Jump to content

Equipment Reviews & Discussions

Discussions dealing with equipment topics (tents, lights, packs, boots, stoves, etc.)


387 topics in this forum

    • 18 replies
    • 3.5k views
    • 24 replies
    • 3.5k views
    • 22 replies
    • 3.4k views
  1. Roll or Stuff a tent? 1 2

    • 21 replies
    • 3.3k views
  2. Troop Tents or Personal Tents 1 2

    • 26 replies
    • 3.3k views
  3. Propane Lantern

    • 3 replies
    • 3.3k views
    • 29 replies
    • 3.3k views
    • 29 replies
    • 3.3k views
    • 20 replies
    • 3.3k views
    • 37 replies
    • 3.3k views
  4. Pad under sleeping bag? 1 2

    • 25 replies
    • 3.3k views
    • 10 replies
    • 3.2k views
  5. Lightweight Patrol Gear Ideas 1 2

    • 15 replies
    • 3.2k views
    • 30 replies
    • 3.2k views
    • 17 replies
    • 3.1k views
  • LATEST POSTS

    • Fred8033: I am similarly sad to read the documents revealing the actions GSUSA was taking at the time of our most-extreme peril.  I recall the ferocious things their national leadership said publically about volunteers in the BSA (like the posters on this site).  Most regretfully, I am troubled by how these attitudes were directly transmitted to their professionals and volunteers at the local level.  Despite the bad behavior displayed and harshest words spoken to us nationally and locally, I have not heard one anti-GSUSA peep from anyone on this site, on my Scoutmaster Staff or around our local council.   One important thing has changed though.  Our Scouts BSA Troop for Girls was once thought to be an "alternate" program for young women.  Parents and their daughters would visit our open houses and directly contemplate whether they would join GUSUA or Scouts BSA for Girls.  No longer.  Three years on Scouts BSA for Girls is now a very normal and broadly-accepted activity for girls in the District of Columbia metropolitan area.  They now come to us and gladly join without any mention of other youth services programs.  This is only a limited observation of one Scoutmaster in one Troop, but I'll note the difference is significant.
    • I wonder if SEs will be able to raid those unit accounts. Sadly i saw a SE raid the OA lodge's account that was to be used for camp improvements for conclave. When all the bills started arriving, there was no money to pay them. 
    • I know in the early to late 1980s, 1982 - 1989 to be exact,  Webelos were coming over as full dens. I do not know when the NSP was officially piloted, but in 1986, my troop was asked to pilot it. IT WAS A COMPLETE FAILURE and we went back to Traditional Patrols a year later. Imagine everyone's surprise when NSPs became a recommended model in August 1989
    • My thoughts. 1. Sea Scouts has been the exception to the Older Scout problem because they have customs and traditions dating back to 1912. Even when Sea Scouts turned into Sea Exploring, and  you had traditional and non traditional ships, those traditional ships survived and thrived. 2. regarding advancement, that was NEVER meant to be a focus for Venturing, hence the original 5 Bronze in specialties, Gold, and Silver Awards. They were optional items. 3. Regarding the term Venture Scout, that term was already in use to those Scouts in Venture crews within troops. When Venturing came out in 1998, they took over the term crew,  and caused Venture crews to be renamed Venture patrols. Now that Venture Patrols are dead, I see no reason to not to rename Venturers  to Venture Scouts since they already appropriated the unit designation. 4. While I love the concept of Venturing, heck I would have loved an active HA Exploring Post back in the day, the biggest challenge is adult volunteers. Sadly you a need number of dedicated, adventurous adults willing to work with the young adults. 5. Why is talk about increasing Venturing membership coming up when I though the Churchill Plan looked at maximizing the age for all BSA programs at 18? I know that fact motivated some Venturing folks, and 99.9999999% of the Sea Scout Community to save the programs, FOR THE MOMENT.  I emphasize FOR THE MOMENT because if you remember the response to the Churchill leak DID state they leave the 18-20 year old question open to future shutdown  discussion. Yes, I remember the national Sea Scout commodore, being taken completely by surprise by that. The topic of shutting out 18-20 year old Sea Scouts had never been discussed with him, and he was the national volunteer in charge of Sea Scouts.
    • Qwazse:  Please be very direct.  Which ages are you in favor of being in a continuing "stand alone" program?  There have been several age-range ideas floating around and I'd like to know the format you favor and why.  Thanks, Cburkhardt.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...