Kudu

Great topic Beavah, and an excellent list of elements! To "Adults sit on Boards of Review," I would add: Adults conduct Scoutmaster Conferences. Adults judge a Scout's Spirit. Adults sign "Blue Cards." Adults tag along on all outings, including the 2nd Class "Five Mile Hike." In the parts of the world where Scouting is played as the game invented by Baden-Powell, the BSA's institutionalization of these five adult-run elements would be viewed as obvious examples of Hunt's observation that: "You may think you have a strong boy-led program, but if you take key decisions away from the boys, you don't really, especially if they know that they are really supposed to be responsible for those decisions. You are just reminding them who is really boss, and that will carry through into everything you do. Of course, you will find that things may run more smoothly this way, if that is your goal." As discussed in recent threads, there are no Boards of Review or Scoutmaster Conferences in these "boy-run" versions of Scouting. The testing of outdoor skills is done for most ranks through a series of adult-free real-world wilderness treks (called "Journeys") of increasing difficulty. The BSA's Five Mile Hike is the only required Journey that remains in the BSA, a vestige of B-P's Second Class standard of eight miles unaccompanied by adults or older Scouts. The teaching of Tenderfoot through First Class skills is primarily the responsibility of the Patrol Leader, although he may delegate. The quality of his instruction is seen as a reflection of the Troop's honor, so oversight is vested in the "Court of Honor" (COH: the session of Patrol Leaders in Conference). Blue Cards: Likewise, when a Scout feels he has mastered a Proficiency Badge subject, he customarily must apply to the COH to meet with an examiner. Permission is usually conditional on the Court's determination that the "applicant" has done his share to "move the Troop along," either by helping other Scouts in their "Progressive Training in Scoutcraft" (what we call "Advancement"), or through various other positions of responsibility, such as Quartermaster, Scribe, etc. Moving the Troop forward is an ongoing real responsibility, however, there are no sweet "six month terms of office" deals here. The Court of Honor is where much "adult association" takes place. If you read the transcript below of a "typical" Court of Honor, you may notice more dialogue between the Patrol Leaders and the adult Scouters than we might expect in a BSA PLC. This includes the appointment of Patrol Leaders. See: http://inquiry.net/patrol/court_honor/coh_session.htm http://inquiry.net/patrol/court_honor/index.htm Note that in this version of Scouting the Patrol Leaders decide on the broad themes of outings and weekly meetings, but often delegate the creative details to the adults, as in acco40's Troop. Kudu (This message has been edited by Kudu)

OldGreyEagle writes: "Obviously some units have had great success in not holding elections and Kudu reminds us of the historical perspective, but to not have someone point out that not electing patrol leaders and the senior patrol leader is contrary to BSA policy on a Forum that discusses Boy Scouting would be, well, wrong." There is no rule against it. You should write that such practices do not fit into the current Scoutmaster Handbook. Back when the Patrol Method section was larger than the entire 179 page current Scoutmaster Handbook, the BSA listed situations where appointing Patrol Leaders was a good idea, and suggested ways to do it. This includes new Troops where everybody is young, and old "in trouble" Troops where the BSA program is not working. My experience is that if you build a strong PLC (and send at least one PL to NYLT), the PLC will convert to Troop elections for SPL without asking the adults for permission to do so. Likewise when a "New Scout Patrol" starts working as a real Patrol, it too will hold a Patrol election without asking for permission. Under a strong PLC, Scouts will take charge when they are ready. Kudu

I admire the flexibility shown in the posts of Venividi, Beavah, & jblake47. Gunny2862 writes: "If your Troop held elections and intentionally voted in bad candidates to SPL and ASPL, would you let them live with the consequences of their mistakes or would you fix it for them?" During the golden era of the BSA's "Patrol Method," the SPL was elected by the PLC. Likewise, in Baden-Powell's "Patrol System" the Scoutmaster is expected to appoint the PLC's choice for SPL. What both traditional systems have in common with the current 1972 "Troop Elections" method is that the Patrol Leaders come together in the PLC to plan events and in theory the SPL merely implements what the Patrol Leaders have voted to do. So the point is that in an adult-led Troop moving toward the current BSA model (as the question implies), the Scoutmaster can work with the PLC to establish candidate guidelines for Troop elections. This empowers the Patrol Leaders. They discuss leadership with the Scoutmaster and they narrow the choice to the most qualified leaders. If it does not work the Patrol Leaders have the power to determine the qualifications of the next SPL and they still outnumber the current SPL in the PLC. Too much concern over who is SPL is a symptom of using the Troop Method rather than the Patrol Method. In B-P's Patrol System some Troops do not even bother with an SPL, one of the Patrol Leaders simply fills the Troop Leader role as needed. So take a hint from both Baden-Powell and William "Green Bar Hill" Hillcourt and concentrate on training the Patrol Leaders. "If you would invalidate the election, what would you tell the Patrols about why you did it?" Again I would work through the PLC. Back in the days when Scoutmaster handbooks were a thousand pages longer than the current version, the recommended procedure for Patrol elections was to include a trial period of four to six weeks after the election. When his probation period begins, the Patrol Leader recites the "Patrol Leader's Creed," which lists all of his responsibilities: As the Leader of My Patrol I WILL lead my Patrol by my initiative and my personal example, in Scoutcraft knowledge as well as in Scout Spirit. I WILL plan, with my Scouts, the Patrol's activities--meetings, hikes, Good Turns, special projects--and will carry them out to the best of my ability. (etc., etc.) For the full text, see: http://www.inquiry.net/patrol/leaders_creed.htm After a month or so, the PLC determines if the Patrol Leader has lived up to the Patrol Leader's Creed. If so then he is formally sworn in at a Patrol Leader's Promise Ceremony. See: http://www.inquiry.net/patrol/leaders_promise.htm This was back when the SPL was elected by the PLC, but a similar procedure can be used for Troop SPL elections. Rather than invalidating an election, the PLC delays validation until a leader has proven himself. Venividi writes: "I think the lack of leadership was a factor in the patrol members' not learning the scout skills to give them the confidence to look forward to a high adventure trip." And vice-versa. As was discussed in the recent threads about Baden-Powell and the Patrol System, the traditional understanding was that there is a relationship between a Patrol Leader's outdoor adventure skills and good leadership. This relationship is not talked about much anymore because so-called "leadership skills" are assumed to be independent of a Patrol Leader's Scoutcraft skills. I would also point out that one single good Patrol Leader can transform an entire Troop. A Scoutmaster in a Troop moving from adult-led to boy-led can make a point of asking for his opinion in the PLC. Such natural leaders tend to like camping. Encourage them to try some challenging adventures even if only a couple of Scouts attend at first. Consider inviting them to attend specialized Council high adventure outings, or those of another Troop's where they will be exposed to older boy leaders. Sometimes you can find Troops willing to include a couple of your Scouts through Roundtables or a Commissioner. In real Scouting, a boy learns leadership from older Scouts while wearing a pack on his back, miles from the nearest parking lot. Kudu

A couple of Trashcan Turkey recipes: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/skills/cooking/trash_can.htm http://inquiry.net/outdoor/skills/cooking/trash_can-2.htm

"Hooray for electronics on camping trips, at least in the good-old days. Now back to the original thread." Nice dodge. The question remains: Do you use the Patrol Method? If so what business is it to any adult what a Patrol does in the privacy of its own Patrol site? Kudu

BrentAllen writes: "Sounds like they did more than just take down the cross. This place was pretty special, if weddings and baptisms were performed there, and even ashes of a former Scouter buried under the altar." I'm with Brent on this one. If this second account is accurate, they why did they destroy the forest chapel just because they constructed a new one? I hate when that kind of thing happens. Our Council partially bulldozed an historic old campfire ring set into the side of a hill deep in the woods after they built a handicapped-accessible new one next to the main parking lot. Likewise they bulldozed two old lean-to's built of logs with 70 years of Scouts' initials craved into them, because the floors did not meet current state codes. Nobody cares about Scout history. Kudu

I'm with Hunt on this one. I would add that if you are really using the Patrol Method rather than the Troop Method, you adults should be largely unaware of whether the Scouts are using cell phones in their private Patrol areas before you request "permission to enter" :-) As a Traditional Scouting and wilderness "purist," I hate electronics in the woods with a passion but I can still remember hiking to a campout one dark night more than 42 years ago. This was before backpacking waistbelts were commonly used in Scouting, and all of the weight of my pack was on my shoulders and I was in considerable pain. We hiked without flashlights. On someone's transistor radio (high-tech at the time) in the darkness came a brand new Beatles' release called "Michelle". Lenny asked the Scout to turn it up. His family had lived on US army bases in Europe most of his life but mostly in Germany, so his older brother Bob translated the French lyrics for us. If the music annoyed our adult leaders, they never told us. Kudu

I wonder if the Evening Standard is a Rupert Murdoch property, like Fox News :-/ I doubt the accuracy of the report because the pews would not be removed to convert the "chapel" into a campfire circle. Judging from the "before" photograph, my guess is that if we viewed an "after" picture, we would find that the only difference is that the simple cross and the tiny altar have been replaced with a campfire ring. Most camps have portable altars for "Scouts' Own" services, and a cross can always be brought to a Christian service in an impressive procession. Perhaps this is all about Keith Rooks-Cowell wanting to impose a permanent cross on everyone else who uses the chapel. He says, "A campfire is a place for sitting round singing, telling jokes and stories... The campfire is not the right place for worship. All religions involves meditation and relaxation." That is bogus! "Make a joyful noise unto the Lord, all ye lands. Serve the Lord with gladness; come before his presence with singing" (psalm 100). I want to thank fgoodwin for his contributions. In recent years he has consistently posted his Scout news articles without comment to the Issues & Politics forum where (unlike Scouts-L) Scouters have the freedom to take the discussion in any direction they choose. He never attempts to shape this dialogue, and he never accuses anyone of "hijacking" his threads. Thanks Fred! Kudu

Hunt writes: "Again, when you talk about what "we" don't allow, who is "we?"" Our policy is that when the Scouts use the Troop Method then the "we" is me. I love to be in charge in the same way that most American Scouters love the Troop Method that puts them in charge of Scoutmaster Conferences, Boards of Review, and "Scout Spirit" advancement requirements! When the Patrols are camped as far away from each other as possible (ideally at least 300 feet apart), then the Patrols make those decisions. Kudu

I would be happy to explain the distinction for you, John! [sarcasm] Ideals, ethics, goals = Relativistic (Democratic) Morals, principles, standards, values = Absolute (Republican) Obviously you don't watch enough Fox News and 700 Club. [/sarcasm] On further reflection since my last post, I decided that Jesus was right. If a being is truly helpful, then "trustworthy" is usually redundant or irrelevant. So, "Helpful" trumps all of the other Scout Laws, and the Ten Commandments too. Kudu

Oh, there is a "Values Method" now? I must have missed the announcement. Beavah writes: "I tend to view all the 12 as equally weighted elements of character, eh? So no one point trumps the others. To my mind, it's an excellent example to the kids if Scouters show by example, and explain, the different ways they think about balancing points of the Oath and Law." Can I play? The BSA 12 (or the Baden-Powell 10) are not of equal value! "Trustworthy" and "Helpful" trump all the other Scout Laws. They are the "Left Hand of God," the two qualities that all religions have in common. The Ten Commandments? Not so much. I would have included "Kind," but the original purpose of this Scout Law was to be kind to animals, and kindness is implied in the Matthew 25:31-46 ("The Sheep and the Goats") account of helpfulness which (in Jesus' "Final Judgement") is all that counts. The goats might disagree. Friendly, courteous, kind, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, reverent (in the good sense of the term "reverent"), are all the natural qualities a trustworthy helpful being. The "Right Hand of God" Scout Laws most often used for evil: "Loyal," "Obedient," and "Reverent" (in the loyal and obedient sense of the term "reverent")! My favorite Scout Law is "Cheerful." And of course Baden-Powell's "unwritten" 11th Scout Law: "A Scout is not a fool." Kudu

Is the camp really more than 500 miles away? Kudu

Trevorum writes: "I don't buy your points #2 or #3, but #1 is interesting." Really? I thought #3 was the most obvious, but #2 is my favorite :-) Kudu

Trevorum writes: "Kudu, I've tried to make this point before, but you have not responded. Maybe you never saw the post." I did not respond because it sounds like the kind of weasel-logic to which those who promote religious tolerance must resort in order to justify their signing of the Declaration of Religious Principle :-) The DRP is what the DRP does: it is designed to use "God" against other people. It is the opposite of the Golden Rule, the idea (common to most religions) that you should treat other people the way that you yourself would want to be treated. The proof of this is that (for the purpose of this thread) no Scouter who rails against Muslims would sign the DRP if the Muslim majority merely switched the Christian word for "God" with the Muslim word for "God" even though (as you say) it is the same god. "Anyway, the word "God" is not a name. It is a title." Oh, really? And exactly where did He write that down? :-/ "True, some monotheists do not see a difference, but "God" (capitalized) is equivalent to "King", or even "President". Those titles refer to an office, which can be held by various persons." An honest atheist like Merlyn_LeRoy can probably sort through this theology stuff better than me. But just off the top of my head, if "God" was an office rather than a name, then: 1) We would say THE God in the same way as we say THE King or THE President. For instance the Scout Promise would read "Duty to the God and the King," or "Duty to my god and my country." 2) Every Christian would know the name of the god who currently occupies the office of God, just as they know that George W. Bush currently occupies the office of President. 3) If "God" was not a name then there would be no special orthodox spelling for it. For instance "G_d," just as Yahweh is spelled "Yhwh" (no vowels). At any rate when they become the majority in the BSA, conservative Muslims can just as easily claim that "Allah" is a title and not a name when they force everyone to sign the DRP and acknowledge a "Duty to Allah" as a condition to participate in the American religious monopoly brand of Scouting. The question I can't wait to see answered is, will Muslims use the DRP to target Christian six-year-olds who want to join Tigers in the same way that Christians now target six-year-old Unitarians like Mark Welsh? Kudu

TheScout writes: "I am not sure where they rant came from." Your posts could just as easily be characterized as "rants" by anyone who wants to dismiss your views about the implications of the Pew poll without actually addressing them. "Though I support the BSA, I do not support is congressional monopoly. I have also never seen anyone on this forum (or at least in this tread) in support of the monopoly either." Then you have never debated your libertarian view of the BSA's Congressional monopoly on this forum! "Lastly, the DRP are not imposed on anyone. Members of the BSA join and subscribe to the DRP through their own free wil." What kind of libertarianism is that? I subscribe to the "Free Markets, Free Minds" variety in which those who are opposed to the DRP (free minds) have the right to join a competing Scouting association (free market) without the current government-imposed religious regulation of the Scouting industry. Kudu

"Internationally, Muslims make up a large part of the worldwide scouting movement. In fact, Muslim-dominated Indonesia ranks second worldwide for the number of scouts, just behind first-ranked United States." I have always been curious about this. The BSA is a powerful religious corporation with a government-established monopoly on Scouting in the United States. As far as I know the BSA is the only Scouting monopoly in the world that forces all of its members to sign a written statement affirming that the recognition of the god named "God" as the ruling and leading power in the Universe and the grateful of acknowledgment of this particular god for any "favors and blessings" are "necessary to the best type of citizenship." According to some sources, Islam is the fastest growing religion in the United States. If for the sake of argument we accept that as true, how would you conservative Christians react if some day the conservative Muslim Scouting majority substitutes the god named "Allah" for the god named "God"? The BSA's Declaration of Religious Principle would now read: "The recognition of Allah as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of Allah's favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members. NO MATTER WHAT THE RELIGIOUS FAITH of the members may be, THIS fundamental need of good citizenship should be KEPT BEFORE THEM." The BSA would remain "absolutely nonsectarian," of course, so that BSA members would be free to worship rocks or trees or the god named "God" as understood by Christians, provided that they affirmed in writing that "Allah" is the ruling and leading power in the Universe and the grateful of acknowledgment of Allah for all of our "favors and blessings" is "necessary to the best type of citizenship." As far as I can tell, liberals would accept the changes without a whimper because for some reason they tend to take the BSA's "absolutely nonsectarian" claim at face value and they agree with Trevorum that Muslims believe in the same God, and simply use a different name for Him. How about you conservative Christians who currently rule the BSA and impose the DRP on everyone? Would you have any problems affirming in writing that you and your family members, your neighbors, and the people in your congregation are not good citizens if they do not believe in Allah? Would you have any problem with your sons, as a condition of advancement, being tested by their Scoutmaster and Committee Members to prove that they acknowledge a "Duty to Allah"? Would you still have the courage of your current convictions, or would you dare to think the unthinkable and agree with me that the state establishment of a monopoly on Scouting for one single PRIVATE religious corporation is un-American, and the imposition of the DRP on adult volunteers and little children as a condition for membership in Scouting is contrary to the spirit of the teachings of both Baden-Powell and Jesus of Nazareth? Kudu

"When I suggested something related to a MB, I was thinking along the lines of learning an Indian game or craft, which could introduce the Indian Lore MB for example." A Council Fire program that includes some Indian Sign Language: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/native/sign/council_fire.htm (Look up the above signs for: "I give you the Sun. I give you the Moon. I give you the Deer, the Elk, the Bear, the Wolf, the Birds; I give you the council fire. I am your friend") at the Online Indian Sign Language Dictionary: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/native/sign/sign.htm A couple of Native American campfire plays for various age groups translated by Ernest Seton, one of the BSA's Founders: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/native/bbr_plays/index.htm Detailed instructions for Indian dance and music compiled and translated by Seton's wife: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/native/dance/index.htm A couple of (non-campfire) Native American games adapted for boys by Dan Beard, another one of the BSA's Founders: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/native/games/index.htm Additional Indian Lore resources for Boy Scouts: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/native/index.htm Kudu

The campfire as the moral heart of the camp: http://inquiry.net/outdoor/campfire/helps/index.htm Kudu

"Yes then the scouting alternative program you promote will be a small cult with a small number of kids." "Cult"? I would use the term "niche market." The BSA as a religious organization certainly has its own cult-like qualities, for instance the first sentence of Personal Fitness Merit Badge which is designed to normalize religious medical neglect, a cruel form of child abuse that causes long and painful deaths while, at the same time, a church "practitioner" relentlessly urges the dying child to acknowledge that he himself has caused the disease through his stubborn refusal to repent his sins to the satisfaction of Jesus Christ. See: http://www.childrenshealthcare.org/ "Again, the statistics are proving more and more each year that the existing program is not attracting anywhere near the numbers it once did. In another thread several scoutmasters said that less than 10% of the boys in their troops were actively involved, and I have heard the same from the leaders in my council." Again, the statistics do not prove the cause of the decline. My experience is that more than half of sixth-grade boys want to join what you call a "gung-ho" Scouting Troop, but the percentage of the parents who allow the enthusiasts to join has declined from more than 50% ten years ago, to 18% this year. So, at least in my area, the cause of the decline is not what attracts potential Scouts, but rather how Scouting is perceived by their parents (whatever that might be). "The real issue is what can we do to attract more youth and instill in them the values of scouting. The sad truth is we are losing the fight and all the rah rah for the Boy Scouts of old will not change that fact Kudu." Which "values of Scouting" are those? If you mean discrimination against children, then you are correct. The BSA, a religious organization, is the youth group flagship of "privatised" state-imposed discrimination. The religious right would be wise to skip the mosquitoes and pretend that any popular activity is "Scouting," as for instance they are now doing with soccer "Cub Scout" teams in the Latin community. If you are talking about Scout Law, however, then the medium is the message! The true "values of Scouting" are taught by putting a Patrol of Scouts in the wilderness where Trustworthy, Helpful, Cheerful, etc. are not abstract values but practical necessities. "I don't like it either but I would rather modify the program than continue to lose more and more youth. It is not a time to form splinter groups but a time to band together to save the program we all volunteer our blood sweat and tears for." Save the program? What program? A program in which any couch potato can earn Camping Merit Badge (and Eagle Scout) without ever walking into the woods with a pack on his back does not deserve the adjective "Scouting." To dumb it down even further, as you suggest, is reason enough to form small "splinter groups" that offer real Scouting to the 50% of sixth-graders who are excited by wilderness adventure. Kudu

RangerT writes: "I think that the real issue here is that most of us want to preserve the scouting heritage of our own youth or that of our father, and the reality is that most teens today are not interested in that heritage." The same thing is true for all forms of heritage. Didn't a recent poll reveal that a significant number of American college students believe that America and Germany fought on the same side in World War II? "In this fast pace technologically advancing world our kids have been absorbed into a sort of virtual reality. The principals and morals of scouting are still relevant today but the outdoorsy, hiking and gung ho camping trips and skills are not relevant to pre teens and teens, in other words most just aren't interested anymore. So what do we do? We have to meet the kids where they are at now, and appeal to them by doing the things that they are interested in." Virtual reality, eh? Yeah, I'm sure that if the BSA sold off all of its Scout camps and substituted dark indoor video arcades (that preserve "Scouting's timeless values" by discriminating against girls, little homos, and godless six-year-olds), BSA membership would increase dramatically! But this idea of figuring out in what things kids are already interested and then calling that "Scouting" is passive. Kids did not know that they wanted Scouting before B-P invented Scouting. The whole point of advertising in a free market is to create a desire for something. Ranger, if you arrange a recruiting assembly in a school in your own neighborhood, I can walk in and in a half hour motivate more than half of an audience of cynical sixth-graders to sign up as interested in this "gung-ho" version of Scouting that you dismiss so easily. See: http://inquiry.net/adult/recruiting.htm "Shoving a program at them developed 50 or more years ago will not work and the numbers will continue to drop as recent history has proven out." The enrolment numbers in a state-imposed monopoly don't prove anything. You say that it is because we still haven't dumbed down the outdoor program enough, others say it is because Americans associate Scouting with discrimination or corruption and greed. My own limited experience indicates that it is the parents who do not allow enthusiastic kids to join! Look for the real answers in Richard Louv's book, Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature Deficit Disorder. Listen to a short NPR interview with Louv about video games and "nature deficit disorder" at: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4665933 "Besides Baden Powell was ahead of his time, if he were alive today I am sure scouting would be very different." I'm sure that Karl Rove says the same thing about George Washington. "All the Baden Powell original program flag waving is pointless with our dropping numbers nationwide." The point, in case you missed it, is that people who hate freedom reject Baden-Powell's program because they want the state to impose one form of corporate Scouting on everyone. "So we can keep beating a dead horse until our numbers dwindle down to nothing: or we can get with the kid culture of today and build a program catering to their wants not our own desires." While you chase the fickle "kid culture of today" and call it "Scouting," a few of us will work for the right to establish small volunteer niche markets based on traditional outdoor skills. "If we stand rigid and refuse to bend with the times then scouting could disappear in the next ten years." Scouting is dead, long live Scouting! Kudu

scoutldr writes: I know Kudu wants a return to the original B-P program, so we'll just concede him that point from the get-go.:-) Just to clarify, I advocate that all alternative Scouting associations "return" to B-P's program as it was practiced throughout the British Empire in the early 1960s. The program is copyright-free and even with the benefit of more than six decades of experience since his death, no would-be re-inventors of the wheel are as gifted as Baden-Powell. The problem with the BSA's program is not the program: the problem is the BSA's monopoly on defining the word "Scouting" for Americans. The BSA's destruction of William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt's program in 1972 proves that until Scouting is deregulated, no matter how perfect the BSA might become, somebody will always come along to dumb it down and call it "modern." Like scoutldr, I would like to see Cooking, Swimming and Lifesaving MB put back on the "Eagle Required List." Most important is uz2bnowl's suggestion to make Backpacking required. The lack of progressively difficult "real-world" backpacking tests throughout a Scout's training in Scoutcraft is the fundamental difference between BSA Scouting and what I would call "real" Scouting as it is practiced in B-P's program. Currently it is possible to earn Camping Merit Badge (and Eagle Scout) without ever (and I do mean ever) having walked into the woods with a pack on your back! Nothing, I say nothing can teach you more about the penalties of poor prior planning than backpacking (uz2bnowl). Kudu

No, Beavah, launching into my "usual objections" is my winter hobby :-/ Kudu

I wrote: 4) To solve these problems, a minority should consider the option of establishing an alternative Scouting program that: a) Uses Baden-Powell's Advancement program, based on more rigorous outdoor Advancement requirements than are currently practiced in the United States. uz2bnowl writes: DOES ANYBODY KNOW HOW WE LEFT THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE? The BSA Tenderfoot through First Class outdoor requirements were pretty close to Baden-Powell's in the early days. It is interesting to note that we somehow lost the BSA "First Class Journey" sometime after William Hillcourt's arrival! (Hillcourt is usually credited for bringing the Patrol Method to the BSA in the late 1920s). The biggest change happened in 1972 when the BSA was "modernized" away from Scouting as a game of Scoutcraft and transformed into a leadership training organization. Years later, Hillcourt was brought back to restore some of the outdoor elements, but (with the exception to the Uniform Method) he was not allowed to reverse the changes made to the "Methods of Scouting" including the new "Leadership Development Method." b) Has identical requirements for both boys and girls. c) (My own preference is to have) male and female Troops within a Group that function independently enough from each other that adult supervision does not interfere with a truly adult-free Patrol System. d) Most importantly, does not involve convincing Americans such as yourself that there is a problem with their association that a coed program would fix. In other words, the problem with Scouting in the United States is not the program, the problem is the monopoly. uz2bnowl writes: I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS KUDO CAN YOU EXPAND? People who object to the membership requirements of the BSA, and have an understanding of Scouting and access to adults with the appropriate outdoor skills, should consider establishing their own Scouting unit rather than wasting time on trying to change the BSA. I would recommend using Baden-Powell's program which was used with great success for more than 50 years throughout the British Empire and is copyright-free. Kudu

ajmako writes: "Actually, it's Baden-Powell's idea. Yes, you're right, the original idea was that a boy would take on the obligation of the Oath, Law, Motto, etc. himself. And everything I've read by B-P makes it pretty clear he expected that Scout to understand there was no picking and choosing. A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent. You can't pick and choose which points of the Scout Law you will be." Well, of course the BSA acts in bad faith (so to speak). It spends hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep a six-year-old out of Scouting if his dad won't sign a "Scout is Reverent" statement, but it does not commit the same resources to defend "A Scout is Clean" against six-year-olds with messy rooms. ajmako writes: "Kudu, I'm afraid it is some kind of misunderstanding. The actual text of the Boy Scout Handbook concerning how Scout Spirit is to be determined has already been quoted." You mean the Scout determines it? Do you think that the same committee who wrote those pretty words also wrote the advancement requirements? Clearly the intention of Scout Spirit requirements is to provide opportunities for adults to make moral judgements about the Scouts. ajmako writes: "I've searched everything I could think of or have access to as far as official BSA literature and I've found nothing that says Scout Spirit requirements, Scoutmaster Conferences, and Boards of Review are intended to allow adults to evaluate a Scout's spirit. It is true that the BSA may not tell you exactly how to evaluate a Scout's spirit, but the BSA does not tell you how to evaluate a Scout's ability to tie a square knot either. Kudu

ajmako writes: "what's wrong with simply getting to know the Scout and opening your eyes to the growth in his behavior? What's wrong with having high expectations for him and working with him to achieve those expectations?" What's wrong? It is a description of your progress, not his. Ask yourself: why do you need adult-judgement Scoutmaster Conferences, adult-judgement Boards of Review, and adult-judgement Scout Spirit requirements in order to talk to Scouts about these things? It is because these "high expectations" are all about what you want, and most adults need sanctions against Scouts who think that Scouting is a game. ajmako writes: "Why is it necessary to argue and debate over aims and methods and history in order to figure out how to know if a Scout is acting like a Scout?" Because different aims, and different methods, and different history, make for very different Scouts. If you can earn Eagle without ever walking into the woods with a pack on your back, and if the adults have all the important Patrol Leader powers (which they call "Adult Association"), then you are more of a Cub Scout than a real Scout, no matter how weepy the adults get when they talk about "expectations and growth." Kudu continued: B-P invented Scouting as an alternative to the same social forces that now insist on turning the Ideals of Scouting into adult-enforced "obligations." ajmako writes: "Really? I thought he invented Scouting as a remedy to such "national inefficiencies" as irreligion....Things that are caused by disregard of the social forces I assume you are talking about (I really can't tell)." If he wanted the adults to judge the Scouts on the causes of these national inefficiencies, he could have worked within the religious drill brigades that existed already. It was a straight-forward matter: accuse the boys of the sins that cause the national inefficiencies, and then evaluate their progress in overcoming these sins. I was pretty sure that B-P chose the opening words of the Scout Oath specifically because a boy who said them would view them as an obligation--a promise he had to keep in order to be worthy of being a Scout. The idea was that a Scout took on these obligations himself on his honor to do his best (with Court of Honor pressure when he concentrated more on his own personal advancement than on helping others advance). ajmako writes: "Have we lost that in the BSA? Yes, to some extent, but it's not lost forever. It can be regained without tearing everything down or arguing over every minute point." I don't see how that is possible without deregulating the Scouting industry, but for those who want to "work for change from within the BSA," then understanding how the game of Scouting is supposed to be played does require rethinking every one of the so-called "Eight" Methods of Scouting. I do recognize that this is very frustrating for Scouters who click on "Scout Spirit" threads just to look for creative ideas for turning the Ideals of Scouting into adult-enforced obligations: "How can we use the Scout Spirit requirements to punish Scouts who find our meetings and campouts boring?" Or "how can we use the Scout Spirit requirements to withhold advancement from Scouts who refuse to wear the BSA's butt-ugly pre-Switchback "Scout Spirit" Scout Pants?" :-/ ajmako writes: "If you say so. Being a religious conservative I for one am not trying to turn the Ideals into obligations." Turning the Ideals of Scouting into obligations is the official policy of the BSA. ajmako writes: "I am trying to get young men to accept the Ideals and recognize it's an all or nothing proposition." Huh? An all or nothing proposition? Scouting is a game. This all or nothing "purpose" thing is your problem, not his. ajmako writes: "I don't have to understand the history of the Court of Honor to understand what the Scout Spirit requirements are supposed to be or how they are supposed to be evaluated. I just have to look in the Boy Scout Handbook, on page 108, which OldGreyEagle quoted. To understand the history of the Court of Honor is to understand the reason for the hypocrisy that exists between page 108 and every other page that includes a Scout Spirit requirement, a Scoutmaster Conference, or a Board of Review. ajmako writes: "His question was how a Scout leader can justify setting attendance percentages or other obstacles to advancement as part of Scout Spirit when the handbook clearly says it's not the Scout leader's job to "measure" Scout Spirit. The answer is, the Scout leader can't justify it. They have to either misunderstand what is meant, remain ignorant of what is meant, or purposefully ignore what is meant by Scout Spirit." We agree in principle on this point, but the BSA takes the Patrol Leaders' advancement powers away from them and gives them to the adults. The adults can give the sign-off sheet back if they want, but clearly the Scout Spirit requirements are intended to allow adults to evaluate the Scouts' "Spirit." This is not some kind of misunderstanding. ajmako writes: "That is human nature, and it's not unique to the BSA." Scout Spirit requirements are unique to the BSA. Kudu