# Boy Scouts rescued from Green River



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

https://etvnews.com/boy-scouts-rescued-from-the-green-river/

Ugh.

and they were from Cedar City. Double-Ugh.

Homemade canoes made from PVC and plastic tarps. That doesn't even deserve an "ugh", but rather maybe a "WTF?".

So, the leaders are obviously morons. I know one of them personally, and this story doesn't surprise me considering he's part of it.

What I really want to know is: What's wrong with the parents of these scouts? What parent in their right mind would allow thier child to attempt a 67 mile float in a homemade canoe that isn't water tight? From the story, it doesn't sound as if these "boats" were even tested, considering they began to sink "a couple hundred yards" from the launch.

Look at the pictures of those canoes. OMG. Seriously, who thought this was going to work?? 67 miles! They were just asking to drown a kid.

Not only is this embarrassing, but very dangerous.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

I can see it already, they spent last winter building the canoes and quite possibly never tested them in a swimming pool. Then came the big adventure. 

At least they were wearing life jackets. But trying to float the Green at this time of year without knowing anything about a canoe on this type of river is pushing your luck. They were lucky that they didn't get a few miles downstream before the trouble started, that area is quite desolate.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

The leaders are millennial's.


Side note: my Uncle was always helping local scouts and kids build kayak's from scratch. He had quite the design, easy to make and they worked great! Strong rib based frame, used heavy canvas for the wrap material, then lots of coats of water proof paint. Every summer family get-together he'd show up with 4 to 6 kayaks to play with. They all worked great and aside from very minor leaks if you hit a rock, we never sunk one.

So its very possible to build watercraft and do a 60 mile float... just not with what those morons made. Probably would have been better off taking 6" or 8" pvc pipe, sealing the ends with caps and building unsinkable rafts.


-DallanC


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

DallanC said:


> Probably would have been better off taking 6" or 8" pvc pipe, sealing the ends with caps and building unsinkable rafts.
> 
> -DallanC


You can't tell from the pictures -- but I'd be surprised if any of those rafts have any material at all to help with floatation.

I can't stop laughing looking at the pictures...what a comedy of errors.


----------



## Greenhead_Slayer (Oct 16, 2007)

That's a special kind of stupid. I did that same stretch as a scout in homemade canoes. I'm glad the leaders that spearheaded our canoe building weren't relying on PVC and plastic tarps.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

If I was their scout leader and saw the results of the canoes I would have said, "Boys, I think the Green River trip is off, let's just go up to the Cedar Community pond for a Saturday morning".

I have been on a few week long river trips in 12' kayaks and I would not have put one of those things on the river.

Oh well, lesson learned hopefully and no one was injured. Also hopefully it will be well advertised so others can avoid the same mistake.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

There are a lot of issues to unpack here, including the lack of preparation. However, the worst decision I see made here is scout leaders abandoning boys. The leader that showed up at the boat dock, while kids are still going down the river? You’re just going to walk back upstream and leave them to fend for themselves, knowing full well by this time that the canoes weren’t fit. 

I generally try to give people the benefit of the doubt. I’ve found myself in difficult situations that seemed innocent enough going into them. Stuff happens. But leaders left boys? Oy, that’s rough. 

SMH...


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

You have to look at it this way, there was no help downstream, only back at the park. 

It would be a hard decision to make to stay and try to help someone that you might not be able to really help or go for help 

Sent from my SM-J737V using Tapatalk


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Not a tough decision at all. Get everyone off the river and to safety, then go for help. Unless I’m just reading this wrong, it seems the leader(s) just bailed while there was still a very dangerous situation brewing down stream.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Without a boat with power on the Green River right now you are helpless. That is unless you have a throw line and or perhaps a kayak to reach someone. Other than that you will become another victim 

Sent from my SM-J737V using Tapatalk


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

No need for me to judge beyond the obvious problem from the start: a group a leaders without the skills to remotely mitigate the risk of the situation. If they couldn't manage canoes at 13,000 cfs, which is a medium flow, then they should never have been in the river in the first place, nonetheless with minors. Imagine if they had chosen a technical section or launched at Swaseys and tried to navigate the new boat chute? Lucky people aren't dead.

I've seen scouts all over the Green and Colorado and rarely am I impressed. One time each raft was rowing a set of oars with at least one completely broken and dysfunctional blade; it looked as if they were made from Pizza boxes, no joking. They were less than halfway through a 80+ mile trip. 

Those leaders on the right don't look like millennials to me but it doesn't matter. I'm into my 4th decade and about half the leaders I had for boyscouts and then CAP were also nimrods. I actually had leaders abandon us during a severe storm (lost half the tents) to go to a strip club. So this isn't some behavior unique to millennials (not one myself).


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

Critter said:


> Without a boat with power on the Green River right now you are helpless. That is unless you have a throw line and or perhaps a kayak to reach someone. Other than that you will become another victim
> 
> Sent from my SM-J737V using Tapatalk


Completely untrue (caveat of throwline below) We've had swimmers in higher water and worse conditions; rescuing people in the conditions they experienced is a cinch if you acquire the right skills. And I'm talking basic skills. Labrynth at 13,000 cfs is moderate flows at worst, as it often cranks out 40k+ on years like this. And its Class I water there, not remotely technical.

A throwline definitely helps but in these conditions the kids should know how to swim offensively to a leader's boat or shore. They should have had a basic safety plan and talk before launching. But more importantly, a throw line in these unskilled hands actually increases the risk. Rope in flowing water without the proper skills quickly turns dangerous.

These scouts should have practiced self rescue long before taking homemade crafts on a multiple day trip. These leaders should be reprimanded by the BSA and never be allowed to lead such a trip again.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

backcountry said:


> Completely untrue (caveat of throwline below) We've had swimmers in higher water and worse conditions; rescuing people in the conditions they experienced is a cinch if you acquire the right skills. And I'm talking basic skills. Labrynth at 13,000 cfs is moderate flows at worst, as it often cranks out 40k+ on years like this. And its Class I water there, not remotely technical.
> 
> A throwline definitely helps but in these conditions the kids should know how to swim offensively to a leader's boat or shore. They should have had a basic safety plan and talk before launching. But more importantly, a throw line in these unskilled hands actually increases the risk. Rope in flowing water without the proper skills quickly turns dangerous.
> 
> These scouts should have practiced self rescue long before taking homemade crafts on a multiple day trip. These leaders should be reprimanded by the BSA and never be allowed to lead such a trip again.


Your first paragraph says it all.

First off these scout leaders had no idea of what they were getting into as far as the rivers conditions were concerned. It looks like a nice slow section of water that is nice and calm, that is until you get into it.

I used to work in Green River and this happens more than a lot of people think. It is just that there are no reporters in the area to report on what is happening to inexperienced boaters down there. I now am in a area where people like to float the Colorado, it is the same here. You wouldn't believe the number of idiots that think that they can float the river in a rubber raft that they buy at Walmart in the morning.

Even experienced boaters get into trouble on the Green. It was years ago when some folks thought that they would join the Friendship cruse on the Green and Colorado Rivers to Moab. They missed the confluence of the two rivers and were headed to Lake Powell. Luckily they made it through the first set of major rapids and were able to beach their boat. They ended up hiking out and taking the boat out in pieces to get it out of the canyon. Now from what I understand they had consumed quite a bit of alcohol before and during their short trip but still, they had no idea.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

Feel free to clarify your first sentence but as it stands right now it sounds like a criticism of me having experienced swimmers in worst conditions. Having swimmers on occasion is a simple reality of anybody who spends considerable time doing whitewater, especially Class IV and above. There is a famous phrase that every boatman knows to that effect:"there are those who have flipped, and those that will." Its why anyone on a craft like a canoe or raft on a river knows to "rig to flip". (If that wasn't your intent than the above is moot even though the principle still matters).

The thing is Labrynth is a "slow section of water that is nice and calm" given just about every meaningful metric. Its class I water at 13,000 cfs and remains that even to higher levels.

https://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/River/detail/id/3765/

There are a ton of unqualified people who do it every year but most do okay hence the number of DIY rental operations out of the region. Some get in trouble, like these folks. Or like the Friendship cruise you described going through Brown Betty (which is an example of poor decision making as well). "They had no idea" isn't an excuse when basic map reading, a watch and situational awareness are expected when navigating a river that doubles in volume and has Class IV rapids. Some people just don't belong on the water as they never take the time to be responsible (ie this scout troop, not your story).

But that doesn't make Labrynth any less "calm". It just means people need basic skills and competency any time they boat a river. Rescuing people on a section of river like Labrynth requires basic skills and planning. Generic tactics like lead and sweep, proper spacing and grouping, knowing how to read water, and having a pre-trip safety talk (and practice with beginners) are all SOP. But in no way do you need a motor or advanced swiftwater rescue equipment to help people that capsize or swim in that stretch. They could help in the right hands but these leaders don't seem like the "right hands". They should have known how to self rescue without that equipment and/or the leaders should have the ability to do so themselves. Overnight trips on rivers rely heavily on such self-sufficiency.

I bring this up as 100% of the accountability lies in the incompetent choices of the leaders. Not the limited river hazards that are easily mitigated. That distinction matters and claiming the river is more challenging then it really is diminishes their responsibility. (I normally wouldn't care much but the style of narrative you used about the Green is common after accidents and rescues. As a culture we often minimize responsibility for the party and exaggerate their skill and the hazards of the environment. I firmly believe that approach leads to more accidents).


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

My first impression when I heard about this was that the group was trying to earn the Darwin Award instead of merit badges. Subsequent review of this hasn't changed my view. 

Very scary, even after the incredulity wears off.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

I am going to have to side with Backcountry.
I wouldn't even try to list all the mistakes and bad judgement made by the leaders and parents of this group.

But other than the hypothermia angle you could float that whole section in a life jacket even at 13000 CFS


----------



## BGD (Mar 23, 2018)

These leaders (and others) totally disregarded the BSA procedures and protocol for an activity such as this. At a minimum they would have been required to have completed Safe Swim Defense training, Safety Afloat Training, had someone that was CPR Certified, and had a trip tour plan in place that was reviewed and approved by the Chartered Org Rep. As part of all this each participant would have had to pass a swim check. If they had completed these trainings, then they totally disregarded the guidelines. 

I will be the first to admit that meeting the letter of the law of BSA safety requirements isn’t easy and our activities haven’t always checked every box but we certainly made significant efforts. 

The summary to the safety afloat training states “Swimming, kayaking, or any aquatic activity will have potential hazards, even for advanced participants. Lives can be saved with proper supervision and training; lives can be and have been lost by not following Safety Afloat practices.”

Safe Swim Defense requires “All swimming activity must be supervised by a mature and conscientious adult age 21 or older who understands and knowingly accepts responsibility for the well-being and safety of those in his or her care, and who is trained in and committed to compliance with the eight points of BSA Safe Swim Defense.”

Sorry for the preaching. This struck a chord with me. I appreciate anyone that will give of their time to mentor youth. But youth leaders do a great disservice when they do not adequately prepare and put in the necessary time to be properly trained to carry out safe activities. Thank Heavens we are only talking of stupidity instead of tragedy.


----------



## Lone_Hunter (Oct 25, 2017)

DallanC said:


> The leaders are millennial's.


That say's it all right there.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

Tough week on the Green.

https://www.ocregister.com/2019/07/08/newport-beach-man-dies-in-colorado-river-rafting-accident


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Not impressed with Boy Scout leadership. I recently took a motorcycle trip to southern Utah. Riding from Escalante to Torrey on Highway 12, I remembered the time when Boy Scouts felled a tree across that same highway and a motorcyclist was killed. Also, they started a huge fire up in the Uintas a few years ago. This "canoe" trip was beyond stupid. Blind leading the blind.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Also remember a couple years ago when a leader knocked over a Hoodo down in Goblin Valley and got into all kinds of trouble. 

There is diffidently a problem with the way that these so called leaders are chosen to lead the young men. And the way that it looks most of them have no idea of how to do it.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

Good thing the LDS church is getting out of scouting.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

middlefork said:


> Good thing the LDS church is getting out of scouting.


But they are starting their own program.

Sent from my SM-J737V using Tapatalk


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I am not intending to call out any individual, but more of a general comment on criticism like this in society overall. I wonder how many people that complain about the leadership of volunteers have put their money where there mouth is and stepped up to offer their own clearly superior abilities instead of these ones that are lacking? 

Again, not intending to call anyone out. And this topic on BSA is just today’s example of a larger problem. I’ve been guilty of it for sure myself. It’s easy to remain on the sideline and criticize. We see it far too often. It’s way too easy to shout from the peanut gallery without ever having stepping into the game ourselves. Again, I’m guilty of it as well, but have tried to identify areas I’ve done it or am doing it and reduce or stop it altogether.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

I feel for the BSA, scouts and families. There has always been demand that exceeds supply when it comes to leaders. It's a decades old problem.

As another poster highlighted here, they BSA has actually done a great job the last 10-15 years pushing safety and skills development for leaders. I've known a few of leaders who have done a great job at adopting those standards. If it's not obvious from my other comment, I actually believe the other "half" of BSA leaders are either plenty capable or know the boundaries to their skills. My childhood troop had a few of them as well. Unfortunately, the others who lead trips that they lack the proper skills for are highly visible and often end up in accidents like this that gain public attention.

I myself haven't volunteered to be a BSA leader nor would I be accepted as one due to the "declaration of religious principles" that is critical to their mission. Luckily there are a ton of other ways to teach, mentor and learn. And I agree that each of us can try to find ways to do just that within our communities.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I don't want to act like that even with your best preparation, bad things and accidents can't and won't happen. That simply isn't true. Anytime you head out into the outdoors, there is risk. We accept certain levels, and draw lines for ourselves all the time. But even on a basic day hike that we'd all consider low risk, there is risk and elements we simply can't control that could cause problems. 

This activity in the article does not appear to be a situation where there was qualified people involved in preparing everyone for this type of activity and then something that is out of their control and part of the risk of the activity lines up and an unfortunate event takes place. I'm generally one that likes to give people the benefit of the doubt, but this situation I can't find any information to support that. 

I've been known to be viewed as overly cautious when it comes to youth activities, and I wear that as a badge of honor. We still believe in robust, high adventure opportunities, but if we don't have the experience and knowledge to do it safely, and if we haven't prepared properly to do it safely, we simply won't do it. I'll take risks when I am by myself and skimp on areas when I am by myself that I simply am not willing to do if I have other people's kids with me. I wish more leaders viewed it that way, and if they did, we'd have less of these terrible situations. We'd still have accidents unfortunately, but we'd definitely have less.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

I'll be the first one to admit my days in the scouting program were for the most part led by competent people. It was about Explorer age when I noticed that the leaders were not really capable of leading most of the activities we were interested in. But then the Explorers were designed to have posts with a somewhat limited focus which did not happen.

I have been lucky to have been involved in both participating and leading in what most people would list as high risk activities as a volunteer. 

The leaders in the OP had absolutely no checks on the suitability of the endeavor or their ability to lead it as I see it.


----------



## BradN (Sep 25, 2007)

Lone_Hunter said:


> That say's it all right there.


I'm by no stretch a millennial, but I think it's unfair to paint a group of people with a broad stroke. Often in LDS troops, the Bishops call millennials to be Scoutmasters and troop leaders and provide little to no support. Often these men don't have the life experiences necessary to plan such trips, but there's pressure from kids, parents and leaders to pull off a big event. BSA guidelines, if followed, will help in planning and help provide a safe environment for these kids.

When I was much younger and a Venturer leader (older scouts), we were doing one of our assessment pre-hikes and we lost a group of 5 boys. Despite precautions, including having a leader at the front and other adults interspaced and a leader at the back, the 5 took a short cut and got lost. They didn't follow instructions. We lost them for about 4 scary hours. Thankfully, the weather was warm and it was a hike close to home. I learned some lessons and thankfully no one was hurt. Point is, when you're older its really easy to be dismissive of younger people who are trying. We experienced folk, need to be mentoring, watching, and supporting training for the younger generations.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

BradN said:


> Point is, when you're older its really easy to be dismissive of younger people who are trying. We experienced folk, need to be mentoring, watching, and supporting training for the younger generations.


This is very well stated, and in my opinion, spot on.


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> I don't want to act like that even with your best preparation, bad things and accidents can't and won't happen. That simply isn't true. Anytime you head out into the outdoors, there is risk. We accept certain levels, and draw lines for ourselves all the time. But even on a basic day hike that we'd all consider low risk, there is risk and elements we simply can't control that could cause problems.
> 
> This activity in the article does not appear to be a situation where there was qualified people involved in preparing everyone for this type of activity and then something that is out of their control and part of the risk of the activity lines up and an unfortunate event takes place. I'm generally one that likes to give people the benefit of the doubt, but this situation I can't find any information to support that.
> 
> I've been known to be viewed as overly cautious when it comes to youth activities, and I wear that as a badge of honor. We still believe in robust, high adventure opportunities, but if we don't have the experience and knowledge to do it safely, and if we haven't prepared properly to do it safely, we simply won't do it. I'll take risks when I am by myself and skimp on areas when I am by myself that I simply am not willing to do if I have other people's kids with me. I wish more leaders viewed it that way, and if they did, we'd have less of these terrible situations. We'd still have accidents unfortunately, but we'd definitely have less.


Overly cautious when it comes to youth activities is a good thing. Each year around spring time, the local Church (LDS) leadership sends out a reminder to all ecclesiastical leaders reminding them to choose activities that DO NOT have inherent dangers in them. They are advised to keep activities within a certain geographical range of travel to limit the danger of someone falling asleep while driving. But every year youth leaders ignore the advise. One ecclesiastical leader asked his youth leaders to not participate in cliff diving on an activity. The leader promised that they wouldn't. Upon return, the youth all talked about how neat the cliff diving was and pictures were posted in the foyer of them participating in it. The funding for the trip the next year was withheld by the main leader because the youth leader could not follow the request to be safe.

I admire those willing to support, be there with the youth, and be a mentor, but part of that involves getting the proper training in water activities, mountaineering and rock climbing and in any other skills needed to carry out the activity. Proper gear and equipment are a must. Also needed are medical personnel who can warn about possible problems like hypothermia and dehydration and have the skills to treat all types of injuries. It's hard to find willing youth leaders because of possible litigation.

I'm hoping with the new youth programs being launched in LDS Church this coming year, the safeguards will be in place and that youth leaders will follow direction and advise. If not, it could be worse than the BSA.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

If they didn’t follow them under the BSA umbrella, they won’t follow them now. 

And the Church’s guidelines are not nearly as spelled out for individual activities as they are in BSA. It’s one of my biggest worries moving into the future. 

It’s interesting when we talk about safety. Lots of folks think they can put on these higher risk activities safely because they know how to do them as an individual. “I know how to rappel safely, so I can take the youth and do it.” While you may know all the safety rules, do you know how to teach them effectively and simply so someone without the skill can match that safety level? Do you know what to do if an inexperienced person on a rope freaks out and you have to take action?

Just because one knows how to safely handle a firearm does not mean they know how to help someone else that doesn’t rise to the necessary level of safety. Do yourself and helping others to do require totally different skill sets and frames of mind. This is where I think most people get themselves into trouble in outdoor activities with youth.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

That is true and the BSA guidelines were modified to deal with such skill based problems. Instructing is definitely a different beast with specific demands. I can't imagine leading a trip for the BSA without adhering to such explicit expectations.

The "safety afloat" standards are pretty clear that the leader in this trip was expected to be "confident in his or her ability to respond appropriately in an emergency". Hence the earlier criticisms.

To the point of instructing and training scouts, Safety Afloat states:

"Before a unit using human-powered craft controlled by youth embarks on a float trip or excursion that covers an extended distance or lasts longer than four hours, each participant should either receive a minimum of three hours training and supervised practice or demonstrate proficiency in maneuvering the craft effectively over a 100-yard course and recovering from a capsize."

From reporting and outcomes it's pretty clear these supervisors and scouts likely didn't follow the protocol to help mitigate the float trips risk. 

Ironically, the BSA is theoretically ahead of the curve for much of the recreation industry. Most organizations that I've seen or worked for don't have written protocol for outdoor activities nor do they any form of training or skill assessment. It's pretty amazing to me how many public institutions and private businesses just take people into environments and activities with noticeable risk without any forethought on mitigation. 

It's more expensive but there is a reason to go with a professional guide if/when you lack the proper skills.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

backcountry said:


> It's more expensive but there is a reason to go with a professional guide if/when you lack the proper skills.


This is very true. And actually, this is part of the semi-recently released LDS Church's safety guidelines for youth activities. (Which would make many of these activities cost prohibitive.) Except for people don't follow them, and therein lies the larger issue. It's tough at times to enforce policies in entirely volunteer organizations.


----------

