Canyon Graffiti in Birch Hollow June 22, 2010

[scubabryan]

Took my group of scouts down Birch Hollow yesterday for part of our summer camp. Came up to the last rappel in the canyon and saw that a rope was stuck. They had forgotten to take out the overhand knot they had in the end of the rope before trying to retrieve the rope. The guy below heard me and asked if I would drop his rope down. He had taken a group of scouts through 4 hours earlier. When the rope got stuck, they decided to leave it and hike out. He saw my truck parked down in Orderville so he took the scouts back to their camp and he came back to wait at the bottom of the last rappel for someone to drop it down. I dropped it down and he was on his way. I had 7 boys with me so he was long gone before I got to the bottom of the last rappel. When I got to the bottom of the last rappel in Birch, I noticed that this Scout Master had carved "Do not take ropes" into the canyon walls, in three places with very large lettering and VERY DEEP! What he carved into the walls will be there for a long time to come. What a great example this guy set for his scouts that day. It amazes me. If any of you were in the group or hear from someone you know that mentions they were in a group that got their ropes stuck in Birch Hollow on June 22, 2010, might be a good ideal to have a little talk with them. I wish I would have caught this guys name!

[Deathcricket]

I don't see what the problem is, in 500 years they will wash off.
:angryfire:

In front of scouts too, lol. Crazy story dude.

[stefan]

absolutely appalling :angryfire:

i assume these were fresh markings? and to think that one's rope is more important than keeping the canyon walls unspoiled. :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

[trackrunner]

there may be a chance I swing by orderville this weekend. what is it that takes some of this stuff out, wire brush? I may try to help clean this up

[mtthwlw]

Took my group of scouts down Birth Hollow yesterday...He had taken a group of scouts through 4 hours earlier. ...Scout Master had carved "Do not take ropes" into the canyon walls, in three places with very large lettering and VERY DEEP! What he carved into the walls will be there for a long time to come. What a great example this guy set for his scouts that day....

Did he say where he was from?

I'm appalled. Did he say that he was a Scouter? I can't imagine any Scout I know doing that... But I know that it does happen. Sorry non-scouters. As a leader I'm doing my best to help train others in my area not to be idiots. But there is only so much a person can do.


there may be a chance I swing by orderville this weekend. what is it that takes some of this stuff out, wire brush? I may try to help clean this up

:hail2thechief:Kudos, Trackrunner. I'm taking a group of Scouts through in July. If you can't do it, let me know... I'd like to get it cleaned up before then.

[canyoncaver]

Too bad there is not a permit so the perpetrator could be tracked down and held accountable....

Oh wait, I forgot, we don't like canyon permits. Sorry. :haha:

[oldno7]

Really too bad, because the Kanab field office in charge of Birch Hollow has been very accommodating to canyoneers.
This scout group needs to be held accountable.

[moab mark]

Bryan,

Need to put an editorial in both the Salt Lake papers stating...looking for the scout troop that......... may help find who did it? Or may just bring unwanted attention to our sport?

Mark

[Jaun_Jablome]

34857

[hank moon]

Oldno7

I agree....and wondering if a letter to local BSA offices might shed some light? Surely there are records of who led what and where?

[trackrunner]

do we know if it was an official scout outing or a youth group. locally it's common to call a youth group trip of scout age kids who happen to be boy scouts a scout trip even though it did not go through the official scouting channels. even if it was a scout trip some leaders do not know of a need to file a scouting tour permit.

this reminds me of that scout troop that carved out dinosaur tracks and tossed them into a reservoir. they got caught. but instead of stupid kids this time it was a stupid adult that should teach & lead by example for the kids.
http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jul/28/news/mn-27533

[trackrunner]

Bryan did you see this guys vehicle when you parked? any other information about him.

[oldno7]

We were hiking up to Telephone awhile back and heard rocks crashing off the walls and kids screaming around campsite #1.
We hollered that we were down there and they quit rolling rocks and they kept screaming at us. We heard them the rest of the way until we topped out. When we got to the top, a "scout leader" was standing there with his group. We asked who was rolling rocks(about the size of a microwave)
He claimed he didn't know but a couple of his boys were still back by the campsite. They walked up and after 5 minutes of telling them that rolling rocks off cliffs in Zion was a bad idea, one of the boys standing next to the "leader" said it was him. "Scout leader" said he hadn't heard anything going on. You could of heard these kids from scout lookout.
These guys were from California. I know there are some great scout leaders, some on here. But, I'm starting to think they are a minority in scouts.

[scubabryan]

Sorry for the delay, just got wifi access. I had to pull the rope up because I couldn't get their knot out to just drop it. As I was pulling it up I asked the guy if he had been waiting there long and he said "No, once we realized it wasn't going to release, I took my boy scout troop back to their camp and then came back to wait for someone to drop it." I have to assume that since they were doing this in the middle of the week, it was their summer camp. We had to file trip reports for our trip but did not have to be specific in which canyon we were doing so I don't know if that group would have filed that info. Birch was busy that day. When I dropped my truck down in Orderville, I counting the number of cars parked down there because I had never seen so many vehicles. There were 8 cars spotted down in Orderville yesterday. The only two that caught my attention were two army green type trucks. Plates on all the cars were from Nevada, Utah and California. We got to the trail head at 1 pm and there were 12 cars parked there...busy day out there! Lauren Hansen (the guy Das Boot was named after) was in the canyon that morning with a large group. Him and I had been communicating back and forth over the last few months to coordinate our start times since be both planned on taking our groups through Birch on the same day so when I get in town, I will be giving him a call this weekend when I get back into town to see if he happens to know who the Scout Master of the group after them was. When I pulled up the rope, I specifically asked the guy if he was in the Lauren Hansen group and he said no. I ran into another guy later that day who was in Laurens group and he said they were out of the canyon around noon so the scout master would have been the group after his. Hopefully I can get more info. It is a shame that this would happen, especially in front of boys at such an impressionable stage in their life. However, it did give me a teaching opportunity with my own scouts.

[hank moon]

Update: Two friends went through today and erased it. Sorry, no photos. Anyone going through soon?

[hank moon]

scubabryan

thank you for following up on this. :nod:

[Sombeech]

Just curious, was it ever confirmed that it was the adult who carved into the rock? This sounds exactly like something kids would do, maybe while the adult wasn't supervising.

[piranna]

My name is Jeff Dredge. I have been a member of this group for several years now. I don't say much on this forum, but have been fortunate to have been through several canyons with many of you. I am one of those "dreaded" LDS Boy Scout leaders. Over the last 10 years I have taken hundreds of kids out canyoneering in Zion, Moab, Escalante, the Swell, and the Roost. To my knowledge the biggest damage we can rightfully be accused of is the loss of a few lizard tails and the displacement of a few frogs. During that time I have worked with several in the BSA community to raise the level of training and experience of those leaders taking boys in Canyons.

Please let me remind all of those of you who have taken such a nasty aggressive stance towards the BSA, its Leaders, and the related sponsoring organizations, that all of those men involved in this process freely give of their time, talent, and resources to help teach, train, and build up young men. Many of these same men also take significant time to take young women out and provide them with the same opportunities as the boys. Canyoneering provides a tremendous enviroment to teach the youth a respect for the outdoors, to help and lift others, and to overcome both physical and mental challenges. As you cast aspersions on the BSA, its Leaders, and the sponsoring organizations maybe you should consider that they are all at least trying to teach these concepts to the youth. What other organization reaches out to so many kids and tries to teach concepts such as "Leave no Trace", Be Prepared, and Do a Good Turn Daily?

Perhaps the operative word here is TRY. There is a learning curve for both the boys and the adults and there are times when the system fails. A poorly trained adult, or an unruly or thoughtless kid can and will make mistakes and errors in judgment. For that there should be additional teaching and training as well as penalties paid depending on the severity of the problem. However, I have spent the better part of 20 years working with youth and adults in this organization. To simply blast the organizations and people involved in general is a shame and only lowers my opinion of the group. The vast majority of those involved with the youth a great men who take considerable time out of their own lives to attempt to build others. How many of you out there throwing the biggest stones can say that of yourselves? Those of you who disparage the sponsoring organization out to perhaps consider that despite differences in religious or spiritual beliefs respect should be given to any organization who seeks to provide opportunities such as those found in Scouting to so many kids.

[SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]I feel much as most of you regarding the damage to the canyon. It is a travesty and I want whoever did it needs to be found and help responsible for those actions. However, comments made by many in this group have gone way beyond damage to the walls in Birch Hollow and into areas where personal biases towards the LDS faith and the BSA seem to be the overriding theme. I find it interesting to compare the group response to this situation versus the recent responses to the posts regarding the two individuals who spent the night Sandthrax due to extremely poor planning and judgment. I can only imagine the response from the group if it was a Scout group who were stranded after making such poor decisions. I

[hank moon]

Jeff Dredge,

:clap::clap::clap:

Great post that highlights the human side of this issue - thanks.

[restrac2000]

First of off, kudos to all those involved in posting this issue on the internet which seems to have led to a solution. Impressive response time and investment in solving a problem.

To Dredge: In the past, I have seen some flippant, disparaging, gross generalizations about the BSA, its leaders, and the role the LDS faith plays in the organization. That said, in this post on Bogley, I have seen a rather even tempered assessment of the situation. When there was a negative remark about scouting, it involved specific instances, which only seems fair game to me. Over the years the BSA has been involved in some high profile incidents in the Southwest which affect its reputation. I am glad to hear that the organization and its leaders are trying to address the grievances; I have seen leaders who go out of there way to educate their scouts about LNT, technical skills and general stewardship. All such people are to be applauded.

In this situation, the scout leader, if he is one, has done more to harm the organization's reputation than any internet forum could. Satisfies the cliche about one bad apple. The rock you cast this time seems disproportionate to this specific thread.

[Iceaxe]

Thanks Jeff :2thumbs:

I had an awesome scoutmaster when I was a kid. I learned a lot of cool stuff like rock climbing, backpacking, whitewater rafting, kayaking, yada,yada.... I owe that man a lot and I still think of him whenever I'm in the outdoors using a skill he taught me.

[Cirrus2000]

Jeff, I can't help but think that some of your post was directed at me, since I have been vocal elsewhere on the forum (nothing to do with the issue posted in this thread) about my disagreement with the BSA and their "sponsoring groups". There has been a lot of discussion on this issue in other threads.

I think, however, that you are conflating the discussions elsewhere with the topic in this thread.

For one thing, scroll back through this thread, and carefully read everyone's responses. I don't notice a lot of people "throwing such big rocks". Some people are very upset - even irate - about the actions referenced here. Someone mentioned that he is wondering whether "great leaders" are a minority in scouts. Is this really what prompted your post?

[QUOTE]However, comments made by many in this group have gone way beyond damage to the walls in Birch Hollow and into areas where personal biases towards the LDS faith and the BSA seem to be the overriding theme. I find it interesting to compare the group response to this situation versus the recent responses to the posts regarding the two individuals who spent the night Sandthrax due to extremely poor planning and judgment. I can only imagine the response from the group if it was a Scout group who were stranded after making such poor decisions. I

[xxnitsuaxx]

I'm with Kev. Your argument may have its merits, but not here and not now.

[Cirrus2000]

I started this morning with Bogley, and have since been to Yahoo and ACA. I see that Jeff's post was over on Yahoo, too, and also quoted on the ACA forum. So apparently, the post was not merely a reply to this particular thread. This kind of makes more sense, in that it's a reply to more than what is simply stated here.

It's an interesting conversation all around, and tough to synthesize all of the comments around the internet into a coherent discussion.

[restrac2000]

I saw the same thing in hindsight. Though I thought the Yahoo forum wasn't over the top either, these sort of threads can carry a cumulative affect from previous comments. Dredge had a spirited post, which is understandable when constantly being judged by the choices of others; don't envy the uphill battle that the good scout leaders sometimes have.

[Scott Card]

Jeff, I couldn't have said it better. :hail2thechief: Thanks for poking your head in here.

[ratagonia]

I started this morning with Bogley, and have since been to Yahoo and ACA. I see that Jeff's post was over on Yahoo, too, and also quoted on the ACA forum. So apparently, the post was not merely a reply to this particular thread. This kind of makes more sense, in that it's a reply to more than what is simply stated here.

It's an interesting conversation all around, and tough to synthesize all of the comments around the internet into a coherent discussion.

Modern 2010 version of a "thread on a forum", includes "all other threads on the same topic on other forums". Get with the plan, Stan!

:moses:

[Jaxx]

Well, since my family and I are not allowed inside (unless we make false professions of faith) I guess I just have to do what I can outside your group.

I am a little confused but I think I see where you are coming from. Are you referring to "allowed inside" as in, inside the scout troop, or in the church? I think troop so I will reply off that.
Any boy is welcome to join an LDS sponsored troop. I have 2 boys who do not belong to the LDS faith. We are happy to have them along on trips. We still say prayers and do religious stuff but we don't make them say prayers or do anything they don't feel comfortable doing. We try our hardest not to let them feel left out and pay special attention to their needs. We would never tell anyone that they weren't welcome to come back just because of their religious beliefs.


I suppose I could try to re-invent the wheel by creating a Scouts-like group that doesn't exclude people based on their lack of religious beliefs, or their sexuality, but you know, I honestly don't think I'm up to that.

Religion has never stopped anyone from being a part of our troop. Because our troop is sponsored by the LDS faith we have rules that run along our beliefs. Having a gay leader creates other complications in the troop. It would be similar to having a woman involved in the troop. Could be problems. Why create that dynamic or worry? Other than the gay rule the BSA will let anyone sponsor a troop. You do not have to be religious in any way. A city, person, or store could sponsor a troop. Not alot of people are willing to put the time and money into scouting that it requires. That is probably why you don't find more troops that aren't backed by a church whether it was LDS or other church.

People in groups can cause trouble. Scouts are no different. I have seen or been (as a boy) some of that trouble with scouts. Now as a leader I keep tabs on my boys and explain some of the rules before we do an outing. We teach leave no trace ethics in scouts.
Sometimes they do stuff you would think they would know not to do because of common sense. On our last trip this past weekend to raft the green river a boy was shooting rocks with his slingshot at a rabbit. What parent lets their 12 year old bring a slingshot on a campout? I had to pull him aside and explain that if he had killed the animal then I would have made him dress and eat it. I taught the boys that there is no point in killing a creature just for the fun of it. I also talked to the rest of the boys about standing up and being the person that says "Hey don't do that, it's wrong" when someone is doing something you know they shouldn't, even if it is against the flow of the group. I never would have thought that I would need to explain this to the boys but it happened.
We teach the boys alot of important stuff that they will use as adults and responsible dads. Lessons that they might not get anywhere else. Scouts was a vital part of how I grew up and learned to love the outdoors. I voluntold because I want to pass that on to other young men. Some of the boys come in not knowing how to cook pancakes and leave being able to buy, cook, and serve a full meal. It is great to see the progression in a young man.

Now my reply to the thread. It sounds like the leader of the group was the one to mark up the wall. There is no excuse for that. To use a famous saying from a great guy on this board "Harbor freight mother f..."

[ratagonia]

Any boy is welcome to join an LDS sponsored troop.

This is a poor forum for discussing this issue, so let's not get into it too much. NO, the Boy Scouts of America excludes certain boys. Boys who are gay, or who are uncertain whether they are gay or not; and boys who decline to profess a belief in a supreme being. Yes, BSA takes many, many religious beliefs, but they do not take them all. They don't take me. Thankfully, when I was a boy scout, they took atheists, so I was allowed and Boy Scouts was an important part of my upbringing.

Tom :moses:

[rcwild]

This is a poor forum for discussing this issue, so let's not get into it too much. NO, the Boy Scouts of America excludes certain boys. Boys who are gay, or who are uncertain whether they are gay or not; and boys who decline to profess a belief in a supreme being. Yes, BSA takes many, many religious beliefs, but they do not take them all. They don't take me. Thankfully, when I was a boy scout, they took atheists, so I was allowed and Boy Scouts was an important part of my upbringing.

It's called the right of free association. If BSA wants to promote it's own idea of appropriate values, they have the right. Someone else has a right to form the GASA -- Gay Atheist Scouts of America. In the free market of ideas, each can attract its own members. If more people are attracted to the BSA than the GASA, so be it. If more are attracted to the GASA than the BSA, that's okay, too. It's all good. Welcome to America. Land of the free.

[ratagonia]

It's called the right of free association. If BSA wants to promote it's own idea of appropriate values, they have the right. Someone else has a right to form the GASA -- Gay Atheist Scouts of America. In the free market of ideas, each can attract its own members. If more people are attracted to the BSA than the GASA, so be it. If more are attracted to the GASA than the BSA, that's okay, too. It's all good. Welcome to America. Land of the free.

I'm not saying they should, or have to. I'm saying they don't, and claims that they do are not accurate. I believe it is SAD that they exclude certain boys and leaders from their program. They MOSTLY have very good values, but intolerance for Gays and Atheists is not, IMNEHO, a good thing to teach young kids.

In my scouting years, it was acceptable to be an Atheist and be a Boy Scout. It is not now.

Tom :moses:

[rcwild]

They MOSTLY have very good values, but intolerance for Gays and Atheists is not, IMNEHO, a good thing to teach young kids.

Your opinion will carry more weight when you get involved with the GASA. :naughty:

Love the sinner. Hate the sin.


In my scouting years, it was acceptable to be an Atheist and be a Boy Scout. It is not now.

My scout troop was sponsored by the Methodist Church. I was allowed to participate, even though I attended the Evangelical Free Church. Now THAT'S tolerance. :haha:

[Sombeech]

In this situation, the scout leader, if he is one, has done more to harm the organization's reputation than any internet forum could. Satisfies the cliche about one bad apple.

Sorry, I've got to ask again, has anybody confirmed that this was an adult that carved into the rock? Because again, this is something right in line with what young boys would do in the absence of their leader. Just curious.

[rcwild]

Sorry, I've got to ask again, has anybody confirmed that this was an adult that carved into the rock? Because again, this is something right in line with what young boys would do in the absence of their leader. Just curious.

It was an adult. One of the dad's that came along on the trip. Not a Scout leader.

[Jaxx]

This is a poor forum for discussing this issue, so let's not get into it too much. NO, the Boy Scouts of America excludes certain boys. Boys who are gay, or who are uncertain whether they are gay or not; and boys who decline to profess a belief in a supreme being. Yes, BSA takes many, many religious beliefs, but they do not take them all. They don't take me. Thankfully, when I was a boy scout, they took atheists, so I was allowed and Boy Scouts was an important part of my upbringing.

Tom :moses:

My bad. Thanks for pointing that out.

The 2 boys we have aren't religious at all. I guess they could be athiest. We haven't had a problem registering or awarding them merit badges and ranks. I'm not going to be bringing it up now that I know. It's our secret.

[Cirrus2000]

My bad. Thanks for pointing that out.

The 2 boys we have aren't religious at all. I guess they could be athiest. We haven't had a problem registering or awarding them merit badges and ranks. I'm not going to be bringing it up now that I know. It's our secret.
:haha:

Shhhh!

[accadacca]

My bad. Thanks for pointing that out.

The 2 boys we have aren't religious at all. I guess they could be athiest. We haven't had a problem registering or awarding them merit badges and ranks. I'm not going to be bringing it up now that I know. It's our secret.


:haha:

Shhhh!
:roflol:

[sarahlizzy]

Having a gay leader creates other complications in the troop. It would be similar to having a woman involved in the troop."

Gosh, I'm sure we wouldn't want *that* :nono:

P.S. I'm sure we have female scout leaders here in the UK, and it doesn't seem to create "other complications"

P.P.S. Unless I'm mistaken about what "other complications" might be hinting at, would it be OK if the woman in question was gay? Just asking.

P.P.P.S. In the UK, scout groups must also accept girls as members. Clearly this is *extremely* complicated.

P.P.P.P.S. Sorry for dragging this further off topic - I was gratified not to see any graffiti in Birch Hollow on Saturday when I descended it, so a good cleaning job was done. Still, the original act of vandalism seems to demonstrate shockingly low levels of environmental respect, as well as being entirely pointless (people who are wont to steal things are generally unlikely to be dissuaded by notes, carved in stone or otherwise, asking them not to).

P.P.P.P.P.S. Math is hard and I broke a nail in Behunin. My life is over. *woe* :cry1:

[Don]

Kev, I enjoyed your analogy about the country club excluding Jews. Made a lot of sense. Almost made me feel bad about having E in cub scouts right now since I am supporting the club that would deny my admission.
This main point should be attributed to Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion; labeling children with the belief systems of their parents is illogical because a developing child is going to grow up and make their own life choices that may or may not include the religion of their parents. How can you call a child a 'mormon child' or a 'catholic child' or an 'atheist child'. There's no telling how that child will decide to believe as an adult.
Case in point; I was raised mormon, went to church every week, served an honorable mission and only years later did I begin to think critically about the religion of my parents, as a child I'm sure I would have called myself a mormon but that would not have been the decision of this adult. On the other hand if you were to call my 8 year old son an 'atheist child' I would view that as offensive because it is bigoted against his right to choose his own path.
Actually, this is why I don't mind sending E to cub scouts; he may or may not believe in god later but it should not matter now. Right now he is a kid honestly enjoying scouts. I would not lie about my beliefs (or lack thereof) to participate in the organization but E doesn't have to lie because to him the world is still all possibilities.
Maybe this point is less applicable to older kids, teenagers who have actually made up their minds about religion but I would argue that many teens have not had the life experience to self-label.

P.S. sarah, you should definitely post more; hilarious + good point(s) = great post!

[Scott Card]

I broke a nail in Behunin. My life is over. *woe* :cry1: This is one of the many *complications* we speak of here, across the pond. I am not equipped to deal with such complications. :haha:

[Cirrus2000]

Math is hard

Oh dear - a girl talking. How about science? Maybe Home Economics would be a better path... :lol8:

Funny stuff, playing off of stereotypes. Yeah sarahlizzy, don't just come play when you have trips in the offing - hang out with us all the time, here in the cool kids club!

[sarahlizzy]

OK! :2thumbs:

Now I just have to deal with my work backlog, and my taxes, and get rid of this annoying jetlag, and then I should have some trip photos to post :)

[Jaxx]

Gosh, I'm sure we wouldn't want *that* :nono:

P.S. I'm sure we have female scout leaders here in the UK, and it doesn't seem to create "other complications"

P.P.S. Unless I'm mistaken about what "other complications" might be hinting at, would it be OK if the woman in question was gay? Just asking.

P.P.P.P.P.S. Math is hard and I broke a nail in Behunin. My life is over. *woe* :cry1:

The complications would be that girls can't do things as well as boys. Girls are weak and shouldn't be in the outdoors. They are the lesser sex and should stay at home with the kids where they belong!

Just kidding. I think women can be awesome leaders. I hope that isn't what you thought I meant.
The complication would mostly be from sleeping arrangements but other stuff could come up. If you have girls in a troop aged 12-14 then there would need to be a woman leader to deal with girl stuff. I never want to be the person to explain to a girl what is happening to her body when she has her first period...AWKWARD! The boys would not be able to concentrate on anything and they would be showing off to the extreme if a woman or girl were present. Girls are allowed in the older troops. Not in LDS sponsored troops because the young women do their own "scouts"
If you have a woman leader then that leaves the door open for inappropriate behavior between other male leaders or scouts. Not because women are at fault but stuff happens. I know my wife doesn't want me camping with another woman once a month and a week during summer long term camp. It just creates a different set of issues that make one more thing to deal with.
On the same note if you have a gay leader or scout you have to deal with that like you would a woman. He would have to have his own sleeping arrangements, which leaders do already, but you would also have to make sure there is always another leader with that leader. I wouldn't worry as much about him coming on to a scout but more if there was an accusation against that gay leader and no one else to back him up. If it was his word against a scout he would be toast. Why put someone in that position?

I believe woman are, in many cases, the stronger sex. My wife is the most amazing person I know and I would never belittle or disrespect her or another woman. Please don't think I am some redneck heman woman hater club member.

[hank moon]

Jaxx

These "complications" are self-created and self-perpetuating by the divisions inherent in the culture. If these divisions were properly erased, a different culture would emerge in which these complications would mostly disappear.

What are some of the long-term benefits (to you, to others, etc.) of perpetuating these divisions? One short term benefit is obvious: self-protection from the complications of transition to a different cultural/relational experience (i.e. remaining in one's comfort zone).

[Scott Card]

"Divisions", "Complications" or differences exist. Erasing them is not the answer. The issue is how do we judge and how do we respond.

There. I have nibbled at the bait and now I will swim away. :haha:

And my oh my are we far away from the original topic...... as usual.

[rcwild]

These "complications" are self-created and self-perpetuating by the divisions inherent in the culture. If these divisions were properly erased, a different culture would emerge in which these complications would mostly disappear.

Canyoneering. Lots of "experts" trying various social experiments over the past 3-4 decades. Canyoneering. Has our society improved as a result? Canyoneering. If you believe yes, by what measure? Canyoneering. Crime rates? Drug use? Alcoholism? Canyoneering. Suicide rates? Self-esteem? Self-reliance? Canyoneering.

[hank moon]

Social experiments are useless and only create more problems. These "complications" will only disappear on a societal/cultural level when divisions are removed on a personal level. Not to pick on Jaxx, but just for example:


I never want to be the person to explain to a girl what is happening to her body when she has her first period...AWKWARD!Sure, but why is that? Obviously this is a "learned" awkwardness (aka conditioning), inherited from parents and peers. This awkwardness would probably be shared by the girl for the same reason. Is this situation necessary or beneficial?

Canyoneering. Birch. Fruit bat.

[rcwild]

Canyoneering. Birch. Fruit bat.

Fruit bats have nothing to do with canyoneering, Hank. Get back on topic.

[hank moon]

Fruit bats have nothing to do with canyoneering, Hank. Get back on topic.

Huh. Obviously you've never canyon'd in Oz!

[Scott Card]

Canyoneering. Lots of "experts" trying various social experiments over the past 3-4 decades. Canyoneering. Has our society improved as a result? Canyoneering. If you believe yes, by what measure? Canyoneering. Crime rates? Drug use? Alcoholism? Canyoneering. Suicide rates? Self-esteem? Self-reliance? Canyoneering. :roflol::2thumbs:

[rcwild]

Huh. Obviously you've never canyon'd in Oz!

Land down under Oz. Yes. Yellow brick road emerald city Oz. No.

[Randi]

Land down under Oz. Yes. Yellow brick road emerald city Oz. No.

I don't think Hank was talking bout Yellow Brick Road Emerald City Oz...
Otherwise he would've said:

Canyoneering. Birch. Flying Monkey. :mrgreen:

[rcwild]

Don't be so sure, Randi. Look closely at the singer on the left. That's definitely Hank.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_CAs3q7G48

[bigred72]

That's what she said...

[trackrunner]

What he said...........


It was an adult. One of the dad's that came along on the trip. Not a Scout leader.

What he said^^^^^^^^^

[bigred72]

Just curious, was it ever confirmed that it was the adult who carved into the rock? This sounds exactly like something kids would do, maybe while the adult wasn't supervising.

What he said...

[trackrunner]

It was an adult. One of the dad's that came along on the trip. Not a Scout leader.

what he said^^^^

confirmed in the ACA canyon forum. someone was able to track down the party and they admitted to it. confirmed it was an adult father not a scout or scout leader.

[accadacca]

The Internet sleuths strike again... :haha:

[Sombeech]

what he said^^^^

confirmed in the ACA canyon forum. someone was able to track down the party and they admitted to it. confirmed it was an adult father not a scout or scout leader.

35100

[Randi]

Don't be so sure, Randi. Look closely at the singer on the left. That's definitely Hank.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_CAs3q7G48

Yeah ~ That does look like Hank! And the middle one looks like YOU! And holy mackerel - the one on the right, looks EXACTLY like Mike! So you guys spent some time together in the Emerald City huh? I take it that was before you were into canyoneering; hence the fact that you've never canyoned there. So you guys knew each other 'before' you became canyoneers? You became friends back when the three of you were lollipop salesman?
COOL! I guess........Kinda weird too!
But truth is stranger than fiction they say... :mrgreen:

[Scott Card]

I am so confused......:crazy: So was it Hank that did the graffiti in Birch or Mike or Rich and are we following the rules/philosophy of Kant or Sherlock Holmes? And what exactly did he/she say? Helmets please. You have all lost it. :haha:

[rcwild]

Yeah ~ That does look like Hank! And the middle one looks like YOU! And holy mackerel - the one on the right, looks EXACTLY like Mike!

Now that you mention it, the guy on the right does look like Mike. BTW, is that canyon graffiti on his shirt? No way that could be me in the middle though. I never allow myself to be photographed or filmed without my Tron suit. :haha:

[restrac2000]

Social experiments are useless and only create more problems. These "complications" will only disappear on a societal/cultural level when divisions are removed on a personal level. Not to pick on Jaxx, but just for example:

Sure, but why is that? Obviously this is a "learned" awkwardness (aka conditioning), inherited from parents and peers. This awkwardness would probably be shared by the girl for the same reason. Is this situation necessary or beneficial?

On the tangential topic:

Support. The BSA, as I understand, is very much about mentoring. Why not mentor young men to be adult about such issues (just one of many), such an approach prepares them for healthy sibling interaction, marriage, the workplace and being assertive fathers. Seems very much in line with the organization's agenda.

If you ever work with young women, I spent most of my time working with female groups in my years guiding Wilderness Therapy, you realize how stigmatizing this issue can be; largely due to the "awkwardness" that is perpetuated in society. Men can handle the issue with the care needed.

Canyoneering. Tampons. Condoms. Sanitary napkins. Harnesses.

[Cirrus2000]

And the whole thread comes around to the MaxxiPad. Ta-da! Back onto canyoneering!

Excellent post, Phil. Excellent.

[Jaxx]

Jaxx

These "complications" are self-created and self-perpetuating by the divisions inherent in the culture. If these divisions were properly erased, a different culture would emerge in which these complications would mostly disappear.

What are some of the long-term benefits (to you, to others, etc.) of perpetuating these divisions? One short term benefit is obvious: self-protection from the complications of transition to a different cultural/relational experience (i.e. remaining in one's comfort zone).

Whether you agree with it or not it is part of the culture. I don't make the rules. I don't think it is appropriate for men and women to be mixed as scout leaders, to much chance for trouble.

Explaining to a girl how her body is changing is not a good thing for me to do. What if I went into more detail than the girl's parents appreciated and they had a problem with it, or worse filed charges. I have 5 girls. I will get my fair share of explaining that as a dad.

What do you think about leaving a gay leader with scouts alone? What if a scout accused the leader of something? Do you not see that as a problem? How do you think a different culture with no self created or self perpetuating divisions change this scenario? Same would go for women and scouts. Extra problems. I worry about enough as it is.

[Jaxx]

On the tangential topic:

Support. The BSA, as I understand, is very much about mentoring. Why not mentor young men to be adult about such issues (just one of many)

I don't think the BSA should be in charge of teaching young men about theirs or others bodies.


IMen can handle the issue with the care needed.

I agree than men could handle that. If they need to. But again I don't think it should be on the shoulders of a male scoutmaster to be dealing with it at ages 12-14.

[ratagonia]

What do you think about leaving a gay leader with scouts alone?

I thought current scout protocols insisted that scouts never be with exactly one scout leader, that two leaders always had to be present?

Also, you seem to be buying into the myth that gays are interested in male children. Adults who are interested in children are called pedophiles.

Tom :moses:

[restrac2000]

I don't think the BSA should be in charge of teaching young men about theirs or others bodies.

I agree than men could handle that. If they need to. But again I don't think it should be on the shoulders of a male scoutmaster to be dealing with it at ages 12-14.

Obviously all very hypothetical and it seems many of these organizations support these ideas in a de facto manner.

That said, a couple more thoughts as we think out loud.

Body education: Not advocating sex-ed or early anatomy lessons in the field, that is already handled by others (hopefully). That said, it is inevitable that such issues come up. Avoidance is one way of dealing with it, but never seems the best option. Kids are curious at the age.

The comment about boys age 12-14: Most girls are experiencing menarche at that age. No need to actively "teach" about that subject, most scout leaders aren't educated to handle the subject in an in depth manner. Nonetheless, there are ways to mentor boys at that age in an indirect way, say confronting the stereotypes that are verbalized at that age. I have found most boys will emulate the attitude of the men they associate with; boys attitudes have a huge impact of girls experiencing menstruation. We have mentioned "teachable moments" a few times on this thread, they are great tool to facilitate conversation. Doesn't have to be nitty gritty, just a moment to explore the concepts of empathy and respect. Teach them to be honest and curious with the people in their lives that are their primary educators (parents, teachers, doctors, whatever). Such conversations are best done in the moment, a lot of down time in canyons.

I can understand hesitance to such change/ideas, especially in today's litigious environment. I can especially see how this could be overwhelming for a volunteer based organization. That said, if you are truly concerned about some of the stated issues (unwanted sexual encounters with adults; false litigation), I would recommend reading demographic and scientific reports; they rarely match the anecdotes presented in mainstream society; they can be dealt with and prepared for in meaningful, easy ways (though this is obviously something the administration of the organization should be responsible for, not the field leaders).

Thanks for engaging in such a conversation when it can be so socially risky. We don't always have to agree on these forums but it is a pleasure to be open-minded enough to share ideas. And thanks for volunteering your time with kids in the outdoors; best of luck out there!

Phillip

[mhambi]

The Internet sleuths strike again... :haha:


Man, I'm bored. :lol8:

http://i46.tinypic.com/jpeb6e.jpg

[trackrunner]

i thought current scout protocols insisted that scouts never be with exactly one scout leader, that two leaders always had to be present?

Also, you seem to be buying into the myth that gays are interested in male children. Adults who are interested in children are called pedophiles.

Tom :moses:

qfe

[Jaxx]

I thought current scout protocols insisted that scouts never be with exactly one scout leader, that two leaders always had to be present?

Also, you seem to be buying into the myth that gays are interested in male children. Adults who are interested in children are called pedophiles.

Tom :moses:

There is not supposed to be any one on one alone time. If there are two scouts and one leader you are ok.

I didn't mean to imply that just because someone is gay that means they like boys. I mean if there was an accusation by a teenager about his scoutmaster (this could happen if straight to) who do you think people would side with. It seems like society would point the finger pretty quickly.

I want to make sure I am not coming off as saying gay guys couldn't make great leaders. But obviously there are extra issues that come up. I hope I haven't offended anyone.

[Jaxx]

qfe

What part are you emphasizing? All of it? Part of it? Or did you just want to be part of the cool crowd?

[scubabryan]

There is not supposed to be any one on one alone time. If there are two scouts and one leader you are ok.

When I was called as a Scout Master, I had to go through the Youth Protection training which states:


Barriers to Abuse Within Scouting
The BSA has adopted the following policies to provide additional security for our members. These policies are primarily for the protection of our youth members; however, they also serve to protect our adult leaders from false accusations of abuse.

Two-deep leadership. Two registered adult leaders or one registered leader and a parent of a participant, or other adult, one of whom must be 21 years of age or older, are required on all trips and outings. The chartered organization is responsible for ensuring that sufficient leadership is provided for all activities.

At least in our Stake here in Las Vegas, two deep leadership is a requirement and can not have one adult with two boys. I would think that it's the same though out the BSA but I can be wrong. It's for the protection of our scouts as well as us in leadership positions.

[trackrunner]

There is not supposed to be any one on one alone time. If there are two scouts and one leader you are ok.

did not know. interesting. Since I'm no longer an active leader, I was unaware the BSA did away from it's "Two-deep leadership" rule and policy. I thought it was great policy and the organization should keep it. Ironically I fought with my sponsoring org over this issue. I needed another leader to comply with BSA policy, sponsor wouldn't provide one or approve my recomendation.

for those interested in the Two-Deep Leadership policy. It can be found on page 5 here (http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/46-221.pdf) and here (http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/HealthandSafety/GSS/gss01.aspx)


What part are you emphasizing? All of it? Part of it?

since I quoted all of it, it would be all of it. two great points.


Or did you just want to be part of the cool crowd?

:hmm2:http://www.anchoredbygrace.com/smileys/nixweiss.gif
Not sure what you mean by this. Hard to understand the intent of internet font, much like the lack of sarcasm font. Sounds like a personal jab. If so, not sure what I wrote or did. If so you have my sincere apology because whatever I did, I never intended it to be personal or insulting, and must have done something wrong for it to be interpreted as such. Again sincere apology if so.
:cool2::hippy:



[FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]I

[Jaxx]

When I was called as a Scout Master, I had to go through the Youth Protection training which states:

Barriers to Abuse Within Scouting
The BSA has adopted the following policies to provide additional security for our members. These policies are primarily for the protection of our youth members; however, they also serve to protect our adult leaders from false accusations of abuse.

Two-deep leadership. Two registered adult leaders or one registered leader and a parent of a participant, or other adult, one of whom must be 21 years of age or older, are required on all trips and outings. The chartered organization is responsible for ensuring that sufficient leadership is provided for all activities.At least in our Stake here in Las Vegas, two deep leadership is a requirement and can not have one adult with two boys. I would think that it's the same though out the BSA but I can be wrong. It's for the protection of our scouts as well as us in leadership positions.


did not know. interesting. Since I'm no longer an active leader, I was unaware the BSA did away from it's "Two-deep leadership" rule and policy. I thought it was great policy and the organization should keep it. Ironically I fought with my sponsoring org over this issue. I needed another leader to comply with BSA policy, sponsor wouldn't provide one or approve my recomendation.

for those interested in the Two-Deep Leadership policy. It can be found on page 5 here (http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/46-221.pdf) and here (http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/HealthandSafety/GSS/gss01.aspx)

They still have 2 deep leadership (Youth Protection) and we follow it strictly. But there are times a leader could find himself alone without another leader. While we were on our last trip floating the Green River we had to take 3 of our 4 leaders and take 2 cars to the end and have one car bring back the 3 leaders. One leader was left with the boys. We actually called the local scout office and they said that was ok. When I offer to take boys home after an activity I make sure the 2 live close together because I have to drop both of them off at the same time so I am not left with 1 boy in my car. Those kinds of things come up all the time.


:hmm2:http://www.anchoredbygrace.com/smileys/nixweiss.gif
Not sure what you mean by this. Hard to understand the intent of internet font, much like the lack of sarcasm font. Sounds like a personal jab. If so, not sure what I wrote or did. If so you have my sincere apology because whatever I did, I never intended it to be personal or insulting, and must have done something wrong for it to be interpreted as such. Again sincere apology if so.
:cool2::hippy:

I didn't mean it as a personal jab. Just a third reason to post, just being goofy. I guess I missed the mark on that one.

[QUOTE=trackrunner][FONT=Calibri][SIZE=3]I

[trackrunner]

They still have 2 deep leadership (Youth Protection) and we follow it strictly. But there are times a leader could find himself alone without another leader. While we were on our last trip floating the Green River we had to take 3 of our 4 leaders and take 2 cars to the end and have one car bring back the 3 leaders. One leader was left with the boys. We actually called the local scout office and they said that was ok. When I offer to take boys home after an activity I make sure the 2 live close together because I have to drop both of them off at the same time so I am not left with 1 boy in my car. Those kinds of things come up all the time.

understood. how did the trip go? guess we should talk about that in the float thread you started in the paddaling section.


I didn't mean it as a personal jab. Just a third reason to post, just being goofy. I guess I missed the mark on that one.

cool understood :cool2::cool2::cool2: :hippy: both misunderstood earlier post.

[peterb]

Let me preface this by stating that the only reason I saw this thread is because bogley sent an
e-mail of "Featuread Trip Reports" which I asked to be done since I lurk and enjoy much of what
read here. I only mention this because bogley (whoever they are) felt the need to include this
post to include in the regular email update that many of us receive. It reallly isn't a 'trip report' is
it. Fanning the flames bogley?

I just wanted to respond to Jeff.
I was a scout in the desert of Arizona and I'll state right up front that I have no problem with the
existence of a male, heterosexual young men's organization. Why not? We have every other kind
of group and this is still the 'land of the free' right?

Since I'm a lurker, I must have missed many of the posts that have you so inflamed. In the context
of this thread however your injection of the LDS into the conversation is inflamatory and reeks of baiting.
It seems a little paranoid as well.

I know, as a scout, we weren't perfect angels, but our scoutmasters did the best they could. Probably some
were even LDS since they were well established in my hometown although the subject of what particular religious
affiliations we had was rarely a topic of conversation. My friends were LDS, Roman Catholic and the odd protestant.
Since I was raised in the atheist tradition, I was glad I rarely had to explain my (non)beliefs to my peeps.

I'd suggest a deep breath slowly exhaled and a slow count to ten Jeff.

[oldno7]

I went through Birch a couple weeks ago, ran into another group that followed us through. At the bottom of the last rappel I could see the faint markings that had been circled several times with a rock(apparently) I rubbed the area with a little wet sand and it seemed to disappear. May come back when the sand was dry. This did not look like a "carving" to me, more like using a small rock as you would a piece of chalk. If there was more, the ones who patched before me did a great job. I would call this a relatively non-issue at this point.(the marks themselves)

[ScoutColorado]

Man, I'm bored. :lol8:

http://i46.tinypic.com/jpeb6e.jpg

good job on the poster!

[Jaxx]

I went through Birch a couple weeks ago, ran into another group that followed us through. At the bottom of the last rappel I could see the faint markings that had been circled several times with a rock(apparently) I rubbed the area with a little wet sand and it seemed to disappear. May come back when the sand was dry. This did not look like a "carving" to me, more like using a small rock as you would a piece of chalk. If there was more, the ones who patched before me did a great job. I would call this a relatively non-issue at this point.(the marks themselves)

Good to hear it is cleaned up. I love Birch!

[tanya]

Back to the Graffitti issue...

:angryfire: speachless!