Uniforms
For All messages dealing with Scout Uniforms
1716 topics in this forum
-
- 1 reply
- 875 views
-
- 6 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 4 replies
- 909 views
-
- 37 replies
- 6.2k views
-
- 70 replies
- 9.6k views
-
- 0 replies
- 911 views
-
- 4 replies
- 1k views
-
- 1 reply
- 824 views
-
- 2 replies
- 983 views
-
- 3 replies
- 944 views
-
- 16 replies
- 4.7k views
-
- 7 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 21 replies
- 3.9k views
-
- 7 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 20 replies
- 3.6k views
-
LATEST POSTS
-
I've been reading the 1941 Handbook for Scoutmasters and it reminded me of something I read as a kid in my first Boy Scout Handbook, 9th edition. To make sure I wasn't misremembering, I pulled it off the shelf and on page 17, it discusses Patrol Hikes and Camps. It says "Good patrols go overnight camping by themselves." The 10th edition dilutes the encouragement and makes it more of a possibility. By the 12th edition, the notion of a Patrol doing something without the rest of the troop isn't even an idea. Just to make sure it wasn't a Green Bar Bill anomaly, I went back to the 7th edition and found a similar idea as the 9th. Even as a youth, I always thought it would be fun to have a patrol campout, but we were pretty limited due to transportation. Even the SA website says, "Patrol Activities - A Scout patrol may camp or hike with other patrols in the unit." This sounds suspiciously like "Only troop camping is allowed", which is a bit like Cub Scouts, with the exception of the Webelos and AOL dens. Even the G2SS has eliminated any mention of patrol outings. If a troop is supposed to be made up of patrols and not split into patrols, then shouldn't the focus be on patrol-level activities? -
By HashTagScouts · Posted
We had started off with intent to keep units separate, then when numbers fell and recruitment just wasn't bringing in new girls, for practical purposes we had to do everything jointly. The pilot just made sense- especially as we were told from our Field Service Director that National did not want councils to keep letting units re-charter with 3-4 youth year-over-year anymore- that it was survival for us. Too many girls in our pack have brothers, and to lose pairings each year would kill us, and eventually begin to make parents question why they are even registering their kids in our pack when they'll have to move to the town over in 3 years like their BFF's kids had to do. -
By BisonBison · Posted
Long before the co-ed pilot, our troop operated as a co-ed unit. We had to register separate girls and boys troops and have adult leaders cross-registered (technically with two scoutmasters), but we ran a single program (with co-ed supervision at all times). -
We are dealing with an obderate council that refused to allow our small unit to be part of the pilot locally, but we have two girls we will register anyway, though how we have not figured out for sure. Otherwise we lose them, and they are part of the family already with committed parents. Two others are a year back. I suggested to the leaders they just move them at charter like normal and then we deal with the nonsensical "stuff". Small units like ours really need ALL the youth we can get, period. -
By HashTagScouts · Posted
The "Make Our Program Highly Relevant" presentation was the relevant one to watch (https://nam.scouting.org/presentations/). Angelique spoke in that video on the pilot and what they are reviewing and timing as "fall". The "Opening General Session" Roger Krone" mentioned October on decision specific to this pilot. Not sure where the December was coming from, but the February that Angelique mentions in the FB post is - to me anyway - odd If the pilot is killed for existing units (for forming new units, that would correlate to AoL crossover, which makes sense if continuing the pilot). I still say that with the 174 units that are in pilot, Scouting America is highly unlikely to do away with this option.
-
-
Who's Online (See full list)