Kahuna

You know, Bob White, you are a lot of fun to be on a forum with. Probably less so to work in a council with. No insult intended. When I say the NSSC keeps changing everything, I would have thought it was understood to be one of those exagerations that we sometimes use in conversation. You don't go as far back in Sea Scouting/Sea Exploring as I do, so you haven't had the benefit of watching the evolution take place. When I began, we were Sea Explorers, made our own uniforms with some guidance from national. Now we are Sea Scouts with quite a bit of guidance from national. How about some changes from edition "b" versus edition "c" of the 10th Edition? Remember, I was talking uniforms. There are some other changes to "doctrine." 1-Uniforms: no more adult winter working blue uniform - black shirt and black pants - male and female. 2- Uniforms: No more youth short sleeve shirt with white bellbottoms. 3- Uniforms: Mininal insignia on adult khaki working uniform. No council strips or unit numbers. 4- Uniforms: Name tag moved to above Sea Scouts BSA strip. Seabadge insignia moved to above that. (that's two) 5- No wearing of OA flaps. 9-Introduction of metal adult position insignia as opposed to wearing the silver lapel pins on, eg, the khaki working uniform. 10-Universal Sea Scout emblem no longer worn , but specific ship insignia may be worn (optional). 11- Limitation to wearing six square knots on SS uniforms. 12- Wear of shoulder insignia (the black shoulder boards)for adults. BTW, p 112 of the "c" edition still says that for QM youth wearing adult uniform, no rank insignia is worn of the left pocket. The medal or square knot is worn instea. So, that's actually 13. Sorry, I can't document "everything," but we all have our failings, with one exception.

There are even differences in the 10th. The "b" edition has been superseded by the "c" edition. We had a wardroom meeting yesterday and every uniformed Sea Scouter there was out of uniform, including me (I wear white shorts). Two were wearing chambray dungaree uniforms and one was wearing the khaki work uniform with the wrong insignia. They're all doing a good job, though and the one bos'n who was there was in sharp white crackerjacks. The big problem is the National Sea Scout Committee keeps changing everything for what reason I'm not sure. Anyway, we will have a new National Commodore and presumably a new committee in October, so we'll see what happens.

Good advice all around. As a former professional, I found that long hours, low pay and disfunctional bosses were only part of the problem. Mainly, what I liked about Scouting was troop work, training, merit badge counseling and that kind of stuff. Professionals almost never do anything like that. I would say that many professionals have very happy family lives. Your wife just has to be on board with the whole thing. I would also point out that it isn't necessary to work 80 hours a week in most cases. Generally, you don't have to maintain office hours, so you have to schedule personal time for exercise and social contacts right in there along with roundtables, district committee meetings, etc, etc.

Eamonn writes: But has anyone heard anything about a new National Sea Scout Commodore? Ssssssssssssssh! We aren't supposed to talk about it. I don't know why but I raised the question on the Sea Scout listserv and the discussion was summarily closed by Bruce Chr. Johnson, listowner. There is something going on. Yes. There is a new Commodore to be installed, it was announced at the National Meeting but nobbody will talk abuot it. One of those mysteries of the National Sea Scout Committee that will be solved when the autobiographies are written.

Beavah writes: Or do yeh Sea Scouting folks still honor long-time traditions like flogging 'round the fleet? No, but an occasional keelhauling keeps the morale up.

At the Seabadge training I attended most the staff wore incorrect uniforms treating the Sea Scout Adult Work Uniform (Khaki) shirt as a Boy Scout Uniform shirt hanging all kinds of things on it that did not belong on a Sea Scout Uniform. But then they had a very unusually attitude toward uniforms to bein with. Ya gotta love it!

The current SSM is pretty clear on what are the uniform options for youth and adults, males and females. It is? :)Must be a misprint. It will be corrected soon. And then we still have the option to modify our uniforms and many units seem to do so.(This message has been edited by kahuna)

Eamon writes: I know some Ships wear the Blue Uniform, but I was led to believe that this was not an official uniform. Of course I'm aware that as Sea Scouts are part of Venturing this entire uniform thing is a real mess. I think BW is speaking of the blue cracker jack uniform for youth. The 3 uniforms are chambray blue, white cracker jack, blue cracker jack. The 3 adult uniforms are blue naval type dress, khaki, and whites. Some adults, of course, wear the blue chambray work uniform.

Keeping in mind that there are three adult unforms and three youth uniforms. On the adult work uniform the Youth would wear the Round patch on the left pocket or the knot, on the adult dress White Uniform the youth would wear the knot over the left pocket. on the Adult Dress Blue Uniform the Scout would wear the knot over the left pocket. If by adult work uniform you mean the blue chambray, a QM youth would not wear the round patch at all. Youth do not wear those on any adult uniform. The SS manual doesn't give a clear answer to what he wears on the adult work uniform, but the consensus here is that he would wear the blue SS anchor patch on his left sleeve, where a mate or skipper would wear the same patch with stars under it. SS manual does say that on the khaki work uniform, QM youth members wear the plain anchor lapel pin on each collar. On the dress blue uniform, QM wear the SS anchor patch on both sleeve cuffs.

Correction to my earlier post. After consulting uniform and insignia guide, I realize youth members would wear the Quartermaster Award patch on their left pocket if they choose to wear the youth uniform.

Bob White writes: Whether you wore the The Quartermaster Award or the knot representing it would depend on the uniform you were wearing. Since Quartermaster is a Sea Scout Rank, a youth in a Sea Scout Uniform would wear the rank patch. A youth in a Venturing uniform would the knot. It would also depend upon whether the youth elects to wear an adult uniform. Quartermasters are allowed to wear the adult Sea Scout leader uniform with either the square knot or the medal. If they wear the youth uniform, I suppose they wear the Sea Scout anchor device patch with no stars on the left pocket?

Welcome to the forum. I have counseled all 3 badges for a long time with groups as large as a dozen boys, although I prefer groups of 3-4. I've never given an exam to any of them. I see my job as MB Counselor as being to see that the boys understand the stuff. Citizenship is a job and a responsibility and I see it as my job to make sure the boys see that. As someone said above, don't forget it's supposed to be fun. All of it can be interesting and fun to talk about.

That, OGE, is somewhat akin to asking, "Who is God?" The answer will depend on who you ask. Some will say, "I am." Those are generally people you want to avoid. "Council" is an entity, like government. You can ask an IRS representative a tax question and pay a big fine for following the advice given. As many of us know from personal experience, your military recruiter will promise you duty in Hawai'i as a lifeguard if that's what it takes to get you to sign up. Later, when you're doing KP in Afghanistan, you realize he was not "the government" There are times that council approval is required for this or that. A signature on a tour permit or an application means that someone has taken legal responsibility for giving you permission. Then there is "black letter" stuff found in bylaws, handbooks, staff manuals or what have you that has the imprimatur of "council". I would rely on that. If my DE gave me an opinion, I would take it as just that. His opinion. The same would go for the SE unless he puts it writing. I think the inevitable answer is found in Walt Kelley's Pogo Comic Strip, "We have met the enemy....and he is us." I think you are exactly right.

My sources tell me that when you have to start placing the knots under your epaulets, you have too many.

BW writes: Before there were scoutmasters, there were commissioners I think the history of the BSA argues against you here. There a lot of places in the country where there were SMs and no commissioners. I could cite a lot of references if you like, but I would think this qualifies as common knowledge. In the earliest days, there were no councils and Scoutmasters got warrants directly from BSA HQ in New York.

I thought it was something like that. Getting a California lawyer is always the best advice, but if you can't afford that, try my suggestion above. There are some other attorneys on the forum, but if you don't find what you need, please feel free to PM me. It doesn't strike me as a huge deal, but you want to get it right. Once you file your bylaws, you are stuck with them until they are legally amended.

If I understand your posts, you have a group of parents who are acting as a self-sponsoring CO and now you wish to establish this under the laws of your state as an association. I don't know where to send you for a sample. I did this years ago for a group starting a new troop, but don't have the bylaws anymore. This isn't legal advice, but what I would suggest is that you find a set of bylaws for an incorporated nonprofit group and use that as a basis for your bylaws. Just eliminate anything that talks about incorporation or stock. The important thing (although I don't know what state you're in and wouldn't know their law anyway) is generally to set out who the governing body is (like board of directors), how officers will be elected and don't forget to set out the purpose of the organization. Good luck.

Wie geht's, Niklas? Wilkommen in unser Forum. Your English seems good enough. What part of Germany do you live in? I lived in Frth (bei Nrnberg) when I was 16. That was about 50 years ago. I was an American Boy Scout, but I got to know a few Pfadfinder from various groups.

Yeah, I tend to agree with David. West parted his hair on the right. The guy in the picture parted his on the left. Another argument against is that the man in the picture is actually smiling. West apparently never did. The Official Report of the Second Biennial Conference of Scout Executives (1922) shows that McDonald was Director of Camping, btw.

About 30 years ago, I rescued this pic from a council office attic clean out. Looks like it may have been a PR photo. The era is fairly obvious from the quality of the photo and the uniforms of the men. There's a stamp on the back that says Department of Camping, L.L. McDonald, Director. I know McDonald was director in 1922, but that's about all I know about him. Anybody have a clue as to who, where or what? Initially, I thought the guy on the left might be James West, but I really don't think it is he. Here's the link: http://www.geocities.com/kahuna4646/scan0004.jpg

I tend to agree with emb021 on Boyce. His disagreement with West and founding of the Lone Scout movement had to do with the fact that he strongly felt that the BSA was not doing enough for rural boys. It's true, he did profit from Lone Scouts through the magazine for them and the fact that it was a source of recruitment for magazine and paper sellers for his publications. He spent a good deal of his own money on the establishment, too. His monetary contributions to the BSA were far more than just the thousand a month. He covered all the office expenses, no limit, for several years and made other contributions. Boyce wasn't involved in the congressional charter effort at all and, in fact, it ran counter to his interest at the time as it pretty much made the merger between BSA and Lone Scouting inevitable, according to his biographer. I don't know what was in his mind when he brought back the handbook from England and incorporated the BSA, but he certainly was willing to cooperate with Robinson et al in forming the national organization without profit to himself.

Years back, I had the opportunity to go to camp as a visiting ASM with a troop that I knew pretty well. One morning after breakfast, I walked into the campsite. Boys were all off at activities. On my way in, I passed a woman with a laundry bag. Asked the SM who she was. "Oh, she's soandso's mother. She comes everyday to bring clean laundry and make sure he has everything he needs." This was about a 1 1/2 hour drive for her and she was there every day. Only time I ever saw that kind of parental overinvolvement.

All of which goes to show that we don't necessarily get smarter as we get older. Our beloved government certainly hasn't. But what could they do? They, being the ones who controlled the movement of the time, just as those who control it at this time could disregard the psychobabble and go for the B-P methods as refined in the U.S. by GBB. Bill used to say that of all games played on a large scale by youth, Scouting was the only one designed just for boys. Little League, Pop Warner Football, etc, are all played on adapted rules and scaled down playing fields. Scouting was designed to be boy-size. Likewise, the newly elevated "Advancement Method" of 1972 would eventually destroy the Patrol Method in summer camp as modern school class schedules and school cafeteria central dining rooms became the norm I guess you are referring to the elimination in most camps of patrol method cooking in the campsite, along with the addition of merit badge class scheduling. Merit badge classes go way back, we were doing those in the early 1960's and I have mixed feelings about campsite cooking. When I was an SM, we camped every month and usually went on a 50 Miler or other heavy duty outdoor activity yearly. So, we went to summer camp to have fun and earn merit badges. I found that, in Florida, the difficulty of doing 3 meals a day in camp (or even 2 in camps that served lunch), especially in the summer heat was not worth the trouble for my troops. However, I will say that in two cases, it was worth the effort. In one case, I took over a troop that had been adult run with central cooking and in another it was a new troop that had only been around for a little over a year. Those kids really found out how to cook, clean up and get out in a hurry and in the process they found out who the boys were that were able to really lead. So, I recommend that kind of summer camp experience in those circumstances (and more so in cooler climes ). In my case, I would seek out summer camps in the mountains or up north - we went all the way to Camp Owassippe one summer - or at least air conditioned dining halls.

You're joking, right? I got a copy of the American Boy's Handy Book as a scout and loved it. Its extensive illustrations and such really inspired me. No, not joking. I think the average American boy of the 21st Century would find the reading very stilted and difficult for them. I'm not saying that the stuff in there is not interesting to do. I wish I'd had a copy when I was a kid. Hand a copy to a 12-year-old boy who is not a bookworm and see how long he lasts. I don't know how long ago you were a Scout, but even when I was a boy, most of the kids I knew wouldn't have wanted to read it. What I'm really saying is that there is some good stuff in the 1911 SM Handbook, in addition to the Grouping Standards and such, but most of us would have a hard time picking through it to get it out of there.

I am fortunate enough to have an original 1913 edition that I bought almost 40 years ago in a bookstore in Boston for $5.00! I never erased the price, which the seller had written in pencil on the first page. Yes, it's pretty dull, but if you compare it to other books of the time, even the handbook and very popular boys' books, like Dan Beard's The American Boy's Handy Book, they make pretty dull reading today.