>
> Another thought, if the demand is SOO high for Philmont slots and
> getting people onto the ranch, how come they don't initiate some sort of
> procedure to ensure that every trek is filled to 12 people?
Because it would make it very difficult or even impossible for small and
medium size troops and venturing crews to send a crew to Philmont if each
crew had to have 12 people. I believe it wise to keep the crew sizes as
they currently structured (7-12 people).
I have seen
> many treks (especially in 2004) that weren't at 12. Several council
> treks from the East coast were only at 8. I think we saw one that was
> at 6 and another one at 7, due to last minute drop outs of some kind.
> If the number of folks in all the treks for a particular summer only
> averages 10, instead of 12, then Philmont is underutilized about 20
> percent.
My understanding is that isn't the way it works.
Each day, Philmont wants 325-350 campers (or a number in near that range)
to arrive. Due to the number of rangers on staff, they have flexibility
as to the number of crews arriving each day so the goal ties to the number
of campers rather than the absolute number of crews.
As an adult who has arranged treks, I understand the nicety of
> flexibility (in case a couple of "wanna be's" drop out), but if it was
> known up front that a trek costs the same whether you send 8 or 12
> people, I think folks would try harder to fill their treks up, instead
> of passing the costs for empty slots on to the remaining participants.
> And, if you have 8 who REALLY want to go, then maybe paying a 50%
> premium for not filling their extra slots is worth it to them??
Attending Philmont, especially for a first time camper, is already
expensive enough. Adding to the cost by charging a fixed fee per crew
doesn't really make sense and would probably keep many young people from
being able to participate.
My understanding is that council contingent crews must pay for a full crew
of 12. Of course, council contingents have a larger base from which to
draw their members so it makes sense to require full crews. But, for the
reasons already mentioned, it doesn't make sense to do that with unit
crews.
YiS,
-- Calvin H. Gray Scoutmaster, Troop 405 Associate Advisor, Venturing Crew 405 Georgetown, Texas I used to be an Owl (WM-62-2-98 @ Philmont) http://www.troop405.org/ ------------------------------------------------------- Scouting E-mail Discussion Lists @ usscouts.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe at http://usscouts.org/lists/ Listserv Commands at http://usscouts.org/lists/lc.asp ------------------------------------------------------- Send listserv commands to: listserv@troop47.com Send postings to: philmont@troop47.com List FAQ found at: http://usscouts.org/lists/faq.asp List Administrator: philmont_owner@troop47.com ------------------------------------------------------- As you gather around this virtual campfire with fellow Scouts and Scouters, do your best to be trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent. -------------------------------------------------------Received on Tue Nov 2 12:00:05 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jul 26 2006 - 12:00:11 CDT