Again, this has been debated at length in previous years, and the
general consensus was (and is) that the benefit would be short-lived.
And there is a downside in that the Troop's institutional memory for
Philmont will be gone for 99 percent of those Troops that lose on
"their" year, and have to wait another 4 years to apply. The answer
(again) is to give increasing bias to Units that lose out, so that their
chances are significantly improved for their second consecutive year,
greatly improved for their third consecutive year, and astronomically
improved for the fourth consecutive year. And in today's computerized
world, keeping track of losing applicants is a trivial task.
On your second point, filling sudden Crew vacancies with Scouts from
neighboring Units is perfectly acceptable and openly encouraged by
Philmont. For me at least, the line in the sand is where you apply for
a Crew slot, knowing in advance you have little or no chance to fill it
from your Unit, and so will *have* to recruit from other Units. Such
"non-viable" Unit-based Crews should not be applying for a Crew slot in
the first place - rather, they should be going with their Council's
provisional Contingents (if one is available), or joining with another
"viable" Unit (that has vacancies themselves) if their Council doesn't
offer provo slots.
Charles Goodwin wrote:
> Why does it not make sense to change the every second year to every
> third or fourth year for a troop? Granted this will not have a direct
> one for one effect since this will probably increase the number of crews
> a troop takes when they do go, but I still believe it would have an
> impact. It seems at least worth trying. It just doesn't seem to make
> sense for some troops to get it every other year while others can't get
> in at all. I would think for Philmont to try to keep track of how many
> times a troop has applied and been denied would be difficult. It seems
> that the problem increases every year, with ever longer waiting lists.
> With having to apply so far in advance, it's really difficult for scouts
> to commit, and some have to drop out because they move or have sports or
> band activities they had not anticipated at the time they sign up. When
> this occurs it seems to make sense to open up the vacancies to other
> scouts from other troops rather than have them wasted even through the
> reservations were made in good faith at the time.
>
> We have a troop of over 100 scouts and have tried to go every four years
> with other high adventure activities on the other three years. We did
> get in in 1992, 1996, and 2000, but not in 2004, although I was able to
> be the council contingent leader in 2004. I was able to get in every
> scout I became aware of, but had to leave most of the adults behind. A
> great father-son bonding opportunity was lost, but at least the boys
> were able to attend.
>
> Charles Goodwin, MD, Scoutmaster Troop 236, Kettering, OH
-------------------------------------------------------
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 Mon Nov 29 21:55:01 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jul 26 2006 - 12:00:12 CDT