JMHawkins

I have a scout who completed (but not a strong swimmer) the swim requirement during the swimming merit badge at a pool... Did the Scout receive a Swimming Merit Badge? If so, was he a stronger swimmer by the time he finished the MB?

The purpose of the requirement is to ensure safety of the Scout. Intepret it (i.e. use your judgement) in the manner you think most likely to keep the scout alive if when he flips his canoe. Swim tests should happen as often as necessary to verify the Scout (or scouter's) ability level is appropriate to the activity. He needs to convince you he can swim well enough to be safe while working on the MB. If he continues to have an attitude about it, I'd suggest you point out the requirement is to ensure that he doesn't drown while you are responsible for him, and therefore, he should kindly re

There is no Page 20 in the pdf version. I assume that's the page that bans all the things people think are banned but can't find the actual section mentioning it.

Does the Camping Merit Badge book explain what is meant by a "long-term camping experience"? I just checked (2010 printing) and there's no definiton of "long-term camp." But since it does sepcifically mention Summer Camp, I'll use that as the reference. If it looks and quacks like Summer Camp - sleeping in tents or structures that someone else put up, eating in dining halls most days - then it's "long-term camp" for me.

I can't help but thinking we would be better off if there were fewer rules and the ones that existed focused more on desired objectives and expected judgement than on detailed proceedures. I program computers for a living. They need very detailed rules to work. Witing detailed rules that work is way harder than most people think, and the most effective techniques for getting detailed rules to work would be impossible to implment for rules people are supposed to follow.

Scoutson joined Troop, went to Summer Camp. Twice. A couple of weekend o/ns. Next, Philmont. Seabase (sleeping on a boat. Could that count?)... As a Camping MBC (and sailor), I'd say sleeping on the boat does not count for Camping MB if it's a typical cruising boat (galley, berths, etc.). Camping is about sleeping in a tent, hammock, under a tarp, or under the stars, and about preparing your food without anything resembling a kitchen. It's not just sleeping in a sleeping bag. Now, if it was a boat like the one in Three Men In a Boat (To Say Nothing Of the Dog), then I would count it,

Seattle Pioneer, Hear, Hear. Some days I think the B in BSA stands for "Bureaucracy" instead of "Boy." For the life of me, I don't understand why Advancement needs to be so complicated. Well, no, I guess I really do understand. It's partly because folks at National feel like they need to Specifiy The Rules, or else... well, or else I don't know, there will be chaos and we'll have Eagle scouts who can't tie a square knot or something. But it's also partly because a lot of adults seem to be screwy about Advancement. Credentialism is rampant in our society, and what off

I am curious about one thing with the approach of the equipment belongs to the CO, and the entire troop has lost the privilege of using the equipment. Does this also apply to the adult that left the equipment out for 5 days? If the question is in a lesson learned, the equipment belonging to the CO can be spared by the leader and a lesson still taught. I'm not sure I'm following your question. Are you saying the SM is at fault for calling the SPL and asking him to make sure the stoves get put away instead of putting them away himself? If so, yeah, maybe. One problem seems to be leaders

As many of you have suggested, our underlying problems is patrol QM is a throw-away position. No one wants to do it, there is no advancement credit involved... Well, interestingly enough, this thread is in the "Advancement Resources" forum, and I was wondering why it was here instead of the Camping forum. However... PORs don't exist in order to give Scouts advancment opportunities, they exist to make sure stuff that needs to get done gets done. Like equipment gets taken care of. I think the key to fixing the problem is shifting the scouts' thinking from "what credit do I get for doing

The stoves are the property of the CO. The CO is generous enough to allow the Troop to borrow the gear. The Troop is not taking adequate care of the gear it is borrowing. Therefore, the Troop is no longer allowed to borrow the gear until they can demonstrate they are responsible enough to be trusted with it. Not just Patrols 2 and 6 - no one in the troop is allowed to borrow gear. All the gear currently in the patrol lockers is removed and no longer available. Nobody has a stove. Or a tent either, if those are Troop property. The PLC now has an issue to deal with. What changes are

You do not need to give a new CO the equipment you already own. That $30k and $40k respectively of stuff is owned by the existing "Parents of..." organizations. If the Troop is rechartered to some other organization, the "Parents of..." can keep the equipment and allow the Troop to use it. Not really any different than the troop renting stuff from REI occasionally. New stuff donated to the Troop would belong to the new CO, but there's nothing ethically dubious about the old CO keeping the existing equipment. But frankly, I'd just tell your DE you won't be rechartering and will be sw

This Scout hung out in a clique, which, for lack of a better term, I will call "the slackers." As his friends drifted away, I think he just lost any real interest in participating. Slackers or go-getters, I think this is the real issue. His friends aren't in Scouts. Teenagers want to be with their friends. In an ideal world, their friends are their Patrol mates, but that isn't always the case. I doubt there's much you can do with the program to revive his interest, unless you can manage to lure his friends back into the Troop. Of course, maybe there's something he could do to l

I guess I'm the person who introduced "who cares" into this discussion and... ... I'm glad I did. I think it's provoked some important debate. Or course "who cares" isn't really the question I was asking. What I was really asking was "what do you care about?" Do you care about the cloth sewn to the kid's pocket, or do you care about the experience and growth that patch theoretically represents? Just like all SMs think their troop is boy-run, all of use think we really care about the experience and the growth. And I do believe most of us honestly think that's the most important

Success is a youth aging out as an active member of the Troop, showing Scout Spirit and living the Scout Law, prepared to be a responsible, self-sufficient citizen as he enters adulthood. What cloth he has sewn on his uniform (if he even has one) is irrelevant. So, frankly, we should stop worrying about whether so-and-so "earned" this, that, or any other rank. Who. Cares. Focus on the program. Is the way you are using the Advancement method helping young men grow into responsible citizens? If yes, great. If not, think about what changes you can make in your program, b

Yes, I'm the SM. It was a Committee Member, not CC or COR. Yeah, so maybe you consider sitting down with the CC or COR and asking if they'd rather find a new SM or a new Committee Member. BTW, not cruel, nothing wrong with the ice cream. MC needs to be replaced or educated. (edit: changed CM to MC, so no one thought I was talking about a CubMaster...) (This message has been edited by JMHawkins)

Na, Tahawk, Kudu was quite clear in advocating patrol hikes. Re-read his post a little more closely and you will see that. Looks like everything in it is compatible with current G2SS guidelines. Besides, even if he was advocating patrol camping, he was doing it in what I took to be a suggestion to BSA. The tip-off is "Find a few experimental Councils around the country." Clearly BSA national could change G2SS rules to premit Patrol Camping if they so choose. Advocating BSA change a rule is not in the least bit inconsistent with following the Scout Law.

I don't propose watering down the test. I would just propose making it less high stress by having the younger boys practice it. Agreed! I might phrase it as, give the scouts an opportunity to become confident swimmers before putting them "on stage" in front of both their friends and random strangers. Self-confidence ought to be something that comes out of a good program. But real confidence will only come from the scouts proving to themselves they can do something. Practice is the only way to get there.

I looked over Wayne Brock's video blog, and watched several of the entries. First thing to realize is that the blog was/is directed specifically at pro scouters, BSA employees, as a way of communicating within the corporation. In one blog, Brock mentioned the BeAScout website and asked for feedback on how to make it more useful. He pointed out that BSA advertising needs a call to action, and that is to send prospective members to the BeAScout website, but that it wasn't really succeeding in drawing in new members. In the comments, there were several suggestions that the website email

"Um, I think it's a pine tree, let me look it up." What sort of pine? Lodgepole? Bristlecone? Ponderosa? Jeffrey? Western White? Whitebark? Bishop? (I'm missing a couple I think...) So, I kindof agree that using a iPad as a crutch in the field is less than ideal, but an electronic teaching aide is a great idea. Something else to keep in mind, setting "...associate with adults of character who know this stuff" as the ideal is fine, but we have a shortage these days of adults who fit the description. It's been mentioned now and then that there's a deficit of experienced

On the subject of electronics, our Troop now has a policy. Here is how it came about. On a campout, a scout brought a tablet device and watched a movie on it in his tent with his tent mates. The movie wasn't anything he shouldn't have been watching, it was within the guidelines of what his family allows him to watch. However, it wasn't within the guidelines of what another Scout's family allows him> to watch. Parents of said Scout raised a rukus when they found out and asked "what are you (meaning the adult leaders) going to do about this?" What we (the adult leaders) did was

A Scout is . . . . ...easier to define than produce. The argument isn't about what "real Scouts" are, it's about how they come to be. The discussion is not about who is or is not a "real Scout", it's about what sort of program has the best chance to turn the average 12 year old into someone who really is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent. Personally I am convinced that the more adventure, the better the odds of a young man developing those qualities. Outdoors is inherently anti-bureaucratic, since

Interesting, Brock is 63. Apparently as part of accepting him as the new CSE, the Trustees are going to grant him a 2-year waiver to the mandatory retirement retirement age, allowing him to serve until he is 67. That means he'll have 4 years max in the job, something of a short-timer (only Harvey Price will have had a shorter tenure, and he was brought in as something of an emergency when Barber resigned amid the membership disaster of Urban Scouting). So, whatever Brock's strengths, he looks like a caretaker appointment. My assumption is the search committee could not reach consensus

Yeah, Shortridge is right, and the Scouters pushing (requiring?) a bunch of MBs from a brand new Scout are... misguided to say the least. A new Scout should be spending the bulk of his time working on T-2-1 requirements and just in general learning how to be a proficient in the outdoors. Earning MBs can come later. But... If he's working directly with a MBC rather than doing a class or Summer Camp version... hurray for him. So, here's my advice as a MBC to a Scout's parent. 1) work with him first to make sure he know how to call someone he doesn't know on the phone and make a

We did a Webelos campalong at one of our Council camps last November. Adirondaks made it a little easier for the younger Webelos (temps were in the mid-20's, but it was mostly dry, which is always a bonus up here in the PNW). Plus it was where we had gone to Summer Camp so the Scouts were able to show the Webelos around and explain all the cool stuff they did and get them excited about bridging over to Boy Scouts. Almost had the entire place to ourselves, it was great. We did a service project and paid $20 for two nights of camping at three different campsites. I don't know if outsid

Personally I'm not a big fan of troop trailers. Maybe it was because of the troop that jackknifed theirs blocking the only exit from the parking lot at the end of Summer Camp last year when everyone just wanted to get home... Most of the good backpacking locations around here are Wilderness areas, so 12 person party size limit. 2 adults, max of 10 Scouts. Works out prety good, either one highly active patrol where most everybody goes, or two average patrols that have 4 or 5 guys going each. I drive a Chevy Avalanche, and can fit 4 scouts in the cab and 12 packs in the bed easily. If t