fred8033

"If I could go back in time to when I started scouting" ... I'd do what I saw another troop do that I thought was really cool. They found an old broken down medium sized pop-up camper. The gutted it. Removed all the heavy weight junk until it was just a shell. Then, they re-sealed the base and used it as one big portable storage box. The low profile reduced wind drag. Even a minivan could pull their scout trailer. The pop-up camper top was still in-tact. A scout on each end could lift the cover and lock the roof up so they could access the insides. The openness of the trailer promoted completely emptying it. In my experience, large troop trailers become the main storage. Troops carry thousands of pounds of extra stuff to camp that they use once a year. The result is only a guy with a Dodge Ram 25,000 can pull the troop trailer.

Fully agree. The only limitation I'd have is if the troop really has special unique rules. Such as if the scoutmaster requires service hours to be pre-approved or done within a troop coordinated event. If that's the expectation, I'd fully document it in advance. Same with eagle project proposal approvals. ... but I'd argue ... units just don't need to create special rules. Keep it simple. Keep it fun. BSA has lots already documented and laid out. The scout is already carrying around his Boy Scout handbook. I would not expect a scout to carry around bylaws or have to read a committee written legal document. Units need to document ...permission forms for camp outs ... where do you meet ... how much are dues ... how are fundraiser results used ... Units really don't need to HAVE special rules or punishments.

I fear this is more a threshold issue than any specific oath or law issue. Also, as a leader, I try to avoid hard line responses as you can only do that so many times before the scouts stop coming to you. I'd approach it more as being smart and having a conversation of equals and not a adult-leader-telling-youth conversation. I'd approach it as this is an age of youth-protection where there have been abuses. We are also in an age where people can easily mis-interpret. Even more, people are actively looking for gotcha opportunities to prove how politically correct they. So, many may think it's funny, but it can and WILL raise alarm bells. We could easily face repercussions for such a skit. So, is it smart to that skit given the risk and potential headaches ?

I agree. Filling PORs with scouts teaches our scouts a bad lesson and can lesson the perception of scouting's value because scouts are checking boxes and getting credit for a title instead of doing something. This reflects a comment that I wrote and removed earlier. Too often leaders get caught up teaching leadership as if it was the only benefit of scouting. There are lots of benefits. But those benefits are benefits, not the core focus. Focus first on the promises of scouting. Adventures. Friendships. Learning new things. Being part of a gang of friends. If troop leaders focus on supporting scouts as they pursue the promise of scouting, there will be continuous opportunities for the adult leaders to teach and coach subtle lessons (skills, leadership, etc) So, get the scouts up and running the program. Support them. Continually adjust. Beyond that, don't worry about having qualified leaders first. Spend your energy on supporting a great scouting program and finding the next warm cup of coffee.

... removed ...

Model the desired program early. Don't wait. Doing anything else creates a program that's not scouting. Get the scouts ... AND THE ADULTS ... accustomed to scouts being in-front and driving the program and the adults in the background. ... If you have 10 or fewer scouts, then you don't need a SPL. Just have a PL. Or if you have 10 to 15 scouts, have two PLs that coordinate with each other. But somewhere after the second patrol is created, the scouts should choose a SPL. A brand new scout may not be as effective as a fifth year SPL, but that's not the point. If you want effectiveness, then just let the adults always be up front. My main two reasons for this is ... scouts use these leadership opportunities to learn how to be a leader. Second, it's their program and they should lead it. I see no reason to wait beyond a brief introduction into scouting and what is expected. IMHO, the best thing is to setup the expectation early that it's a youth program with the adults in the background. I'm not saying you let things fall apart. We as leaders continually adjust to the scouts that we have and not wait until they are picture perfect. Heck, often scouts move on before that happens. .... So, a brand new SPL? Take him aside before a meeting. Coach him. Ask him what he wants to accomplish at the meeting. Ask him what he thinks he should cover. Ask him what's next on the schedule. Ask him how he's going to address menu planning. Maybe some subtle hints, but I've often found the best scoutmasters mostly ask questions and rarely suggest or tell. The key point is continually adjust to the scouts and find subtle ways to guide the scouts.

I'm not sure how much news this is. Our many years of Cub Scout camps were very much family camp. Some families had both parents there. Family camp may be just a re branding that the scouting program so desperately needs.

Tatung42 ... My apologies. I never meant to infer you did not know or that you were unreasonable. I fully understand and I've been there. I was in your situation 12 years ago with my second son. I had taken him on long canoe trips. Overnights on a local slow moving river with my father-in-law. I think it created some great memories for both of us. Then, the den wanted to go on a canoe trip as part of their fun. But we did follow BSA's rules and we grumbled quite a bit about it. It seemed ridiculous that an outdoor program put such tight restrictions on their members. On BSA's side though, there is clearly a question of whether an 8 to 11 year old kid is mentally and physically ready for a canoe trip. Can they save themselves? Do you require one-adult-to-one-scout ratio so there is an adult to save each scout? What if the adult is too busy saving themselves? Or saving the canoe? I've seen slow class I get dangerous because rocks get exposed and canoes can get trapped or tipped on those rocks. Add a quick forming storm and storms do happen. ... Even in slow moving water and with life jackets, it can get dangerous quickly. I flip back and forth on this each time I think about it. IMHO, it should be fine. I as a parent would absolutely take my kid doing it. But then again, it's my kid. As an organization, can BSA take on the responsibility for approving what could easily be an overreach by the den leaders ?

Did you find "gently flowing water" here? https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/HealthSafety/pdf/680-685.pdf I always first refer to the Guide To Safe Scouting. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34416.pdf Page 15 says "Cub Scout activities afloat are limited to council, district, pack, or den events that do not include moving water or float trips (expeditions)." I fear BSA's internal documentation has internal conflicts way too often. Their age sheet says it's okay for wolf and above. Their G2SS Safety Afloat says no. BSA really needs to gear up their quality control Situations like this are aggravating. Also, I fear calling your council to ask may result in a 3rd different answer. IMHO ... the issue is not whether your son can do it. It's really the lowest common denominator situation. It's also a peer-pressure issue causing a dangerous situation. Often in dens, there are 2 or 3 strong swimmers. 2 or 3 okay. And 1 or 2 weak or non-swimmers. And, there are often dads with poor health or not able to swim that don't want to admit it. Essentially, lots of cub scouts and lots of dads are just not up to moving water. ... So a den saying let's go tubing can cause a dangerous situation. Also, a class I can quickly become a class II or III depending on rain or lack of rain. ... Also, I generally refer to class I as a river.

This is more an issue with approach than unclear definitions. Though these sentences are worded as they are for a reason, BUT the more important point is our attitude when working with scouts. Arguing legalities means we are not supporting the scouts in a friendly constructive way. Worry less about legalities and more about being supportive and helpful to the scouts.

Two more syllables. Otherwise, "demonstrate" infers a bit more "doing" than "show". Dictionaries say both "show" and "demonstrate" are about displaying, but "demonstrate" is about displaying the method of doing something.

I assumed you were making a point that I missed. Partials have no expiration except the scout turning 18. BSA Guide To Advancement, Section 7.0.3.3 Partial Completions ... "Partials have no expiration except the Scout’s 18th birthday."

EBORs will never see the physical blue cards unless the scout chooses to bring them. I've been on many boards and never seen them brought or people ask to examine. The EBOR wants to see that BSA national has a record of the MB being earned. That's it. The rest of the record keeping is between the scout and the troop. With scouts and MB counselors, we need to keep our "procedures" flexible and supportive. If you want to find the procedure details to implement, read BSA's Guide To Advancement, Section 7 The Merit Badge Program. That's what's expected and that's what we can hold the scout accountable to doing. No more. No less. Hopefully, it's consistent with the scout's handbook and the wording on the physical merit badge card. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf

Qwazse was right and well written. Deal with the scout as an honest individual who can represent himself. Be friendly, not inquisitive. Looking for understanding, not laying down the rules. My area of emphasis would be different though. I'd ask ... Why do you have the blue card? Give it to the scout. Incomplete MBs are the scout's responsibility, not yours. Maybe take a picture just in case the kid loses it. That's just being helpful. The point is incomplete merit badges are between the scout and his counselor. If that counselor is now gone (MB fair or summer camp), then help the scout find another counselor. Beyond that, it's between the scout and the MB counselor. Plus, It's up to each individual counselor to decide what is complete in a MB. If I were a MB counselor receiving a scout with a partial MB, I would probably sit with the scout to understand if and when he completed the previous requirements. STRANGE ... After all these years, I'm just now realizing a contradiction I've always had without realizing. Ranks earned / reviewed are done. You don't undo awarding ranks. Further, rank requirements that are learned, tested and signed off in the handbook are sacrosanct in my view. They are done. Not to be undone. They are only revisited for repetition, reminder, learning, competitions, etc. ... The contradiction ... is that I've always thought of the merit badge as the requirement and not the individual MB requirements. I've always been comfortable when a scout changes MB counselors that a new MB counselor can revisit requirements. The scout has the option to find another counselor, but I've always viewed MB requirements as a soft more flexible baseline. Essentially, once a scout earns a MB, it's done. But individual MB requirements for incomplete MBs were always a grey area. So ... in my view. The card says "Needs #4". That's a personal note for the counselor to remind him what's left. Don't make it your job. Relax and have a cup of coffee.

I've often seen biased judging too and I rarely like camporees competitions, unless we win. But except for the physical size, I don't see much advantage by older scouts. Younger scouts often benefit from more recent teaching and being a little more focused. Older scouts have size, but have often forgot or are not as committed to the competition. My experience is few older scouts really care about the competition.

I just don't see the issue. New patrols can very easily win a camporee competition ... if they prepare and are motivated. The SM should always be inspiring and encouraging the scouts to grow. But that's different than always setting the direction and the specifics. The skill is knowing how much, how far and which direction. Inspiring a four year patrol to win a camporee can often alienate scouts. Camporee competitions are good for scouts in their first few years. After that, it's a been-there-done-that situation. So then we look for the next growth opportunity. Adult leaders need to constantly adjust. Adjust to the scouts. Adjust to the situations. Adjust to find new ways to inspire and help the scout stretch and grow and have a good experience.

Putting temporary badges on the back of the sash is per BSA uniforming guide. Page 11, "Excess Insignia" ... "Scouts may wear only temporary patches (no badges of rank) on the back of the merit badge sash." I know scouters can posture on many different issues, but this is really one that we should celebrate and not ridicule. There are way worse uniforming creations than what is worn on the back of the sash. I have my hot button ones too, but our role is to celebrate the scouts and not look down on them.

I fully agree. I'd also suggest developing your own plan for camp. Such as ... bring two or three large books to read. Or bring wood carving supplies for yourself. Or work on your schoool lesson plans for next year. Or a sewing kit. Or take lots of naps. Create a plan for yourself so that you are busy. Maybe there are courses at the summer camp for adults to become trained adult leaders. I've seen that too. But make your activities boring for your son so that he goes off on his own with his friends and grows.

I had this and several other issues with the centennial uniform. I did returns and received new only to have similar issues. It really killed my excitement for uniforming sharpness. It's hard to be enthused to show a quality uniform when the source doesn't provide a quality product.

Voting only helps if that is the personality of the unit committee. Otherwise, it's best done by consensus. That's my experience. Your mileage can vary. Leave details to those taking responsibility for doing the work. I'd practice a few ways of politely saying that in the committee. I'd ask the questioning parent ... as relaxed as possible ... something like ... "is that a show stopper or can we leave the details to the blue and gold chair?" ... "are you volunteering to help the blue and gold chair?" ... It really depends on your personality and whether you can say it politely with a smile and not upset the other person. I've found that one or two problem parents can often ruin the tone of unit committee or unit leadership.

Sensitive subject to me. I've had three Oscar de la Renta uniforms. One for pack. One for troop. And one that flip flopped. Worked well for ten / twelve years. Then came the centennial uniform. I was enthusiastic. I bought four to switch over to support the update. Then, the pants tore (never had trouble with the previous pants ... in fact previous are still good). The new belts all broke. Never had trouble with previous belts. Letters fell off the shirt. Seams gave. etc etc etc. That really really broke my enthusiasm for investing in sharp uniforming and definitely broke my faith in BSA's supply division. ... Lost enthusiasm doesn't come back. Many of my uniforms wore out after lots and lots of use. The Oscar de la Renta uniforms were thread bare. The centennial uniforms failed because they were used instead of displayed on a hanger. So at this point, I have one well worn uniform that I use. I use it for district activities, troop activities, camp outs, etc. Sometimes I wash it on long camp outs and hang it to dry. I have one uniform. I'm debating about buying a new one. I'm not sure when though.

I fear BSA's writing is a feedback reflection of the common reality. It's not the best practice, but it's a common reality. I've seen the details of five local troops. All those troops brag about how they are boy-led with the inference the others are not. They all brag and argue about how to ideally structure patrols. But all those troops only created troop level plans for camping, activities, skills, learning, competitions, etc. ... except my first two or three years in 2005 to 2007, I never saw any scoutmasters encourage patrols to create their own activities or camp outs or unique ideas. Sadly, I do see BSA's statement as correct. Most patrol activities take place in the context of troop activities. Most "patrols" are not real autonomous units. They seem more like a sub-team to divide a big group. IMHO, if you want a patrol to be a patrol, you need to create regular unique activities and goals for them. Maybe they go to the movies together. Maybe they go on a ski trip or a canoe trip. Maybe they have game night. Maybe ... So I really can't blame BSA. Even troops that boast of "patrols" really don't do patrol method.

I don't understand the issue. BSA's 404 error reflects a web-site with content changing with re-writes to for gender. And, it's not going smoothly. . Nothing I've seen indicates patrol method is at all being eliminated or slighted. What I do see is BSA's literature is largely unchanged. I like the 1950s wording better, but it's largely the same concept adjusted for after 2010 youth protection. But, the concept has not changed. Looking at the 1950s Boy Scout Handbook, the description is largely the same. https://archive.org/details/officialboyscout71967boys/page/82 .... page 88 ... "The Scout patrol is the finest boys' gang in all the world. The patrol is the unit that makes Scouting go. It is a group of boys, usually six to eight, who pal together because they like to do the same things." It's also right up front in the BSA's Troop Leader Guidebook. Chapter three. The words are a little less clear, but pretty much the same. https://www.amazon.com/Troop-Leader-Guidebook-Vol-1-ebook/dp/B07N92GJ58/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_1?keywords=Troop+Leader+Guidebook&qid=1552603046&s=gateway&sr=8-1-fkmrnull ... "A patrol is a a semi-permanent group of compatible Scouts who elect their own leader. " Semi-permanent? Compatible? Group? I like the 1950s wording better. IMHO, the reason it might not be clear or we might not be happy is we all have different opinions how to make the patrol method work and what a patrol should be. For me and mine, I want a patrol to be friends that want to do things together. My view is a healthy troop drives from that. Others want the patrol to be a mentoring structuring leaving the tight friendships crossing patrol lines. Other debates about mixed-age versus same-aged patrols. Others about permanent or re-structuring patrols. Others about assigning boys in or letting them choose. Scouting is supposed to be simple. ... Side note ... I really wish my sons could have used an older style handbook. I like the 1950s one. I'm sure there are others that would be nice too.

Cool. I never knew that. That helps understand the details. Thank you ! I never understood that. Thank you.

That sounds consistent with our troop of mostly 16 and 17 year old scouts. They've done the advancement thing. It helped drive them when they were 11 to 13, maybe 14. Now, they just want to hang and do some cool stuff and do it together as friends. Ski. Camp. Game. Explore. IMHO, their adventures have kept them together.