In 2010, the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) will institute a new height/weight policy for scouts and leaders heading out on high adventure or extreme treks where medical care is farther than 30 minutes away. This chart isn't a guideline, it'll be mandatory, excluding both obese or even fit, muscular scouts/adult volunteers who don't fall within these body mass index (BMI) parameters.

As a fan of BSA, a Tiger den leader and a former Sierra Club National Outings Leader of backpack and canoe trips, I definitely agree participants need to be in shape and at a healthy weight to participate in rigorous outings. And it's true people don't always self-assess accurately -- I'll never forget the older gentleman who signed up for a strenuously-rated backpacking trip to Wyoming. On the first day, he stumbled maybe 200 yards down trail, then admitted he had a lung condition. We walked him back to the parking lot and said our goodbyes.

The scouting blogosphere is in the midst of a heated argument about the new policy right now. Implementing a risk management policy to ensure scouts and adult leaders are fit to hit remote trails is a good idea, but is BMI the best method? Commenters are attesting there are fit, capable people with high BMIs. Looks like BSA is listening to the high-muscle mass criticism, because their health and safety support committee is considering an alternative measure. What do you think?