AMY THORSTENSON
FEBRUARY 2012 

Stevens Point, WI 
715/343-6215 
www.goldensandsrcd.org

2 
Introduction 

Biological control studies are currently underway in Wisconsin to improve the 
science of applied biological control of Eurasian watermilfoil (EWM). Many lake groups 
are eagerly awaiting the results of those studies and are interested in applying biological 
control in their lake. However, for many cash-strapped lake groups, purchasing their 
weevils outright would be cost-prohibitive. As we move forward in our understanding of 
the biological control of EWM, this mass rearing pilot study aims to move us forward in 
making milfoil weevils a more practical option for lake groups with more sweat equity 
than cash. The mass rearing method (Thorstenson 2011) is labor intensive and must 
be followed to the letter in order to maximize success. Phase I of this pilot study was 
the first year of evaluating the capability of volunteer groups to successfully produce 
weevils on a mass scale. 

Methods

Study area —Lake Holcombe (Chippewa/Rusk Co) is a 2,881-acre impoundment 
of the Chippewa River, with a maximum depth of 61 ft. Large parcels of the riparian 
properties belong to the State of Wisconsin or paper company holdings and remain in 
natural/wooded condition. The Minong Flowage (Douglas/Washburn Co) is a 1,587- 
acre impoundment of the Totagatic River, with a maximum depth of 21 feet and 
surrounding natural/wooded shoreline. Goose Lake (Adams Co) is an 84-acre seepage 
lake with a maximum depth of 22 ft and surrounding natural/wooded shoreline. 
Study Design — Weevil rearing methods were modeled after Hanson, et al. 
1995, with modifications based graduate work conducted by Amy Thorstenson at UW-

3

Stevens Point (Thorstenson2011). Hanson, et al. reported that an outdoor stock tank 
performed just as well their indoor, controlled 20-gal aquariums, with less management 
time invested. Thorstenson’s studies found similar results, and developed a simplified 
method for outdoor, mass rearing. 
Each lake group set-up and maintained 10, 370-L “Freeland poly-tuf‟ stock tanks 
(79cm W x 132cm L x 63cm H), stationed in an outdoor area where full sun and access 
to a clean water supply was available. The sunniest location available was selected to 
keep the milfoil stems (food stems) healthy, but water temperatures were monitored to 
ensure they did not approach lethal temperatures (34 C / 93 F). Water temperatures 
were monitored with aquarium thermometers and recorded regularly. Fresh water was 
added as needed to top off the tanks. NoSeeUm (0.033 cm mesh) light duty fiberglass 
screening was used to cover the tanks and pools. While the primary use of the 
screening was to exclude predator/competitor insects and birds, it also functioned as 
light shade to reduce peak temperatures in the tanks during sunlight hours. 

EWM stems to be used for food were collected from the same lake that would be 
the recipient of the weevils reared. Stems were collected from the deepest milfoil beds 
available, farthest from shore, where naturally occurring weevils were less likely to be 
present, in order to avoid the inadvertent introduction of unaccounted for weevils. To 
minimize the introduction of predator or competitor insects, the collected food stems 
were laid thinly over a mesh screen and sprayed with a hose and nozzle at a pressure 
sufficient to clean the milfoil but not damage it. Cleaned stems were then be floated in a 
wading pool of clean water, sorted and untangled. Because weevils lay their eggs on 

4

apical meristems, only stems with apical meristems were retained for use; stems that 
had gone to flower or had broken tips were be discarded. Stems were trimmed to a 
length sufficient to reach from the base of the rearing chamber to the surface of the 
chamber’s water (62 cm). Stems were then bundled together in groups of fifteen stems, 
and attached at the base to a rock with a rubber-band to weight the stems down and 
achieve vertical orientation in the rearing chamber. All chambers received an initial 
stocking of milfoil food bundles, with stockings repeated every 21 days to keep the 
weevils supplied with actively growing milfoil (Table 1). 
Table 1 
Weevil feeding schedule. 

# of EWM 
stems to feed 
per tank 
Day 0 
Day 21 
Day 42 
105 
165 
225 

The “starter batch” of weevils were purchased from EnviroScience, Inc., Ohio. 
EnviroScience Inc. provided weevil stock from northern Wisconsin, in order to ensure 
weevils with winter-hardy genetics. Each tank was stocked with 0.19 weevils/L (72 
weevils per 100-gal tank). The purchased weevils arrived as eggs and early instar 
larvae attached to bundles of milfoil stems in sealed plastic bags. The estimated 
number of weevils in each bag was written on the outside of each bag, however the 
number of weevils inside were assumed to be unevenly distributed amongst the milfoil 
stems within. Therefore, the stems were placed into a large tub of water and counted to 
derive an estimated average of weevils per stem. Stems were then selected randomly 

5

to accumulate the number of weevils needed to stock each rearing chamber. Thus, the 
number of weevils initially stocked to each rearing chamber was an estimated average. 

Chambers were maintained for approximately 55 days, allowing enough time for 
producing two generations. Prior to releasing the weevils to their recipient lake, 
subsamples were extracted to estimate total production. A 10% subsample of the 
weevil-containing food stems were extracted from four of the ten tanks (selected at 
random), preserved in 80% isopropyl alcohol, and refrigerated until laboratory 
examination. The preserved subsample stems was examined by Thorstenson by 
floating stems in water in a glass pan over a light table, with 3x magnification goggles. 
Each stem was carefully examined for weevil eggs, larvae, pupae, and adults and the 
total number of weevils recorded. The assistance of a higher power (30x) Carson 
MagniscopeTM was used for identification of specimens when needed. Specimen 
vouchers were preserved in sample vials in 80% isopropyl alcohol. 

Data Analysis

For the each rearing site, average return rate and total estimated 
production was estimated based on the 10% subsamples. Total estimated release (total 
production – subsamples) was also calculated. Temperature records were analysed to 
calculate min, max, mean, and 90% confidence intervals, to evaluate whether volunteers were 
maintaining optimal water temperatures. 

Results

Goose Lake – Expected return rate was 9.6 weevils out per weevil stocked, and 
Goose Lake’s return rate was 0.6. (Table 2) 720 weevils were initially stocked to the10 

6 

rearing tanks, and total production was estimated at 400 weevils. Lab examinations 
observed: low occurrence of miscellaneous insects; substantial mixing of hybrid milfoil, 
M. sibiricum, and M. verticillatum stems; dead or bacteria-engulfed pupa; low 
occurrence of pupation sites; and low evidence of weevil damage on non-M. spicatum
stems. Due to an acute lack of available M. spicatum in Goose Lake, M. sibiricum and 
hybrid milfoil were also collected as an optional food choice when it became necessary. 
Water temperatures were monitored but not recorded. Tank temperatures were 
moderated by adding fresh groundwater as needed. 
Minong Flowage - Expected return rate was 9.6 weevils out per weevil stocked, 
and Minong Flowage’s return rate was 1.8. (Table 3) 720 weevils were initially stocked 
to the10 rearing tanks, and total production was estimated at 1,300 weevils. Lab 
examinations observed: low occurrence of miscellaneous insects; no non-M. spicatum
mixed in; heavy weevil damage to stems in some tanks; and fused, deformed milfoil 
leaflets and hardened, opaque stems (indicative of exposure to herbicides) in some 
tanks. Tank temperatures were moderated by adding fresh groundwater as needed. 
Water temperature ranged from 60 - 80 F, with a mean of 71 F. (Table 4) These 
temperatures were similar to temperatures expected (per Thorstenson 2011), but lower 
than the temperatures optimal for weevil production. (Figure 1) 
Lake Holcombe - Expected return rate was 9.6 weevils out per weevil stocked, 
and Lake Holcombe’s return rate was 3.1. (Table 5) 720 weevils were initially stocked 
to the10 rearing tanks, and total production was estimated at 2,090 weevils. Lab 
examinations observed: low occurrence of miscellaneous insects; no non-M. spicatum
species mixed in; poor stem health; heavy weevil damage to stems in some tanks; 

7

limited available oviposition sites; and fewer eggs than expected. Tank temperatures 
were moderated by adding fresh groundwater as needed. Water temperature ranged 
from 70 - 90 F, with a mean of 82 F. (Table 6) These temperatures were higher than 
temperatures expected (per Thorstenson 2011), and similar to temperatures optimal for 
weevil production. (Figure 1) 

Discussion

Goose Lake production was substantially lower than expected, and the optional 
feeding on non-M. spicatum species was likely the key problem. Temperatures were 
closely monitored (although not recorded), and not believed to be a problem. 
Subsample observations noted few miscellaneous insects, ruling out a predation 
problem. Subsample examinations confirmed several species of milfoil were used in 
feeding, including: M. sibiricum, hybrid milfoil (northern x M. spicatum), M. verticillatum. 
M. heterophyllum is also present in Goose Lake and may also have been fed, although 
subsample examinations did not confirm this. Subsample examinations noted problems 
with pupation (bacteria-laden pupa, dead pupa, few pupal chambers observed), and 
weevil damage observed on M. spicatum but not the other species that were mixed in. 
Weevil developmental time is longer, and developmental performance is poorer, on M. 
sibiricum than on their exotic host, M. spicatum (Newman et al. 1997). Research in the 
Midwest has found that weevil performance on hybrid milfoils was intermediate between 
the native hose (M. sibiricum) and the exotic host (M. spicatum) (Roley & Newman 
2006). Weevil developmental time is significantly longer when reared on M. 
verticillatum than on M. spicatum (37 days versus 21 days) (Solarz & Newman 2001). 

8 

Additionally, oviposition (where they choose to lay their eggs) preference was 
significantly less for M. sibiricum and nearly absent for M. verticillatum in females that 
were reared on M spicatum (Solarz & Newman 2001). Weevil development on or 
preference for M. heterophyllum is unknown. Therefore, the optional feeding of other 
milfoils, although unpreventable due to an acute lack of M. spicatum in 2011, was likely 
the main factor in low production. 
Minong Flowage had lower than expected production, possibly due to a 
combination of factors. One factor may have been food stem quality. The Minong site 
was the shadiest of the three sites, and subsample examinations noted stems in very 
poor condition, some limp, as if they did not get enough sunlight. Additionally, some 
tubs had stems that were deformed (fused leaflets, tough, opaque stems) as if exposed 
to herbicides. Food stem collection was in an area of the Flowage that had not been 
treated with herbicides, but was within the same bay (Serenity Bay). (Appendix B) It 
would be possible that residual herbicides were insufficient to kill the milfoil there, but 
yet sufficient to cause growth deformities. These deformities may have negatively 
affected the plant’s qualities as a host plant for successful weevil development. (Note 
the dead pupa recoded in the same tub that had the deformed stems.) 
Lake Holcombe had lower than expected production, probably due to weevil 
development time being shorter than expected. The rearing site was in open prairie, 
with all-day sun, which allowed the tubs to warm more than expected. Volunteers 
managed the temperatures frequently, adding fresh, cool groundwater twice a day if 
needed to keep tanks from getting too hot during heat waves. Their temperature 
records reflect that effort, with tank temperatures hovering around a mean of 81 F, and 

9 

a tight 90% confidence interval of less than 1 degree. We were expecting tub 
temperatures to average around 71 F, as in Thorstenson 2011, and for the full life cycle 
to take about 21 days. Lake Holcombe’s temperatures were closer to optimal 
temperatures for weevil development (84 F, Mazzei et al. 1999). At this temperature, 
the full life cycle takes only 17 days (Mazzei et al. 1999), which means the weevils 
should have been fed four days sooner, at each feeding cycle. Subsample 
examinations found heavy feeding damage, a shortage of healthy growing buds suitable 
for egg laying, and a shortage of healthy, fat stems suitable for pupation sites, all 
evidence that the weevils were running out of food and habitat, which certainly led to 
reduced production rates. 
Although the results of this study were well below expected, the problems 
encountered can be adjusted for with modifications to the methods. In future studies, it 
is recommended to: 
select rearing sites that have a minimum of 6 hours of sunlight to maintain 
healthy food stems; 
collect food stems well away from potential herbicide residue areas; 
avoid the optional use of other milfoil species; 
and to monitor temperatures regularly and shorten feeding cycle times at very 
sunny sites where optimal temperatures are attained. 

Acknowledgments 

This study was funded by an Aquatic Invasive Species Grant (#AEPP-304-11) 
from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. This study would not have been 

10 

possible without the dedication of team leaders at each site: David Blumer, SEH, Inc., 
Reesa Evans, Adams County Land Conservation Department, and “Doc” Dougherty, 
Lake Holcombe Association; and their dedicated volunteer crews at Goose Lake 
Association, Swift Nature Camp, Minong Flowage Lake Association, and Lake 
Holcombe Association. 

References

Hanson, T., C. Eliopoulos, and A. Walker. 1995. Field Collection, Laboratory Rearing 
and In-lake Introductions of the Herbivorous Aquatic Weevil, Euhrychiopsis 
lecontei, in Vermont. Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, 
Waterbury, VT. 
Mazzei, K.C., R.M. Newman, A. Loos, and D.W. Ragsdale. 1999. Developmental rates 
of the native milfoil weevil, Euhrychiopsis lecontei, and damage to Eurasian 
watermilfoil at constant temperatures. Biological Control. 16:139-143. 
Newman, R.M., M.E. Borman, and S.W. Castro. 1997. Developmental performance of 
the weevil Euhrychiopsis lecontei on native and exotic watermilfoil host-plants. J. 
of the North Amer. Benthological Soc. 16:627-634. 
Roley, S.S., and R.M. Newman. 2006. Developmental performant of the milfoil weevil, 
Euhrychiopsis lecontei (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), on northern watermilfiol, 
Eurasian watermilfoil, and hybrid (northern x Eurasian) watermilfoil. 
Entomological Soc. of Amer. 

Solarz, S.L. and R.M. Newman. 2001. Variation in hostplant preferences and 
performance by the milfoil weevil, Euhrychiopsis lecontei Dietz, exposed to native 
and exotic watermilfoils. Oecologia 126:66-75.

Thorstenson, A.L. 2011. Biological control of eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum 
spicatum) using the native milfoil weevil (Euhrychiopsis lecontei). M.S. Thesis. 
University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, Stevens Point, WI. 

_____________________________________________

Creative License

Here is where I change the pattern of the Hero’s Journey a bit. In the classic version the Hero meets a Mentor that guides him or her to heed the Call to Adventure. So step 4 would be Meeting with the Mentor. Step 5 is Crossing the Threshhold where our Hero commits to the Adventure. In my structure those two steps are reversed as the Mentor in this typical scenario is the camp counselor that helps our Heros and Heroines through the tests of the Journey.
Now back to our story…

_____________________________________________

Stage 4 – Crossing the Threshold

Our Hero is now encouraged to answer the Call by parents, other family members, friends and even camp videos. Through this encouragement many children finally decide to commit to the Journey. They are going to camp. This commitment leads to all kinds of feelings and emotions. The camp fee has been paid and our Hero is gathering his/her gear for this Adventure (sleeping bag, toiletries, camera, clothes, etc.) and the feeling of excitement mixes with dread and anxiety. But our Hero must have courage (taking action in the face of fear). They must go forward. And our Hero does. They take the drive to camp and cross the Threshold onto the camp property where there are new sounds and sights. This is an unfamiliar place that is scary. Our Hero is committed though.

Stage 5 – Meeting with the Mentor

Now our Hero meets their Mentor, the camp counselor. The Mentor is confident, wise and protective. The Mentor knows that our Hero must face challenges during this Adventure but is there to help guide them through. The Mentor understands that our Hero will have to stretch him or herself, that they will grow as people through this experience.
While the Mentor may want to shield our Hero from adversity by letting them sit out of the challenges a camper faces (community living, camp competitions, high ropes course, swimming, performing, etc.) they also are wise enough to know that these challenges, these trials, are improtant to the Hero’s Journey.

Stage 6 – Tests, Allies and Enemies

Our Hero will face tests during this Journey. Our Hero may not know it but he/she is on a Journey for Treasure. That Treasure is completion of the Journey. It’s like a treasure chest filled with all the experiences, personal growth, relationships and memories that the Journey brings. But no treasure is worth having if there aren’t obstacles, challenges, tests, adversity.
The good news is that our Hero will not only have a Mentor but also Allies that will help our Hero get through it all. If our Hero goes to the pool for swim instruction their Ally will be the swim instructor. On the archery range it’s the archery instructor. Our Hero also has a cabin or group full of Allies (and possibly a few Enemies, which is also part of the Journey). These peer Allies will be important when it comes to camp competitions, ropes courses and team building, performing skits and evening activities such as camp dances.

Stage 7 – Approach to the Innermost Cave

On the first day of camp our Hero has met their Mentor and Allies, heard about the upcoming tests and challenges and have possibly met some Enemies (bullies, inner fear, bad food). At some point during the Journey our Hero will venture into the Innermost Cave, the darkest place they can imagine, the ultimate test. For many first time campers at resident (sleep-away) camp that Cave is night time where they will face their worst enemy -  homesickness. As night approaches our Hero feels a knot growing in the pit of their stomach. They begin to think about home and mom and the safety of their rooms. Even their little brother, who they fight with constantly, is being missed right now. If our Hero has not created Allies or has created more Enemies than Allies at this point then homesickness will be strong.
For other campers the Innermost Cave can be the fear of heights on a ropes course, the fear of drowning in the pool, the fear of body image when in the community shower, the fear of not making friends, the fear of being made fun of or losing a camp challenge.

Stage 8 – The Ordeal

Our Hero must now deal with their fear.  Hopefully the Mentor has recognized that our Hero is in the Cave facing his or her ultimate camp fear and is able to give our Hero advice on how to deal with it. Allies can also be a big part of getting through the Cave. For example, if our Hero has a fear of heights then his/her Allies will encourage our Hero to persevere as our Mentor gives clear, calm instructions. If our Hero does not face his/her demons then the Treasure may be lost to them. If homesickness leads to the parents taking our Hero home, if our Hero never leaves the gound at the high ropes course, if fear keeps our Hero from entering the water, then the memory of the Journey will be tainted, the sense of accomplishment will be lost, our Hero will not have stretched himself/herself and will have the hole in their soul to prove it. They MUST accomplish the task.

Stage 9 – Reward

Our Hero has conquered the fear, climbed the mountain, seized the sword, vanquished the dragon. They have emerged from their Ordeal. This was their initiation. They should now be recognized as special, a part of the select few that have conquered their fear. Now is the time for celebration. This may be an ending campfire, a group celebration of cheers and whoops, a token or trophy of their accomplishment or even a proud look from a mentor.

Stage 10 – The Road Back

Our Hero has done it – gone through all the experiences camp has to offer (and then some). The Treasure has been earned. Camp is over. Now it is time for our Hero to leave this Special World and return to the Ordinary World. But our Hero is not the same person they used to be. The Journey has strengthened them. Camp is no longer an unknown and scary place. It is a place of wonder filled with friends and Allies – a place where our Hero has learned that he or she can be courageous and do things they didn’t think possible. It is a place that taught them they could be without electronics, a place they found independence, a place they stretched and grew.

Stage 11 – Resurrection

But the story does not end there. Now that our Hero is home they must cope with a new Ordeal – the Oridanary World. The excitement fades as the Special World is out of site. Our Hero wants to return to the place of wonder, but they cannot. They have left a place of acceptance, encouragement, love, peace, challenge and accomplishment only to return to a harsh reality. This seperation anxiety is tough for many Heroes. Their new friends and Allies are missed, as is the Mentor who guided them through so much.
Camp is a place where kids can be someone else, someone better. They can start fresh. When they come home they return to the people that know them and their weaknesses. These people (family and hometown friends) weren’t there to see the strength our Hero used and the accomplishments our Hero made.
This is a time of rebirth, where our Hero sheds the personality of camp and builds a new one suitable for the Ordinary World, taking the lessons they learned on their Journey and fusing that with the best parts of their old selves – like a Phoenix rising from the ashes.

Stage 12 – Return with The Elixer

Now that our Hero has returned to the Ordinary Life and has ressurected into their new selves they bring back with them the Elixer – stories, pictures, momentos of their Journey, their Adventure, that they can share with others. This may inspire friends to go on journeys of their own. This may be the Call of Adventure for others that hear our Hero’s tales. The Elixer is the final part of our Hero’s Journey. It is the proof that our Hero was there, that he or she vanquished the dragon showing all others what is possible and that it is a Journey worth taking.
Once everyone back home has heard the tales our Hero has brought back – the time is right to plan the next journey.
this article is from http://summercampprogramdirector.com/new-campers-a-heros-journey/

• Learn about the rehabilitation of injured, sick and orphaned birds of prey during this live wildlife display. You’re sure to create lasting memories as you and your children interact with these amazing creatures!

• At Base camp, you will have the opportunity to build “nature sculptures” with the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie of the US Forest Service. During this activity, kids will utilize local, natural materials that surround them to create artistic “habitats”.

• This year, the Cook County Forest Preserve will be joined by their very own snake and turtle for an up-close and personal encounter.

• REI will have a presentation on PEAK, a hands-on, interactive program where children are taught to have fun outside while practicing responsible outdoor recreation. Children will also learn the 7 Leave No Trace principles: know before you go; choose the right path; pack your trash; leave what you find; be careful with fire; respect wildlife; and be kind to other visitors. REI will also be handing out some cool goodies as well.

4. WHAT SHOULD IT COST?

Camp comes in all sort of prices from $50 to $200 or more per day. The average given by the ACA (American Camp Association ) is $85 per day. Can you always assume a more expensive camp is better, NO. Nor is a cheaper camp worse. This is where you must do your homework, weighing activities, philosophy and directors versus cost. 
Remember, many camps have financial aid, scholarships, deferred payment plans, sliding scale tuition, and discounts for bringing a friend. Here is a hint, Look at camps in your range then start to compare programs.
 

5. CAMP PHILOSOPHY, WHATS THIS?

This is the heart and the soul of the camp and the most important aspect of the camp. This flows from the Directors down to the staff and then to the campers. Things to consider
Does your child get to work in a group, collaborate with other kids, learn how to work with a team?
How do they Discipline?
Do kids get work out conflict?
Do the children make their own schedule?
Are they in control?
You may have other things to ask that best soot your child’s needs and expectations.

6. TELL ME ABOUT THE DIRECTOR AND STAFF?

At Swift Nature Camp we encourage every family to call or meet with us at an open house, held in late May. We feel it is important for campers and parents to feel comfortable with us caring for their child. Sure we have years of experience and training but none of that matters if you cannot talk to us. This is true for any camp, if you can not talk to the Director that will be at camp 24/7 I would seriously consider continuing your search. Once you feel comfortable then asking about staff is easy. Because you know that the Directors are going to ensure the staff are properly trained and more interested in your child than their time off. As for staff ratios, the ACA accreditation sets requirements based on age and programs. As long as you select an ACA camp you will be assured to be meeting the code.

7. WHAT ABOUT SAFETY?

Safety is all that matters at camp. Again ACA camp s meet many criteria to be sure camps are safe and here are just a few: background checks on all employees, staff trained in CPR and first aid, Nurse or Doctor at camp, ample lifeguards, training and licensing for transportation.
 

8. WHAT ABOUT PARENT VALUES?

Every parent is different and so is every camper, the only real way to make sure this is the place for your family is to review the materials in websites and mailings. Then call the Director and chat. Ask every possible thing that might matter, here are a few:
Are kids in tents or cabins? 
Are showers in the cabin? 
How religious is camp?”
Can a child with food allergies be kept safe?
Who will dispense meds?
Can I talk to my child on the phone?

9. WHAT ARE OTHERS SAYING ?

Ask for refferences. The can be from local families or those far away. This will give insight what kind of reputation the camp has. When talking to other families be sure to not only talk to the parent but to the camper. Ask a few difficult questions not just “how was camp?” This will give you real insight into the daily working of camp.
Lastly if possible do a site visit so you can decide for yourself which camp is best for you and your children. It is best to tour the camp when campers are there, this can give you a good sense of the camp. Obviously this is not all that easy to do, so don’t put off camp just because you can not make it to the camp facility. 

Remember it is all about the work you do upfront that will help ensure your childs camp experience will be a great one. To get more information refer to Summer Camp Advice a wonderful website dedicated to helping parents learn how to pick a summer camp

"There is no substitute for real leadership," said Mike Dreiblatt, a former teacher and president o Stand Up To Bullying. "Many zero-tolerance policies are nothing more than feel-good, bumper-sticker, no-real-change-in-behavior empty gestures," Mike said.

"A truly effective zero-tolerance policy responds to bullying, harassment and other acts of misconduct efficiently, effectively and in a timely manner. A zero-tolerance policy which truly responds to bullying with a thorough investigation, appropriate intervention and continued follow-through is all too rare."

Pennsylvania schools' zero-tolerance policies drew criticism earlier this year when Madison Guarna, a 5-year-old in the Mount Carmel Area School District in Northumberland County, allegedly told schoolmates that she was going to shoot them with a Hello Kitty toy that makes soap bubbles.

Madison, a kindergartener, initially received a 10-day suspension from school officials and was ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation. The suspension later was reduced to two days, and Madison's mother, her attorney and school officials eventually reached an undisclosed settlement on the matter.

Last month, Harold Jordan, project director at the American Civil Liberties Union's Pennsylvania branch, authored and released a study about the zero-tolerance policy and noted that it's being used against a range of behaviors — including those in which kids are simply being kids.

The study, titled "Beyond Zero Tolerance: Discipline and Policing in Pennsylvania Public Schools," revealed that children are being targeted for dress-code violations and talking back to teachers.

Hardest on minorities

Jordan said African-Americans and students with disabilities are primarily hurt by the policy.

"[Blacks] make up just under 14 percent of the state's public school students but about half of the out-of-school suspensions," Jordan said.

The study noted that students with disabilities were almost twice as likely as others to receive out-of-school suspensions, and black students with disabilities received out-of-school suspensions at the highest rate of any group — 22 out of every 100 were suspended at least one time.

Further, 17 percent of black students were suspended at least once, a rate that's five times that of white students. It also revealed that one out of every 10 Latino students were suspended at least once, ranking Pennsylvania among the highest Latino suspension rates in the nation.

'Suspending a lot of kids'

Jordan said the report excluded charter and private schools, and data were extracted from reports by the state Department of Education, the federal Department of Education, Pennsylvania State Police and the state's Commission on Crime and Delinquency and after a slew of Right-to-Know requests.

The results ultimately show that the students as well as schools pay a high price because of the measures, Jordan said.

"They tend to become disengaged from school, even when they return, or they tend to drop out more than other students," he said. "Those schools don't necessarily become more peaceful places, and less violent places, just because you're suspending a lot of kids."

A total of 10 out-of-school suspensions were issued during the 2011-12 school year for every 100 students in public schools around the state, according to the ACLU study. That marked an increase from the 2009-10 rate of nine out-of-school suspensions per 100 students.

During the same year, 166,276 out-of-school suspensions were given out in Pennsylvania's school districts and about 1 out of every 15 public school student — or 6.51 percent — were suspended out-of-school at least once in 2009-10, the year for which the most recent data are available. The national average stands at 7.4 percent.

'One size fits all'

Psychologists and others said administrators are overlooking the fact that children are regurgitating what's being fed to them through various media and, for the most part, they are not a threat to safety.

"Most school board policies provide options and flexibility for administrators," said Kenneth Trump, a school safety consultant and president of National School Safety and Security Services in Cleveland, Ohio, which specializes in school security and emergency preparedness training, school security assessments and crisis services.

"What you see is poor decision-making and poor implementation of the policies, rather than the fact school administrators are handcuffed in terms of their discretion," said Trump, who, like others, noted that the recent rash of school violence, including the Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy, has only served to reinforce zero-tolerance policies.

"I think people are afraid because of the striking and dramatic events that have happened in schools and that have been reported by the media," said Susan M. McHale, director of Social Science Research Institute, director of Children, Youth and Families Consortium and professor of Human Development at Penn State University.

"The people who study youth violence often talk about the fact that school violence is phenomenally rare compared to street and gang violence," McHale said. "The cases we've seen in schools are horrendous but disproportionately small compared to other violence. This one-size-fits-all method of punishment is not "» the most effective way to get kids to show you their best and to trust and believe in adults."

Taking it too far?

The state's zero-tolerance policy was instituted in 1994 and required all states to mandate a minimum one-year expulsion of any student caught with a firearm on school property.

Like some other states, Pennsylvania expanded the zero-tolerance policy to include fighting, touching and other offenses such as talking back to teachers and administrators.

However, there are several reasons the policy simply doesn't work, said Christopher Emdin, an urban education expert, associate professor at Columbia University and a Caperton Fellow at the WEB DuBois Institute at Harvard University.

"While the idea of zero-tolerance for bullying appears to make sense by letting youth know that it's not condoned, too many anti-bullying initiatives impose too harsh a punishment that does nothing but demonize the bully," Emdin said.

"Common practices like isolating the bully from the general population or automatic suspensions are never a good situation."

Defer Payments

Credit cards have long been a way for parents to spread out the camp tuition payment. Lately more camps are letting families not Pay in Full prior to camp but are instead having families pay some before camp starts and some when camp is over.

Bargaining

Lets face it haggling has been a way of buying goods and services for 1000’s of years. It is important that camp is not only about price and not all camps are equal. So get a list of your favorite camps and start from that point and see how you do.

Early Bird Rates

Often camps will give some sort of discount when you sign up closer to the end of last summers camp.

Brother or Sister Discount

Summer camps are often willing to give a discount to your family if you have a sibling come along as well. So be sure to ask for this it is a no brainier.

Website Enrollment

On occasion you might see this discount but it seems to be going away as most camps do online registration.

Trade

Swapping service or products can make camp nearly free. These can be from things the camp may need to your services. Always good to get in a conversation with the director for this.

Affordability

This is a newer idea, camps give you a choice of prices and you pick the one that you can pay. Camps are hoping your honesty will shine through and if possible you will not just select the lower price for the same service.

Dependent Care

Some employers offer the ability to help pay for day care or other child care expenses. So check with your employer if a dependent care flex account can work for you.

Tax Deductions

Many parents view overnight camp as day care and recently the so has the government. So be sure to check with your accountant, you might just be able to take a deduction.

To learn more about choosing the right summer camp for your child see SUMMER CAMP ADVICE