Kudu

The purposes of the corporation are to promote, through organization, and cooperation with other agencies, the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods that were in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916. Depending on how Sec. 30905 ("Exclusive right to emblems, badges, marks, and words") is interpreted, the basic idea is that big government gives the BSA a monopoly on Scouting in the United States in return for the preservation of the Scoutcraft program in common use by Boy Scouts on June 15, 1916. That would be the 1911 program: http://inquiry.net/advancement/tf-1st_require_1911.htm The BSA's Scoutcraft program in 1911 was roughly on par with the rest of the world. Compare it even to a current generic version of American Baden-Powell Scouting: http://inquiry.net/traditional/handbook/index.htm The courts have usually defended the BSA's monopoly, most significantly in Wrenn v. Boy Scouts of America. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youthscouts I believe the court in its ruling specifically quoted the BSA's interpretation of the Congressional Charter ("marks protected by the congressional charter granted in 1916 under 36 U.S.C. Chapter 309"). Wrenn was the ruling that knocked out the second wave of Baden-Powell Scouting in the United States. The exception to the BSA's unblemished success in suing other Scouting associations out of existence was the 1924 legal action against the Girl Scouts, see: http://www.inquiry.net/adult/bsa_vs_gsusa.htm Perhaps because it is difficult to establish "standing," the protection only works in one direction. The BSA can use the Congressional Charter to prevent Baden-Powell Scouting associations from offering true Scoutcraft programs to Americans, while at the same time declining to honor their obligations under the terms of the Congressional Charter. They simply change the Purpose of the corporation from Scoutcraft (objective standards) to subjective stuff like "making ethical decisions" or "Leadership and Character." As for instance this year's national media blitz to replace camping for Hispanic "Boy Scouts" with soccer and expensive translators. See: http://www.inquiry.net/leadership/sitting_side_by_side_with_adults.htm Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

I have talked with a few former BSA employees but have never been able to pin down the National TAY % (Percentage of Total Available Youth), or even what their own District or Council goals were. Maybe TAY is a mythical thing like accurate BSA membership numbers I do know that AFTER the BSA had given Webelos to Scout Crossover their best shot in Western NY, I was able to register an additional 28% of the sixth-grade boys in our local school by presenting our program as the kind of old-school adventure that attracted boys to Scouting on June 15, 1916. See: http://inquiry.net/adult/recruiting.htm The "potential" TAY was usually 70% (the number of non-Scouts who signed my list, in front of their peers, asking me to call their parents). For what it's worth I have the statistics of why that 70% dwindled down to 28%, if anyone wants me to dig them out (Excuses parents gave me over the phone--I don't think they mean anything). I believe that the bottom line is that with the retirement of Green Bar Bill in 1965, the BSA made the conscious decision to switch our product from Scouting to "Leadership and Character" no matter what it cost in membership numbers. Yours at 300 feet, Kudu (This message has been edited by Kudu)

Eagle92, we seem to agree on the big picture but not the details Eagle92 writes: As I mentioned, working on Cit Nat and World were done in conjunction with the HA trip. Lots of hiking around DC, did three trails we discovered at the post trip meeting, and canoeing and portaging in the Canadian Wilderness. Baden-Powell's program gives badges for the High Adventure trips themselves, not the school work. (However, having adults tag along on an Expedition would have negated counting it for what we call advancement). Eagle92 writes: There are ways to incorporate some of the PW Mbs into scouting. With PM, you can use a patrol's budget for a weekend as a foundation for other budgets. Working Personal Management into Scouting is like incorporating the branding of "666" on athletes' foreheads into Little League. All things considered, I think some boys would prefer the searing of their flesh to paperwork. The difference is that Little League does not have a monopoly on baseball, so if "experts" imposed adult stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with baseball onto Little League, the boys would simply go elsewhere. The YMCA was very clever in securing a monopoly on Scouting so that boys would be forced to do YMCA "boy work" instead of Baden-Powell's program. There is no free market for Boy Scouts, they can not go elsewhere so either they stop working on advancement, drop out, or realize that they love Big Brother ("Hey maybe that paperwork Eagle will look good on my resume"). Eagle92 writes: You are so correct in the PM is a model of our democratic republic, i.e. patrols elect PLs who represent the members on the PLC. No, electing Patrol Leaders is not what Baden-Powell meant by "citizenship." The whole idea in both his Patrol System (and Hillcourt's Patrol Method) was to find the Patrol's best leader and stick with him. For instance as you would stick with the best lifeguard and NOT hold regular elections so that everybody at the waterfront gets a chance to learn about "democracy" (and the subsequent "controlled failure," which makes a virtue out the natural destructive consequences of POR requirements). By "citizenship" Baden Powell meant the interaction of a Patrol of sweaty Scouts pulling together under stress on a Journey without adult supervision, as men would do. Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

Eagle92 writes: Although it depends upon how the MBC deals with it. My CitCom, Nat, and World counselor was awesome and made it fun. Honestly, if the BSA required that we brand "666" on the foreheads of our Scouts, then Scouting forums would be full of helpful suggestions on how to make the branding process "fun" and "related" to Scouting Eagle92 writes: The problem as I see it is that the schools are not preparing the scouts in these topics, at least in my neck of the woods. So why Scouting? If the schools are failing then why not have Little League take up the slack? Little League could do what the BSA did: Get those boys indoors to learn the three branches of government and play fake leadership "team-building" exercises. Unlike Little League, the inventor of Scouting specifically said (over and over and over) that his game is the very opposite of school! Eagle92 writes: part of scouting is to teach citizenship and to prepare them physically, mentally, and morally. So scouting is filling in that role. No, Scouting is not filling that role. Baden-Powell designed Scouting to teach citizenship by requiring small groups of Scouts (called Patrols) to learn Scoutcraft by organizing their own hikes into the woods without adult supervision. Wood Badge intentionally took that away from American boys by ending Patrol Leader Training in 1972. Now any cupcake can get an Eagle Badge without ever walking into the woods with a pack on his back (as long as he is good at paperwork). Such Eagle Scouts are equivalent to a Baden-Powell Second Class Scout because they did not prove their mastery of Scoutcraft with the First Class Journey. Eagle92 writes: Also I knew folks who aged out at Star and Life, and they were better at scoutcraft than some Eagles I know Yes, BSA Boy Scouting is like BSA Cub Scouting, it filters out the boys for which Baden-Powell designed his game. You know, the boys who want to do the "fun badges," help on other's service projects, and let the whole schoolwork thing go by! Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

Engineer61 writes: So, my Scout's interest in Scouting is pretty simple. He wants to do the "fun badges", go camping, help on other's Eagle projects If it is any consolation, it is just human nature for boys to hate the paperwork Merit Badges. In fact 103 years ago a major-general called the "Hero of Mafeking," invented a game for boys that was the exact opposite of this kind of schoolwork. All requirements for his game were based on "Scoutcraft" and "Service for Others." In other words, fun badges: go camping and help on other's projects. According to this guy, boys hate stuff like fake leadership, Personal Management, and Citizenship Merit Badges, have always hated stuff like fake leadership, Personal Management, and Citizenship Merit Badges, and will hate stuff like fake leadership, Personal Management, and Citizenship Merit Badges until the end of time. But what did anyone know about human nature 103 years ago, huh? Yours at 300 feet, Kudu (This message has been edited by kudu)

Why can't an adult leader play manhunt with the Scouts? Baden-Powell designed a number of his manhunt games to include the Scoutmaster: Deer Hunting, Sharp Nose, Escaped Convict, and Seeking the Scoutmaster, among others. See: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/games/b-p/index.htm Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

acco40 writes: A patrol leader's primary responsibility is just that - to lead his patrol. How he leads doesn't matter as long as he does. If he organizes and instructor to teach a skill or he does hit himself - doesn't matter. There are many styles and ways to lead and yes, that is why introducing leadership training to the boys is not a bad idea. Thanks for the perfect example of leadership logic. You saved my bacon, acco, because now nobody can accuse me of making that stuff up! Introducing leadership training to the boys teaches them how corporate leadership experts play word games to take things from people, from trillions in toxic assets to cheating Boy Scouts out of the Patrol Method. If Wood Badge neutered BSA Lifeguards the way it neutered BSA Patrol Leaders we would hear exactly the same kind of word games: "A lifeguard's primary responsibility is just that - to guard life. How he guards doesn't matter as long as he does. If he organizes a Neighborhood Watch because he does not know how to swim - doesn't matter. There are many styles and ways to be a guardian, that is why introducing guardianship training to the boys is not a bad idea." Oh, and let's make swimming in water over our heads a violation of the Guide to Safe Scouting. The "Lifeguard Method" can be learned in baby pools and splash pads -- just as the "Patrol Method" can be learned without ever taking a Patrol out on patrol. John-in-KC writes: Even a patrol leader (British Cavalry style) reported back to his Troop Commander and to the Regimental commander. In every unit of the Armed Forces (which we agree, B-P modelled his organizational structure upon, Well, no John, we do not agree on that point: 1) Baden-Powell's form of reconnaissance patrol was a reaction against military drill training. It was controversial and not well received until the publication of one of his books just happened to coincide with six months of good headlines from the Siege of Mafeking. 2) The purpose of B-P's military patrols was to go out on patrol, not to stay with the regiment to hold elections and practice "team building" exercises. 3) Remember that B-P considered Senior Patrol Leaders to be purely optional. If used at all, they were selected by the interaction of the PLC with the Scoutmaster, as in Green Bar Bill's Patrol Method in which the Patrol Leaders selected the SPL. As a Major-General he could have based his Patrol System on our current Troop Method "chain of command," but he did not. See: http://inquiry.net/traditional/por/groups.htm John-in-KC writes: Supply Sergeant, Cook, Quartermaster, armorer, signal officer... so yes, there is room in Scouting for the folks who provide specialized support to the PL. Of course. Do we somehow disagree on that? Yours at 300 feet, Kudu The purpose of a Patrol is to go out on patrol. That is why Baden-Powell called them "Patrols." Therefore a Patrol Leader's primary responsibility is to: "Qualify to take my Patrol hiking and camping" (Patrol Leader's Handbook, 1967, page 12). Because the purpose of a Patrol Leader is to take his Patrol out on patrol.

Stosh, A "Real" Patrol Leader is the land version of a BSA Lifeguard. All of your "Does it count?" rhetorical questions are based on "getting credit" for a Position of Responsibility. POR "credit" is designed to poison the Spirit of Scouting. Before PORs were required for advancement, Scouting worked just like you describe it in your Troop: A job needs to be done, so a man steps up to do it. You know, just like we adult volunteers do! What a role model, huh? A man with no stupid acronyms! Just do what is needed. My first year as a Scout I became Troop Scribe in what would now be called a "Mega Troop." Everyone paid a dime a week, so the math was easy. I got a cool patch, but more importantly I got to hang out with the older Scouts! Then I became a Patrol Leader, then three years as SPL. I did it because it was fun to know what the Scouts wanted to do before they could put it into words. POR credit seems like a good idea if you want to corrupt Boy Scouts by teaching them that their service has a specific value: To teach them to extract as much as they can for doing as little as possible. That is why we need POR contracts, just so everyone agrees on the exact "value" of what should be "Service for Others" freely given. You know, "Service for Others," what Baden-Powell also called "Practical Christianity." Yours at 300 feet, Kudu The purpose of a Patrol is to go out on patrol. That is why Baden-Powell called them "Patrols." Therefore a Patrol Leader's primary responsibility is to: "Qualify to take my Patrol hiking and camping" (Patrol Leader's Handbook, 1967, page 12). Because the purpose of a Patrol Leader is to take his Patrol out on patrol.(This message has been edited by kudu)

Twocubdad writes: I don't know where Kudu is, but in the past he's been fairly adamant that Positions of Responsibility are creations of adult-led troop and the whole corporate Wood Badge establishment which has ruined Scouting anyway, if I may be so bold as to speak for Kudu. Yes, the problem here is mixing "Positions of Responsibility" with advancement. Without PORs, we could just ignore the Troop Method. Introduced in the year of Green Bar Bill's retirement: A required POR is the tool by which "leadership" experts destroyed the Patrol Method, removed all camping requirements from Eagle, and replaced these two most fundamental Methods of Scouting with Fake Leadership. I believe that the subsequent loss of two million Boy Scouts was perfectly acceptable to this cult of Fake Leadership, but Green Bar Bill was called in out of retirement to sprinkle some camping requirements back into the program. That helped to bring some kids back to Scouting, but now any cupcake can wear an Eagle badge without ever walking into the woods with a pack on his back. That is significant because, contrary to what you learn in training, the whole point of both Baden-Powell's Patrol System and Green Bar Bill's Patrol Method is to take a Patrol out on patrol. Let me repeat that for the leadership impaired: The purpose of a Patrol is to go out on patrol. That is why Baden-Powell called them PATROLS: Because they go out on patrol. Duh! It follows then that the purpose of a Patrol Leader is to take his Patrol out on patrol. Let me repeat that too, for the sake of all the Wood Badge idiots who are skimming this post looking for helpful tips on how to design a POR contract to turn a Troop into an SPL's corporate office: The purpose of a Patrol Leader is to take his Patrol out on patrol! So, why call it "Fake Leadership"? Because if you look at the POR descriptions upon which POR contracts are based, the Patrol Leader's PRIMARY responsibility is missing: Qualify to take my Patrol hiking and camping (Patrol Leader's Handbook, 1967, page 12). Why do you suppose that is? Because to "qualify," a Patrol Leader Course takes six months of hands-on training to teach even the Patrol's best natural leader how to take his Patrol out on patrol, and perhaps another six months of Patrol hikes to "qualify" him to take his Patrol camping without adult supervision. See the PLT course for what the BSA once called a "Real Patrol:" http://inquiry.net/patrol/green_bar/index.htm When Fake Leadership's Troop Method was introduced in 1972, this Patrol Leader Training Course was discarded, a Patrol Leader's "Recommended Term of Office" was introduced (set at only six months to match the POR requirements), and so the primary job responsibility of a Patrol Leader, to "Qualify to take my Patrol hiking and camping," was removed (Patrol and Troop Leadership,, 1972, page 68). So what's the point? The "Purpose" of Scouting is to teach Scoutcraft, not "Leadership." Forcing Scouts to sign a POR contract is to force them to admit in writing that adults trained in Wood Badge have the right to cheat them out of the Scoutcraft program guaranteed to them as American citizens by an Act of Congress. Yours at 300 feet, Kudu In case you missed it, a Patrol Leader's primary responsibility is to: Qualify to take my Patrol hiking and camping (Patrol Leader's Handbook, 1967, page 12). Qualify to take my Patrol hiking and camping (Patrol Leader's Handbook, 1967, page 12). Qualify to take my Patrol hiking and camping (Patrol Leader's Handbook, 1967, page 12). Qualify to take my Patrol hiking and camping (Patrol Leader's Handbook, 1967, page 12). Qualify to take my Patrol hiking and camping (Patrol Leader's Handbook, 1967, page 12). Qualify to take my Patrol hiking and camping (Patrol Leader's Handbook, 1967, page 12).

More Neckerchief information: http://inquiry.net/uniforms/neckerchief/index.htm Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

BrentAllen writes: I have had more adult interest in our backpacking trip... It is counter-intuitive to those stuck in Webelos III Troops, but if you develop backpacking and canoe programs you can attract more competent adults for those trips than usually attend your regular monthly Cub Scout campouts. Your incompetent popularity-contest-winning-junior-leaders will tend to stay at home as well, which will provide opportunities for your natural leaders (the potential young outdoorsmen) to step into the leadership vacum. If you want to experiment with B-P's Patrol System and try his 300 foot standard at least once in your tenure as an adult volunteer, then backpacking is the easiest way to get a Troop out of its Webelos III rut. 1) Do Not Call it Backpacking: Try "Backwoods" Trek or Trip. Calling backwoods adventure "backpacking" is like saying "Let's go haul roofing tiles up a ladder." 2) Sell Backwoods Treks as Adventure: Nobody in my current Troop wanted to go "backpacking," but 20 of them signed up for a "Backwoods Fishing Trip." Likewise for "Wilderness GPS Candy Treasure Hunt" and "Laser Man Hunt Weekend." 84 Wide Games just itching for such 21st century modifications can be found at: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/games/wide/index.htm Additional Night Games can be found at: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/night/index.htm 3) Adventure NOT Distance: Start with destinations less than 1/2 mile from the parking lot. The idea is to wean them from Troop Trailer camping, not to cover any significant distance at first. Remember: It's all about an exciting Adventure. 4) Where To Go? Google hiking trails + local location names like county. You may find local hiking groups and locations that you did not know about. Roundtables and/or an outdoorsman at your local Council office may turn up additional resources. Likewise for Scout Camp Rangers and State Rangers. I am always surprised to discover how many Troops have parents that want nothing to do with regular monthly Webelos III campouts, but are very enthused about back county trips. 5) Temporary Backwoods Leadership: Make sure you separate those Patrols by at least some distance right away so they do not settle into their usual Webelos III rut. Assuming low attendance, ad hoc Patrols work best that so you can influence each temporary group's best natural leader to serve as temporary Patrol Leader. One of these Patrol Leaders can also wear the SPL or "Trek Leader" hat because you need your Troop's best leaders in those remote Patrol sites. A safe trip is about competent outdoor leadership, not "controlled failure." 6) Advancement Requirements: Those wonderful national committees of Eagle Scouts, Silver Beavers, and Four-Bead leadership experts removed the backpacking trip as a requirement for Camping Merit Badge (and replaced it with the option to float downstream eating cupcakes), but a small backpacking trip is still one of the alternative requirement options. Most Scouts and parents have not read those requirements very carefully, so you can sell four-mile (round trip) "Backcountry Fishing" trips as a Camping Merit Badge requirement. 7) Weather Permitting: I promote beginner trips as fair-weather only! In a perfect world your destination will have a regular campground nearby for a "Plan B" in bad weather (because most Tour Permits are not flexible). Remember that in the south, the time to haul a backpack around is in the winter when it is cool. Yours at 300 Feet, Kudu

Note that you can get all of the camping requirements for Eagle signed off without ever walking into the woods with a pack on your back. The only real camping requirement in Camping Merit Badge, the low-level three mile (round trip!) backpacking overnight, was replaced with non-camping options such as riding your bike around or floating downstream on an inner-tube eating cupcakes. What most BSA Troops call "camping" is known in the rest of the world as "static camping." The purpose of static camping is to learn the Scoutcraft skills necessary for real camping, which is called "Journeys," "Expeditions," and (of course) Patrol outings. Baden-Powell's camping requirements were measured by nights+distance, not merely "nights." For instance, the First Class Journey: Go on foot, with three other Scouts, on a 24-hour journey of at least 15 miles. The Journey and Expeditions requirements of increasing difficulty can be found at: http://inquiry.net/advancement/traditional/journey_requirements.htm Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

acco40 writes: Let's look at the education we give our professionals that work with Cub Scout and Boy Scout age boys. They get a mixture of "Scoutcraft" courses - mathematics, English, history, science, etc. and also a lot of "Leadership" courese - child development, child psychology, learning behaviors, etc. Scouting is not school. In fact Baden-Powell spent a considerable amount of energy explaining that Scouting is the opposite of school. acco40 writes: Is one better than the other? Yes: Scoutcraft is better. acco40 writes: I'm really frustrated with this either / or mantra on Leadership / Scoutskills that Kudu preaches. Then explain the "Patrol Method" presentation of Scoutmaster-specific training in which "leadership" experts removed ANY mention of a Patrol Leader or a working Patrol and replaced them with leadership EDGE theory. This is the Patrol Method presentation, mind you. Leadership Experts: Stupid or Evil? I mean, really, what kind of "leadership" expert removes the Patrol Leader and a working Patrol from the Scoutmaster-specific presentation on the Patrol Method, acco40? Leadership Experts: Stupid or Evil? Presumably these are the same "leadership" experts whose goal it is to use The Guide to Safe Scouting to officially ban Hillcourt's Patrol Method and Baden-Powell's Patrol System in celebration of the BSA's centennial. Leadership Experts: Stupid or Evil? Which is it, acco40? Stupid or Evil? The purpose of a Patrol is Adventure: To go out on patrol without adult EDGE experts: Patrols are ready to go hiking and camping on their own just as soon as the Patrol Leader has been trained, and the Scouts have learned to take care of themselves, have learned to respect growing crops and live trees, to avoid unnecessary danger, and in all ways conduct themselves as Scouts...It should be your goal to get your Patrol Leaders qualified for hike and camp leadership at an early stage Handbook for Scoutmasters, fifth edition, page 118. Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

acco40 writes: Kudu - I've had Scouts who were masters of a certain skill. However, they couldn't teach a lick. So? The purpose of a Patrol Leader is to safely take his Patrol out on patrol: Day hikes and then overnights. If a Scout is in a Patrol that regularly hikes and camps without adult supervision, he will learn all the Scoutcraft he needs no matter how bad the Patrol Leader is at EDGE theory. acco40 writes: They would make lousy patrol leaders. The only lousy Patrol Leaders are those that do not take their Patrols out on patrol without adult supervision. acco40 writes: Then why did I go on a patrol hike, pick out our campsite and camp for two days with my patrol during Wood Badge? Well, I don't know. Did they tell you "why" at Wood Badge? Did they tell you to take that home to your Troop? If so, do your Patrols go out on Patrol hikes and camp for two days without adult supervision, like a Wood Badge Patrol without an SPL or other Staffers? If your answer is "No, our Patrols do not go on patrol," do they at least camp 300 feet from the nearest Patrol, Baden-Powell's minimum distance? If so, congratulations! But you know very well that only one out of every 10,000 Wood Badgers can get real Patrol Leaders to take their Patrols out on patrol, any only one out of every 1,000 can even train real Patrol Leaders to meet B-P's minimum standard for a Troop campout. Contrary to the goal of IOLS, mastery of Scoutcraft is not measured by "Advancement," but by how a Scout applies it when his Patrol goes out on patrol. Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

Exactly, IOLS presents the Scoutcraft skills removed from Wood Badge as things to be checked off a first year advancement list, so that applied Scoutcraft does not get in the way of Wolf Den Leaders wearing those pretty Beads. This summer I attended an IOLS course at Camp Rainey Mountain (Georgia) in which the adults spend the week watching the eleven-year-olds go through the camp's first year "TNT" course (in other words, there is no "hands-on" instruction for the adults). The IOLS course director boasted that Scouts can earn "90%" of the Tenderfoot through First Class skills (including the five mile hike) in fifteen (15) hours! No. A Wood Badge graduate should be able to teach Patrol Leaders the Scoutcraft skills necessary to take their Patrols out on patrol without adult supervision: Patrols are ready to go hiking and camping on their own just as soon as the Patrol Leader has been trained, and the Scouts have learned to take care of themselves, have learned to respect growing crops and live trees, to avoid unnecessary danger, and in all ways conduct themselves as Scouts...It should be your goal to get your Patrol Leaders qualified for hike and camp leadership at an early stage Handbook for Scoutmasters, fifth edition, page 118. That is what the term "Patrol Method" meant before "leadership" experts kicked Scoutcraft out of Wood Badge and replaced it with group theory. There is no reason to invent a new course, simply kick the Cub Scouts out of Wood Badge, move their boxes of tissue and "leadership" theory to the University of Scouting, and restore those Beads to the Patrol-based backwoods Scoutcraft competency that Baden-Powell intended them to stand for. Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

VigilEagle04, The exemption of Patrol outings from the two-deep leadership rule can be found in the Guide to Safe Scouting, Scoutmaster's Handbook, Senior Patrol Leader's Handbook, and Patrol Leader's Handbook. However, rumor has it that Wood Badger Wolf Den Leaders on the national "safety" committee are working overtime to reverse that policy in time to mark the official death of Green Bar Bill's Patrol Method this year, as Leadership Development's contribution to the BSA's centennial celebration CalicoPenn, I ain't driving to no campout just to spend the weekend in a stinkn' motel! Patrols that go on patrol are more abstract than we like to believe. I find that if you separate them by 300 feet on Troop campouts (if only once in a while), lights go off in the heads of the gung-ho outdoor Scouts, and (if they can get their parents' permission) they soon start to arrange their own campouts of mixed friends (some in Scouting, others not). When I was a Scout I never thought of asking my Scoutmaster's permission to go on patrol with my friends, and that is true today. As a Scout with a car our "Patrol" drove a hundred miles to camp in the Adirondack High Peaks, and as a Scoutmaster one of my Eagle Scouts drove his "Patrol" 240 miles to get there. If I read Basementdweller's post correctly, his SM is forcing each Patrol to cook for seven adults. In my retirement I'm finding that establishing the Patrol Method as an ASM takes a lot of time and patience Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

Before 1972 there was a Scouter's skills course: It was called "Wood Badge."

Scoutbox writes: Why do I get the feeling that most on here who don't like the WB21 either did the old course, or haven't done any courses yet. Speaking of Egos that is... I feel that much of the argument on here is from people who are unhappy with having to do it over again or people who don't want to do the course. These are perfect examples of using ad hominem logic to justify Leadership Development. An explanation of how ad hominem works can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem As I mentioned in a previous post in this thread, this tradition of using ad hominem to shift a discussion away from what a Patrol does in the woods started in 1965 with John Larson's destruction of William Hillcourt's life work: Larson later reported, "He fought us all the way... He had a vested interest in what had been and resisted every change. I just told him to settle down, everything was going to be all right." The central problem with using Wood Badge Beads to replace Scoutcraft training with leadership theory, is: We no longer train Patrol Leaders how to take their Patrols out on patrol. In other words: Leadership theory took the patrolling out of the Patrol Method. It would be easy enough to refute that observation: Simply point out the success that your units have had in applying leadership theory to match or exceed the Patrol Method standards of Scoutcraft training as set forth by William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt in the United States, or Baden-Powell in the rest of the world. For instance: "This weekend our SPL Explained to the Patrol Leaders that Patrols should camp B-P's minimum standard of 300 feet apart, Demonstrated how his posse was set up 300 feet from where the adults were camping, Guided them through measuring the length of a football field in the woods, and Enabled them to camp their Patrols without much adult supervision." Or "This weekend our Raven Patrol Formed at the Patrol Leader's house at 8 AM Stormed for lunch when they discovered that Mike had forgotten the peanut butter. Normed during the remainder of the eight mile hike. Performed good group leadership theory by camping without adult supervision at the old mill." Easy Peasy! Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

Shortridge, OGE, and jblake47's replies are all good first posts. The Patrol Method is all relative: 1) 14 is usually too many for one Patrol but the Patrols do not have to be equal. The important thing is: Who gets along? Who can lead? 2) I agree with OGE of course: The Real Patrol Method is based on distance. This spring I worked with a Troop that had NEVER used the Patrol Method before (except for separating tables of note-taking Scouts at indoor meetings). We just happened to have three "old-school" BSA Scouters on this campout, so we separated the Patrols a football field apart. Two 13 year-old Scouts supervised the setup of their respective ad hoc Patrols just fine, while the senior Scouts were out setting up a GPS candy treasure hunt. BUT a) I picked the junior leaders and b) The three adult leaders had all been in Real Patrols when we were Scouts. 3) As far as too many adults it depends on personalities. Yes, 300 feet between the adults and the Scouts, and 300 feet between the two Patrols should solve most of your problems, but you better have solid natural leaders in control of those Patrols! If you decide to teach "democracy" and "controlled failure" instead, then you will likely need to decrease the distances to the point where the 13 adults will tend to take over So answer Shortridge's questions! Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

An international collection of old-school Troop and Patrol Yells can be found at the Inquiry Net: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/campfire/helps/yells.htm Note that a Patrol Yell is not the same as a Patrol Call. The later is the call of a natural Patrol critter used by members of a Patrol to communicate with each other during Wide Games and Night Games. Back in the days when Scouting activities were measured by physical distance, it was against the rules to imitate another Patrol's call! 84 Wide Games: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/games/wide/index.htm Night Games: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/night/index.htm Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

TNScoutTroop writes: we're embarking on a roll-our-own IOLS training that's getting close to Wood Badge in length (2 full Saturdays + 2 Fri PM - Sun PM weekends) and that is focused on learning, and then teaching Scout craft skills, we'd like to know what specific problems you envision. The fundamental flaw of IOLS is that it is based on the Wood Badge assumption that Scoutcraft skills can be separated from leadership skills. In other words, IOLS is designed to teach adults how to check things off a requirements list. So the specific problem that nobody in the United States will be able to point out to you is: The purpose of a Patrol is to go out on patrol. In other words, Wood Badge took the patrolling out of the Patrol Method. Scoutcraft skills and Patrols are interrelated. The purpose of Scoutcraft is twofold: 1) To give Scouts the basic skills they need to take a single Patrol out on patrol: packing a pack (and walking perhaps a quarter-mile to where your course takes place), setting up tents, building fires, setting up backpacking stoves, cooking, backwoods navigation; and 2) To give the Patrol something to do while it is out on patrol (pioneering for instance--which is not really necessary for camping). Everything about Scouting (including your project) becomes self-correcting if you always space the Patrols out as far as the boys' discipline will allow. Many people make fun of me for insisting that Baden-Powell's minimum 300 feet between Patrols on a Troop campout is some kind of magic cure-all, but (as long as you maintain strict discipline and work up to that distance in small steps), I think you will be amazed at the effect that physical distance has on both Patrol leadership and making Scoutcraft look like it actually has a real-world use. TNScoutTroop, is this for adults only, or adults and Scouts? Either way, Green Bar Bill's Patrol Leader version of Wood Badge can be found at the following URL. You might find it helpful in designing your Troop's "roll-your-own" Scoutcraft course: http://inquiry.net/patrol/green_bar/index.htm Yours at 300 feet, Kudu (This message has been edited by kudu)

jet526 writes: If you have ever tried to convince a merit badge counselor that your scout's riding his bike one afternoon should count towards his Camping Merit Badge, you might be a helicopter parent. That should be changed to "...you might be a parent in a Helicopter Scouting association." Please make a note of it! Helicopter Scouting is all relative: Requirements 9b-3&4 were designed as an alternative to the previous requirement of a baby three mile (round trip!) backpacking trip. Remember Scouting is all about "ethical choices" or "Leadership and Character," not camping. Every ethical couch potato has the right to be an Eagle Scout without ever walking into the woods with a pack on his back! Requirement 9b-3 allows a Scout who hates camping to ride his bike around a Scout camp parking lot for four hours. Requirement 9b-4 allows a Scout who hates camping to float downstream on an inner tube eating cupcakes. Technically speaking, forcing an ethical cupcake to pitch his tent outdoors is "adding to the requirements"! Simple Wood Badge Logic: Define Scouting by making up bogus "missions" like "ethical choices" or "leadership and character," then find "outside of the box" ways of meeting those fake aims. What is the "goal" of camping? Fresh air and exercise! Therefore siting on an inner tube and riding a bike around is camping. But I'm sure you knew that! I hope that helps! Kudu(This message has been edited by kudu)

Yeah, maybe we should check the 1973 television lineup to figure out which program lured those three million Boy Scouts away (you know, after we just happened to trade Scoutcraft Adventure for fake leadership) The demographics myth is easy enough to disprove. If you want to understand how "cool" Scoutcraft Adventure is, simply use my sixth-grade recruiting presentation as written: http://inquiry.net/adult/recruiting.htm Whatever the percentage of Total Available Youth (TAR) in the BSA now, if you offer Scoutcraft Adventure you will recruit about 28% of sixth grade boys. That is 28% in addition to whatever we have been able to recruit with all the resources of the BSA millionaires and volunteers, because my presentation is given after all the Webelos have already crossed over. So, if BSA TAR is 5%, then Scoutcraft Adventure is almost six times more "cool" than Wood Badge for Wolf Den Leaders About 71% of the sixth-grade audience will (in front of their peers) sign a list asking you to call their parents, so the potential TAR is 71% above current BSA membership. In other words, 71% of sixth-grade boys think Scouting is "cool" if you present it as the 1916 Scoutcraft Adventure mandated by our Congressional Charter. Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

The point of the 1970s experience was that Scoutcraft was not "cool" with the potential urban marketshare, so we used the terms "Leadership and Character" to express our open hostility to Scoutcraft. The point of our Chief Scout Executive's goal for 2010 is that Scoutcraft is not "cool" with the potential Hispanic marketshare, so again we use the terms "Leadership and Character" to express our open hostility to Scoutcraft. The idea that Green Bar Bill put the "outing" back in "Scouting" is simply not true. The 1972 invention of Leadership Development took the "patrolling" out of his "Patrol" Method. When was the last time one of your Patrols went out on patrol... ...without adult helicopters? Before 1972, taking your Patrol out on Patrol was the "outing" in "Scouting." Green Bar Bill called the process "Patrol Leader Training." Patrol Leader Training was never restored, in fact the "Patrol Method" presentation of Scoutmaster-specific training never even mentions a Patrol Leader. Yours at 300 feet, Kudu

sherminator505 writes: We are talking about SPLs here. Not White Stag or WB21, and certainly not fish! ... As I tried to explain, the SPL would be the patrol leader by default. A Troop of eight Scouts needs an SPL like a fish needs a bicycle. sherminator505 writes: Whether you call him a Patrol Leader or an SPL is really irrelevant for the scenario I described. It's just terminology....Look, the SPL has been a part of Scouting for most of Scouting's history, certainly longer than William Hillcourt's Wood Badge course, much less the White Stag course that replaced it. The idea that words have no meaning is how we got into this mess. Yes, the BSA used terms like "Senior Patrol Leader" early on, but the "Scout Master" was clearly in charge: The Patrol Leader and the Scout Master Care should be taken by the Scout Master that the patrol leaders do not have too great authority in the supervision of their patrols. The success of the troop affairs and supervision of patrol progress is, in the last analysis, the responsibility of the Scout Master and not that of the patrol leader. There is also a danger, in magnifying the patrol leader in this way, of inordinately swelling the ordinary boy's head. The activities of the patrol should not be left to the judgment of any patrol leader.... http://inquiry.net/adult/methods/1st/index.htm Until Hillcourt's third edition in the late 1930s, the purpose of the SPL in the Handbook for Scoutmasters was to carry out the Scoutmaster's plans: Senior Patrol Leader: Preside at meetings. Lead games. Carry out plans of the Scoutmaster. Supervise and direct work of Patrol Leaders and Scouts (Handbook for Scoutmasters, second edition, page 255). "We lost three million Boy Scouts because of Leadership Development's war on Scoutcraft and our Congressional Charter." sherminator505 writes: More accurately, we lost those folks when we tried to "modernize" Scouting and de-emphasize the outdoors. I'm not sure how much White Stag had to do with this. White Stag had everything to do with this. It used "Urban Scouting" as an excuse to remove Scoutcraft from Wood Badge training and replace it with leadership theory. Then it destroyed Patrol Leader Training and replaced it with generic leadership theory so that Patrol Leaders were in the close physical proximity of adult helicopters, rather than out in the woods conducting independent Patrol Hikes and Overnights. If we took away BSA Lifeguards' position-specific training like we did to BSA Patrol Leaders, then BSA waterfronts would be scaled-down to baby pools and splash pads. Office theory safety experts would teach Lifeguards the EDGE method and then rightfully express horror at the idea of allowing teenagers to swim in water over their heads. They would then write the consequences of leadership theory into the Guide to Safe Scouting just as they are reportedly now doing to Patrol Outings (which were the goal of Patrol Leader Training before White Stag). "The only way for office experts to justify the toxic effect that leadership theory has on Scouting is to attack those who stand in its way, starting in 1965 with White Stag's personal attack on William Hillcourt." sherminator505 writes: You seem to want to refight this fight on every thread you enter! Yes, the use of BSA training to destroy the Patrol Method is the only topic I consider important enough to debate: You are what you train for. sherminator505 writes: Honestly, if Bob Mazzuca were to appear on the Today show with a coffee stain on his uniform, and someone started a thread expressing dismay and soliciting comments, I honestly believe you would find some "connection" to White Stag! You are correct. I would certainly take the opportunity to remind everyone of what Bob Mazzuca appeared on the Today Show to say. This year his goal is to commit "major resources" to hiring translators so that he can recruit 100,000 Hispanics who hate camping: Camping is not necessarily a big thing with them, as a matter of fact in some cases it is not big at all. So we need to kind of think about, is it more important that we reach that child with the kind of things we have for children and we have for families in character development and leadership skill growth and all of those things? Or is it more important that we get them in a tent next week? And so I think the answer to that is fairly obvious to us. ...when we say 'we want to take your twelve-year-old son but you can't come' we're making a mistake there. We have to engage an entire family... For example one of our pilot programs over the last recent years has been Scouting and soccer... It's crucial to us that we recognize the importance of hiring bilingual staff ... to give traction to these programs, and that's a major resource issue for us and one that we are willing to invest in as we go forward... We are deadly serious. We are absolutely serious about this. See: http://inquiry.net/leadership/sitting_side_by_side_with_adults.htm This is exactly the same direction Wood Badge took in 1972 when we lost three million Boy Scouts: In general, Patrol Leader training should concentrate on leadership skills rather than on Scoutcraft Skills. The Patrol will not rise and fall on the Patrol Leader's ability to cook, follow a map, or do first aid, but it very definitely depends on his leadership skill. See: http://inquiry.net/leadership/index.htm For someone who fancies himself as some sort of modern-day Baden-Powell, you have a very keen ability to gloss over decades of history when it doesn't suit your argument. This form of personal attack is called an "Appeal to Ignorance." I said that Baden-Powell considered SPLs to be purely optional. In return you move the discussion to your emotional projection that I fancy myself to be "some sort of modern-day Baden-Powell." Again with the "attack" jargon? Yes, the function of your ad hominem attack is to talk about people's feelings rather than addressing the obvious issue: Why would a major-general not base Scouting on a "chain of command"? My topic is the history of the Patrol Method. I post in forums so that thousands of readers can point out any factual errors that I may not be aware of. For most people it would be more productive to pick one of Beavah's leadership styles and then explain why they need an SPL to implement it: Adult Run: Adults do most of the day to day tasks, with youth "helpers." Cooking, cleaning, setup. Sometimes that's all they know how to do; sometimes it's because they kinda think like Engineer61 and think it's da best way. Adult Led ("youth run"): Kids get to do the day to day tasks, in a "chores" sort of way. Assigned cooks, assigned cleanup. They have some real responsibility, but the direction is mostly from the adults. Where there is youth leadership, it's more as a mouthpiece of the adults, and it'll tend to be just one or two boys (SPL), not a group of boys. Adult Directed ("youth led"): Youth get to lead and are responsible for all of the day to day tasks and the basic outing stuff. They get to make choices within adult limits; they have annual planning conferences that might be a bit adult driven. Yeh see adults actively coaching youth leaders in a hands-on way; SM-to-SPL, ASMs assigned to PLs. The adults still hold on to a lot of things that they feel are beyond the boys - planning, making reservations, safety, budgeting etc. Adult Structured ("youth led"): Here da youth may be trusted with things like planning, safety, and other things, eh? Just as long as it fits within the adult structure. Adult-style job descriptions, and committees, a top-down approach of da adult mentoring the SPL who mentors the PLs. Collaborative: Youth get to make up their own structure, and adults are just a part of it. Job descriptions and roles change according to da people in them. Youth routinely work together in ways that aren't top-down, and da adults fade more into the background as occasional collaborators. Yours at 300 feet, Kudu