Regulating A Summer Camp

The purpose of a resident BSA camp boils down to two things; 1)  A program that promotes, supports and demonstrates ALL elements found with the Aims and Methods of the Boy Scouts of America; 2) The scouts have fun.  What the regulations want of a BSA camp is simply that we provide a safe environment from which to put on the program and adherence to the standards which are born from the guide to safe scouting AND that we do offer a program that encompasses all aspects of the Aims and Methods of the Scouting program.  These reasons are why we have National Standards which are in place to govern camp operations.  I had mentioned some time ago that the national council was looking at revisions to the current standards which I think is a great idea.   However, before they do that, they need to understand what a standard means.

A "standard" is defined as a level of attainment by which we all adhere or agree to.  Let me give you an example of the standard, "the staff wears the BSA uniform correctly".  We all know what the BSA uniform is, there are rules/regulations that pertain to this so it cannot be left up to interpretation...it should be black and white.  Yet some camps make up their own uniforms and forgo the BSA standard and are allowed to do so.  There is no Boy Scout camp that should stray from this standard and if they are allowed to do so, THEN GET RID OF THE STANDARD.  You see, for some camps it is convenient to do things that are simple like let the staff wear any kind of uniform because the management does not want to take the time to enforce this.....but then why have "uniforming" as a method?  The methods of scouting are not there to conform to your personal viewpoints........you joined the program knowing that we adhere to the methods.  If that is an issue for you, get out.  The other thing that national needs to lose are subjective "mandatory" standards.  "The camp offers an exciting program......."  Really?  Some people find excitement jumping out of a plane, others find it sitting on the couch playing video games.  How do we agree and adhere to what is "exciting" and who gets decide what is exciting or not?  The geriatric volunteer who is "inspecting" our camp?

The standards are in place so that we run the camp safely and we run it using the scouting methods, it is as simple as that.  There are county, state and federal laws that govern the storing and serving of food; the management of water supplies; the inspections of buildings/facilities and equipment.  Use them or adapt them to a summer camp.  "All fire extinguishers will be checked yearly"......now that is a standard that can be applied in Seattle and Boston.  "Fire extinguishers should be in good working order" is NOT a standard....what does "should" or "good working" order mean?  Inspector A may believe one thing, Inspector B another.  Auxillary verbs like "should" cannot be anywhere in a standard just like the words "may" or "some".  The national council has gotten this right at times.  Previously it used to say that the Ranger will be certified by NCS within a year of their employment (does that mean that a camp must have a ranger?); now they can make the option without changing the standard:  IF the camp employs a full time Ranger they must be certified within one year.  What a difference the word "if" makes.

I for one want standards so that we have a direction to follow just like any other BSA camp in the US.  I should be able to pluck any staff member from any camp in the country and put him/her at Camp Parsons and never have to say to them "we don't do that here."  Standards that are properly written and enforced bring respect to what a program can offer, not only for those who work the program but also for the folks who stand on the sidelines and see what we do.  We have strict standards for BSA Lifeguard.....but they are only as good if they are enforced to the letter and not modified.  If we can insure that, then it is a qualification that would be honored outside of the BSA as an equal lifeguarding qualification from any other national agency because we held to a standard.  However, the standards must not inhibit our primary purpose.....to provide a safe facility for the scouting program.  If there is a standard that says that you can operate an aquatics facility ONLY if you are 21 or older AND hold NCS certification as well as Aquatics Instructor BSA then you already have hindered some council's ability to operate an aquatics facility which can be done safely without that rule.  The importance of having an Aquatics Director certified by the National Camping School is to insure that the director understands all aspects of the aquatics standards and how to operate a safe beach within those standards.......it has nothing to do with being a lifeguard.....you can hire certified lifeguards to staff the beach.  So the standard should require a NCS certified adult to be Aquatics Director AND the standard should require that the instructor of of BSA Lifeguards be an Aquatics Instructor BSA; but the standard SHOULD NOT require them to be one and the same.  If they are, then fantastic.  I use the word "should" here as we are dealing with an option of how the standard could read.  Whether we are talking about the Tower or Shooting Sports or Aquatics, safety has nothing to do with the expertise of the particular activity but instead the level-headed adult that is hired to assure that the standards are adhered to......you can always hire expertise, but they may not be NCS trained.  If they are one and the same....GREAT!!!  If not, then do not limit small councils with limited resources to forgo programs because they do not have the financial ability to recruit staff that are proficient leaders as well as have the expert ability.  I don't need to be a marathon runner to organize a marathon and surprisingly you do not need to know how to swim to manage an aquatics program safely (though it probably would help.)

The new draft is heading this way somewhat, but they are getting a little tighter on things that require more bureaucracy and add nothing to safety or enhance the program.  There are some good changes but I don't think there are enough.  I believe that the standards should be succinct and direct and if that were the case, they would lose the number of bullet points on those standards.  I also believe that volunteers should be removed from camp "inspections" as they will never be held to the consequences of any mistake that is made.  The council scout executive is held responsible by the board for all things that happen within the council.  If an accident occurs as a result of non-compliance to the standard, the scout executive will be held responsible.  I would propose that members of the Executive Committee who are actively involved in either camping or facility operations be the extension of the scout executive assuring the governance of the council that their camp is in good working order and adhering to the standards.  If exceptions are made by those ultimately responsible for what might happen, fine....however given the recent spate of lawsuits due to non-complicance of other policies, I doubt that would be a good idea.  I often hear that we will see some changes soon.  Well, some is not a number and soon is not a time......let's make this a professional endeavor.