, I certainly don't want to beat a dead horse. As I said, I just didn't want to leave the earlier comment un-countered.

[Scott Card]

The fact that there is no real female counterpart to scouts (in the sense of energy, time, and money commitment) is symptomatic of that bias in society in general, and in Mormonism in particular. Dang, I am glad my wife (a long time young women's leader) didn't read that. In the LDS Church there is a Young Women's Program that is every bit as active, time consuming and equally funded. It is specifically for young women ages 12-18, just like the scouts. My wife would argue that she spent way more time and effort with her Young Women's groups than I did with my scout groups. Yes, the young women do some things differently and some the same and some joint activities with the young men in the church but the time, money and committment I assure you is equal if not greater in favor of the Young Women. Camping is not equal between the scouts and the young women's program but I find that is because of the leaders mostly not the girls. I know when I have been in meetings and the girls want to go camping or do the "fun" stuff the boys do, the reply is almost universally, "plan it and you can do it".

Also, I know of no Mormon scout troop that excludes kids on the basis of religion. None. Nada. I mean come on, we are Mormons!!! We like to have people of other faiths or no faith with us. Would you like to know more? :mrgreen: :lol8:

[Scott Card]

mtthwlw- Thanks a lot.

I am by far the most outdoorsy of my troop, and I can't go with them. I have been telling them that I think this is wreck-less of them but they keep pushing ahead because they "want the boys to be challenged". I also want the boys to be challenged but some of these kids would be challenged by walking to the store :). Anyway, I am being told that I am worrying over nothing on this but it doesn't feel like it. So I thought I'd turn to you guys and see what you thought. I didn't know that it was against BSA rules to go Canyoneering without being BSA certified and I will try and work that angle. This may sound counter to my recent posts in the canyoneering forum re: the scout certifications but Dan, if you don't feel this is a safe activity and you have the most experience, I would use the lack of certification and every other angle to protect the boys. Just be careful because any certification requirement you espouse, you will have to get. BTW, My ratio of leaders to boys in a canyon setting was 3 or 4 leaders for 8 boys. (12 person permits in Zion). We were top heavy for good reason. Challenging kids is wonderful but killing or hurting them is not. BTW, certification doesn't protect boys per se. Certification is a liability/law suit thing. But in this circumstance that you have described, certification may protect kids, for now. If the leaders get certified and are still reckless, certification will do nothing.

[Brewhaha]

But it seems than in this patriarchal society, the women are mostly there to keep the house clean, their husbands fed, and produce a kid every 14 months.)

C'mon Kev! That's a bunch of crap and you know it! It isn't 14 months it's 10 months.:wink:

[Cirrus2000]

Dang, I am glad my wife (a long time young women's leader) didn't read that. In the LDS Church there is a Young Women's Program that is every bit as active, time consuming and equally funded. It is specifically for young women ages 12-18, just like the scouts. My wife would argue that she spent way more time and effort with her Young Women's groups than I did with my scout groups. Yes, the young women do some things differently and some the same and some joint activities with the young men in the church but the time, money and committment I assure you is equal if not greater in favor of the Young Women. Camping is not equal between the scouts and the young women's program but I find that is because of the leaders mostly not the girls. I know when I have been in meetings and the girls want to go camping or do the "fun" stuff the boys do, the reply is almost universally, "plan it and you can do it".
Interesting to read this stuff. Thanks for sharing that. Lots to think about. There's more to it, of course - this is a self-selecting group, so there's serious sample bias, blah blah blah, but worth considering.

Thank you, Scott.


Also, I know of no Mormon scout troop that excludes kids on the basis of religion. None. Nada. I mean come on, we are Mormons!!! We like to have people of other faiths or no faith with us. Would you like to know more? :mrgreen: :lol8:
:roflol: Hmmm... yes, tell me more! :haha:

The thing is, that I could not, in any honest way, recite the Scout Oath in its entirety. I find it interesting that in Guides, the word "God" may be substituted by "whatever word your spiritual beliefs dictate". (I would consider my higher duty to be to humanity, or something even more inclusive of all life on earth. One could get even more inclusive, and consider that one has a duty to respect any life anywhere, or... so on and so forth.)

So, if I could not do that, I could not be a leader, right? And my kids - I can't condone the hypocrisy that would be involved in reciting that oath just to be in a "club", no matter how laudable the goals.


C'mon Kev! That's a bunch of crap and you know it! It isn't 14 months it's 10 months.:wink:
:lol8:


Oh yeah, back on topic:


This may sound counter to my recent posts in the canyoneering forum re: the scout certifications but Dan, if you don't feel this is a safe activity and you have the most experience, I would use the lack of certification and every other angle to protect the boys. Just be careful because any certification requirement you espouse, you will have to get. BTW, My ratio of leaders to boys in a canyon setting was 3 or 4 leaders for 8 boys. (12 person permits in Zion). We were top heavy for good reason. Challenging kids is wonderful but killing or hurting them is not. BTW, certification doesn't protect boys per se. Certification is a liability/law suit thing. But in this circumstance that you have described, certification may protect kids, for now. If the leaders get certified and are still reckless, certification will do nothing.

:2thumbs: :2thumbs: :2thumbs:

[Scott Card]

What is interesting to me is that plan. It is obvious that no one has any experience in Zion or Brian Head given the current conditions and the come-heck-or-high-water plan. You got high water....Did anyone check flow rates? Call the Park? Call Brian Head for conditions? Learn about permits? Some leader would certainly get busted at the trail head and cited for the group of 20 in the Subway. As for training the boys on a cliff in a canyon (what canyon), that is not that bad per se. They gotta start somewhere so long as the canyon has about, oh say, one rappel in difficulty. The leader ratio as stated above is troubling. What is the knowledge of the one leader who will teach? etc. etc. etc. Lots of questions. One of the greatest attributes of a youth leader is knowing when to say no and when something is over your head. GUTS!

[Spooky]

Climbed Lone Peak once, and the scouts passed me up. Just young teenagers, no supervision, scrambling up the cliffs. I couldn't even believe it. No way would I take a kid up there let alone send one up without an experienced adult.

I'm often incredibly surprised at what I see scouts doing! Take it slow, you know? Learn how to rappel on an indoor wall maybe, until the kids are comfortable with ropes and height. My boys learned at an indoor rock climbing place in SLC.

Sometimes it seems the scout leaders are trying to outdo each other on how "big" their adventures are.

Kev, I agree about the religious association. I tried to get my boys into scouts, but the entire thing was controlled by the church, and we aren't religious. They were ridiculed for not being members. The only other place for them to do scouting was a Lutheran church in Sandy. And why isn't it just "scouting" for girls and boys? I think that's also ridiculous. Girls kick butt! :nod:

[trackrunner]

OK I guess I'll chime in. growing up our troop had members from many different faiths. I liked it. religion was not an issue. even had adult leaders (both assistant and scoutmaster, including female) with beliefs different (some strongly) from the sponsoring church. sad to hear others have made it an issue.

only one time a church leader released a scout master from his "calling" for disobeying his "priesthood council" by taking the scouts to an organized camp in Oregon. scouts and parents followed the scout master to a troop sponsored by a different faith. like I wrote, it only happened once and afterward they were invited back.

sadly I see scout programs in my church turned from scouting to young mens youth activity night. and by activity I mean lets meet at the church and play basketball or go to a worship service.

I really like venturing scout program in the US. is not gender segregated and some venture scout programs do some really cool stuff. Saw one program has a yearly camp in the Virgin Islands.



Ohh and Kev isn't Scouting in Canada a socialist, commie, pinko, secularist, environmental fruit cake, gender equality, free lunch health care style youth organization, similar to Hitler youth but instead of Hitler it's "the great one" Wayne Gretzky. :wink::haha:

^^^^ strong sarcasm about scouting in Canada but it appears to be gender open

Edit: as for the original question is it more frustration no longer Havasupai or lack of qualifications from the instructor to teach rappelling to a larger group of boys. I bet the narrows should be open by next weekend.

[Scott Card]

:roflol: Hmmm... yes, tell me more! :haha: Well OK! Just one more little tidbit... If memory serves me correctly, the Heber Valley Girls Camp here in Utah is the most expensive building project ever undertaken by the LDS Church. Yes, a girls camp. I might add it is beautifully done too. This girls camp is more expenensive than any church owned high rise in SLC, more expensive than any temple around the world or building project on BYU campus including the football stadium. :nod:

[Jaxx]

Are any of the other leaders topping out or climb on safely certified. If not that will kill your rap plans. I'm sure if you brought this up with the bishop then the plans will get squashed. If someone is certified then I don't see a problem finding a 70' cliff to learn on as long as their is competent leadership.

I don't have time to go into detail but I have to say that I love scouts and scouting. I did as a youth and I do as a leader. Non members are welcome to join LDS troops. You just have to put up with a spiritual thought and prayer now and then. If you don't want to join one then start your own troop! Girls can be venture scouts.

[Scott P]

Do any of you guys have any suggestions?

If you were going as far as Zion, Escalante would be about the same distance from SLC.

I would highly recommend the Fortymile/Willow Creek Loop (as soon as it stops raining). It is one of the best non-technical routes out there (I'd go as far as to say it's one of the best non-technical routes in the world), but is still fairly challenging and has some nice obstacles.

I haven't finished the full trip report, but you can get a teaser by looking at my log below:

http://www.summitpost.org/custom-object/590857/2010-trip-log.html

See May 28-29.

No permits needed (nor high rivers) and if you did want to find places to rappel, there are plenty.

[greyhair biker]

having spent decades in the BSA - under LDS rule - :haha: I think this trip is a death waiting to happen anywhere NEAR a rainy season. Don't these adult leaders follow HISTORY?! Stay out of the friggin canyons(sorry) if you want the boys to come home alive. Wait until its blazing hot and no chance whatsoever of rain for a hundred miles. AND, there needs to be AT LEAST two certified climbers with every TEN boys in my opinion...the permit situation should eliminate this hike. This needs to be strictly a high adventure program - read: OLDER SCOUTS - Please forgive me if I have offended anyone and really, I dont have the hiking/canyon experience necessary for this but I DO have the years of BSA leadership experience for this and the BSA council involved needs to be 'helpful' with this activity. OK - coming off my high horse now:nod: