Re: [Philmont]: Pre-Trek Training Agreements

Well, I am one who is willing to admit that it's gratifying - even if
not particularly justified - to see the respect in peoples' eyes when
they ask what trek we're on (no, we don't volunteer this info as a means
of beating our hairy chests, but we will answer if asked). I do
strongly caution my Crews not to play the trek number game, and I
usually inwardly smile (and think of Wally) every time we get the "trek
challenge" from another Crew.

Again, the misconception is Philmont-induced with the (IMO)
inappropriate T - R - S - SS designators. As y'all know, this was one
of the reasons why I developed the Challenge Index in the first place,
so that people would understand that the trek difficulty designator was
only one parameter (among many) in understanding the "true" challenge of
a Philmont trek. Failure to understand this is how people who ended up
having a mediocre to miserable experience set themselves up for it in
the first place. Anyone who equates "Typical" to "Easy" is in for a
rude awakening, and very likely an unpleasant experience.

In my last posting, I stated that my Commitment Contract would be
identical whether we were on Trek 1 or Trek 35. I forgot to mention
that of course this was so, because the contracts are distributed,
signed, and returned about 6 - 8 months before we ever select our trek
(Commitment Contract in early fall, trek selection the following March).
  Furthermore, our preparative schedule (meetings, hikes, shakedowns)
would also be identical, regardless of what trek we ended up taking.
Certainly my personal level of preparation wouldn't change an iota.
This consistency of approach, I suppose, is the most important point.

- Dr. Bob

Feurtado, Walter C. wrote:
> In 1994, there was this lady who had the most feminine voice that I had
> ever heard. While there were ladies hiking the trails, there were not
> were near the number that hike the trails today. After the trek I asked
> her if anybody asked what trek she was on. She began to laugh because
> when she said 32 the macho men just backed away!! In 1996, there was a
> lady who was planning on going on trek number 7 (now 22) and I strongly
> suggested that she go on trek 22 because the only difference was that 22
> went up to Sawmill and the other went to Cypher's Mine. She finally
> changed and after the trek I asked her the same question and she too had
> the same reaction. It's all a matter of perception!!!
>
>
>
> Many Philmont hikers do equate trek difficulty with trek number. There
> tends to be this thought that low number treks are "EASIER" but it would
> be more accurate to say that they were "LESS DIFFICULT". There is
> nothing easy about a Philmont trek.
>
>
>
> I forget the year that Philmont added a new trek, trek 27. Trek 27 was
> the highest number trek and was rated as super strenuous. When our
> contingent arrived, there was this advisor who was on the advisor's
> porch asking new crew advisors what trek they were on. Then he
> proceeded to tell them the virtues of his trek 27. I was amused because
> that trek did not do Baldy or Mt Phillips but as long as the trek
> provided him some sense of accomplishment, well I guess that is good.
>
>
>
> I particularly love the South and Central parts of Philmont. There are
> other people who love the Northern portion because of Baldy. There is
> something for everybody at Philmont, but trek 4 still has a special
> place in my heart!!!
>
>
> Wally
>

-------------------------------------------------------
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 Thu Sep 15 06:31:23 2005