Kudu

If I remember correctly, when I was looking through the insignia guide, it stated that hats could be worn inside during ceremonies. Just not to be worn during religious ceremonies/services. Also if you look at many of the older pictures and you will see scouts wearing hats during indoor activities A collection of official BSA photographs and drawings of Scouts wearing hats for ALL indoor activities (including religious services) can be found at: http://inquiry.net/uniforms/hats/inside.htm The red berets were introduced around the same time that the BSA killed Green Bar Bill's Patrol Method and made it possible for "inner-city youth" to collect Eagle Scout badges without ever attending a single campout. Oh, and demoted the Uniform from "Method" status to "Program Element" for a decade (as in the 1972 "Seven Methods of Scouting)." See the History of Scouting Methods: http://inquiry.net/adult/methods/index.htm So the red beret is a finger-in-your-eye symbol of fake Scouting. Maybe Chief Scout Executive Robert Mazzuca should introduce them again to complement his current 1972-style racial fake Scouting media campaign. Kudu

BrentAllen writes: To add my answer to the question, how will you know until they are given a chance? Brent, note that with the invention of specific "Positions of Responsibility" (POR) in 1965 and "Leadership Development" in 1972, the meanings of words like "leadership" have changed since Green Bar Bill used them. When you ask "how will you know until they are given a chance?" I too must add a question: "A chance at what?" Maybe the answer is obvious these days: "A chance to 'be a leader'." or "A chance to learn 'leadership' for later business and family purposes," or "A chance to practice EDGE theory in an outdoor classroom;" or just "A chance to earn POR credit." But Green Bar Bill's answer to your question would be a chance to regularly lead Patrol Hikes without adult supervision with the goal of leading Patrol Overnights without adult supervision. The difference is values: Traditional Scouting "leadership" involves specific "values" expressed as managed risk. But "modern" leadership usually ends up with discussions of future moral values ("ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes"). That is why so many people laugh at me when I insist on a specific "value" like 30 or 300 feet. But if you teach your Patrol Leaders to manage real risk, then your question when applying Green Bar Bill's "leadership" might be: "How will I know if EveryBoy might possibly turn out to be a good leader until I trust him with the lives of seven other Scouts, without my supervision?" The last remaining position of real responsibility in the BSA is BSA Lifeguard. Whenever I visit a BSA waterfront, I also hear values expressed as specific numbers because, like Green Bar Bill's Patrol Leaders, they must be trusted to manage real-world risk: "Jump into water over your head and swim 100 feet..." or "Everyone swim to that floating dock and wait for me," etc. I do not hear many parents plead to allow a questionable swimmer become a BSA Lifeguard because he might posibly learn on the job if we just trust him with the lives of other people's children. The degree to which a Scoutmaster is open to leadership surprises is inversely proportional to the responsibility he gives his Patrol Leaders as measured by the frequency of adult-free Patrol Hikes and adult-free Patrol Overnights and/or the distance between Patrols at adult-supervised Troop campouts. I'm off to Colorado with my Troop for summer camp! I hope y'all have this question solved by the time I get back Kudu

BDPT00 writes: How did you ever get through that whole thing without mentioning 300 feet?! Since you insist: Baden-Powell's minimum 300 feet between Patrols during multi-Patrol campouts is, I think, a reasonable compromise with Green Bar Bill's minimum standard for a "Real Patrol," namely unsupervised hiking and camping. Because "every boy a leader" took Green Bar Bill's position-specific training away from Patrol Leaders and turned them into office managers, it is unreasonable to expect much from them in most Troops. If we allowed Leadership Development to do to BSA Life Guards what it did to BSA Patrol Leaders, then we would be forced to dumb swimming down to the same Cub Scout level: Family baby pools like the family campground Patrol Method we have now. BDPT00 writes: Good for you. So you tried it? Good for you. Kudu

The theory that all of the Methods are "equal" was introduced in 1972, presumably to garner respect for the questionable new "Leadership Development" Method of Scouting, in an attempt to elevate it to the same status as Hillcourt's two Methods of true Boy Scout leadership: Unsupervised Patrols in the great Outdoors. It is interesting to note the other primary Method closely identified with Green Bar Bill, the Uniform, was demoted from Method status at that time and redefined as a "Program Element" for the rest of the decade. Obviously the Uniform was not considered "equal" by the office manager experts who invented the "equal Methods" concept for their "Seven Methods of Scouting." http://inquiry.net/adult/methods/index.htm If the Outdoor Method was really equal to Leadership Development, it would not have been removed from Wood Badge. If the Patrol Method was equal to Advancement, it would not have been removed from summer camp. Nor do the Outdoor and Patrol Methods play an equal role in the new Chief Scout Executive's 1972-style racial make-over of the BSA. If you study his recent media statements you will find that he considers "Character and Leadership" to be the aims of Scouting. And these, he says, can be learned by playing soccer; or by sitting indoors "side by side with adults of character." Positions of Responsibility, not Positions of Leadership, a key difference, I think. I think not. If there was any real distinction between the two, then we would not have taken the Patrol Leaders' position-specific training away from them and forced them to sit through the same lame "leadership can be taught" lessons as the Troop Librarian and Troop Bugler. The destruction of the Patrol Method and Outdoor Method is intentional now, just as it was in 1972. The racial motivation is the same. The only way to counteract these powerful forces on the unit level is to shield your Patrol Leaders from too close an identification of their tenure with POR credit (why force all Patrols to hold elections at the same time?); and restore position-specific training, just as we do in both cases with BSA Lifeguards. Unit-level position-specific training for Patrol Leaders: http://inquiry.net/patrol/green_bar/index.htm How many of you hold regular six-month popularity contests for BSA Lifeguard? What is good for BSA Lifeguards is good for BSA Patrol Leaders. Kudu

jblake47 writes: Of the two feeder cub packs, 17 went with the adult led program and 5 came to the boy led program. Cub Scouts is a Patrol Method filter. Scouting in a form that either Baden-Powell or Green Bar Bill would recognize is far more successful when you recruit the kind of boys who dropped out of Cub Scouts, rather than the ones who stuck with it long enough to cross over. Boys of the "right sort" are easy to find if you have access to the public schools in your area, and offer adventure. See: http://inquiry.net/adult/recruiting.htm jblake47 writes: now the promises made by adults seem to draw the boys into a program where they simply sit back and enjoy vs. having to roll up their sleeves and do some leadership/work. One point on which we differ is that all the Scouts need to roll up their sleeves and do some leadership work. I think you buy into leadership way too much. There is nothing wrong with lazy boys, in fact they are often the most fun on a campout and the reason that most of the other boys want to go. In a boy-led Patrol Method Troop you only need one good leader per Patrol, and in a boy-led Troop Method Troop you only need one exceptionally talented natural leader to motivate the entire Troop (although the Patrols will have to camp closer together). Good leaders get help as they need it. Kudu

Yes, I HAVE decided to embrace the Dark Side of Scouting. Ironic, ain't it? For years I have been fending off Wood Badge Logic by explaining that an ad hominem attack such as "Kudu has bad Scout Spirit" does not remove Leadership Development's cast iron skillet from the skull of Green Bar Bill. However, I must now admit that my critics are right: It is far more entertaining to dismiss another person with a couple words like "Scout Spirit" or "bad breath," than it is to write pages of tightly-reasoned commentary. Entertainment is king! How could I have lost sight of that? I have a few Scouting skills, but I can only do two things better than most people: 1) I can walk into an auditorium of skeptical (if not openly hostile) middle-schoolers, tell them about Old School Scouting, and then convince two-thirds of them they want to be "Boy Scouts," and 2) I can assemble an Old School Scouting Website (Inquiry.Net) and attract more than 26 million page views in eight years. That is about all. What I am really bad at is motivating Internet adults to do anything. I doubt if a single volunteer in the world has ever used my recruiting presentation or tried Baden-Powell's minimum standard of 300 feet between Patrols because of anything I have ever written. Why is that? Well my critics might say "It's because your personality sucks, Kudu!" But I chalk it up to Adult Peer-Pressure. As a recent thread indicated, adult volunteers could not care less about a definition of Scouting that attracts 66% of the sixth-graders who are not already in Boy Scouts (Old School adventure in Patrols). No, what our adults crave above all else is a definition of Scouting that convinces other adults that what they do is worthwhile. This boils down to opinions hyped as "character" and business manager skills hyped as "leadership". The advantage of this Adult Peer-Pressure definition of Scouting is that every parent is already an expert on "character," and every office worker is already an expert on "leadership." That is why "modern" adults do not offer specialized training for Patrol Leaders, or even mention Patrol Leaders in the Patrol Method session of Scoutmaster-specific training. There was a time when if the Chief Scout Executive announced that Scouting is all about "character and leadership" and therefore we should offer stuff that adults like better, such as computers, aerospace, and soccer; thousands if not tens-of-thousands of Scouts would have sat down and expressed their outrage on a piece of paper, then put that piece of paper in an envelop and mailed it to National Headquarters (this was called "writing a letter'). Likewise for what Wood Badge has done to the Patrol Method. When I was a kid, our National Jamboree Troop was camped across from where William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt was stationed. All week I watched thousands of Scouts stand in line to meet him. I wonder if any Scouts have ever stood in line to meet the Wood Badge heroes who destroyed Green Bar Bill's life's work, villains like Ken Blanchard all the way back to the prime father vampire Bla H. Bnthy. So my next project is to move from discussion group logic to some other entertainment medium. From my "retail" Old-School Scouting recruiting presentations to my "wholesale" Old-School Scouting Website, I know there are tens-of-thousands of boys who might never join "Boy Scouts" but would find the game of outdoor Patrols worth playing. Part of my Patrol Method as entertainment project will be to "vilify" everything that killed Scouting in the United States: From Scout Spirit requirements to classroom Merit Badges and Position of Responsibility requirements (basically everything past First Class). I'm thinking maybe Kudu's Anti-Leadership Development Patrol Leader's Handbook. Something they can carry around with them if they decide to join a BSA Troop. First on their list of Troops to avoid will be those who camp at a distance of less than 300 feet between the Troop's best Patrols, which I assume will include most of you! desertrat77 writes: Yes, all the topics are related to one degree or another to the patrol method, but protocol is important. Well I am still the only person to offer any "hiking chants"! But yeah, desertrat, if I had it to do all over again, I would post my cadence calls without any explanation. Maybe all my future Scouter.Com posts will be in that form ozemu writes: "People do things they later look back on and would rather like it to be unsaid." I still like the first verse (the problem of Scout Spirit requirements). But I have adjusted the second verse (the solution): Jodie says my Spirit sucks, my leadership don't "measure up." Guess I'll never be like him: Bad breath and a double chin! Sound off Sound off I like to hike until it hurts. Don't need his badges on my shirt. Jodie's Conference don't mean jack, 'cause my Patrol has got my back. Sound off Sound off Kudu

Jodie says my Spirit sucks, my Leadership don't "measure up." Guess I'll never be like him: Bad breath and a double chin! Sound off Sound off Don't need no badges on my shirt, we camp and hike until it hurts. Jodie's Conference don't mean jack, 'cause my Patrol has got my back. Sound off Sound off Kudu

kenk writes: The patrol boxes are WAY heavy, but they really help keep gear together. Heavy Patrol boxes also keep the Patrols together: Usually in small camping lots only a few feet from where they were unloaded. "Real" Patrols have some distance between them. And "Real Patrols" get out on the backwoods trails, which is not possible when you are "heavily" invested in two-burner stoves, propane distribution trees, then Troop trailers and all the other junk that goes with heavy equipment kenk writes: Several of the adult leaders in my son's troop are worried that lightweight gear wouldn't withstand the abuse boys give the gear. Quality gear lasts longer. Of course you can not balance heavy pots on small lightweight stoves, you use small folding cooking racks for that. If you don't have the lightweight equipment, you never learn how to use it correctly, and then you never "get around" to moving past Webelos III Troop camping with Patrols close together in small campsites. Kudu

Every "problem" in Scouting boils down to the fact that we no longer use the Patrol Method. All "hijacking this thread" ever means is that the accuser does do not agree about the bigger picture. This is hikeing god's thread, and he asked for hiking chants. The ONLY ones who honored his request were Crew21_Adv (who suggested a Google search for cadence calls), and (as usual) Kudu who wrote him a nice custom chant to explain the history of Scouting to anyone he meets along the trail who, like you, tries to hijack his theme! That is the thing about ad hominem attacks, John-in-KC, they are always a form of projection. It is YOU and your Wood Badge buddies who "hijacked this thread" by turning his simple request into a discussion about why your "values" are better than his. Kudu Green Bar Bill and Baden-Powell, Wood Badge says they're out of style! We destroy their whole life's work, Dumb it down to business clerk! Sound off Sound off Bulldoze down the Tooth of Time, 'Leave No Trace' is past its prime! Modern Scouts play soccer now, Business is our holy cow! Sound off Sound off

Consider following the BSA advice to purchase lightweight stoves (pictured on page 253 of the Boy Scout Handbook), which the Handbook advises us can be used for both regular "plop" camping at established campsites and also out on the trail, which is what Scouting is all about. Many beginners say "Well, we will put that off until someday when the boys get more experience, but 'just for now' we will invest in heavy two-burner stoves and plywood Patrol Boxes." Of course that "someday" never comes, the boys never get out on the trail, and after a year or two they begin to drop out because camping is always the same old car camping, lacking in any real outdoor adventure. For more information about investing in lightweight "essential Troop equipment" for regular monthly campouts, see: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/equipment/lightweight_camping.htm Kudu

Pack212Scouter writes: As for your response Kudu, it says more about you than I ever could. I will not be reduced to trading insults with such as you. You no longer warrant any responses civil or otherwise. Good, that means I get the last word. Often it is the Cub Scout Usernames who use ad hominem logic to defend bad training. Have you ever noticed that Cub Scout camp always has a theme? Sometimes the theme is based on popular children's movies. Sometimes the theme is a broad adventure motif like "space exploration." Usually all it boils down to the same old camp activities, but with a thematic spin designed to capture Cub Scout imaginations. When Cub Scout leaders cross over to Boy Scouts they all bring this imaginary theme perspective to the Patrol Method (which, as the imaginary Baden-Powell quote advises us, is the ONLY method). So instead of a imaginary "space flight" where each Cub Scout learns "leadership" and "character" by having his turn to command a "real space walk," we end up with imaginary Baden-Powell Scouting where each Boy Scout learns "leadership" and "character" by having his turn to command "real Patrol Camping." In summer camp this boils down to the "Patrol Leader" waking up his imaginary Patrol so that they can march to the dinning hall where adults cook for them (Scouting is School, after all). In monthly campouts "real Patrol camping" usually boils down to the Patrol Leader learning "leadership" and "character" by making a duty roster and supervising cooking and clean up. When someone points out that an imaginary "real space walk" is not actually, um, a real space walk the first response is along the lines of, "Well of course it is a real space walk! Who are you to say that my Scouts are not learning 'leadership' and 'character'?" Because "leadership and character" are the de facto new "Aims of Scouting," that should settle the matter. If it doesn't then every discussion will ultimately end up with the accusation that anybody who does not believe that imaginary "real space walks" do not teach "leadership" and "character" must themselves be lacking in the qualities of leadership and character. If the only tool you have is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail. I doubt if the Troop that "hikeing god" is from practices the real Patrol Method, where Patrols are always separated by distance from the rest of the Troop. So what if his Patrol wants to imagine themselves on a gruelling military hike? I'm sure that nobody would have objected if he had asked for suggestions for pretending to be on a "real space walk" (In space nobody can hear you chant). Of course without real Patrol Camping (which is measured in distance not values) then the untested leadership and character it teaches is fake. When adults are used to controlling Scouts with Scout Spirit requirements then their fake "values" always boil down to "A Scout is Obedient, or else!" It is easy to imagine yourself revealing deep meaningful truths about "values" like "Friendly, Courteous, and Kind" or "Leave No Trace" but hikeing god isn't buying. The only "value" that the imaginary Cub Scout Patrol Method theme teaches is Obedience to adult leaders, and it seems that his adult leaders don't object to chanting. At least he is outdoors hiking, rather than indoors learning "character and leadership" by "sitting side by side with adults of character." It all boils down to adult training, and most BSA training is based on imaginary themes. If Patrol Leader Training taught Patrol Leaders how to manage risk (if we still had Patrol Leader Training and if it still resembled BSA Lifeguard Training), we would not have to fend off fantasy theme "spoilers" with ad hominem logic. Green Bar Bill and Baden-Powell, Wood Badge says they're out of style! We destroy their whole life's work, Dumb it down to business clerk! Sound off Sound off Bulldoze down the Tooth of Time, 'Leave No Trace' is past its prime! Modern Scouts play soccer now, Business is our holy cow! Sound off Sound off Kudu

Pack212Scouter writes: Let's not help this young lad out by teaching him the value of an outdoor experience Are you saying that Chief Scout Executive Robert Mazzuca has been misquoted on the "value" of outdoor experience? He says "character and leadership" can be taught indoors sitting side by side with adults of character: Camping is not necessarily a big thing with them, as a matter of fact in some cases it is not big at all. Pack212Scouter writes: That's the REAL Scout spirit and leadership that your showing this youth. Way to go! I know that Baden Powell and Green Bar Bill would be proud! Scout Spirit is just code for Scoutmasters forcing their opinions on Scouts. If adults led by example they would not need Scout Spirit requirements. Likewise "leadership" is code for the destruction of Patrol Leader Training. Your real concern for Baden-Powell and Green Bar Bill can be measured by how far your Patrols camp from each other. How far apart is that, Pack212Scouter? Have you met the minimum of 300 feet even once in your life, or is the example you set as fake as your moral outrage? Kudu Green Bar Bill and Baden-Powell, Wood Badge says they're out of style! We destroy their whole life's work, Dumb it down to business clerk! Sound off Sound off Bulldoze down the Tooth of Time, 'Leave No Trace' is past its prime! Modern Scouts play soccer now, Business is our holy cow! Sound off Sound off

"hikeing god" writes: hay i am going to philmont in a couple days and i need some hikeing chants to keep moral up...the other boys in my troop are not that into wildlife I don't have any that express your values as perfectly as crushing the skulls of songbirds, but you can use the following chant to show how your view of wildlife fits into the "modern" Boy Scout tradition of killing what the previous generation worked so hard to build: Green Bar Bill and Baden-Powell, Wood Badge says they're out of style! We destroy their whole life's work, Dumb it down to business clerk! Sound off Sound off Bulldoze down the Tooth of Time, 'Leave No Trace' is past its prime! Modern Scouts play soccer now, Business is our holy cow! Sound off Sound off Before 1972 "Green Bar Bill" (see the "Site Dedication" at the lower left of your computer screen) wrote that the purpose of Patrol Leader Training was to get a Patrol out to hike or camp without adults and the rest of the Troop at least once or twice a month. Likewise, Baden-Powell wrote that when the whole Troop does camp together, the Patrols should never be closer than 300 feet. Your grandfather's generation killed Green Bar Bill's Patrol Leader Training as soon as he retired so that they could replace it with business manager training. Now your father's generation calls Green Bar Bill and Baden-Powell "old-fashioned" because camping really close together is a much better way to teach Scouts the "state of the art" business theory they learn in Wood Badge. As far as enjoying nature goes, the new Chief Scout Executive Robert Mazzuca makes fun of it with his phrase "rubbing two sticks together." He says that the only thing that rubbing two sticks together is good for is getting a Scout to sit side by side with an adult of character: Our goal is not to teach someone to rub two sticks together and make a fire. But when you rub two sticks together and make a fire side by side with an adult of good character, you're going to learn about who you are and go on to lead men. But he says, it is more modern to move indoors to study aerospace and sit in front of a computer: You can teach a kid about character and leadership using aerospace and computers. The secret is to get them side by side with adults of character...We recognize the evolving science of leadership. We've had CEOs on our board say they want to send their people to Wood Badge, our adult leader training program, because we use state-of-the-art techniques. So forget about Patrol Leaders. http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2008-07-20-boy-scouts-advice_N.htm Likewise the new Chief Scout Executive says that camping is old-fashioned, we need to play soccer so that we can be modern and popular: 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. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#29491940 So by the time your generation takes over the BSA, Wood Badge will be laughing at the idea that you could teach "character and leadership" without playing soccer. "Leave No Trace" will be as old-fashioned then as Patrols camping 300 feet apart is now. Kudu(This message has been edited by Kudu)

You mean this? http://www.pilandonline.com/BSHB_web/

I used to get helicopter parents before our "Feeder Pack" folded. One of them called me to ask if she could drop by every week to pick up "POR assignments" for her precious darling who hadn't been to a meeting in a year because jazz band met on Monday nights. Jazz band was more important, but all he needed for Eagle was a POR and a project. When I started recruiting my Scouts from the public schools, I discovered that I did not need a feeder Pack because the vast majority of sixth grade boys really want to join Boy Scouts, just like they did until Wood Badge discovered "Leadership Development" and killed the Patrol Method. When I call the parents of the usually 45 boys who want to join after a presentation, I describe the benefits of Scouting strictly in terms of fresh air and sunshine. I never describe Scouting in terms of garbage like "Leadership and Ethical Choices," or the advantages of "Eagle Scout" on a couch potato's business resume. And I never encountered a helicopter parent again. Sometimes my Wood Badge buddies would tag along to see how I did it, and they would point out that if I did a better job of selling parents on the "benefits of Scouting" more than the usual 15 would register their sons as Scouts. That might be true, but remember that all 45 of the kids were boys who had either dropped out of Cub Scouts, or would never (ever) join something like that to begin with. I can't tell you how many mothers laughed when I first called and told me how shocked they were when their rough and tumble son "just came home from school and said he wanted to be a Boy Scout!" So it is GI=GO, pure and simple: You reap what you sow. If you want to see helicopter parents, just wait until the BSA switches from camping to computers, aerospace, and soccer; all in the name of "Leadership and Ethical Choices"! Kudu

John-in-KC writes: I'm trying to figure out why your bitterness is so palpable, and you elect to share that bitterness in most every thread? Anyone can get 2/3 of an auditorium of sixth grade boys (a tough audience by anyone's standards) to want to be a Boy Scout, if Scouting is presented as the rugged Patrol camping that existed before BSA millionaires invented Leadership Development. But to make us more "popular," Chief Scout Millionaire Robert Mazzuca has mounted a national campaign to replace camping with soccer. Now why would anyone be bitter, John? cardinal50 writes: To those of you with MBA's ... we might learn something useful from the Scout training you love to ridicule. To understand the value of an MBA, look at how much your retirement account was worth a year ago, and how much it is worth today. The difference between those two figures is what those who profit from your loss call "hype." When we apply business hype to Scouting we take away the specialized training of Patrol Leaders (which was the life work of William Hillcourt), and in its place we teach them the same business manager theory hyped as "leadership" (the stuff like EDGE) that we give all the other PORs including great "leaders" like Buglers and Librarians. We dumb "leadership" down to the least common denominator. That is why teenage Boy Scouts are forced to camp close together like Cub Scouts. Likewise the Patrol Method session in Scoutmaster-specific training never once mentions a Patrol Leader. Before Leadership Development was invented, the Patrol Leader was central to the Patrol Method. Neglecting the essentials and replacing them with theory is "hype." You would have liked Wood Badge just as much if the subject matter had been the Patrol Method rather than business manager theory hyped as "leadership." Kudu

dan writes: This maybe just me and my communication style but I cannot seem to explain to people who know nothing about scouting what it is about and why I do it. I have tried Scouting teaches these boys on how to be leaders... Scouting teaches these boys to make ethical decisions... camping and hiking is just the tool we use to teach with... Could this be part of the issue, it is to hard to explain what scouting is and is not so that it is understood? It is hard to explain because you are spouting false propaganda that nobody buys unless they have been to BSA training. When we say that camping and hiking is just the tool we use to teach boys management hyped as "leadership" we are making a pubic affirmation that we drink the Kool-Aid that destroyed the overwhelming popularity of Scouting before that fake leadership was invented. dan writes: Has anyone found a good way to explain what scouting is, in a short time frame? If you explain that Scouting IS camping and hiking, 66% of sixth grade boys who are not already in Scouting will (in front of their peers) sign a list asking you to call their parents so that they can be a Boy Scout. See: http://inquiry.net/adult/recruiting.htm It is interesting to note that in the last ten years everyone (except OGE) who has ever commented on the presentation has liked it but as far as I know, out of the tens of thousands of volunteers who have read it, not one of them has ever actually ever tried it. The reason, I think, is that most volunteers have been trained to really believe that "Scouting teaches these boys on how to be leaders...Scouting teaches these boys to make ethical decisions...camping and hiking is just the tool we use to teach with..." and if they got in front of an assembly of sixth grade boys and lied about camping and hiking being anything more than "just the tool we use to teach" them fake leadership, the boys would know they are lying and hoot them off the stage. Why else would people who pretend they want to increase the number of Boy Scouts not be interested in old-fashioned Scouting that still makes 66% of the sixth grade boys not in Scouting want to join? It is because most people who have been to BSA training know in their hearts that the "Promise of Scouting" is just a cheap trick we use to lure them into business manager school, and they really agree with the Chief Scout Executive that a more "modern" promise of computers, aerospace, or soccer would work better. To understand BSA "leadership" and "ethical choices" in action, one Council actually went to the trouble to cut and paste my presentation onto their official BSA Website and then wrote the following fake introduction: "A long time ago a TAC Scouter (Dan Wolboldt) and I were facing a distinct lack of enthusiasm among 6th grade boys to join scouting. Dan put on a wonderful presentation" I would not have noticed it, except that they also cut and pasted the html page description from my Website, so when I Googled my page, their fake "Dan Wolboldt" version outranked mine! Kudu

gwd-scouter writes: What is the EDGE method and how is it used to teach someone to tie a knot? To understand EDGE theory try the following experiment: 1) Hand out a sheet of paper to every Scout in your Troop. 2) Tell them to make a paper airplane and fly it. 3) Every boy will soon be tossing his paper airplane in the air. 4) Now carefully "Explain" the technique of making a paper airplane. 5) "Demonstrate" step by step the proper procedure for folding a paper airplane. 6) Hand out a second sheet of paper and carefully "Guide" them through the process. 7) When you "Enable" boys to make a paper airplane the number of them that can still do it will have decreased by approximately the same percentage as the decrease in the market value of all corporations that use the corporate "leadership skills" taught in Wood Badge and talk about "ethics" in their "mission statement." Kudu

Hal_Crawford writes: Thanks for busting that myth. It sounded screwy to me for a number of reasons and it is good to hear from a reliable source that it 'taint so. Yeah, why should a Boy Scout know wilderness first aid [WFA] if any couch potato cupcake can earn Eagle Scout without ever walking into the woods with a pack on his back? Management is "modern" and applied outdoor skills are "old-fashioned!" Hal_Crawford writes: I am surprised that we have not yet seen flames about the EDGE requirements. GernBlansten covered that base with stunning foresight on May 18th: Absolutely absurd. WFA is way to outdoorsy for the new BSA. Now if you floated a rumor that a Star scout take a course in management styles or E.D.G.E, I might believe it. http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=239862&p=1

http://tinyurl.com/lf6pgf

BrentAllen writes: Are Scouts not allowed to use GPS since it wasn't in use in 1917? What about modern hiking water filters? There is an international formula for that. In free countries (where the government does not pick the winning corporations--how many Citizenship Merit Badge Counselors cover that?) Traditional Scouting is defined as the program as it existed in a specific year (usually 1916, 1938, or 1965) with changes made only for advances in the areas of 1) Health & Safety, 2) Environmental Impact, 3) Lightweight Technology, and 4) Relevant Legislation. I don't see how in the world you can teach Scouts Citizenship and not cover how our government works. That is what Scouting is: Backwoods field work that Scouts can take back to their School and Sunday School classes. Baden-Powell was very clear: 1) The goal of Scouting is to teach citizenship. 2) Scouting is the opposite of classroom instruction. Pretending that "modern" means "opposite" is just corporate leadership weasel logic. We teach Scouts to be obedient, to obey the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have them changed in an obedient manner rather than disobey them. Every hear the saying "It would take an Act of Congress to get them to do the right thing"? The assumption is that even your worst enemy would not defy the ultimate civilian law, an Act of Congress. The BSA clearly violates an Act of Congress when it pretends that the "Mission" of the BSA is teaching "ethical choices," thereby justifying a switch from camping to soccer so that the corporation is more cool to "modern boys" and more popular with a specific racial minority. The Act of Congress is very clear: 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. In exchange the winning corporation gets a government-enforced monopoly on "Scouting," a pretty sweet deal even by socialist standards! If the BSA practiced its own definition of "obedience" (or anyone's definition of citizenship) they would obey the ultimate law of the land, and try to have it changed in an obedient manner rather than disobey it. Presumably if they were successful and got an extension of their Congressional Charter to include a monopoly on soccer as well as Scouting, they could teach citizenship to Hispanic boys by forcing them to sit in classrooms too. Then by Boy Scout weasel logic, classrooms would be more "modern" than playing fields! Kudu

Hal_Crawford writes: According to my reprint of the 1911 Handbook for Boys there were six ranks much as there are today. The order was different as Life was the first rank after First Class, followed by Star and then Eagle. I don't have it in front of me but if I recall all the required merit badges had to be earned for Life and the higher ranks were just for additional merit badges. Eagle was a total of 21 as it is today. Yeah, the 1911 Handbook for Boys is interesting because the BSA had not yet begun to confuse Baden-Powell's term "Rank" (leadership position such as Patrol Leader, Scoutmaster, etc. -- page 44) with Scoutcraft "Awards" (only Tenderfoot, 2nd Class, 1st Class) which the BSA in 1911 called "classes." At that time there were only three "classes" of Scouts: "There are three classes of scouts among the Boy Scouts of America, the tenderfoot, second-class scout, and first-class scout. Before a boy can become a tenderfoot he must qualify for same. A tenderfoot, therefore, is superior to the ordinary boy because of his training. To be a tenderfoot means to occupy the lowest grade in scouting. A tenderfoot on meeting certain requirements may become a second-class scout, and a second-class scout upon meeting another set of requirements may become a first-class scout. The first-class scout may then qualify for the various merit badges which are offered in another part of this chapter for proficiency in scouting. The requirements of the tenderfoot, second-class scout, and first- class scout, are as follows:" See: http://inquiry.net/advancement/tf-1st_require_1911.htm Eagle Scout is only a "merit badge:" "Any first-class scout qualifying for twenty-one merit badges will be entitled to earn the highest scout merit badge..." Presumably Life, Star and Eagle were worn on the right sleeve with the other Merit Badges and not on the left sleeve and pocket with what we now mistakenly call "Ranks" (they are not worthy of mention on the badge placement diagram -- page 19). Note that in 1911 "Civics" (aka Citizenship) is NOT a required Merit Badge. Hal_Crawford writes: For First Class you needed to know how to kill a mad dog and how to stop a runaway team of horses. Actually: "Know... how to help in case of runaway horse, mad dog, or snake bite;" I don't hear much objection in Scouting forums to knowing how to help in the case of a runaway horse, but the SPL of my Wood Badge course used it to express his disdain for traditional Scoutcraft, which he felt should be replaced with the business manager skills that "modern" Scouts really need. John-in-KC writes: I'm not an academician, as Lisa is, but I've seen enough undergraduates who are clueless about our representative democratic system of government that I agree: Scouting is one of the last bastions of imparting the truth of America to kids K-12. I'm sure that Lisa's academician colleagues in the dental school would also agree that Scouting should also impart the truth of good oral hygiene. Certainly Boy Scouts would enjoy learning the Fitness Aim by having their teeth drilled, just as much as most boys enjoy academics, which Baden-Powell very specifically described as the opposite of Scouting. Trevorum writes: just curious - what was the recommended method for killing a mad dog? "The first thing to do is to kill the mad dog at once. Wrap a handkerchief around the hand to prevent the dog's teeth from entering the flesh and grasp a club of some kind. If you can stop the dog with a stick you should hit him hard over the head with it, or kick him under the jaw. A handkerchief held in front of you in your outstretched hands will generally cause the dog to stop to paw it before he attempts to bite you. This will give you an opportunity to kick him under the lower jaw. Another way suggested is to wrap a coat around the left arm and let the dog bite it; then with the other hand seize the dog's throat and choke him." Perhaps that is just a bit too 'hands on" by today's standards where presumably we call 911, watch the rabid dog bite people, then apply the after-the-fact first aid presented in the current handbook. For those who are also curious about the runaway horse: "The method for checking a horse running away is not to run out and wave your arm in front of him, as this will only cause him to dodge to one side and to run faster, but to try to run alongside the vehicle with one hand on the shaft to prevent yourself from falling, seizing the reins with the other hand and dragging the horse's head toward you. If when he has somewhat slowed down by this method, you can turn him toward a wall or a house he will probably stop." BrentAllen writes: We expect the boys to know proper flag etiquette, is it too much to expect them to know how their government works? Real Scouting is "hands on" education, the opposite of "instruction." Proper flag etiquette is "hands on," but knowing the three branches of government is instruction. Real Scouting teaches citizenship by hands on participation in a Patrol without helicopter adults. Kudu

Lisabob writes: What makes something a wide game, anyway? Wide Games are rugged, active games played over a wide wooded area. Trading cards is not a Wide Game. As the term "Wide" implies, the most important aspect of Wide Games is the amount of territory. I have found that it is equally important that the areas have very distinct boundaries. In this regard our Troop had the most luck with four local venues: The first was a densely wooded area at a local park encircled by a paved park loop roadway. It was the smallest of the four venues, only 1/4 mile diameter, but the dense undergrowth made it ideal for hiding. This is where we started, spending an entire summer with outdoor meetings devoted only to Wide Games. We never met indoors from June to September. Our first Wide Game was "Spiders and Flies." Our second and third successful venues were both wooded peninsulas in an area where, over geographic time, creek beds had formed significant cliff walls. One was at remote local parkland, and it was very narrow, only a few hundred yards between radical cliff drop-offs, but about 1/2 mile long. The second was our Troop's own property, a similar peninsula, but the cliffs on one border were very dangerous, a 200 foot sheer vertical drop. The other border was a gravel quarry only about 60 feet deep and not so steep. This area was 1/4 mile by 1/2 mile. The forth was an actual island, about 1/4 mile by 1 mile. This is where we played "All Night Capture the Flag" once a year in November. The Patrols would spend all day Saturday Scouting the island for their bases, and then begin playing after dark. The central theme was to play all night, but after a day of building forts, the actual games were usually over by midnight. Wide Games are the reason that we have Boy Scout associations. Baden-Powell included eight military Wide Games in his applied reconnaissance book Aids to Scouting, published during the Siege of Mafeking. English boys seized upon these eight games right away. Perhaps you have already heard of one of them, an obscure mounted horse game called "Flag Stealing" now known to all American boys as "Capture the Flag." This and the other military games intended to be played on horses (note the equine Google ads on the page), were adapted to foot or bicycles by pre-Boy Scout English boys. http://inquiry.net/traditional/b-p/aids2scout/a2s_167.htm Lisabob writes: Which ones do the boys seem to particularly enjoy? In Troops with passive adults, boys seem to enjoy Capture the Flag and Manhunt the most, but that is only because those are the Wide Games that they have already heard of. In Baden-Powell's day Scouters were not as theoretical as we are now with 21st century "Leadership Development" where "boy-run" is often an excuse for adults to stand around spouting business formulas while Scouts try to figure out for themselves something interesting enough to do to keep them from dropping out of Scouting. Scouters should be resources for introducing physically demanding new activities. This is what is required to get your Troop interested in Wide Games. With a few significant exceptions, boys no longer read things to learn new game ideas, and reading is what is required here. It usually takes an adult to comb through the 84 different Wide Games and find a few that he or she knows will appeal to his or her Scouts. Some of these games will become your Troop's passion! For instance, "Manhunt" is not one game as most American boys believe. Manhunt is a whole class of 31 different Manhunt Wide Games. See: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/games/wide/man_hunt_type.htm Finding the half-dozen Wide Games that will become your Scouts' main reason for attending campouts or weekly summer meetings held in the woods is all a matter of matching the dominant personalities in the Troop that you serve with the games that compliment the personalities of your Troop's natural leaders. For instance, our District Commissioner asked me to be Scoutmaster for his sons' Troop. The Scouts (most of whom were friends with at least one of his four sons) were always after him because of his compulsive smoking, so their favorite Wide Game when he went camping became "The Escaped Smoker." A Convict has escaped from prison, and, being an inveterate smoker, the first thing he does is to buy a large supply of cigarettes and matches. On a dark night a message is brought to the Scouts that he has been seen in a wood close by, still smoking. The troop at once turn out, and, enclosing the wood, silently try to find their man by using their eyes, ears, and noses, as well as they can. The man, who is playing the part of the convict, is obliged to keep his cigarette in full view all the time, and strike a match at least once every three minutes... See: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/games/b-p/night.htm#1. Another Manhunt Wide Game that became popular when we had a deaf Scout in the Troop is "Showing the Light." We played "Showing the Light" with a laser pointer. When the game leader blows the whistle at regular intervals, the quarry was required to shine the laser into the branches of a tree (works best with bare winter trees). The visually oriented deaf Scout was really good at picking up traces of the laser in the branches of intervening trees when the quarry projected the light on the branches of a tree a significant distance away from him so as to throw off the pursuing Scouts. The intervening trees could be traced back to the quarry's actual location. In dense summer foliage we also played "Showing the Light" with cheap electronic photographic flash units. I have a couple of these, one has a broken "foot" that once attached the unit to the camera but still works fine, and the other has a broken battery door which I "fixed" with duct tape. The big advantage of introducing light into a Manhunt game is that it greatly increases the pace of the game, especially where a well-hidden quarry could otherwise be hiding 3/4 of a mile away for hours. See: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/games/b-p/night.htm#5. American Wide Games are divided into three categories: Treasure Hunts Seizure Conquest English Wide Games are roughly divided into four categories: Raid Cordon-Breaking Treasure-Hunt Man-Hunt See: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/games/wide/index.htm Our Scouts much preferred the English Wide Games, especially the Raid Games which include "Bomb Laying." See: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/games/b-p/bomb_laying.htm The English Wide Games have indeed withstood the test of time better than the American Games, but the three American categories above are worth clicking on just to view the three master-sketches that at a glance provide an overview of how all the games in each category work. Enjoy! Kudu

Twocubdad writes: Always interesting to hear a historical perspective. But for those operating within the current program That is the whole point of knowing Scout history, isn't it? 1) Human nature does not change. 2) The traditional methods always work. 3) There is no rule against using them. Kudu

sandspur writes: The most popular scout running gets elected. As long as we have elections, and not appointed leaders, that will happen. You write that as if it were good thing So, require certain qualifications for SPL. Yeah, its called gaming the system. Adults do that all the time to keep the most talented natural leaders out of office, so they can teach business manager skills to a greater number of Scouts. Of course the central contradiction of Leadership Development is that business managers are appointed, aren't they? Use a JASM to backstop a weaker SPL. After all, you can appoint a JASM. That is what I would do in this situation. As Mafaking notes, the Troop's natural leader "is now lord and master with no real POR. He controls the group but not through the formal organizational scheme." So why not appoint him JASM to "backstop" the SPL? If unqualified PLs ... do not improve, remove them and elevate the APL. Yeah, I have done that to get my way when the more qualified leader is appointed to an assistant position by the winner of a popularity contest. Basically if the SPL and the Patrol agrees that the APL is better than the incompetent PL, the SPL uses the Peter Principle to "promote" the PL to the meaningless position of ASPL. But of course you realize that elevating an APL (or for that matter allowing an ASPL to serve in the SPL's absence) gets us right back to appointed leaders, doesn't it? And everybody knows that is WRONG! Kudu