Kudu

Eamonn quotes some of my posts to show that I do not belong in the BSA:

>> In my version of the game of Scouting

Every Troop's version of the game is a little different, because of local conditions and the people involved.

>> Likewise, we use our own version of the Uniform Method

Prior to the BSA hiring a dress designer to produce a hot house indoor Uniform, William Hillcourt (the father of the BSA's Patrol Method) advanced the Uniform as a functional icon of outdoor adventure. Our Troop continues this tradition with our Activity Uniform.

>> In my Troop, every Patrol Quartermaster

If you really practice the Patrol Method, then you know that the Patrol Quartermaster is the one person most critical to a Patrol's true independence in the woods. This position of responsibility certainly deserves a position patch as much as, say, the Troop Bugler! As far as I know, there is no BSA rule that forbids multiple "Troop Quartermasters," any more than the BSA forbids multiple ASPLs.

>> I don't see the Patrol Grouping Standards as a necessary, or even

>> helpful function

"Patrol Grouping Standards" was the BSA practice which instructed "Scout Masters" to divide the boys into Patrols by their social class or by their height & weight. Are we to assume that you are so "loyal" and "obedient" to the BSA, that if they returned to these practices, you would actually comply? I would not, and that is the difference between us. Baden-Powell's "Unwritten 11th Scout Law" was "A Scout is not a fool."

>> I hate "Camporees." For one thing they violate my first (and most

>> important) rule of Troop car-camping,

This is the only quote that is relevant to this discussion. The point was that while my Scouts may take my "rules" into consideration, their PLC consistently thinks independently and votes to attend Camporees. Why then should I pretend to them that I do not to have a point of view?

> With all the respect in the world Kudu, I really wonder .... if you and

> I belong to the same organization?

Obviously not. There are four BSA's: 1) The pre-Hillcourt BSA era which instructed "Scout Masters" to keep Patrol Leaders out of the chain of command. 2) The Hillcourt golden era which produced the best explained Scouting methods in the world. Foreign traditional Scouting associations (Scouts Ireland, for instance) still use his materials, even though the BSA does not. 3) The politically correct era starting in 1972, which gutted Hillcourt's traditional outdoor methods in favor of urban Scouting, and gave us the current dress designer Scout Uniform, while at the same time removing the Uniform as one of the Methods of Scouting. 4) The current era in which the BSA positions itself as a conservative religious corporation.

I'd say that I belong to BSA #2, and you belong to BSA #4.

> What ever became of servant leadership?

I don't know, is that the latest BSA Wood Badge pop business management theory? If "servant leadership" is what you are practicing in this forum, then I am not likely to become a convert.

> I'm a big fan of Baden Powell, I served as leader to a UK Troop for a

> fair amount of years, but that was there and that was then. We can

> not turn the clock back, we serve the youth that are in the programs

> today and prepare for the youth that will follow.

The BSA is only one brand of Scouting, in the same way that McDonald's is only one brand of burgers. You can pretend that a corporate Scouting product is the inevitable result of "progress" ONLY when your WOSM association has an absolute monopoly on Scouting in a given country. If McDonald's had the same monopoly on burgers that the BSA has on Scouting, then "true believers" like you would say that fried burgers are the inevitable result of "progress," and that flame-broiling is an example of trying to "turn the clock back."

> We do so as members of the BSA.

The BSA currently has a monopoly on Scouting, so here I am.

> If everything starting with the mission statement is the wrong fit

> for you?

My guess is that if you set up a video camera and asked BSA Scouters to recite the BSA Mission Statement, 99% would not be able to do so. It is just harmless corporate fluff.

> Maybe it is time for you to devote more time and become more

> involved in designing a small, highly-specialized international youth

> program that is similar to what we call Scouting.

An alternative Scouting association will face overwhelming odds: many years of litigation from a multi-million dollar monopoly corporation that is opposed to freedom in the marketplace of ideas. If successful, most people who dissagree with the BSA's methods will remain, rather than abandoning it to people who are intolerant of other points of view.

Competition benefits everyone, and the first thing to go will be the senseless things that can only exist in a monopoly culture, such as an over-priced indoor uniform that should be on any list of Banned/Discouraged Items Camping :-/

> We could have put cotton socks and tennis shoes on the "forbidden

> list". There would have been no problem. And nothing learned.

OK, but I hope that you do realize that this is a faith statement. Scouting is a game, not a science, and this is certainly a great story about a well-played game. But there is no scientific proof that the 12 Scouts wearing the correct foot wear would not have learned anything if Matt had not gotten blisters. My faith statement is that Scouts can also learn from good experiences, and that positive experiences build knowledge, confidence, and the willingness to try more challenging activities.

Simply put, there is no scientific proof that Scouts make better citizens, are more fit, or exhibit better character than boys who do not get involved in Scouting. In the end, we take that kind of thing on faith too. Scouting is a game, not a science.

You didn't say if your equipment list for the day hike recommended hiking boots and non-cotton socks. I doubt that you remain silent and force your Scouts to discover blisters through blind trial and error, as some radical advocates of hands-off Scout-run philosophy propose. We probably also agree that car-camping trips are the appropriate times to learn the consequences of not following directions. My guess is that we differ mainly on how we characterize how these "directions" are conveyed, and some of this is due to the limitations of the written word.

I do try to forbid things like cotton on backpacking trips, because it is irresponsible to allow Scouts to risk blisters or hypothermia in high-adventure situations where they can't just get in a car and ride away from the consequences of their actions. That being said, I know that one of my Scouts, Brandon, who can't afford good gear, will be wearing cotton socks this afternoon, so I have packed extra socks so that he will be in compliance. This is simply not the situation in which to teach him some kind of lesson. On that we may disagree.

> Our mission is not to conduct the perfect day hike. It is to teach

> boys to make good choices.

Your mission, maybe. My mission is to give the Scouts a clear checklist of everything they need to conduct the perfect day hike. If my best efforts fail, THEN I can chalk it up to their "choices."

Oh, that reminds me, how do the Scouts in other Troops react to "Roses & Thorns" sessions? This reflection on the consequences of actions is another adult thing that some of us impose on our Scouts, how about you?

Eamonn,

Would you care to translate your mystical personal attack into something more constructive?

I doubt if I have anything to learn from anyone who wears cotton camping socks, but I'm willing to keep an open mind :-/

madkins007 writes:

> A lot of the items discussed for banning/discouragement seem to be

> placed on the list because they violate the posters idea of what a

> perfect campout should be. Some things seem to interfere with some

> people's ability to commune with nature or violate some sense of the

> 'Scouting Way'....

The Scout Way (Hillcourt's first Method of Scouting) is "A Game, NOT a Science" (emphasis in the original).

I said that I look to The Scout Way for guidance, not that it supports one particular position in this discussion.

As I see it, the Scout Way is the spirit in which the other "Eight" Methods of Scouting are applied.

Every Troop has its own personality, and so the "game" of Scouting is played differently in every Troop. One of the current Methods is "Adult Association," which in my mind implies that adults are individuals and all have different areas of expertise and experience which ultimately effect how the game is played in their own Troops. This is true even in radical "Scout Run" Troops where the adults believe that they have no influence over how the Scouts run their Troop.

In my version of the game of Scouting, I favor the "commune with nature" aspect of the Outdoor Method (which B-P called the "Religion of the Woods'), but I will swap it for the Patrol Method if the Scouts set up their Patrols far enough away from each other to function independently. Likewise, we use our own version of the Uniform Method to get the Scouts to buy olive-drab nylon zip-off cargo "activity" uniform pants, so that they all have at least one pair of non-cotton pants for campouts.

From your posts, it sounds like your priority regarding the Outdoor Method is just getting them into the woods. We go through cycles of that too, so we don't have rigid written "scientific" lists of what not to bring on campouts.

Currently, the only other adults who are willing to camp with us are two Commissioners who have sons in the Troop. The three of us would rather be backpacking than car camping, so we tend to try to prepare the Scouts for more challenging outdoor experiences down the road. This translates to things like discouraging cotton, and forbidding personal snacks because they tend to encourage Scouts to eat in their tents.

Scouts (and their parents) tend to ignore the cotton rule until they get really wet on a campout, but I'm not sure what the "allow them to fail" learning curve would be for getting mauled by a bear attracted to the smell of chocolate and BBQ potato chips ground into the floor of a tent on a previous campout.

For those who are interested, my version of the rules of our game can be seen on the permission form and equipment list for our backpacking trip tomorrow:

http://www.inquiry.net/outdoor/equipment/coh_campout.htm

http://www.inquiry.net/outdoor/equipment/backpacking_summer.htm

Maybe the solution is to encourage Tommy Tenderfoot to listen to a CD of natural forest sounds on his Walkman.

The BSA's mission statement is about making ethical and moral choices. If it had any real-world meaning that encouraged Scouts to think for themselves rather than being dictated to by lists of forbidden things, then the BSA would not impose on them a list of forbidden ethical and moral topics that churches are not allowed to discuss within the context of their own religious awards (religious doubt, for instance).

Mission statements are mostly public relations fluff dreamed up by people who spend too much time under fluorescent lights with business management gurus. These are the kind of committees who hire dress designers to create hot house uniforms for an outdoor youth organization :-/

If I were to pick any written BSA principle to guide me in this controversy, it would be William Hillcourt's first (and most important) Method of Scouting, The Scout Way: A Game, NOT a Science.

Forbid personal snacks, and you encourage Scouts to cook cobblers or smores.

If you are interested in accuracy, I would double check anything that the BSA attributes to Baden-Powell.

Most of their B-P misquotes were actually things that were said by William Hillcourt, but in the 3rd Edition of "Handbook for Scoutmasters," Hillcourt attributes this one to Roland Phillips.

I already wear the ideal Scout Uniform: olive-drab nylon "zip-off" cargo pants and a tan breathable nylon shirt.

The shirt has mesh vents under the arm pits and under a flap between the shoulder blades.

Contrary to common wisdom, this material is ideal for all Scouting activities, the pants can even be used as a shell in the winter.

For about the same price as the official Uniform, you can buy high quality outdoor clothing such as this retail, or for about half the price if you wait for sales and close-outs. Most of the stuff is made in China, but presumably if you ran the biggest outdoor youth organization in the world, you could cut a similar deal with American manufactures.

Sometimes I wear olive drab BDU pants, which are American made and cost $20-30, but are slower to dry because of the cotton in the blend.

Speaking of cotton, I also like the feel of my 100% cotton official BSA shirts for indoor wear. The only problem is that the BSA hired a dress designer (what were they thinking?) and he did not understand how the neckerchief is supposed to be worn.

Oh, and those Christmas tree red epaulets: I hope the next BSA hot house dress designer changes them to tan to match the shirt (what were they thinking?).

For a detailed comparison of various existing materials for Scout uniforms, see:

http://www.inquiry.net/uniforms/bdu.htm

I understand that a fun washing machine can be constructed out of a five-gallon bucket (the kind that bulk food comes in), and a new toilet plunger. Cut a hole in the center of the top of the bucket just large enough for the plunger handle, and use that as a the agitator. Use Woolite for soap.

Well, in my defense I believe that I am perfectly honest about my hypocrisy. I always explain to my Scouts that I am old, cranky, a light sleeper, and above all else: very easily annoyed. I tell them that I am willing to drive them out to the woods every month, as long as they don't annoy the adults too very much in the process.

They also know that the further from my tent that their Patrol sets up, the less thinking I do for them. All things considered, I think that is a fair deal.

Among the things that REALLY annoy me (in their order of irritation) is 1) Whining Scouts in wet cotton, 2) OPM (Other People's Music), 3) Getting woken up after I fall asleep (especially by people yelling at bears), 4) Helping to clean candy-flavored puke off sleeping bags in the middle of the night.

By the way, this is a BSA Troop, not a BPSA-USA Troop, so if I purport to follow anything, it is Hillcourt's program circa 1960, not B-P's original program (which includes assigning Patrol Leaders, and a different advancement scheme that includes retesting).

The BSA "Eight Methods" (such as they are) saw better days under Hillcourt, but they still suggest that Scouts do not discover the Scouting program through some inevitable Scout-led discovery process.

Before Hillcourt's Ten Methods of Scouting, or even before the Brownsea Island campout, Ernest Seton wrote the "Nine Important Principles of Woodcraft," In his introduction to them he said:

"Not long ago a benevolent rich man, impressed with this idea, chartered a steamer and took some hundreds of slum boys up to the Catskills for a day in the woods. They were duly landed and told to "go in now and have a glorious time." It was like gathering up a net full of catfish and throwing them into the woods, saying, "Go and have a glorious time."

"The boys sulked around and sullenly disappeared. An hour later, on being looked up, they were found in groups under the bushes, smoking cigarettes, shooting 'craps,' and playing cards -- the only things they knew.

"Thus the well-meaning rich man learned that it is not enough to take men out of doors. We must also teach them to enjoy it.

http://www.inquiry.net/traditional/seton/woodcraft/9_principles.htm

We don't have any by-laws, but we do have a few rules which (except for food in tents) can be bent.

We prohibit blue jeans and all other 100% cotton clothes. So, we require olive-drab BDUs if it is one of those years in which olive-drab nylon "zip-off" cargo pants are not being sold for $20 by chain stores like Target and Wal-Mart.

Beyond the hypothermia dangers of cotton here in the north, wet cotton also increases the "whine factor," which is the tendency for wet Scouts to try to make everyone else as miserable as they are, until someone finally drives them home.

As for camo, we do allow camo hunting clothes. Parents who hunt tend to spend a lot of money on this, and it all seems to be well made (presumably, guys with guns make for bad disgruntled customers). The usual partial cotton content has always been a mystery to me, because it seems to keep the Scouts warm even in the rain.

We have never had any Uniform Police comment on our Scouts' camo hunting clothes, but that may be because these Scouts blend into the natural environment so well that the Uniform Police can't see them.

We "prohibit" electronic devices because we want Scouts to be in tune with the natural environment. I would say that adults promoting the sounds of nature is part of the Outdoor Method, which is the basis of Baden-Powell's "Religion of the Woods," which in turn makes it more important than the counter-balancing "Scout-Led" dictum, but YMMV.

In practical terms, in our Troop this means that if adults don't hear or see the CD players, then no harm, no foul. We also have a rule that a Patrol's campsite must be far enough away to be out of the sight of the other campsites. When it is practical for a Patrol to actually comply with this rule, the fact that adults are less likely to see or hear the CD players is an extra incentive supporting the Patrol Method.

Our exception to the electronics ban has been personal two-way radios, which can be both annoying and handy on hikes. In the annoying column are the hailing chimes, and the constant amplified chatter. Keeping the Scouts and adults on different channels, and requiring earphones helps, but it really distracts from nature and traditional hiking methods. One of our Scouts recently lost one of his sister's expensive units when he dropped it in a muddy, fast-moving river, and he reported that the other one "disappeared" as well, so we may revisit the issue of two-way radios.

We also prohibit caffeine on Friday nights (Scouts can drink coffee in the morning if their parents say it is OK. Caffeine withdrawal headaches indicate that some Scouts are really addicted). I also like lights out at 11 & no talking after midnight on Friday nights, to avoid cranky Scouts on Saturday, but if a Patrol camps far enough away, then they can do as they please. We haven't had problems with Scouts getting out of their tents and roaming around in a few years.

We recently started prohibiting personal snacks. They tend to end up in the tents, spoil meals, and sometimes get vomited out in the middle of the night.

We prohibit food in tents, but with varying degrees of success. A bear got into one of the Scout's tents last year during summer camp swim check, which was only 20 minutes after we arrived at camp. When we confronted him with the remains of his bagged lunch, he replied indignantly, "I didn't have any FOOD in my tent, it was just GARBAGE, a banana peel and the crusts of my peanut butter sandwich!"

Way back in the 1960s, I think, Boys' Life featured an annual "Green Bar Bill" Patrol Flag contest. Does anyone know what in what month the photos of the winners was published every year?

>The primary purpose of the BSA is secular. Applying the 3 prong test

>from the Lemon-Kurtzman case doesn't raise any concerns: (1) The

>primary purpose is secular, (2) There is no advancement or inhibiting

>of religion and (3) There is no government entanglement of religion.

For what it is worth, in its letter "inhibiting" Unitarian-Universalist Scouts from wearing their church's religious award on the BSA uniform, the BSA (a government-established monopoly on Scouting) rejected the UUA's characterization of the BSA as a secular organization:

"This version of 'Religion in Life' contains several statements which are inconsistent with Scoutings values. Boy Scouts is not a secular organization as stated in Religion in Life; Boy Scouts is an ecumenical organization which requires belief in God and acknowledgement of duty to God by its members."

Lawrence Ray Smith, Ph.D

Chair, Religious Relationships Committee

Boy Scouts of America

http://www.uua.org/news/scouts/scouts_to_uua.html

Please forgive me for submitting the following references to BSA as a religious organization, complied by Stephen Hansen, without reading the entire thread to see if they have already been cited:

I think it is appropriate to provide references to some legal cases in which the BSA has said that it is a religious organization. (And, I agree that BSA is not a religion. There is a difference between a religion and a religious organization.)

In case no. 92C-140, Riley County District Court, Bradford W. Seabourn vs.

Coronado Area Council, December 16, 1992, the BSA filed a "Separate Answer"

with the following as its "Sixth Affirmative Defense:

"Boy Scouts of America is a religious organization, association or

society, or nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or

controlled by or in conjunction with religious organizations, associations or

societies within the meaning of the Kansas Act Against Discrimination, expressly

permitted by the Act to limit the occupancy of its real property, which it owns or

operates for other than a commercial purpose, to persons who believe in God or to

give preference to persons who believe in God."

Recently, in the Balboa Park case, U.S. District Judge Napoleon Jones

Jr. ruled that "The Boy Scouts are a religious organization"

(http://www.bsalegal.org/downloads/1DE211_July_2003_Order.pdf pp.11).

The judge based that finding on assertions made by BSA in pleadings of

that case. That finding was not disputed in the BSA appeal of that case. Indeed,

in the appeal brief, the BSA compares itself to a number of specific religious

organizations, and argues that such leases may be extended to religious organizations

(http://www.bsalegal.org/downloads/Ninth_Circuit_Brief.pdf ).

The BSA Uniform is the perfect metaphor for this discussion, because it is an example of an emotional issue which, in common with the larger issues confronting the BSA, will never be settled with logic.

The Uniform has an advantage over the 3-G issues because it is not based on religion. However, I suspect that how we perceive the BSA Uniform on a visceral level probably reflects our religion more than most people realize.

The only time I ever got blisters on my feet in my adult life was the one day I wore Scout socks to summer camp, so from that day forward I simply refused to wear them.

When I first took Scoutmaster's Fundamentals, the SM called a surprise uniform inspection. I got the best grade, but failed getting a perfect score because I wasn't wearing Scout socks.

My solution was to wear Scout socks to the next session, in accordance with the uniform policy. Since the policy does not specify that Scout socks are to be worn on our feet, I simply tied them around my ankles, securing them with a respectful square knot.

To answer Bob White's question: if a Scout ever called me on this issue, I would quote to him what Baden-Powell referred to as the unwritten 11th Scout Law: "A Scout is not a fool."

Scouters are "weapons dealers" when we feel that it is our duty to use Scout Law against our Scouts as a "weapon." Our justification for trying to making them look like fools by forcing them to wear impractical and ugly Scout pants is often based on "loyalty" and "obedience," but B-P's 11th Scout Law trumps this common BSA abuse of Scout Law.

It is fun to watch you Scouters agonize over logic and ethics, or make a virtue out of necessity, while ignoring the obvious larger issue (no freedom to go to a competing Scouting association, as in the UK--where Scouting was invented).

While we must conform to the Guide to Safe Scouting, for instance, there is no REAL moral virtue in following bad rules like the GtSS rule against lazar tag. Baden-Powell wrote plenty of games that involved "killing" your opponent. Given a choice, most of my Scouts would, in a heartbeat, leave for a BSA competitor that allowed lazar tag. This IS Scouting, after all.

Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. The reason that Scouters need to conform to bad rules in order to set an "example" for our Scouts is that the BSA, in common with communism, does not benefit from the self-correcting forces of freedom in the marketplace :-/

Thus the topic, "Scouters as Communist Weapons Dealer," although a tad over the top, gets to the very essence of the question that Bob White is asking!

Oh, and speaking of Bob White, I am new to this forum, but I notice that you do not stick to your own topic. Do you ignore the topic "Scouters as Communist Weapons Dealer" because it does not suit you personally to observe it? :-/

> Which rule book are you talking about?....

> The one that protects legal, licensed, property of the BSA?....

This rule is based on the Congressional Charter, which grants the BSA a monopoly on words like "Scouts" and "Scouting." So the government forces us to be "communist weapons dealers."

I would define "communist" in the sense of the state forbidding competition in a free market.

It is freedom that makes America great. It is the lack of this freedom in American Scouting that causes most of the BSA's problems, from the "3-Gs" to bad Uniforms.

As long as the BSA remains a state-sanctioned monopoly, the official Scout Uniform will ALWAYS be the worst case ugly scenario of the horrors of central planning: a hothouse indoor uniform designed by a dress designer, Oscar de la Renta.

Think about it: the largest outdoor youth organization in the WORLD does not manufacture an outdoor Uniform! How stupid.

Who but the oldest Stalinists, secure in their totalitarian power (despite their obvious senility), would not see the obvious capitalist opportunity that Scouting offers if only the BSA produced decent outdoor Uniforms at a reasonable price.

Seeing a group of BSA members wearing official Scout pants always reminds me of the "Soviet fashion show" pictured on those Wendy's television commercials in the 1980s.

The point of the ads was that innovation is the natural result of freedom in the marketplace. In a free society, consumers have the freedom to make choices, be it for comfortable clothing or Wendy's burgers.

In a society run by central planners, however, ugly clothing is considered a moral virtue: an outward sign of party loyalty. Of course in a totalitarian culture there is only ONE party, and people who oppose freedom of choice want to keep it that way.

BSA party loyalists often recommend that we wear the ugly uniform with pride while at the same time making our voice heard by "working within the system." They urge us to write letters to our Council President. To write letters to the national office. To keep writing them, not stopping when we don't get a response, and to get all of our friends and associates in Scouting to do the same.

This advice reminds me of my favorite scene in the film "Good Bye Lenin!"

The premise is that Christiane, a communist grandmother and staunch party loyalist, suffers a heart attack and falls into a coma just before the fall of the Berlin Wall. By the time she awakens, her beloved East Germany has a free market economy and is drenched in Western consumerism. Her doctors advise Christiane's son and daughter that their mother's health is still fragile and she cannot handle any shocks to her system. So as she slowly recuperates, they re-create in Christiane's bedroom the socialist world as it was when she was well.

Among other things, this means that before entering her bedroom, her visitors have to change out of their comfortable Western clothing and into the poorly designed pre-freedom clothing.

To make Christiane feel useful, her friends and relatives ask her to compose letters (as she had done in the past) to the central planners of the German Democratic Republic, petitioning them to make practical, comfortable clothing!

Sound familiar?

She writes, "Should it be our fault that our physical measurements stand in the way of your achieving planned production targets please accept our apologies. We will do everything in our power to become shorter and squarer in the future. With socialist greetings....

Maybe we could borrow that text when we embark on future letter-writing campaigns to the BSA central planners.

The BSA is a private religious corporation with a government-established, absolute monopoly on Scouting. This is fine with neo-conservatives as long as the corporation reflects their values.

However, a true conservative, like a libertarian, believes that freedom exists only when the government gets out of the business of picking corporate winners and losers.

A true conservative believes in the wisdom of the marketplace, and freedom in the marketplace of ideas.

So in the end, you could say that the BSA Scout pants are ugly because the BSA is not conservative enough.

The only solution is to stop those little communists at the door, and to send them back home if they dare to wear ugly official BSA Scout pants to Scout meetings.

And make sure you double-check for hidden Scout socks.

The same is true in our Troop. If a Scout joins in May, knows how to swim, goes to summer camp and ALL of the campouts and Troop events, he can usually earn First Class by November. Last year, only one Scout of the twelve that joined in May did so because only three of the twelve could go to summer camp. An additional one of these three Scouts also earned First Class in six months, but the total elapsed time was a year because he dropped out for six months after his dad died.

If a Scout joins in September when I recruit in the local public school, it will usually take him a year if he knows how to swim and goes to summer camp the following summer. If one or two of them are very motivated, we will schedule Troop events so as to proceed at their pace.

Non-swimmers usually take three or four years, if they ever earn First Class at all.

It takes longer for Scouts joining in September because the advancement for those Scouts is handled more by the Scouts themselves, and it is just plain clunky. Our current 13 year-old Troop Guide is very good, but he can only handle one or two Scouts at a time so there is no group advancement. One of his Instructors can handle a couple of additional Scouts, but frankly the two of them work harder than most of the other Scouts, and sometimes they just want to lay back and act like lazy 13 year-olds :-/

I'm rebuilding the Troop so we don't have many older role model Scouts. On monthly campouts, most of our new Scouts are interested only in Patrol hikes and cooking. The rest of all that advancement stuff, not so much.

We do NOT take advantage of summer camp staff-run "first year Scout" advancement programs. My Assistant Scoutmasters run our own first year program in our campsite during the day while the Troop Guide and his Instructors take Merit Badge classes.

I try to talk non-swimmers into taking swimming instruction if it is offered by the camp, and I try to talk first year Scouts that can swim into taking Swimming & Canoeing Merit Badges (so that they can go on canoe trips in the fall).

I also try to encourage Patrols to take some of the same Merit Badges together as a Patrol, but the nerdy Patrols tend to be more individualistic.

In the evenings at summer camp, the motivated squeaky wheels are free to corner someone to work on advancement, so it is possible for motivated first year Scouts to take five Merit Badges (including cooking) during the day AND catch up on all of the Tenderfoot-First Class requirements that were offered while they were out earning Merit Badges. The remaining advancement requirements are covered from August through November.

This year the Scouts decided to go to a summer camp that happens to have centralized cooked meals, so we won't be cooking every meal by Patrol, which I think is a shame.

> Maybe I live in an isolated world, as has been alleged by some, but can

> adults old enough to be the parent of a a Tiger claim they didn't know

> about the gay and God thing? Maybe since I am in the BSA I cant

> conceive of anyone not knowing about the Gay and God policies, what

> is your experience?

During his Tenderfoot Scoutmaster Conference, I asked one of my 11 year-old Scouts to explain the meaning of the Scout Oath. When we got to "Duty to God," he told me he didn't have one because he was an atheist . When I asked him what that meant, he shrugged and replied, matter-of-factly, "God is fake." I raised my eyebrows and he patiently explained, "You know, fake like Santa Claus!"

I talked to his parents about it, and it turned out that his mom was an atheist, and he was just quoting her views on the subject. Believe it or not, some people simply do not follow the trials and tribulations of the Boy Scouts in the media, or have any idea of what "ACLU" stands for.

This was a working-class family, and they really had NO clue that children can get kicked out of the BSA for not believing in God. Maybe most young atheists come from more literate families where the parents are aware that personal beliefs have political consequences. For this family it was just commonsense, and not some issue that needed to be debated.

It is a bit like signing up for Rabbit Farming Merit Badge, only to find out that you have to believe in the Easter Bunny. For us it may be obvious, but for others, not so much :-/

Physical Separation and SM Approval for PL-Appointed Patrol Quartermasters.

Get the Patrols separated as far as possible when tent camping. Try Patrol Competitions with Reeses Cups (the coin of the realm) awards for the best remote Patrol Site.

The Patrol Quartermaster is probably more important than the Patrol Leader in making a Patrol truly independent. Buy him a clipboard with a pen attached with a string, make up a Patrol Quartermaster List, and make sure that the Patrol Quartermaster (and his assistant) go through the checklist before EVERY campout. See:

http://www.inquiry.net/outdoor/equipment/quartermaster.htm

In my Troop, every Patrol Quartermaster is technically a "Troop Quartermaster." He wears that badge, and receives "position of responsibility" credit for advancement.

> I realize that the Eight Methods of Scouting are not required but I would

> like to see Method number 9 added and then required by all....Humor

> might be our first shot instead.

This was the intent of William Hillcourt's First Method of Scouting, "The Scout Way (A Game, NOT a Science)."

This, perhaps the most important Method of Scouting, was eliminated in 1972 (along with the Uniform), when the "Seven Methods of Scouting" were first introduced:

1) Scouting Ideals;

2) Patrols;

3) Advancement;

4) Adult Male Association;

5) Outdoor Program;

6) Leadership Development;

7) Personal Growth.

If the BSA could change its mind and reinstate the Uniform as a Method, then why not The Scout Way?

See:

http://www.inquiry.net/adult/methods

The first Scout Cheer was the Scout's Chorus, or Eengonyama Song. By some accounts it is the only song anyone could remember singing at the Brown Sea Camp. It can be sung on the march, or standing in a circle around a campfire as each Scout takes turns jumping into the circle to mime his stalking of prey or enemy while the rest of the Scouts chant and stamp their Scout Staves in time to the beat, see The Kudu Net:

http://www.kudu.net/outdoor/campfire/songs/war_songs.htm

For an international collection of traditional Troop and Patrol Scout Yells see:

http://www.kudu.net/outdoor/campfire/helps/yells.htm

> I'd say rather, that the trouble starts with the very idea that "methods

> are not required", as if the methods are some kind of option, or a helpful

> suggestion from BSA. What does it take for some to understand that

> Methods are not optional? Must BSA write a legal document that must

> be signed by the adult leader and notorized? "THE METHODS ARE

> REQUIRED - SIGN HERE".

I'm new here, so I will take the flame bait.

> So, Ed, what is your objection to the Methods? They don't work for you,

> or you have better methods (or ways), or what?

From the mean-spirited nature of the personal attacks against Ed, it should be obvious that the BSA Methods of Scouting have seen better days.

What we now call the "Methods of Scouting" were introduced in the 4th Edition of "Handbook for Scoutmasters," edited by William Hillcourt. Hillcourt's first Method of Scouting was "The Scout Way (A Game, NOT a Science)."

If The Scout Way was still "required," would we see the kind of fundamentalist approach to the rest of the Methods that we have witnessed in this forum?

> "... the methods of scouting are not requirements however if you do

> not incorporate them in your program you can't really have a true

> scouting program."

The definition of "true scouting program" is the central problem here. The BSA is just one "brand" of Scouting, in the same way that McDonald's is just one brand of burgers. The difference is that Congress granted this private corporation exclusive rights to terms like "Scouts" and "Scouting," so, by law, Scouting is whatever the monopoly corporation says it is.

If Congress granted McDonald's a similar monopoly on terms like "burger," then by definition burgers would have to be fried, and flame-broiled ground beef would not be a "true hamburger program."

In countries (like the UK) which allow more freedom in the Scouting marketplace, small alternative Scouting associations offer different kinds of Scouting. I currently have a BSA Troop, but obviously I would also like to try a Baden-Powell Scouting program to see how it works.

Likewise, I'm sure that a 1960s style William Hillcourt Scouting program would have a small but dedicated following in the United States. It is all a matter of taste, of course, but I don't see anyone in the BSA with Hillcourt's ability to envision "a true Scouting program" that is worthy of an absolute corporate monopoly on Scouting.

His 1947 model was more universal to Scouting as an international movement, see:

http://www.inquiry.net/adult/methods

Note that in Hillcourt's Methods, "Boy Leadership" is a subset of the Patrol Method. In practical terms this meant that "Patrol Leader Training" consisted of teaching Patrol Leaders how to conduct Patrol Meetings at their homes, and how to run Patrol Hikes and Patrol Campouts. I suspect that these Patrol activities (which are still a part of other Scouting programs) would not be so rare if the BSA trained Patrol Leaders how to be Patrol Leaders, rather than teaching general abstract managerial skills for the sake of non-PL "Junior Leaders." This, I think, is a direct result of the "required" Leadership Development Method (and the resulting leadership advancement requirements).

Likewise, "Personal Growth" is not a Hillcourt Method. As far as I can tell, "Personal Growth" is just a natural result of Scouting. What Personal Growth in Scouting is not the result of the other seven methods?

Therefore, I only "require" seven of the eight Methods. I only allow "Personal Growth" once a year, which is popular with the parents because they don't have to buy as many sneakers :-/

Bob White,

Thanks for your feedback and information.

A few minor points:

> (as I pointed out this is a book on training scouts not training

> scoutmasters).

I don't understand your distinction. For instance, the introduction to the old BSA Scoutmaster Fundamentals handbook said that it was in the tradition of "Aids to Scoutmastership" (of course, it also misquoted B-P as saying that "Scouting is a Game with a Purpose"). It seems to me that a book on training Scoutmasters has to be about training Scouts, unless you are talking about some kind of "train the trainer" course or the American version of Wood Badge.

> In Baden-Powell's words taken from the Aids To Scoutmastership..

> "The aim of the Scout training is to improve the standard of our future

> citizenhood, especially in Character and Health;

Baden-Powell saw the Aim of Citizenship as being accomplished through training in Character and Physical Health. This is another possible approach to building a "methods" model of Baden-Powell's Scouting game, because in his "National Inefficiencies" chart he lists his 16 program elements under the two categories of Character and Health, see:

http://www.inquiry.net/traditional/b-p/scoutmastership/intro.htm

> Character Citizenship and Fitness. Seems to me the BSA has kept

> very true to its origins.

I find the single Aim of Citizenship more easy to understand and explain than having Three Aims (four, if you count "Mental Fitness" as being different from B-P's Physical Health). But that is just a matter of taste.

> But I wish you well in your 'new' program.

Thanks, but it is not my program. I am just acting as an outside advisor to a group that is importing a pre-existing UK Tradition Scouting program.

> as a historical note the chapters you listed were not the methods of

> B-P's scouting program they were what B-P called the 4 great qualities

> of a scout.

Where can I find a reference to B-P calling them the "Four great qualities of a Scout"? It seems to me that the "great qualities of a Scout" are expressed better in Baden-Powell's ten Scout Laws.

> The BSA Methods are an explanation of how the elements of the program

> achieve the aims and mission of the program. The two are not comparable.

Sure they are comparable. Methods are the means that adults use to attain their aims. In Baden-Powell's version of Scouting, the Aim is citizenship, and this is done though games that concentrate on Character Development, Health and Physical Development, Self-Improvement, and Service for Others.

The BSA Methods may be more catchy, memorable, and even useful, but they are only one way of looking at Scouting.

> What exactly is your question?

Would you list "How to Train the Boy" as a "method" (for a total of five methods), or is it an overview or forward to the "four methods" that are used to train the boy?

Eagledad writes:

> I would be excited to have a discussion on methods, could somebody

> start the discussion over and ask the question differently?

Actually, I do have a "real world" question that might help put the methods of Scouting in a different light. I didn't spin it off to a new topic because I assume, from the nature of the discussion so far, that there will not be any takers :-/

I am involved in designing a small, highly-specialized international youth program that is similar to what you call "Scouting," but which is based on a game designed by Baden-Powell, not the BSA (or WOSM, for that matter). The general idea is to play the game as it was played by Baden-Powell, updating it ONLY for reasons of health, safety, environmental concerns, and advances in camping equipment. In other words, a 1940's program, but not historical reenactment.

Baden-Powell's advancement requirements are fairly straight forward, but I have hit a snag in working out Baden-Powell's "Aims & Methods" for adult training.

Under the topic "Methods of Scouting NOT Interdependent?" John-in-KC grouped a number of B-P's quotes under the BSA's current "Eight Methods" model. This is a useful way to look at Baden-Powell's writings, but the so-called "Eight Methods" are not universal to Scouting, except as a DESCRIPTIVE way of viewing non-BSA Scouting programs like Baden-Powell's.

B-P had only a single "Aim of Scouting," Citizenship. Although he talked about the "methods" of Scouting, he never used the term consistently. The best Baden-Powell "Methods of Scouting" model that I could find was the organizing structure of his book "Aids to Scoutmastership:"

1) Character Development: to practice the qualities of honor, self-reliance, observation, deduction, happiness, and enjoyment of life;

2) Health and Physical Development: to practice the qualities of self-discipline and energy through healthful habits and physical fitness;

3) Self-Improvement: to introduce hobbies, handicrafts, and skills that encourage self-discipline, thrift, resourcefulness, and ambition;

4) Service for Others: to develop the qualities of reverence and unselfishness in everyday life.

The question I have is regarding the first chapter of the book, "How to Train the Boy." I did not list it as one of B-P's "Methods" because it appears to be an overview to Scouting as a supplement to school: a game that concentrates on Character Development, Health & Physical Development, Self Improvement, and Service for Others.

However, some of you may look at the Methods of Scouting in a different way. "Aids to Scoutmastership" is available on the Internet, but it is a lot to wade through. One summary of the five chapters of "Aids to Scoutmastership" can be found in Baden-Powell's early pre-Wood Badge training model, especially the "Questions to be Answered by Candidates" at the end:

http://www.inquiry.net/traditional/b-p/scoutmastership/study_patrol.htm

At any rate, with apologies to Eagledad, I have asked the question differently :-)