KoreaScouter

We don't have any of the CSPs any of you have mentioned so far and are interested in all of them. How about, since this was my idea, I send mine to you first with a SASE, and you use it to mail yours back to me? All I need is your mailing address, if you'd like to send it to me at this e-mail address: dhazlett@kornet.net

Right now, I have only four new, flat, unsewn, unwashed CSPs. Our Scout store was a little low on inventory when I went up there last, and should have more in the very near future. If you're interested in trading, please e-mail me and I will get one to you.

I'm VERY new at this patch-trading gig, so if I'm doing it wrong, please let me know!

The promotion efforts from the leaders are important, but I think a good camp program sells itself better than anything else, through word-of-mouth from Scouts who were there last year and their parents after hearing the stories over and over. We start apportioned fund-raisers early to get buy-in from the Scouts and their families; that seems to help too.

Just a point of clarification, Sager, on Girl Scout camping and 11-year olds being ready to camp. While it's true that young Girl Scouts do camp overnight (I have a Brownie, too), I don't think that compares with a long-term resident camp such as Boy Scout Summer Camp...that sort of camping in Girl Scouts doesn't happen until they're Cadets, right? Also, one 11 year old can be ready for a week away from home and another one may not be. I've seen the situation where parents allowed their son to attend several short term camps before a long-term one...it was a good call. Ultimately, the parents know their kid best and I think we should defer to them.

If anybody wants to swap a new CSP from your council for one from mine, please let me know. My son's got a bit of a collection going, and would like to add to it. We're one of two overseas councils, the other being Transatlantic in Europe.

Mom;

There's a lot of reasons why what you described can happen. Ultimately, I think the Scoutmaster's responsible for the program and how it's delivered. I certainly don't know your Scoutmaster and do not presume to criticize how he's doing his job. Having said that, if he's inexperienced, or your troop events/activities chair is inexperienced (or if the position's unfilled), or the new Scout patrol isn't used, or if there isn't a dedicated Troop Guide, or if the new Scout patrol doesn't have a dedicated ASM, or if your volunteer leaders just had a rare bad day, or any of a number of other variables exist, an opportunity to document an advancement requirement could be missed.

My advice is to chat with the Scoutmaster, and offer your help if you have time. If you have a knack for detail, he may really appreciate it.

One man's opinion: Aside from a competent Scoutmaster, I think any troop is fighting an uphill battle with their outdoor program if it doesn't have a good facilities/equipment chair, and a good events/activities chair. We are blessed with great people in both those positions. Our troop equipment is tight, and our facilities/equipment chair is seemingly a mind-reader. Many times, I've thought before an event: "Gee, I forgot to ask Matt to get..." and in the door he walks with exactly what I was thinking about...it's a little weird, actually. And, with a good events/activities person, things are planned so the mayhem's minimized at departure -- no chasing permission slips or tour permits, and he understands the need to plan events that facilitate advancement and the documentation.

Good luck with the next one; I trust this was not a representative sample...

Bob;

Don't apologize for having had the opportunity to spend time in the same room with Bill Hillcourt! If anything, recounting the experience allows the rest of us to experience it, too.

I count my blessings every day, but one thing about the rest of you I'm envious of is that we're so far off the beaten path, we get few opportunities to see the leaders of the movement (see, I didn't say "organization"). I'm going to our District Dinner in Seoul tomorrow night, and will meet out Council Executive for the first time...we're in two different countries; they call it "the tyrrany of distance".

I for one can't wait to see the SPL's handbook. I hope it does justice to the truly amazing responsibilities an SPL has in a Scout-run troop...

Even suggesting something like this presents several serious questions in my mind. First, are these fund-raising efforts accompanied by a completed unit money-earning application? If so, how would a unit indicate what type of unit is applying? There are only boxes for Pack, Troop, Team, and Crew, not for a "booster club" or some other shadow organization. How would a unit answer the question about the unit chartering organization having knowledge and approving the money earning project? If a unit money earning application isn't filled out, how do the unit leaders rationalize this? That it isn't a Boy Scout organization raising the funds? Then why are Boy Scouts participating?

Perhaps I've been spoiled by good COs, but any unit that has to launder their money and equipment to keep a CO from taking it has problems way beyond how to fill out the form...

Okay, I don't mean to nitpick here, but when you guys say "fold", does that include rolling it to slide it into one of those cylindrical storage bags? I have a Eureka 4-season with a huge vestibule, and I always gently roll it around my pole bag while saying soothing kindly things to it, then I glide it into the storage bag like slipping my baby girl into a receiving blanket (okay, she's 8, but still my baby girl). Am I hurting my tent? Is the "no fold" admonition a throwback to the canvas days?

Hey Mike;

With almost 400 posts, you'll always be a "senior" in my eyes...

We found out the hard way why it's a good policy for MB counselors to re-register each year (when the troop re-charters, ideally). First, it's a great way, in fact the only way, to make sure your list is up to date. Also, and as many Scouters have complained right here in these forums, how do you "weed out" the MB counselor who's embellishing or dumbing-down the requirements, is inaccessible, or has some other shortcoming? Don't recharter with them...

I guess I come back to my original point, which is that a Scoutmaster's primary function at an outing is not that of a pharmacist. I think one of the reasons BSA allows different leader/Scout ratios for Cubs and Boy Scouts is the presumption that Boy Scouts, being older, require less hand-holding and nose-wiping than the little guys do. To me, that should include remembering to change your socks and take your pills. I understand that failing to take meds can be life-threatening. However, I have no medical training beyond first-responder stuff. Do you really want me to be responsible for detecting signs that a child hasn't taken a required med? As an adult leader at a Webelos resident camp in Virginia, I had responsibility for Scouts from 4 different packs. One of them, who I never met before, had athsma, which I had trouble spelling at the time, let alone knowing anything about symptoms and immediate treatment. I needed a crash course from the medics (who held the meds but not the inhaler) and had to ensure that in addition to everything else, the Scout had his inhaler with him. That didn't cause task saturation for me, but multiply that by a number of Scouts and a number of ailments, and I'll need to carry a Physician's Desk Reference around with me instead of the Fieldbook. Personally, I like the way our District does it. Army medics on site all the time, they hold the meds, they know the schedules, they chase down the Scouts who don't show up to get their meds, and I get to concentrate on the program...it's a beautiful thing.

I'll be the first to admit we're blessed in that neither of our kids have medical problems that require medication. Yet, I know many do, and my question is how to best balance SM responsibilities for the program with the requirement for Scouts who need meds on a regular schedule to get them, especially at a resident camp where the activities can have them spread out eight ways from Sunday.

I'm not even going to touch so-called Scouts stealing controlled substances. I think that's a criminal matter on a completely different plane from what we're discussing...

When we're on our way to troop meetings, it's a little ritual for my son and I to stop at Burger King for hamburgers. Our situation may be different since we're on a military base overseas, but when we're in line in full Scout uniforms, the other people in there appreciate what they see, partially because most of them are on a remote tour away from their own kids. But also, because they know what BSA stands for. I also get new Scouts and volunteers that way, too.

Our Scouts wore their uniforms to school one day during Scout week, and the principal made special mention of it during morning announcements. The same day, they gladly let our Scouts out of school an hour early so they could join a formation with the local VFW post and other military units to honor a Korean War Medal of Honor winner who came back to visit the site of the bayonet charge he led. Our 4-star commanding general came from Seoul, too, and after the ceremony, he made a beeline for our Scouts, shook all their hands, and told them how proud he was to see them there...our Scouts don't mind wearing their uniforms at all. They're looked up to and sometimes feel like celebrities. I just hope it stays that way.

try www.usscouts.org

They have a forum, and there's another site I have at home that I can't recall the address for right now...

I think we may be collectively confusing a "condition" with a "standard". In the military, when we teach a skill, we prescribe a task, a condition, and a standard. The condition is the end result you want, the standard includes timing, acceptable error, etc. I think, using the rope whipping/fusing as an example, the condition you want to prescribe is that the rope stays whipped when you use it, throw it, smack it, whatever. The standard, if you wanted to prescribe one, could be how long you give the Scout to whip the rope. BW's right, there is no standard, but there is a condition, even if it's only implied with some of these skills.

The leaders do the quality control on signing off advancements by making sure the Scouts know what they're doing, and by watching the application of these skills on campouts and outings. As far as consistency, I think you have the same argument for various ASMs within a troop signing off advancements. They're by definition all over the place when it comes to opinions on what constitutes a completed requirement, but since they're grownups, it's not the big deal it seems to be when it's Scouts signing advancements. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

As a leader, I've had the whole gamut, from dispensing meds to escorting Scouts to the med tent to get them, to sending Scouts to the med tent. All those procedures are okay, and often dependent on who's running the particular camp.

My recommendation is to read the camp literature very carefully when you get it, including the section on meds and who stores/administers and raise the issue if you have one.

My experience with Scouts and meds is that we seem to be selling them short. Whether the Scout holds his own or goes to a medic for them, he still has to remember SOMETHING. And, by and large they have remembered in my experience. After all, we're not asking them to remember an occasionally practiced Scout fieldcraft skill, but something they do every day of their lives. They know better than we think they do what the consequences are if they don't get their meds...they're real, profound, and virtually immediate; whereas, not remembering to change your socks means you just wear yesterday's socks again.

While I share everyone's concern with liability and the well-being of the Scouts, there's a line beyond which it's an individual responsibility/ family matter, too. When the parents fill out the health history or the docs do the class 2 or 3, they (the parents/pros) need to let us know whether this campout/outing/whatever is feasible for this particular Scout on this particular med. If the workaround is parents coming on the campout as a med dispenser, so be it. I don't think leaders should be playing "nurse" by dispensing meds to the point where that role supplants the other "deliver the promise" things we're supposed to be doing out there. I don't mean to give the impression that I'm uncaring, but I come back to my assertion based on my experience that the Scouts are capable of handling a lot more responsibility than we may be giving them credit for. On selling their ADHD medicine to their buddies, last time I checked, that's called drug dealing. If he's not doing it out of the house (I presume he's not), then he likely won't do it on a Scout outing, either. If a Scout is doing this, his troop has problems way beyond who holds the meds.

An anecdote: one of our Scouts is prone to motion sickness -- great kid, he just tends to puke a lot. My approach: bring Dramamine, ziploc bags, or stay home...and the Dramamine and bags are his responsibility not mine. You know what? He comes on most of the outings, and has Dramamine and/or ziploc bags...imagine that.

I think the GTSS is getting longer and more detailed, but I also don't have a problem with that. I think the policies and recommendations are sensible for the most part. For example, the GTSS says that taking prescription meds is the responsibility of the person they're prescribed for, although leaders can accept responsibility if they want to. By contrast, my kids' school doesn't allow any of the kids to hold their own meds, even athsma inhalers or bee-sting antidotes -- and they have to be immediately available!

I like our rules better.

scoutruud;

You and I have something in common -- we have both lived in The Netherlands. I found it a wonderful place to live, although I didn't always agree with the politics, or the fact that many Dutch people had a "holier than thou" attitude about the superiority of their society. Using the UN Human Rights Declaration as a benchmark, I'd like to know:

- why the Dutch government required my wife, a legal resident of The Netherlands, to present herself annually to the "alien police" for questioning and registration? Couldn't that be considered a violation of Article 5, which prohibits degrading treatment?

- why the Dutch government uses expressway photo radar on a nationwide basis, mailing tickets to the owner of the photographed vehicle without regard for who was driving the car and without opportunity to represent oneself? Couldn't that be a violation of Article 11, which assures due process?

- why Dutch local government officials repeatedly inspect the contents of the trash cans of residents of foreign citizenship, presumably to ensure we're properly recycling? Couldn't that be a violation of Article 12, which assures individual privacy?

- why the Dutch government requires employers to pay higher wages to older workers for the same job, which creates a disincentive for these employers to hire older workers and essentially "traps" older workers at jobs they don't like because they're essentially unemployable if they quit? Couldn't that be a violation of Article 23, guaranteeing equal pay and the right to work?

I'm sure the answers are complex and intertwined with Dutch culture and custom. My point is not to counter criticism of my country with criticism of yours, but to point out that such a broad, sweeping declaration such as the UN UDHR is probably best seen as an ideal or a goal that may not be completely attainable, even in as liberal a society as The Netherlands.

I live outside the United States now, and while I enjoy the opportunity to sample other cultures, I wouldn't trade being a middle class American for being the king or queen of anything -- even with all our faults and the occasional ham-handedness with which we conduct ourselves.

Is your impression of Americans and American thought (not an oxymoron I assure you) based on a visit to our country? If so, where and when? Our regional differences can be as pronounced as those between South Limburg and Friesland...

In my Scoutmaster Fundamentals recently, and at District JLT, our District staff reiterated that Scouts can sign advancements for Scouts lower in rank than they. We've just begun doing that, and based on a small sample so far, they're doing it very responsibly -- guess we shouldn't be surprised.

Last time we taught Totin' Chip, a senior Scout taught and ran the ax yard, with an adult leader providing overwatch. The first time a Scout works with stoves, or when an experienced Scout uses a new stove the first time, it's with adult leader instruction, then supervision after that.

This has come up before in this forum. Many leaders feel hamstrung because they know MB requirements weren't met or were liberally "interpreted" by counselors who weren't trained (nod to Bob White), were recruited locally in a "brother-in-law/dope deal" arrangement, or some other suboptimal arrangement. The basic problem is, I think, that we're collectively accustomed to "batting last"; that is, after all's said and done, we get the final vote. With the MB process, it's not that way. The unit leader (SM) vote is at the front end. If an MB counselor is "questionable", or the summer camp program for a particular badge or badges is unsat in the SM's opinion, his veto is up front by not signing the blue card (approval to begin working on the badge) under those circumstances.

I repeat, that's one area of the BSA program where our input seems bass-ackwards -- at the beginning instead of at the end. But, that's the way it is. I found this out the hard way once when I knew there was no way a particular MB requirement could have been met at this camp, because I was there as a unit leader. Frankly, I thought the Scouts would come home with a partial and we'd pick up the missing requirement in a troop activity later. Much to my surprise, I got handed a half-dozen completed blue cards after camp, and had to bite the bullet. I look a lot more closely now at blue card applications and counselors, especially at camp environments...

You're right, there's no substitute for the actual pamphlets. In fact, my son has bought personal copies of many of them, especially the 3-month badges such as family life and personal fitness, or the complicated ones such as E-science, so he's not monopolizing the troop's copy.

On having the most up-to-date requirements at your fingertips, here's another technique, for those of you who may be as geeked-out as I am with a Palm Pilot or similar PDA. Get a document converter, convert the meritbadge.com requirement sheets into Palm files, and squirt them into your PDA. The document converters will convert Word files, HTML pages, text files, just about anything, and there's one less book you have to carry around. I also have a lot of other Scout-related stuff in there, including the GTSS, Scoutmaster minutes, skits, advancement records, etc...really comes in handy when a requirement changes mid-year.

My $.02:

I don't believe in "punishing" the entire troop for one patrol's laziness, if it can be clearly determined which patrol left dirty dishes, mistreated equipment, etc. If you can determine that, have the guilty patrol go through the drill but leave the rest of the troop alone -- they'll learn the lesson by watching their buds in a "do-over".

If we make the entire troop wash all their dishes, pitch all their tents, etc., all over again, the miscreants will learn that there's no reward for laziness, however, the squared-away Scouts will also learn that there's no reward for doing it right, either, if even one Scout screws it up. I know what the school reply will probably be: "Not even one Scout should screw it up." Agreed, but especially this time of year with the newly bridged Scouts, there's a lot of stumblin' & bumblin'. If we punish everyone for one Scout's actions, the experienced Scouts will be less enthusiastic about new Scouts going on outings -- they'll be perceived as a recipe for trouble.

In another thread, a leader (sorry, can't remember who) said he deals with the sleepyhead by letting them sleep and miss the activity...another bangs pots. Either of those might work depending on the circumstances. Here's an approach I use at home with my kids, who both dislike oatmeal -- a lot. If it's time to get up, and you don't get up, I start spelling o-a-t-m-e-a-l. If I get to the "l", you're getting oatmeal for breakfast. It works. You might be able to do an adaptation of the same thing, although you can't take everyone's least favorite food on campouts. How about "last one out of his tent washes dishes all day"?

You know, you can "what if" these things to death and come up with hypothetical situations that support any argument.

I'm making an assumption for the sake of argument that we are not child molesters, and that any youth protection rule violation is not committed with malicious intent, but out of necessity (even if the necessity was caused by leader stupidity). Those assumptions made, it seems to me that the leader about to violate the rule needs to ask himself if the violation is worth being kicked out of Scouting permanently. If nothing illegal occurred, that's the worst that can happen, right? And, if you more savvy posters are right in your assertion that a YP violation, if discovered, is grounds for excommunication from the movement, it's gonna happen. So, you better be okay with hanging up the shirt as a result of what you're about to do. Looking at the situation through that filter, there will be very, I repeat very, few situations that would compel me to commit a YP violation, and they'll be life/death, not just a cold, scared, or hungry kid. I agree with others that if you have done your homework you shouldn't find yourself in this situation...

You guys are fabulous! This is almost as good as going to a roundtable (if you could squirt brownies through a fiber optic cable, it WOULD be as good as a roundtable).

Thanks for the great advice.

Our troop committee just authorized our facilities/equipment chair to acquire new troop tents that match and will be large enough to camp the whole troop and leaders with all gear inside. Now, we've got a hodgepodge, and our PLC wanted standardization for reasons of pride and ease of setup & teardown.

Here's our problem: Being overseas, the tents we could get on the economy may not meet fire retardant standards, and it's hard to tell if they do. The military exchange here sells Colemans, but we don't know if that's the best way to go. So we can explore the Internet too, but we're talking a significant investment and don't want to take a chance on an unknown e-tailer.

Where do you get your tents? Do you get quantity discounts? Any advice is welcome...

thanks.

I think all you guys are right, at least to a degree. Also, I firmly believe that with an organization this big and far-flung, operated by a bunch of unpaid volunteers where the rubber meets the road (at the unit level), AND where training is optional, AND where so much of the guidance is suggestions rather than requirements, AND where most unit-level Scouters have never seen the BSA policy manual, BSA by-laws, etc., but only allusions to it or excerpts in pubs like the insignia guide or the GTSS, what we have is a natural consequence. And, BSA must be okay with it or they would change something (like getting the no-kidding BSA by-laws, rules, and policy manual into unit Scouters' hands, making training mandatory, etc).

Meanwhile, this is what we have: very little black and white, and lots of shades of grey. The real problem in my opinion is that there is so much wiggle room that some Scouters, even well-meaning ones, assume there's wiggle room in everything. Before you know it, tour permits, MB counselor registration, two-deep, and other requirements become "optional" too.

It's easy to judge other leaders based on our standards and "reality". That's a minefield, because no two troops are identical. That SM who's doing more "hands-on" than you are may have a new SPL, or may have just taken over the troop from a SM who was more hands-on than he, but needs time to get the leaders to lead with confidence. That's just one example -- there's a million of them out there.

When I first joined the military, an expression you heard a lot was "So-and-so has a bad attitude". I, too, used that tag, until I realized that a bad attitude is incredibly difficult to define because it's so subjective. There were individual troops who had either good attitudes or bad attitudes, depending on which NCO or officer was describing them. Ultimately, it came down to this: anyone with an attitude other than yours could be accused of having a bad attitude. I got away from looking at an undefinable attitude and started looking at very definable performance.

Perhaps this is the same thing. Unless we're all raised in the same home, won't our personal values vary somewhat? Are we chasing our tails trying to define a standard set, when there's no standard set of people?

How about "A Scout is Reverent"? What does that mean? To me, it means regular mass attendance, in part. But, I have Scouts who don't attend church regularly. Some of them worship in other ways. Are they less reverent than I? Whose values should prevail? Rhetorical questions, actually, but I think it underscores the point that there are very few absolutes, and that you can be in any of a number of points on this continuum and still be "right"...