Information on these High Adventure Programs -??

[Eamonn]

I have just looked at the thread on Venturing and the OA.
I like the OA and don't have any problem with the new stuff that is coming down. I like to think that Wagion Lodge 6 does a good job, but I have not been around other Lodges to really be able to form an educated opinion.
Having said that, I'm not for changing this Boy Scout program and opening it up as a come one come all program.
I admit to not liking the Venturing program.
I see that under the heading Venturing and Sea Scouts, someone added "Information on these High Adventure Programs" I'm sorry while I see Sea Scouting as a high adventure program, Venturing doesn't have to be.
In the District I serve we are just about to start a Crew that will be following Theater and the Arts, we hope to start a Crew which will follow Youth Ministry. While it could be that some of the youth in these Crews might want to become involved in High Adventure, but I'm unsure where they will find the leadership.
Maybe when we stop looking at Venturing as being High Adventure or a program for big Boy Scouts it will come into its own.
I still will not like it, because I'm to much of an old Boy Scouter, I like the clearly laid out uniforming and advancement program that Sea Scouts offers.

[Mrw]

When I trained as a Venture Crew Advisor about 4 years ago, it was being billed as a high adventure program.

The group forming to follow theatre and the arts sound more like it should be an Explorer Post.

At the time the thinking seemed to be that what used to be the high adventure Explorer Posts were the model for Venture Crews and the Explorers were going to be more focused on the career interest type themes.

The Sea Scout program would hence fit neatly into the Venturing model.

We started a Venture Crew at the time (that is why we went to training). It was pretty short-lived as we couldn't get a critical number of folks involved despite quite a bit of recruiting work by the boys who tried starting it. What I kind of questioned at the time was how many youth that got into the program would be interested in the aadvancements and ranks they had set up. The boys we had get involved wanted more camping opportunities, but couldn't care less about the advancement program.

The training didn't give any motivation for trying to promote the advancement/badge program either.

[Eamonn]

"The program of every Venturing crew revolves around a special avocation or hobby interest. What a Venturing crew does is limited only by the imagination and involvement of the adult and youth leaders and members of the crew"
I copied that from :
http://www.scouting.org/venturing/about/activities.html
I think if you read the books that the BSA has on Venturing you will find that a Crew can revolve around almost any interest that the members have.
I whole heartedly agree that there are a lot of youth who don't care about much about advancement or recognition, it is however a method of the program. The problem I had was me!! I still like a clear cut program which clearly states do this and do that and you become such and such.
I also agree that we recruit mostly Boy Scouts into Venturing. I do however ask why?
Surely if our Boy Scout Troops were delivering a quality program, there would be no need for older Scouts to be looking elsewhere to find the high adventure program that they want. Taking these older Scouts out of the Troop only hurts the Troop. Starting new units and having two committees and twice the leadership is a waste of manpower, we must be better off if we start catering for the older Scouts in their Troops. The program is supposed to run until they are 18. It seems that most Troops are not working hard enough to provide a program that will hold the interest of 16 year olds.

[Mrw]

Our rather short-lived crew was mostly boys who had left scouting or cubs , but still wanted to go camping. They just weren't interested in the rest of the programs. The problem was, they were interested in a co-ed program and never made that fly.

The boys driving this the most were also still involved with the troop and eventually made the decision that their time should be spent with one or the other and they could make a difference with the troop. The crew was more frustration than progress.

They did influence some more high adventure activities within the troop.

I think though, the whole thing was driven by someone from Council who was being rated on how many new units they could get started, not necessrily whether there was a demand for the units or if they had quality programs.

[wagionvigil]

The thing about a Venture crew is it can be many things. It is not cut and dried. The Madison Scouts Drum and Bugle Corp is a Crew. they actually started as an Explorer Post and made the Crew change when the Venturing Program Started.
You can have a Religious Based Crew,A Theater Based Crew and Crew for Skate Boarding etc. It can be high advanture or interest based. BUT it takes leadership to make it work and that is what is lacking in a lot of cases.

[Eamonn]

So now we agree that Crews do not have to be High Adventure.
My big question is - Why would they want to join the BSA?
Please don't tell me about insurance!
We are not in the business of selling insurance.
If we are entirely honest what can we do for a Special Interest Crew?
The youth that belong to a Skate Boarding Crew, are not interested in being part of the BSA, they are not in most cases going to follow the Venturing Recognition Plan, use Council owned property or visit any of the High Adventure Bases.
We as an organization know very little about Skate Boarding. We do know about the stuff we are good at -Outdoorsmanship (I'm aware that most skate boarding is not done indoors.)
I suppose that it could be said that by just having these youth meet we are working toward meeting the Mission of the BSA, but these youth and nearly all of the youth who belong to special interest crews would be better served by belonging to an organization that is all about whatever activity they opted to follow.

[wagionvigil]

My Thoughts??? I would like to see ALL COUNCIL CAMPS have a Venturing Only Week. For any type of Crew. Have program geared to that end.

[Mrw]

So just what type of program do you offer the appeal to the camping crew, the theatre crew and the skate-boarding crew all at the same time?

I am not trying to be sarcastic, just curious.

[wagionvigil]

That is the Problem!
And that is what Powder horn teaches you to do.

[Eamonn]

That is the Problem!
And that is what Powder horn teaches you to do.

I hate to have to ask, but how does a course that teaches an introduction to High Adventure help?

[wagionvigil]

ACtually it is not all high adventure.
Communication
Living History
First AId
To name a few

[Eamonn]

Come on Wagionvigil!! Put your hand on your heart and tell me what the Advisor of a Theater Crew or Skate Boarding Crew is going to get out of attending Powder Horn?
You only have to go to:
http://www.powderhorn-bsa.org/what.html
to read:Powder Horn is a training opportunity designed to expose the Venturing or Boy Scout leader to activities and resources necessary to operate a successful Venturing Ranger Award or Troop High Adventure program in several ways
Backpacking , Land Navigation
Cave Exploring ' Leave No Trace
Communication ,Life Saver
Conservation Project Development ,Mountaineering
Cooking, Outdoor Living History
COPE Overnight
Cycling/Mountain Biking ,Physical Fitness
Ecology Plants & Wildlife
Emergency Preparedness ,Scuba
Equestrian ,Shooting Sports
Expedition Planning Watercraft
First Aid, Wilderness Survival
Fishing Winter Sports
Hunting.
I know that the Lady who is leading the Theater Crew would just hate every minute of Powder Horn if she went and would not get very much out of it.
We as the BSA are very good (OK some are better than others) at this outdoor stuff, but Venturing isn't always about the outdoor stuff.
When it comes to training we might as well send special interest crew leaders to Sea Badge Training as Powder Horn.
Or of course we could admit that Venturing as it is now is flawed and admit that trying to use the 1950's Exploring Program as Venturing doesn't work, allow the Special Interest Crews to go back to LFL, while we serve the youth in programs that we at least know something about - Yes the Outdoor Stuff!!

[wagionvigil]

It is as flawed as the New Wood Badge Course is.

[DadScout]

It is as flawed as the New Wood Badge Course is.

OK I'll bite. I'm planning to take the Wood Badge course next summer. Where's the flaw in it? From the few people I spoke to that took the course in the past few years they spoke well of it.

Regarding the Boy Scout - Venturing - Exploring discussion I'd have to agree with Eamonn on many of the points. Venturing crews with a focus towards the outdoors leans to a high adventure Boy Scout program. While Venturing crews with a slant towards other interests would lend well to Explorer posts. Powder Horn training for a music's crew advisor or trying to involve a crew with an Arts focus in an outdoor program seems to have many challenges to being a success.

[wagionvigil]

Wood Badge is great don't get me wrong Take It Take It. But for those that have the Old Course which was much more outdoor oriented . If the course stays as it is then Scoutmaster Fundamental Outdoor Training must be improved. In My Opinion.

The Outdooor Living History the Communication even wilderness survival and First Aid are important even to a Music Crew. E might be correct that the non high adventure crews would be served better under learning for life. I do not argu that point. BUT we as scouteres in Positions of responsibility must sell the programs we have like them or not. I found this out when I was Lodge Adv. for Wagion. " The Party Line" So to speak.
E must sell the programs if that is our position and try to make improvements upon these programs. I never have liked the Tiger Program but I still would try to sell it to parents of young boys.

[riverwalk]

Or, when I went "exploring" I have learned this. Yes, Venturing Crews have all kinds of themes or primary activities. And much of this is as it was in the Exploring program. A great example, and a needed one today I think, is the Safe Rides Post, oops I mean CREW, haha. See, Venturing now offers guidelines for a Safe Rides theme, and Exploring did also, back in their day. Why, it's the same young men and women. And they don't all have the same interests/hobbies, yet may want to belong to a group that is structured to do certain things.

[Eamonn]

Sure I have and continue to support the BSA.
As you know 2004 was the first year that National did away with allowing Councils and Districts to make Quality by showing 2% growth.
While I wouldn't go as far as to say that some Councils cheated! I do feel that both Councils and Districts may have been a little over active in starting Crews that were very much out there all alone. We (Districts and Councils) couldn't provide the services they needed, because what they were doing was outside of our area of expertize.
Looking at the Venturing numbers for this year, there is a big drop. One Council I know and love is showing a drop of over 600 Venturers!! They as if by magic are now in Exploring. As we know Districts do not in most areas get credit for LFL programs.
For a very long time I have heard that Venturing is our fastest growing program? Our brand new DE returned from PDL 1 telling me how easy it would be to start Venture Crews! My reply to that was that I hoped so because we (The District) had seen 3 Crews that weren't two years old fold.
The Party Line is all well and good, but we as volunteer Scouter's are not in Scouting to play number games. If that's what the pros feel they have to do, I say let them but we all know at the end of the day it is going to bite them in the tail end!
I happen to like the new Wood Badge Course for what it is - A course that is all about leadership. I also think we need to spend more time teaching "How To" at every level, I'm unsure if people would attend? I know that we didn't have the Scoutmaster and Assistant Scoutmaster Outdoor Skills course, in our Council this fall because only two people signed up. I find it hard to believe that out of over 90 Troops and with the Webelos Den Leaders that will be crossing over that only two need trained!
It's really sad to think that the little Lads we have now will one day be thinking that they have outgrown Boy Scouts, but will never have mastered the skills needed to be part of a High Adventure anything. I suppose they will join a special interest Crew -Maybe one that is all about flower arranging?

[wagionvigil]

The Drop would have never happened if they would have listened to me. I told them they did not belong in Venturing but LFL to begin with. You are correct councils are using Venturing to get numbers and we do need to correct that.I do not believe that will happen knowing BSA history.

[Eamonn]

Sad as it might be one of the things that will halt the inflated numbers is lack of money!!
At a recent board meeting a where lack of funds and cut backs were on the agenda, a person who had served as a Council Treasurer made mention that some large Crews had come about by having the membership fee that goes to National, paid by the Council. While this might seem like chicken feed, it becomes a sizable amount when you start talking about several hundred members and really takes on new meaning when you don't have enough cash to pay the everyday bills.
I called a friend who works at the National Office as he was leaving home to go visit a Council and do a membership audit. I have no real idea how this is done, but would hope that one thing that would be looked at it Super Crews that ought to be in LFL.

[Guest]

Having just attended the CDC for Powder Horn I have to say that if it was meant to be anything other than a "How to do a High Adventure program" it was never mentioned in the two and half days we were in class.

I can see how First Aid, Communications, and Living History are directly related to the high adventure prep that Powder Horn was explained to us to be.

I too would like to see local council camps have a week of Venturing...BUT... the Venturing program simply is not ready with enough members to support that kind of financial commitment. This fact was driven home during the Course Directors Conference when it came to light that of the nearly two dozen Directors and assistant course Directors present representing several councils and more than 1 region, most were active Sea Scout Skippers and Mates.

If other aspects of Venturing do not improve soon I do not see how Venturing will survive much longer. Sea Scouting has seen a resurgence because it is a truly high adventure program. Venturing seems unable to find a direction, or an audience, or more importantly the needed leadership to become a fully legitimate program.

Too often Crews are started by Scoutmasters looking for a way to keep older scouts. If as a leader you cannot keep them interested as a Venture Patrol then by what magic wand will you keep them active as Venturers under the same leadership?

Venturing was designed as way to bring more youth into scouting, not simply to rearrange the youth we already had.

Unless Districts and Councils make better use of the Venturing Program all older scouts should start to learn Sea Shanties.