Proud Eagle

You need to put together a committee or group of some form that includes people with a variety of types of expertise.

You will need some people with experience in running or leading Cub Scout programs. I would imagine there are people who have put together camporree programs in the past that you could ask to assist. You may also find some cub scout leaders in your lodge.

You will also need some people who know what types of resources the lodge has available. Your lodge should have people who are skilled in a variety of areas, and someone with a working knowledge of this needs to be involved.

However, if you don't have time for a full blown committee to plan the process, I do have some ideas on how to start. First think about basic Boy Scout skills that would be of interest to Cub Scouts. Your lodge will certainly have people who could run demonstrations, competitions, and such things based on simple Scout skills. Then think about what goes on at your lodges conclaves and fellowships. Consider if any of those activities would be good for Cubs. Cubs are after all interested in many of the same things that Boy Scouts are, but you just have to scale it back a bit in skill level, and include some creative aspects to keep them interested. For example, a hike in the woods can be done with Boy Scouts for no other reason than the fun of hiking. However, for Cub Scouts, you need to shorten the hike, and do something like create a scavenger hunt list to keep them interested as they go. The skill levels and attention spans of Cub Scout is a good bit lower than that of Boy Scouts.

I really am not an expert in Cub Scouts either, so I can't offer any specific examples. However, I do have quite a bit of experience planning OA related things.

Hopefully someone who is will come along and provide some thoughts.

Oh, one final thing, are you dealing with Cub Scout in general or just Webelos? The age appropriate activities list in the Guide to Safe Scouting indicates that camporees are only appropriate activities for Webelos as visitors, and not appropriate for other Cub Scouts. Only Boy Scouts and Venturers should be full participants. Obviously if your council includes Cub Scouts, brining this up is a losing battle. I know in my council cubs come and stay the entire weekend just like everyone else. Some of us have tried making an argument about the age appropriate activities, but the response from council winds up sounding something like that the guide to safe scouting only applies to units. Obviously if that were true, it would mean it is fine for a council to hold a camporee and invite Cubs, but not fine for the Packs to actually come to that camporee. Sometimes things like that make me feel ill.

It is really up to the lodge to determine this based on its calendar, program, and available resources. While one time of year may be better for your troop, it could cause problems for the lodge.

In my lodge we have in the past required that elections be completed by mid-April.

This year we are still shooting for the same thing, however we have changed our Ordeal schedule so that all Ordeals are after summer camp. This ensures that more of the candidates will be called out before their first opportunity to go to an Ordeal.

In the past, we elected people by mid-April. The first Ordeal was in late May, and the second in August. This meant that at summer camp, some of the candidates had already gone through the Ordeal. To correct this, call-out started being offered at district spring camporrees. Yet, not all districts had spring camporees, so that didin't work either.

To make certain every candidate knew they were a candidate, letters were mailed out to all candidates before the May Ordeal.

In any case, we are now trying to fix this situation as best as we can.

I think we may need to move our elections back a bit in the future, that way we can offer candidates a third opportunity in early spring.

In a troop or team, an eligible youth under the age of 21 who is elected by his peers becomes a candidate immediately. He could go through the Ordeal the next day.

Now, in practice, it isn't fair to set up a system wear the candidate looses an opportunity to go through the Ordeal because his troop held its election too early.

So, that would, in my mind, be a potential unusual circumstance and the Lodge Executive Committee could approve an extension. In fact, it could even make a blanket extension for all those elected early.

Now the long term fix for this is to change the way elections, ordeals, and call-out are scheduled during the annual calendar planning. There are 12 months in a year. That is plenty of time to conduct elections, hold call-outs, and still give a candidate more than one chance to go through the Ordeal.

However, keep in mind, that technically, a person is a candidate from the time the election is completed, not from the time of call-out. There is no requirement that a candidate be called out. Let me repeat that, there is no requirement that a candidate be called out.

Now, for adults, they are candidates from the time they are approved by the lodge's adult selection committee. The troop or team committee nominates adults to the lodge adult selection committee. That committee must then approve the nomination before the adult is a candidate.

So, to review, for youth they have one year from time of election, and for adults, they have one year from time of approval. There could be one Ordeal, or there could be 12 Ordeals during that year. It doesn't really matter. They still get one year to complete the Ordeal.(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

Well, I know this type of thing is hard, but it can be done.

We used to have this SM that was very good. He was the type that did lots of research and planning and thinking on his own. Yet, he managed to keep it boy run. How he did this is hard to describe, but it involved things like carefully making suggestions to just the right people, or telling the right story around a campfire, so that next time the troop was planning something, one of the boys would think, "Hey, I remember hearing about this great place to do this that and the other." Next thing you know, we are at that place doing this, that, and the other. The SM was also the type of guy that made sure the committee was on the same page as him as well. He really ran the entire show, but at the same time it was boy-led, and the committee actually functioned as intended. It is hard to explain. It worked great though.

Then we had an SM that was a bit more hands off in some ways. He didn't want to mess with administrative stuff, and often left the committee to run its own coarse even when that wasn't necessarily the direction he needed it to go in to support the program. Some how the training of leaders broke down also. Instead of fixing it, it became increasingly SM run. He burned out and ran out of time all at once. He is a great Scouter, and will be back someday. Hopefully he fits in better with that future role.

Then, after the second SM left, I was acting Scoutmaster (I am an Assistant Scoutmaster) for a time. I basically had to continue what had been planned before the SM left. However, I did confront some of the committee and parents about training, correct planning process, and the election of youth leaders. It was just as well that I wasn't taking over as SM because I think we were on coarse to clash.

Now, we have a new SM (he had been the advancement coordinator). He doesn't really have much experience leading a troop, but he is very outdoor oriented and has been a very involved parent and Committee Member. He just needs to learn the BSA system a bit more. I think he is open to a more "by the book" approach. I have been trying to guide him in that direction and it seems to be working. It will take time, but it looks like it will work. He is also lucky in that I got the ball rolling on change and was the one that delivered the wake up call to everyone, so he can both make changes and stay on good terms with everyone.

This all works out very nicely for me, I get to help steer the troop in the right direction, but I don't have to take it on myself. I also get to see if this grand experiment of conversion actually works. Really, my great strength is in having put a great deal of time into learning the BSA program, reading books and manuals, and then being able to articulate the concept. However, I am not quite ready (littel experience dealing with the committee and parents, not really considered a peer by some of the adults) to take on the job of dealing with making it all work in a troop that is need of serious change. On the other hand, we had a very mature, capable adult who needs some help figuring out the BSA program. Put the two of us together, and it should work out nicely. Either that or it will lead to a disaster. One or the other.

Good luck to you.

I think you can make it work, but you will likely have some pains along the way.

Huh.

I can't say that I have ever heard of your chapter, or even your lodge. I certainly don't know any Patrick Boyd.

What I do recognize is the problem you are describing.

It is a relatively common problem than can be caused by a great many different things. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about your situation to make a good guess, and the complete list is nearly infinite (and more than I know). I would be willing to bounce some ideas back in forth. However, for that to be productive I would need more information.

Examples of what I would to know are:

Size (members and general idea of physical size) of the chapter and lodge.

What does the chapter do?

What does the lodge do?

What goes on at chapter meetings?

When did this lack of interest become apparent?

What changed around or slightly before that time in the chapter?

What changed in the council/district/lodge/council/community near or slightly before this time?

I was a Chapter Chief myself once.

That was the first big step up in the OA world for me. The next thing I knew I was Lodge Chief. Now, not but a few years after that, I am one of the youngest Lodge Advisers in the country.

In any case, chapters are a constant source of both wonderful positive results and painful failure around here. I was working on creating a "quality chapter" system a couple of hours ago. I think if chapters had a better defined role, and really knew what they needed to do, they would be more likely to succeed. So, with any luck, the youth on the Lodge Executive Committee will be implementing a "quality chapter" system within the lodge by the end of the day.

Anyhow, get me some additional information, and I will give the issue some thought. Perhaps we can think of some new ideas, or save each other from reinventing the wheel.

Sorry to say, but I don't know of anyone.

Though there are plenty of us from the great Southern Region.

SR-6N myself.

Greetings to you in any case.

Perhaps I was less than clear.

I know the terms for the actual positions for adults in a Venturing Crew.

What I am looking for is the generic, catch all sort of term like "Scouter" that applies to all adults in the Venturing program.

If you are ever in a mixed group of youth and adults in the Boy Scout (or even Cub Scout) program you could use a general greeting like, "hello Scouts and Scouters".

What I am looking for is the Venturing equivalent, the "Hello Venturers and ...." Advisers doesn't really work, because that doesn't cover all adults. The term Scouter covers Scoutmasters, Assistant Scoutmasters, and Committee Members. The term Advisers would cover Advisers and Associate Advisers, but it would not cover Committee Members.

Thank you oh silvery haired Eagle of advanced age.

I should note my brief stint as a Venturer would have qualifid as that.

Though I should be quick to point out that was not a product of the Crew or the Venturing program.

In fact, that Crew was the first unit in the BSA I have ever found that doesn't even attempt to deliver the promise (what that constitutes in Venturing, I have no idea, they didn't even bother to make the promise) to its members.

In fact the entire purpose of the Crew was this and this alone. To provide a mechanism for making certain its members who were engaged in serving other units were provided with BSA insurance coverage and the right to wear the uniform.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, that Crew was the summer camp staff Crew I have mentioned before.

Serving on staff was lots of fun. Being part of a paper Venturing Crew and wearing a different uniform didn't really add to the experience.

But, I did have a great time in my two months of Venturing. (So, I can honestly say I have been part of all 3 of the major programs of the BSA, and had fun while a member of all of those parts. Yay.)

Another question, why is a Venturing Crew a Venturing Crew? Let me explain that question bit.

A Cub Scout Pack is a Pack made up of Cub Scouts.

A Boy Scout Troop is a Troop made up of Boy Scouts.

A Varsity Scout Team is a Team made up of Varsity Scouts.

A Venturing Crew is a Crew made up of Venturings. HOLD IT. That isn't right. There is no such thing as a "Venturing". There are Venturers. So why is it not a Venturer Crew? or a Venture Crew? (OK, Venture Crew sounds way too much like Venture Patrol, so I guess that was out already.)

Who exactly came up with the naming system for Venturing? It seems like whoever they were they must have been having an off day when they undertook the project, because it sure came up with some funny results. (For proof of that, try explaining the correct terms for, and the program differences between, a Venture Patrol, Varsity Scout Team, and Venturing Crew to someone who is more or less clueless about it. That exercise should prove my point.)

We know that youth in a Pack are Cub Scouts.

We all now an adult in a Cub Scout Pack is a Scouter, or a Cub Scouter. (Though Cubber was apparently the original form.)

We know that youth in Troops are Scouts.

We know that adults in a Boy Scout Troop, or serving the BSA in a district, council, region, or national capacity is a Scouter.

We know that youth in Venturing are Venturers.

So, what is an adult leader in a Venturing Crew? Are they Venturerers? That can't be right. So, are they simply another form of Scouter? That doesn't make since, because Venturing seems to all it can to identify itself as Venturing, not Scouting. After all, make the mistake of calling a Venturer a Scout, or suggest they are doing Scouting, and you will often be quickly corrected that they are a Venturer and do Venturing.

So, what is the correct term for an adult in a Venturing Crew?

If I were the SM in your troop, I would make certain everyone going on the trip who is over 18 and not immediate family of one of the Scouts, be registered in BSA.

There are fine ways to bring along parents and families. There are reasons to bring along potential new recruits.

But what reason is there to bring along some extra adults who are no longer part of BSA?

Now, if they are willing to serve as actual leaders with the group, and are willing to fill out an application and pay the membership fee, and are willing to at least take some on-line training, I would probably be willing to let them pay their own ways and come along.

Another option would be, these two friends of your could simply camp in the same park you will be, at the same time. They could then go visit Jambo on the same day(s) your troop does and meet up with you.

However, I really must ask the question, why are you going on this trip? Are you planning on providing leadership to the troop and its youth, or are you simply going for your own enjoyment?

There is nothing wrong, per se, about going for the fun of it, but you are an adult now and that carries certain responsibilities. I had a bit of a hard time adjusting the idea of being an adult for the first year or so, and often thought I was going as a leader, when in truth I was still more of an overgrown Scout. Make sure you know what you are getting yourself into here.

All of that aside, your SM is the person to talk to. Don't go to him asking how these guys can come along, go to him and ask if it would be possible for a pair of Eagle Scouts who are not affiliated with the troop to be part of the group going to visit the Jamboree. Also, make certain your friends understand they are adults now, and that if they go, they will be going as adult leaders (even if they are not registered, they will still have responsibilities) and as guests (someone else is in charge).

I can understand your enthusiasm, and that of your friends. After all, how often do you get to go to Jambo (even if just as a visitor) with two good friends? That being said, consider other alternatives if the three of you can not go with the troop. (Obviously if you have made a commitment to providing adult leadership and the troop is counting on you, then you should stick with the troop.) There is no reason 3 Eagle Scouts couldn't plan an independent visit to Jambo.

First question, in what position do you serve the unit?

2. What kind of meeting was this? Troop committee? Parents? Patrol Leaders Council? Annual Planning Conference? adult leader's meeting?

3. Who chose this high adventure activity and who is responsible for choosing the major programs to take place during it?

If you can answer those question, I could probably give you some useful thoughts.

I don't even really know what that is, but I certainly hope it has died.

To find the latest policies on such things always check the Order of the Arrow Guide for Officers and Advisers and the Guide to Inductions.

In this case, what you will find is that newly elected candidates have one year to complete the Ordeal.

The Executive Committee of each lodge has the power to grant an extension to that one year period. Should you feel the situation in this case warrants special treatment, you could take the matter up with the Lodge Executive Committee. If you are not currently involved in the business of the lodge, you should start by contacting the Lodge Adviser and Lodge Chief to discuss this issue.

Now, in my experience, there are many candidates who do not complete the Ordeal for a great variety of reasons. Some of them run into scheduling conflicts. Some decide they are not interested. On rare occasions a genuine emergency gets in the way.

However, in the 5 years or so I have been involved in the lodge, I don't know of a single case where the Lodge Executive Committee has approved an extension. In fact, I can't even think of a case where someone asked for it. Usually people wait until the next election and the candidates will probably (though there is some risk to this) be re-elected.

I thank the two of you for your replies. If you think of anything else, don't hesitate to post it.

Come on, there are surely some more of you with some ideas about this.

Who knows, something you suggest could even wind up making camp better for a unit and its Scouts.(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

As previously mentioned, I am planning on serving on summer camp staff again this year.

Most likely I will be the/a Camp Commissioner this summer. The primary reasons I will be doing it include: good personal and working relationship with the camp director, considerable Scouting experience, having the time to both go to Camp School and work on staff, and other things.

However, I don't really know much about Commissioners in general or Camp Commissioners in particular. I do know the basic job descriptions for both, but I don't really know what they should be doing in a hands on sense.

Further, since I will be sent off to Camp School and trained, that means I will be expected to run the Commissioner corps at camp. The hope is to have several people working in the commissioner corps every week.

So, I will start by asking everyone what their thoughts on Camp Commissioners are. Primarily this first part is addressed to people who have been unit leaders at camp or otherwise been in positions to work with or observe Camp Commissioners.

What do unit leaders need from Camp Commissioners?

What do you want the Camp Commissioner to do for you?

What is the most effective thing you have seen a Commissioner do?

What services should the commissioner corps offer you at camp?

What was the least effective thing you have seen a Commissioner do?

In what ways can the Camp Commissioner do to much? Or, put another way, when should the commissioner leave the unit and leaders alone?

Any other thoughts from the unit and unit leaders perspective on how to make the commissioner corps at camp work and on how the Camp Commissioner can enhance the camp program would be appreciated.

The second area of concern I address to those with experience as Camp Commissioners, in other Commissioner positions, and in senior staff positions at camp (camp director, ranger, program directer).

What have you found to be the best number of commissioners per unit?

Who are the best prospective recruits to be Camp Commissioners?

What are some good strategies for recruiting Camp Commissioners?

How should commissioner services be organized at camp?

What programs or services should the commissioners offer?

What is a good idea for camp commissioners not usually covered in training?

What is something for camp commissioners to avoid not usually covered in training?

Any other thoughts you could offer would be great. I know camp school will offer a great deal of information, the problem is I won't be going to camp school until the shortly before camp starts, so I really won't have much time to do much thinking or planning after returning. Therefore, I would like to get a bit of a head start. (I will try and get my hands on some materials and manuals ahead of time, but some suggestions on what would be most useful would help. Also, if any of the Unit Commissioner or other Commissioner training and materials would be helpful, I would appreciate a heads up on that.)

I am planning on returning to work on camp staff again this year.

As with just about every other Scouting thing I do, if there is something related to OA going on, I am going to have a hand in it.

This year that will certainly be true, since I am the Lodge Adviser.

I am wondering if anyone has any new ideas for how to make the OA an affective and integral part of the camp program.

We have in the past had a weekly meeting at camp, but this has mostly been a business meeting to cover things related to the OA call out later in the week. I would like to make this into something more like a fellowship. Suggestions on that would be appreciated.

We also have a call out ceremony on parents night after the camp fire. We have a pretty good ceremony, but suggestions are always welcome.

What else have you seen OA do at camp that seemed to be a good idea?

Have you ever seen the OA get involved in promoting service and conservation projects while at camp? How was it done and how well did it work?

Have you seen OA become involved in other parts of the camp program? If so what ways seemed to work well?

Your thoughts would be welcome and appreciated. I know we have many good ideas around here, but we certainly don't have a monopoly on good ideas. There is no sense reinventing the wheel if someone else has thought of and perfected something.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Oscar de Larenta credited with playing a part in giving us our current uniform?

Thought I would mention he designed the First Lady's gown for the inaugural ball this year.

Better not tell the boys about this or it will make getting them in uniform even harder.

There are special heaters made for use indoors without needing to install a chimney or outside vent.

Some of these are even designed for home use.

There are also some small catalytic heaters that are portable that seem to be safe for use indoors.

The key thing is you need to place the thing in a spot such that it won't burn the place down if it gets knocked over. You also need to have at least a bit of ventilation, just in case the thing doesn't work as advertised. If this cabin or yours isn't very well sealed, then it would probably be OK. If on the other hand it is sealed up pretty well, then you should probably crack a window or something.

However, there really isn't any fuel that is truly safe to burn in an open container in a closed room. They all use o2 and produce co2 and co. There is also the previously mentioned risk of fire.

If you are going to do this despite the safety issues some of us have mentioned, then go look for the type of alcohol made for those small stoves. That stuff is often used on galley stoves in sailboats and such places.

Again, make certain you use a product designed for this application, make certain to consider the fire risks, and think about your ventilation needs. Keeping warm isn't very useful if you burn alive or die from lack of oxygen.

My first SM who did the job for over 25 years. He was the best SM I have ever known. He was both an expert trained leader, and a natural for the program. He worked on district and council programs, including serving as a WB coarse director.

My last SM as a youth, who is college teacher, and single father, and yet still found time for Scouting for a number of years.

Both recognized they could no longer honor obligations to family and Scouting, and so made the hard choice and chose the greater path of serving the needs of family. Both are still willing to help out as able, and either one could some day return to a more active role if other obligations permit.

I will always consider that first SM of mine to be The Scoutmaster.

There was also an SPL in the troop that I think of in a similar way.

There are legitimate reasons for using multiple names on a forum such as this.

Lets pretend a unit leader gets involved in this forum. He reveals information that could identify him, his unit, his council, his fellow leaders, etc. Then some of the other leaders from his unit get involved in this forum as well.

Now, that first leader wants to post his opinion in the Issues and Politics section, but he feels it could cause problems in his home unit. Therefore, he could either not post his thoughts, or he could create a second anonymous name to use to post items in that section.

I have often felt torn between the advantages of being forward and providing identifying information, and being reserved and remaining anonymous.

Of late, I have chosen to be out in the open about who I am, to the point that anyone that wanted to do so could use the information I have posted to find my real name on at least one official website.

Because of this, I have started being a bit more careful about what I say. I want to set the best possible example to any locals who are reading this, and I want to avoid creating any possible conflict. I know I have posted a few things in the past that were somewhat less than fully thought out, and I have posted other things that indicated my personal opinions about various topics of controversy.

In a way, I now have to think more about how my posts would reflect on the troop, council, and lodge than they do on me personally. That doesn't mean I won't be critical or controversial, but rather that I will try to be a bit more restrained.

N.B. Nothing I post here constitutes official policy, opinion, or should be taken as authoritative in any way. My posts are mine and mine alone and should be considered a reflection upon me. I represent no one but myself here.

What the bloody 'ell does "Kwell" mean?

To be quite honest, we can not please everyone.

If we try to appease the price group, we will end up with an even cheeper uniform than we have now... and it will be made by sweat shop labor in some third world country, probably be kids that would be better served by being in Scouting than making BSA uniforms.

If we appease the dress looks group, we will end up with something that will look very sharp but will be too dressy to even engage in simple games at troop meetings. It will also be even more expensive.

If we want to have a quality, versatile out doors uniform, we can probably do that for a similar price to what we have now. Unfortunately, it will either be a general uniform that is about is comfortable as BDUs, or a multi-part specialised interchangeable system that contains 30 different pieces each specialised for some particular use. This uniform will be great for hiking, packing, camping, etc, but even it won't be suitable to the full range of activities, and it will probably look somewhat less than dignified for formal settings. Just imagine the Eagle COH... "no, don't pin that on, it will ruin the breathable, quick dry, water proof membrane of his expedition jacket" or what have you.

This isn't to say we can't do better, but we all sometimes get carried away and think we have some miracle answer, when in truth we just have a solution to fix our pet peeves while making the rest of the problems worse.

I will suggest one idea that could be of use. When a new Scout is recruited, they should be able to buy their first complete uniform at a discount. This should only apply once per program, and only to youth. It should also only apply if the complete uniform is purchased. This would make it easier to buy the entire thing, and it would encourage people to actually have the complete uniform, not just a shirt to wear with their faded baggy blue jeans.(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

Venture Patrols are appropriate in many but not all cases involving older Scouts.

If the older Scouts have an interest in doing more high adventure, more sports, and are willing to take the initiative to plan extra patrol level activities, then they are good prospects for a Venture Patrol.

If they simply want to get away from the younger Scouts, want to shirk leadership roles, or want to have an all high adventure type program at the troop level, then they are not candidates for a Venture Patrol (at least not until their mindset is changed). In fact, in cases like that, I would suggest it could be time for them to move on to a Varsity Scout Team or Venturing Crew. That would provide them the separate, focused program they are looking for without draining your troop, since those are separate, independent units with their own leaders.

The optimal Venture Patrol should be older boys, interested in remaining active in the Troop, willing to at the least lead by example, willing to work with the younger Scouts at least part of the time, but yet desiring to take on some more challenging and exciting activities from time to time. They should be willing to provide a greater portion of the leadership and initiative for these activities than is expected of younger Scouts.

Also, keep in mind, that for some, the Scouting journey is not a life long thing. For some, it comes to an end while still a youth. Even for those that do continue on the Scouting trail, it sometimes includes changing direction and moving out of the Troop and into another unit such as a Crew or Ship. As unit leaders we should want what is best for the unit, but we should always make certain that the best interest of the Scouts is kept in focus. Sometimes, that may mean sending someone on down the road with our best wishes for the future. (It is sort of the like the Army idea of "Mission First, People Always".)

In any case, if you do use a Venturing Patrol, it should be understood that they are just another patrol in the Troop. They are not an independent group (though they may have some separate activities), they are part of the troop. They should be expected to provide leadership, attend meetings, be helpful to younger Scouts, participate in fundraisers, wear the uniform, and be active participants in just the same way everyone else in the troop is. Perhaps even a higher standard should be expected since these are the older, more experienced, more mature Scouts.

BSA suggests that the optimal troop meeting will contain at least three different programs (or subdivisions of the same program) one for new Scouts, one for experienced Scouts, and one for older Venture Scouts. The idea is this provides for having both an integrated program and common activity, and yet being able to cater to the different needs of each group. I like this idea, though I have yet to ever see it work as written. (Mostly because I have never been involved in a troop that had all three patrol types at the same time.)

The meeting should take place as a troop, but their should be time set aside for each patrol to get together on their own for patrol business, and there should also be time for skills instruction splitting the troop into approximately 3 groups based on skill level. In this regard the Venture Patrol should be spending part of the meeting off on its own. In a troop with a single Venture Patrol, it will probably spend both the patrol meeting and skill instruction time on its own. However, it should be with the rest of the troop for the other parts of the meeting. (Individual older Scouts from the Venturing Patrol could also be involved with the new scout and experienced scout portions of the meeting as instructors, or helping lead the troop by carrying out various troop positions of responsibility.)

Final, closing thought.

The patrol is the natural, fundamental unit of Scouting. Without the patrol, there is no Troop, therefore it is the fundamental, foundation unit upon which everything else, from troop to council is built. It is a natural unit, because it is an organized version of the groups boys will form on their own. It probably contains more structure than a normal group, but it is essentially an outgrowth of what comes naturally for boys. While mixing with those of other ages is natural to some extent, there are also divisions that exist. You don't often see high school seniors choosing to hang out with 6th graders on their own. The BSA realizes this and seeks to provide an outlet for this through the use of three patrol types. (I would even suggest that the natural pattern of socialization changed and that in turn drove the change from mixed age patrols to distinct types of patrols.)

(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

anarchist, is it possible that these out of council camps you are visiting are actually better camps?

It seems to me that if a camp is going to great lengths to provide a better experience for out of council people they are shortchanging the in council troops and ultimately undermining the camps long term outlook.

In my experience, there a good programs, facilities, and staffs, and there are bad programs, facilities and staffs. Those that are good work well for both in and out of council. Then there are bad ones that don't work well for anyone.

Now, in my council, it is pretty well established that some troops will almost always come to the council's camp, while there are other troops that you could offer them the world and they would still go out of council. On the other hand, the troops from other councils that frequently go to out of council camps are a potentially huge source of new customers for our council's camp.

So, there are some extra attempts made to get troops to come back that don't usually come to our camp. The troops that are coming back year after year we already have their loyalty. The troops that never go in-council are utterly hopeless. The units that alternate between in and out of council have the potential to become mostly in council campers. The out of council units that always look out of council and are visiting us are an opportunity to gain new loyal customers from outside our normal base of support.

However, this attempt to attract new customers, and keep the new ones, doesn't extend all the way through the system. There is no special training on "how to make out of council troops want to come back" for the new staff members.

Now, in my experience, there are times being out of council can hurt. Not knowing all of the stuff that in council troops do from experience. Missing all the pre-camp meetings. Those things can hurt, particularly at camps that don't usually host out of council units. My troop had some problems visiting a small camp a couple years ago that was only hosting 3 out of council troops that summer. The staff were friendly and tried to make us feel welcome, but after the, "hi, welcome to camp, glad you could join us" there was an inevitable, "how in the world did your troop ever end up coming to camp here?".

So, in conclusion, summer camp is a business. However, it is a business thats primary purpose isn't to make money, but rather to serve the Scouts, who happen to be its customers. It is also a business that operates in a somewhat unusual marketing environment. After all, does the experience of the customer really outweigh the opinions of the adult leaders and the long running traditions of the troop? In many cases it does not, and so service to the true customers (the Scouts) is placed behind service to those influencing the customers (leaders and parents).(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

I see no one hear has ever dealt with the WHITE CARDS.

They are used by Greater St. Louis Area Council, I think.

On those merit badge applications, they actually require:

SM approval to start badge

couselor signature at start of badge

counselor signature on completion of badge

SM signature on completion of badge

and to top it all off...

The signature of the council's Scout Executive.