[at-l] RE: Group Hiking Query

[jsmith at wate.com (James N. Smith)]

bleeder guy:
I hear what you're saying and I don't entirely disagree. We all should be
sensitive to the issues you raise.

But as a Boy Scout leader I find that advice is also impractical.

In order to give a group the "intimate relationship with the outdoors" they
are seeking, and yet maintain the safety and training they need, it is
usually not possible to break up the group into sub-groups that small and
still keep sufficient leadership.

This is especially true in Boy Scouts. We are required to maintain at least
two adult leaders in every group, regardless of group size, and there are
only so many leaders to go around.

Scouts are taught to follow Leave No Trace principles, so hopefully that
mitigates the situation.

-jns


Beau Bushor "bleeder guy" wrote:

Any group above 6 is too large no matter what the skill level.  Groups tend
to go to popular hiking areas that already have too many impacting it.
Shelters, tent sites, sewage and water sources become overwhelmed with that
many people. Groups tend to forget that others are also using the spot. The
delusion that experienced leaders will make it better is ridiculous. Church
groups are no better acting than Scouts, college outings, the annual thru
hiker train, etc.  Small, less than 6, size groups can have a more intimate
relationship with the outdoors.