Eagledad

I would suggest you Not break up the two patrols because you would in a sense be starting over. Its hard enough developing patrol bonding without breaking them up every time the troop becomes imbalanced. Instead you use the existing patrols as a resource for future new patrols. This is the one time that I would use the NSP. I have experienced this very scenario a few times and learned the hard way from the experience. You will be a lot farther a head with the first two patrol staying together and growing stronger. I think you need at least three NSP with 20 scouts to be manageable. I think you need at least two Troop guides per patrol and another ASPL or JASM to help manage work with the TGs them without actually being involved with any patrol. There are several ways of getting the two scouts per patrol, but there is one way we did it that worked pretty good. We assigned an old patrol to work with a NSP. We called them Big Brother Patrols. The NSP would set up their camp near the old patrol. Far enough to have patrol separation, but close enough that the Troop guides can walk over in just a few seconds. The work together the first few months as separate patrols, but in the same groups so that the new scouts have role models to watch. The problem is you have three NSPs and only two existing patrols. If you choose this idea, this might be one reason to only have two NSPs, but you have to understand the work required of working with 10 untrained, undisciplined 11 year old boys. The scouts need to see it coming and understand how to deal with it without yelling and getting frustrated. There are several ways you can approach the 20 new scouts, but everyone needs to understand the future problem of mixing the new scouts into existing patrols later, or if that is even possible. When we have NSPs, we mix the new scouts into existing patrols in about six months. If we need to create new patrols, we ask if anyone in the existing patrols would like to start a new patrol. We also allow the NSP to become a permanent patrol also, but that has never happened. There is usually a couple older scouts that would like to create a new patrol and recruit scouts (new and old) to join their new patrol. That is how you can create new patrols without breaking up the old patrols. But you dont want to do that at the beginning because it requires to much work on the older scout to develop the new scouts up to speed to where the work within the existing patrols. The NSP is the better route in this case. Does that help at all? Barry

>>Best idea keep the new scouts together with an older troop guide

I was the SM Specific trainer for our District for four years and I ran into the very same challenges Kudu mentioned. I also was of like mind with Beav that we couldnt stray away from the subject at hand. There are many important reasons for that, but just staying consistent with the training of other districts was important at the time. We discussed that these courses could not become a lecture about Barry Boy Scout program, or Bobs Boy Scout Program or Carols Boy Scout program. It was the BSAs and we needed to respect that to the fullest possible. I must admit that I was asked to take on the course to make the nine hours more palatable. SM Specific is by far one of the most boring adults courses presented by the BSA. We tried a lot of ideas to make it a better course including using three different very experienced scouters who were also very good presenters to break up the tone during the nine hours. Just having a different voice and face can be a relief. The reason we insisted on experienced presenters was we wanted a lot of actual experience stories backing up the subject lines, and to break up the lecture. And that worked very well. Our district developed enough of a reputation that we were getting a few participants from other districts. It was a bit a struggle not to make comments or criticize some parts of the program and we worked hard to push the BSA intent of each subject. For example I absolutely despise the way the BSA presents the Venture Patrols. Our troop had a very successful older scout program at the time that wasnt a model of the BSA Venture Patrol. Still I presented the subject the way the BSA had it in the text, and then I followed with experiences of our High Adventure Program or Older Boy Program. Truth is while I think the differences in the BSA program and our program is significant in performance, they dont appear all that different in definition. Another area of difference between the three presenters was Uniform. The uniform, believe it or not, is discussed in different context at least three different times through course. But I must admit that while all three of us use the Uniform method a little differently in our programs, the differences were not far enough away from the course text. I also admit I had the Patrol Method section and I didnt fully present it as adults taking such a big part. But here is the thing, we found that 99 percent of the participants dont really care what its called or how it is defined, they want to know how to do it. It doesnt really matter the subject, training, uniform, leadership, Patrol Methods, they really want to hear more about the hows than the whats. Patrol method is very difficult to get in the BSA text, so 20 minutes of how to work with boys goes a lot farther than just reading the text. The number one question that was always asked and complained about in all training is that the BSA doesnt do enough training on is how to work with misbehavior. Misbehavior is perceived as the biggest challenge by many of these folks. So I presented real life scenarios of dealing with Misbehavior in a patrol method application. I did the same thing when they asked about leadership or teaching or planning and so on. I also gave examples of how to combine the eight methods. I also spent a lot of time discussing the boy run part of the SM Handbook text during the patrol method. Its a pretty good place to air out and let participants ask questions. We purposely did not present anything that contradicted the BSA text. In fact we tried to used real life stories to color in a better picture of what the text was trying to say. We had three different leaders from three different units that kept the real life applications in balance and in within the intent of the text. That is how we did it and I think it worked out really well. I love this scouting stuff. Barry

I guess it is all relative. I developed the reputation as the most traditional SM in the District. I never really considered that because I was just doing it the way I learned when I was a boy scout. Another SM friend, who was never a boy scout as a youth, called me at work one Monday and asked what his scouts should do on campouts when they get bored with learning scout skills. At first I thought he was joking, but then he explained that he was doing everything that he learned at Wood Badge (old course) and SM Handbook. His agendas were pretty regimented with getting up, eating breakfast, scouts skills activities, eating lunch, more scout skills activities, dinner, Campfire and lights out. I asked him where he fit free time in there. He asked What free time?. I imagine if you asked him at that time if he was running a traditional scouting program, he would say yes because he knew of no other way of doing it. Its all relative. I love this scouting stuff Barry (not Manilow)

>>Has your PLC considered planning fun activities for Sundays?

I can't ever remember the oath and law not being said at any opening, Troop or otherwise. The "retesting" thing is a form politcal correctness of modern scouting and has lost its true meaning and intent from uses like this. The oath and law are the pillars of the ideals the BSA program uses for building the kind of character we want our sons to take with them the rest of their life. Without the oath and law, we are just a camping club. If a boy gets nothing else from the program, he should at least take with him the oath and law. And they get them simply by repeating it at least once every day in the program. Even as adults, most of us can remember the oath and law. Barry

I think ane evaluation is another good source of communication. True, there are the reviews and confrences, but we tend to get in a groove or rut (depending how you look at it) that could leave folks out. We once did something like this for the families so both the parents scouts could rate the troop. We found out that while the scouts were happy with the program, the parents had some questions about the way we did some activities. For example, there was some concern that adults weren't allowed to the PLC meetings. But the policy is any adult could attend if they first called and got permission from the SPL. Most parents didn't know that. Simple fact that needed a better explination. So we got more proactive in explaining why we did things the way we did. Truth is the adults and scouts need to learn how to evaluate each other and their program through reflections, so these kinds of evaluations aren't needed very much. But an evaluation one in great whiles can be a pretty good reflection itself. Barry

>>I personally don't ever want to be SM, I do think it's important for these young men to have a good male role model... I hang around because I think it's also good for these young men to see that a woman can do all the same things they do

>>And if someone woke me up in the middle of the night and asked me to go watch em pee, I would first wonder if they were serious, second if they were high off of anything, and if they insisted I would probably punch them.

Philmont doesn't really have a problem either. It has the appearance of a problem because the scouting community network is broad spreads news really fast. One incident sets off a pretty big alarm. Im trying to remember, but I want to say that they have had only two bear incidents in the last 20 years with only one of those requiring medical attention. Barry

>>NT in Bissett, MB doesn't use bear bags. The trees that far north just aren't big enough to properly hang a bag. So, bear canoes are the norm. You put the food packs on the ground and a canoe upside down over them, away from the tents. Then stack your pots on the canoe. Anyone hears the pots, rally everyone awake to scare the bear off.

I have always wanted to hike the Mid Alantic area, they say the view is unbelievable. I'll give you a call when we head east so you can point us to best spots. I can see that Philmont is quite a jog from your part of the county. I grew up in New Mexico, so its home to me and Philmont is just a day drive for us from Oklahoma. I'd say we are lucky, but I'm not sure Philmont can beat what you already have. There is the Philmont program of course and that is unique. But as far as a great back county experience, hard to beat the Mid Atlantic. Barry

I guess we are all different in our habits, but I was taught a long time ago that shelter always comes first in the wilderness because a person is a lot more susceptible to hypothermia when they are fatigued. I actually saw this happen to a few scouts on a Northern Tier trip and it certainly made me more aware of the risk. Thatis also what is taught at servival schools. Also the odds to me that a bear will wonder through a bunch of loud campers busy setting up their camp is much smaller compared to being caught in an afternoon rain shower. Ironically the BSA Guides on our Pecos backpacking trip werent near as worry about bears as their counterparts are 100 miles away at Philmont. The Frank Rand Staff were very concerned with hypothermia because they had a couple of very serious incidents. But Philmont has 40000 scouts come through every year and they have to worry about public perception of safety, so they have to show an aggressive reaction to incidents. I think their policy is wrong because it doesnt set a good example for boys who will be future wilderness campers, and I told them that. But they explained their marketing situation and I understand. Im not trying to be defensive because I want everyone to think I am a know it all, Im just explaining why I do it this way. Truth is we are only talking a matter minutes either way. But I guess my experience with hypothermia just reinforced what I was taught. And while I have a very deep respect for bears, Ive set up camp in the rain a lot more than I seen a bear even near a camp. So I play the odds I guess. Barry

I found it interesting at Philmont that the crews very first task after reaching a camp is putting up the bear bag. Back county protocol any other place in the world is set up your tent first incase bad weather sets in. But the bear attacks at Philmont motivated the staff to create an aggressive bear policy. They are so serious about bear safety at Philmont that one adult in another crew was pulled off the trail for being caught not following the bear prevention policies. He was warned once and then asked to leave when he contested the policy to the ranger. The ranger left camp and came back with the camp director who was in no listening mood. And yes, we did have staff members walking through a couple of our camps checking that we were following the bear policies. They are very serious about protecting the scouts against bear attacks. As for our experiences, we found skunks wondering through the camp to be pretty convincing. Beary

>>well the benefit i see to a patrol of 1st years is that they would all be on the same page in terms of advancement.

80 to 90 percent of what a boy learns in a hands-on program like Troops is learned by watching other people perform in natural settings. Boys in New Scout patrols learn about 40% as much as scouts in mixed age patrols because the scouts in mixed age patrol have constant role models to watch. Boys in same age patrols only learn when someone (adult or troop guide) come in to instruct them in a school type format. And the boy scout experience is not near as much fun when you have to sit and listen to teachers all the time just to learn simple skills. Its rare to find a good boy run troop that uses same age patrols because the scouts tend to be exclusive and cliquish. In fact, I have personally never seen a good boy run program with same age patrols because it requires to much adult intervention to maintain a minimum level growth at the boy level. However, there are times when a troop has to use a new scout patrol. One is when a troop receives so many new scouts, the existing patrols cant function with the influx. We found a patrol can only handle two new scouts at a time without messing up the dynamics. Barry

Can you explain why you think the buddy system is required in a tent? I'm not saying you are right or wrong, but we only incourage the buddy system when the scout leaves the campsite. I always tried to look at things like this under the definition of: does it help the scouts practice fitness, citizenship and character? Not sure this subject fits under citizenship or character, but I can see it being a fitness issue. One might look at it as a safety where one scout helps another if one gets sick. However, I personally see a boy growing in maturity by practicing independence, self-relience and organizational skills. A new scouts maturity might require a tent mate for his growth, but the enviroment needs to change for his continued growth. That being said, I could never turn down that new scout who got a new tent for Christmas and has been dreaming about sleeping in it. Barry

>> then you should stick with our current Webelos III program

I don't really know the answer, but the most fun I've had with being an adult role model for a boy run group is High Adventure Crews. Now I admit they don't stay together long, but the bonding and character growth that goes on during that week is tremendous. Barry

Yes, I guess we have to agree to disagree, but if you take a look at every scouting youth organization in North America that gave in the political correctness pressure, you find none of those organizations numbers grew after the change. In fact some of them suffered dearly to the point of struggling to survive. So whether or not there really is a public perception problem with BSA stand on gays, history alone suggest change is not worth the risk. I'm not sure that there is a public perception problem. Oh sure the activist have done their job well to bring to light BSA stand, but is the community really put off by it? Not in our area. Of course I live in a conservative area, but Ive travel a lot and just dont see it. And there are many scouts in our area with gay and atheist parents. So they dont seem to offended that they cant be leaders. Finally, I think before National starts letting outside influences motivate change in the program, they have to attack problems inside the program first because what if the internal problems are the real problem? You spent most of your post on the gay issue, but really you hit the nail on the head with the Cub program. Cubs are the root of a successful Scouting program. I know for a fact that less than 50% of Webelos in our area crossover to Boy Scouts. If that is just the Webeles II numbers, you can imagine the total number of Cub age boys that dont make it the Boy Scouts. I think it is interesting that the focus on this discussion is on the Boy Scouts and many, including me, suggest the old way is the better way. But what about the Cub Scouts? Could it be that that maybe the old way would be the better way for them. Ever since I have been an adult leader in the BSA, the Tiger program has struggled. I have seen many changes to the Tiger program attempting to ease the problems of that age group. But in reference to this discussion, Tigers didn't exist in the old program. Could going back to the old ways be a possible solution here? Barry

You have got some really great advice so far. We started by doing some back packing on campouts and then growing out by looking for camps that customized a trek for our younger group. Camp Frank Rand in New Mexico was a great experience. BUT, looking back on it, the boys aren't as much the problem as the adults. Adults have to be motivated as well to have a good adventure troop program and by starting small, you give the adults time to learn and build experience. High Adventure is expensive just in the gear alone, so you can scare a lot of folks away if you take on to much to fast. Do some local hiking on your weekend camping trips. First just a couple five mile hikes with backpacks. Then do a weekend trip where you actually move the troop to a different location. Not a long hike (5 miles max), but long enough for everyone to learn what you really need and what is just added weight. But make sure you get a good summer trip in somewhere that is scenic and fun. Your troop will likely have the bug to be an adventure troop after that. I really like the idea of finding another troop to learn and gain adventure experiences, but don't forget the Venturing Crews. I have always found them excited to teach Boy Scout Troops. And older scouts always have a good influence on younger scouts. They also have some good canoeing crews that will get you ready for Boundary Waters. They may even offer to go as guides and what a great experience that would be. I also suggest looking for experiences like Hiking in the Pecos Wilderness through Camp Frank Rand because they send a guide with you as well. I think that was really the point where our troop took off because everyone who came back from that trip felt trained in back county camping. The scouts who went on that trip even found Philmont to be bit of a let down after Pecos. BUT BEWARE: A troop that has the reputation of high adventure will grow like crazy because most troops don't do it. The most boring troops are the ones who think adventure starts at age 14. Adventure should start the day a Webelos joins the troop. Give them a reason to buy a pack. Barry

Wow Kudu, I cant put my (bewilderment?) into words. I never read so much, misdirection and hibbery jibbery just to say, Yep, Barry and I disagree. At least I think we disagree, I can't really tell. >>The equal importance theory was introduced to use Hillcourt's invention of the "Methods of Scouting">In Kudu's camp the same thing happens WITHOUT business theory. Scouts don't jump ahead in time machines; it is easy to see a potential leader blossom as he takes on responsibility.>No, Eagledad, "Every Boy a Leader" means a Patrol scaled down to the Cub Scout level.>The Eagledad camp should have the courage of its convictions and take BSA Lifeguard position-specific training away from BSA Lifeguards just like they did to BSA Patrol Leaders!

>>What faith-based morality have they abandoned, specifically?

>>What would constitute coming back to their senses?

>>The theory that all of the Methods are "equal" was introduced in 1972, presumably to garner respect for the questionable new "Leadership Development"