Proud Eagle

I used to think traveling in uniform was a bad idea. I thought it was inconveniant and uncomfortable and there was no benefit to it. I have since changed my mind. When practical, the uniform should be worn while traveling. There may be times it is better to wear the activities uniform instead of the field uniform, but normally wearing some type of the uniform is farely practical. If you are going to be seen in public during a Scouting event it is a good idea to be in uniform. It shows what type of group you are. It helps encourage the best behaviour of the Scouts. It can lead to many interesting experiences, such as running into a group of old guys at a McDonalds that all earned their Eagles together decades ago. I personally travel in uniform when it is up to me. It saves time after arriving at many events. I am also not so worried about getting the uniforms dirty as I once was. I realised this is Scouting, a bit of dirt comes with the territory. I don't wear the uniform to service projects, or at every event, but as long as it is practical I do. Here is a suggestion for long road trips: Travel in the activities uniform and switch to the field uniform for such things as stopping for dinner. Sure, the shirts may get a bit wrinkled, but so what.

I know in my home council the OA Lodge Chief was once a member of the Executive Board. Unfortunately they stopped inviting the Lodge Chief to be a member a few years before I became chief, after a showdown between the Scout executive and the then Section Vice Chief. I will spare everyone the details, but as far as I know that put an end to youth members of my council's board.

Let me provide something to use as a comparison. I think Christianity, as a whole, is more or less a movement. Yet within that movement there are programs, bureaucracies, leaders, followers, organizers, planners, and other such things. The Roman Catholic Church is certainly a part of the Christian movement, though many would argue that it is more of an organization than a movement in and of itself. On the other hand, even the modern non-denominational Christian churches have pastors and boards of directors and others that have leadership or control. I think a movement can remain a movement even when it contains organization, structured programs, and formal positions of leadership. I think Scouting can be said to be an organized movement. Certainly there are no longer very many boys scrambling to buy a copy of Scouting for Boys and starting up troops and patrols all on their own. However, that doesn't mean the movement is dead. Rather the movement has changed. It has a new form. Maybe the BSA has become to Scouting what the Roman Catholic Church is to Christianity. I would argue that isn't such a bad thing. The Church has after all survived for most of 2000 years. If a bit of structure is what it takes to keep Scouting going for another nineteen centuries, I think I can live with that.

I don't really know for certain when the election procedure was changed. The only copy of the Guide for Officers and Advisers I have on hand at the moment is the 2002 version. I believe that the policy has been in effect since at least 1999. If I were you I would encourage the advisers, officers, and chairmen involved to read the Guide for Officers and Advisers. I would point out the following sections in particular: The last sentence of the first paragraph on page 20. The entire section titled "Unit Election Procedures" on page 22 and 23, paying special attention to the fifth section, which is found at the top of the first column on page 23. It sounds like your chapter adviser is seriously off the reservation, so to speak. It may be useful to contact the Chapter Chief, or the Unit Elections Chairman, to find out if the procedure being used is the correct one, or the chapter advisor's procedure. I would certainly contact the Lodge Adviser as soon as possible and discuss the issue. Having a Chapter Adviser that is incorrect about such an important procedure is something that should be brought to the attention of the Lodge Adviser. If that is does not produce results, try contacting the Lodge Staff Adviser. Finally, if all else fails, the council Scout executive, acting as the Supreme Chief of the Fire, has the authority to straiten the mess out if no one else will. Also, if you know any youth that are officers they may be able to pursue the matter independently, though that could put them in an awkward position. I know if something like this had come up while I was Lodge Chief it certainly would have gotten a response from me. I certainly hope this gets worked out. Having even a single chapter carrying out elections in such a blatantly incorrect way is not a good thing for the Order.

An Arrowman's first responsibility is to his unit. That should be the point of his scouting focus. He should be promoting camping, encouraging good camping skills, and preserving local camping traditions. He should be actively involved in unit level service work. He should be seeking ways to be of service to his fellow scouts and the community. If these are the only things he has time for, he can be a perfectly good Arrowman doing just that. Now you mentioned he hasn't gotten anything from the chapter or lodge. That is a very bad sign. Most lodge's put out at least a quarterly newsletter to all members, and some chapters also produce regular newsletters. Most likely your son's contact information did not get to the right person at the Lodge, or it was misplaced. That means you won't hear from them until they hear from you, so to speak. So the first step is to establish contact with the Lodge. You can find out who to contact by asking your Troop OA Representative, your unit leader, an known active Arrowman, or by contacting the council service center if no one locally knows who to contact. Probably the best point of contact would be the Lodge Chief or Lodge Adviser, since they are familiar with the organization of the local Lodge, and know what events are happening next. You may want to turn the project over to your son once you get the ball roiling. After all, a 15 year old First Class (or above) Scout should be able to handle a few phone calls. I would find out three things; 1- how do I start getting the Lodge/chapter newsletter? 2- when is the next Lodge event? 3- when is the next chapter meeting? Once that information is in hand, I think the next steps are obvious. Sign up for the newsletter, go to the chapter meeting, and go to the event. After a line of communication has been opened with the Lodge, information should begin to flow about chapter, lodge, and other events. (Though there will probably be the occasional lapse in communication.) What is done with this information is up to your son. He can either become involved in the OA, or not. I would certainly encourage him to do so. The OA, like most everything else, will give back based on what you put in. No one ever made new friends, had an awesome time at conclave, got the satisfaction of helping candidates complete their Ordeal, or gained a deeper understanding of the Order while serving on a ceremony team, until they showed up. If I hadn't ever gone to that first chapter meeting with a group of people I didn't really know, I don't know if I ever would have become involved the way I did. If the SM of another troop in my town didn't happen to be a gung-ho OA member, I may not have had anyone reach out to me as a new Arrowman. When I was asked the month after my Ordeal if I wanted to go to the Chapter meeting (had to miss a Troop meeting for it, I think) I made what was a truly life changing decision. I said yes. I went, I met new people, I got lost in some discussion of chapter business, but I had a good time. Then I went back the next time, and the time after that, and then the next lodge event. Next thing I was reserving a spot for something called NOAC and having a blast at Lodge fellowship. Then there was that first Lodge winter banquet at the Ponderosa. And then there was... Basically OA saved me as a Scout. I was getting board with the troop and what it had to offer. I was at a point where I could have easily turned away from Scouting and toward many of the other "opportunities" of life. Instead I became heavily involved in OA. I stayed involved in Scouting. I did just about everything I could. My Scouting record now includes a trip to the Jamboree, Philmont, 2 NOACs, several Section Conclaves, more Lodge events than I can count, the greatest opportunities for developing leadership skills I have ever had, the greatest leadership challenges I have faced, many hours of service work, and other things too numerous to mention. I have met many great people and made good friends. My uniform is now occasionally graced by a bit of red, white, and blue ribbon with a silver bird hanging from it, and at other times a white sash with arrow, bars, and a triangle in red thread. If it hadn't been for OA, I don't know that any of that would have happened. If I hadn't decided to go to some meeting I knew nothing about, with some people I didn't know, to a place I had never been before, I don't know if any of that would have happened. So the answers are: promote Scout camping work to serve others be the best Scout and unit member possible contact the local lodge get the newsletter go to chapter meetings (you may be able to find some new friends to ride with) volunteer to help out with a committee (every Arrowman should be a member of at least one committee, it says so right in the handbook in fact) go to lodge events and have fun and help out become the Troop's OA Representative Beyond that who knows what comes next. Maybe ceremony teams, maybe deciding not to go back, or maybe a path that leads toward becoming National Chief. I certainly can't say where the path will lead. I can say, without any doubt, it won't lead you anywhere if you never take the fist step. Sorry if this went a bit long and wandered a bit. I just had to try to get the message across that OA offers as much or as little as you want. It isn't everything to all people, but it is something to many people. Oh, and sorry about the change in tone and subject. I think I switched from telling you what your son should do to addressing your son directly somewhere in there, don't know quite why.(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

My troop uses the official dark green neckerchief with embroidered logo and edges in red. To my knowledge every troop in my home town uses that same neckerchief. I don't really know why that developed that way, but it did. New Scouts are usually presented a neckerchief during the bridge crossing ceremony, or their first troop meeting. At one time every youth and adult was expected to wear the neckerchief at every meeting. Now it is only loosely encouraged. Also, it is common to see other neck wear in use. This is especially true of the adult leaders. Many choose to wear bolo ties, or special neckerchiefs. Occasionally a youth member will also wear a bolo or other neckerchief. Most people wear the neckerchief under the collar. I personally despise that method of wear and instead turn the collar under and wear the neckerchief over it. The troop has never really set a policy on this matter, to my knowledge.

I have never heard of a conclave that wasn't fun. When I was lodge chief the conclave we went to was cold, wet, and windy all day. During the night there was a tornadic thunderstorm. Even despite the misreable conditions it was still a fun activity. The National Order of the Arrow Conference is also a great activity. I went to both the 2000 NOAC at UT and the 2002 NOAC at IU. Both were great. I will be going to the 2004 NOAC in Iowa. If it were in Hawaii very few people would be able to go. I certainly wouldn't be able to go. The primary reason most youth (and some adults) do not attend NOAC is the cost. Certainly it would be cheaper for those on the islands, but it would be more expensive for the other 99% of us.

I think I can probably give you the correct answer here. I was once my chapter's unit elections chairman, and then later the same for the lodge. I also went on to work my way up to Lodge Chief. So I know a little about this. I have also attended a bit of training on the subject at the National Order of the Arrow Conference. There is no "unit elections guide" produced nationally. There could be a lodge version of such a thing. However, there are two documents produced by the National Order of the Arrow Committee that do relate to unit elections, those being the Order of the Arrow Guide for Officers and Advisers, and the Guide to Inductions. I must ask you to clarify one statement. "I was told the Chapt. Adv. said that a max. of 50% of the ELEGIBLE Scouts can be sent to ordeal - so if all are elected, we'd have to decide which 2 (50% of the 4) get to go this time around." - Gags Was he saying that only 50% may attend a specific Ordeal? or that only 50% may attend the Ordeal, period? Also, are there multiple opportunities available to attend the Ordeal? What I am trying to determine is if this rule actually limits the number per unit inducted each year, or if it limits the number attending a specific event. I think it would be best to first set out the qualifications for election, and the procedures for elections, before getting into this too deeply. I want to make certain there is no misunderstanding about this. This is not the complete text of the requirements, nor the complete election procedure. Do not attempt to hold an election based only on this information. The following is taken taken, directly or indirectly, from the Order of the Arrow Guide for Officers and Advisers, 2002 edition, #34997B : "Unit leader approval. To be eligible for election a Boy Scout or Varsity Scout must be registered with the Boy Scouts of America and have the approval of his unit leader prior to the election. The unit leader must certify Scout spirit (i.e. his adherence to Scout Oath & Law, and active participation in unit activities). The unit leader must also certify that the nominee meets all specified requirements at the time of this annual election." Youth membership qualifications. * "Be a registered member of the Boy Scouts of America." * "Hold the First Class rank of the Boy Scouts of America, as a minimum." * "After registration with a troop or team, have experienced 15 days and nights of Boy Scout camping during the two-year period prior to the election. The 15 days and nights must include one, but no more than one, long-term camp consisting of six consecutive days and five nights of resident camping, approved and under the auspices and standards of the Boy Scouts of America. The balance of the camping must be overnight, weekend, or other short-term camps." "Election of any person under 21 years of age as a candidate for membership shall be based on fulfillment of the youth membership requirements." Guide for Officers and Advisers, page 20, Membership Requirements "In Boy Scout troops and Varsity Scout teams, every registered active member of the unit under age 21 at the time of election is eligible to vote." Guide for Officer and Advisers, page 21, Election Procedures Unit Elections Procedures. 1. The lodge determines the time of year for election and informs the unit leaders in advance by mail. 2. Hold the election at the time and place determined by the unit leader, and have Boy Scouts and Varsity Scouts assembled with their unit leader ready to elect candidates. The Order should be represented by a two- or three-member team from the lodge or chapter elections committee. 3. Before the election, the OA team must secure from the unit leader verification that at least 50 percent of the registered active unit membership is present. If at least 50% is not present, an election cannot be held. If the unit leader is an Arrowman, he may explain to the group the purpose of the Order of the Arrow and the basis upon which candidates should be selected, and describe the method of election. If the unit leader is not a member of the Order, a member of the OA team should make this presentation with the unit leader's consent, demonstrating that election leadership is a cooperative effort of the unit leader and the OA team. 4. The unit leader provides a list of all registered active members of the unit who meet all eligibility requirements, including attitude and participation. 5. The election team leader explains the following to the unit leader: * This is the current method of election. * All eligible youths who receive votes from at least 50 percent of those who turn in ballots are elected. If no one is elected a second vote may be held immediately, and the result of this vote will be final. 6. A voter may list on his ballot any combination of names, including all eligible candidates who he believes are worth to become members of the Order of the Arrow. There is additional information on the basis for election, as well as additional procedural matters, and some information purely for the elections team. Those sections do not seem pertinent to the discussion at hand. Now that we all have a better understanding of the elections process (I hope) let me share the only reference out of the combined 124 pages of these guides that directly limits the number of participants in an activity: "it is the policy of the national Order of the Arrow committee that not more than 50 candidates participate in a single ceremony." Guide to Inductions, page 37, Planning the Ordeal 2002 printing This is the one and only reference that I have found in any current publications of the Order that would require that a lodge must limit participation. However, this is not a limit on the number attending the Ordeal. It is possible to keep the number per ceremony bellow 50 and yet have more than 50 candidates at an event. However, it may be that the Ordeal planning team has decided to only hold one ceremony per Ordeal. It is also possible there are other issues involved that I am unaware of (such as number of available Arrowmen to assist in the Ordeal, facilities limitations, or other local conditions). I would argue that the 50% per unit rule is not in the best interests of the Order. It does not, from my point of view, provide for an affective means of limiting the total number per ceremony, nor does it directly support the purposes of the Order or the induction principles. I would suggest that if it is necessary to limit the number attending for some reason, that the best mechanism to use would be to place a limit on the number who may attend. Then have a first come first served based registration system (obviously advance registration would be needed to provide notice to the candidates who are unable to attend that event). It is vital that all candidates have the opportunity to attend the Ordeal within one year of election. It is the duty of the lodge and chapter to provide this opportunity. (Note; this does not mean that an Ordeal convenient to each candidate's personal schedule must be offered.) If the 50% per unit rule you quoted is being used to in any way limit the number of youth per unit who are allowed to complete the Ordeal, then it is contradicting the policy of the Order. "No lodge rule, policy, or procedure may deviate from or change in any manner a requirement in the current printing of any of the Order's literature." Guide for Officers and Advisers, page 20, Lodge Rules If you, or anyone else, has any questions or comments about this, or any other OA related issue, I will be happy to assist as best I can, taking into account the nature of this forum and my limited knowledge of the local situation.

The answer to the question is that anyone can sign off on anything. However, only those authorized to do so may do so. The SM can sign off anything he wants, however, he may not do so if he want it to officially be valid. In most cases if the SM signs off on something no one will ever check to see if he was supposed to. There are, after all, many areas where the idea of a registered merit badge counselor is a foreign concept, yet Eagles are still produced. I can tell you for a fact that I have signed off on merit badge requirements, those badges were accepted by the troop and council, the Scouts learned what they were supposed to, the badges were taught at troop meetings, I have never registered as a merit badge counselor, and I have never been through any training to become a merit badge counselor. Now I certainly wasn't trying to cause any problems by doing this, in fact I thought it was perfectly normal and legitimate at the time. The scouts also thought the same. I would be willing to bet that in many areas there are multiple generations of Scouts in multiple troops that never did a single badge with a registered counselor. Also, I should note that records of who signed off what badge are not well kept and are rarely if ever reviewed. I know that while I was finishing my Eagle I got a copy of my records from the council, and no where was there even a location for recording the name of the counselor. Now all that being said, just because you can get away with it is no reason to do it. Do it the right way if at all possible.

I would suggest a model similar to the one used for the Jamboree may work. Each Jamboree Troop consists of 40 people. There are four patrols of 8 youth, (32 total), 4 youth leaders, and 4 adult leaders. The method I have seen had the SPL, ASPL, Scribe, and QM being the 4 youth leaders. They were not members of any patrol, but rather had responsibilities to the entire troop. None of the troop leaders, (youth or adult) had assigned duties of the sort given to patrol members. All duties assigned to leaders were related to serving the troop. For camping the youth leaders tented with each other. Our camp site was set up with 22 tents, 5 dining flys, a gateway, and a few other assorted items. Two patrols were set up on each side of the campsite with 4 tents and a fly each. The youth leader tents were set up one on each side of the gateway at the front. The adult leaders each had a tent to themselves set up along the back edge, and a dining fly for troop use was set up by the adult tents. Each of the four patrols prepared food for 10, their 8 members, and one youth and one adult troop leader. The youth and adults were rotated so that they all had a chance to eat with each patrol during the Jamboree. This provided some distance between the patrols and leaders, and yet provided an opportunity for interaction on a regular basis. The leaders could evaluate the performance of the patrol and the condition of the patrol members, and the patrol members could ask question and share concerns with the troop leaders.

I certainly hope mk's comment wasn't really supposed to be quite so universal and definitive as it came out being. However, the statement by itself certainly seems like something from Mars, so foreign is that to me. Now certainly a law enforcement officer shouldn't be passing around his loaded service pistol to just anyone, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't ever give anyone else a weapon to fire. There are plenty of times that it would be quite normal for a LEO to give someone else a weapon to fire. Training new recruits, their kids, friends, neighbors or other intersted parties in proper and safe use of arms seems to me to be a reasonable idea. Then there are all the strange "what if" type scenarios that can happen out on the street. Maybe an officer is injured, under attack, unable to defend themselves, and a citizen happens to be available to assist but is unarmed. I must assume that mk was referring to some narrowly defined situation, such as an officer handing over his loaded service weapon to someone elses kid without the permission of the parent or the adult supervising the youth.

I certainly thank you for the complement. However, the BSA, and the other Scouts and Scouters I have worked with deserve some of the credit. During some planning activities and training sessions I participated in, I learned that a common mistake (I have made it plenty of times) is trying to provide the answer without knowing the question. It is necessary to define the problem before you can determine what the best solution is. This same lesson can also be found in the scientific method if you pay close attention, though that is not a normal component of leadership training. The Army is certainly very big on teaching people to define the problem first. In this case defining the problem is perhaps not the best term to use. It may be better to describe the first step in this process as determining the objective of the uniform in BSA. After we know what the uniform is supposed to do, then we can start defining the characteristics needed to fully fulfill that objective. (It could be argued that creating a separate "wish list" of desirable, but unnecessary, features should be created.) Now I for one am going to take a look at some BSA literature and consider my own personal experiences to try to create an answer to the questions, "what is the objective of the BSA uniform?" and "what characteristics are needed to meet that objective?". If there is continued interest in this topic, and other also are willing to attempt such an evaluation, perhaps we will actually be able to put together some usefull ideas between us.

All I can say is that if the NEA gets its way the teacher will be replaced by the administrator as the great messianic giver of knowledge, students will be trapped in failing schools, relativism will abound, secularism will flourish, progressive ideas will become the only unbigoted ideas, skills useful to leading a productive life will decline, and self esteem will become more important than self control. In short, the NEA is setting up those generations that will fight the future battles in the war on terror, and the wars yet unseen, to fail. Let me relate a local example of the NEA at work. After a series of standardized tests committees were formed to improve certain weak areas. The high school teachers were left asking the middle school teachers why students were sent to them without key skills for learning science, math, literature, language, and practical skills. The middle school teachers answered by asking the elementary school teachers why they were sending students who couldn't read to middle school. The elementary school teachers (all of whom had been taught NEA promoted education methods in college) then asked what they were supposed to do about it, fail the kids? The middle and high school teachers answered, that yes, you can't send kids on without being able to read. The elementary school teachers then protested that doing something like that would crush their self-esteem, that it would crush their desire to learn, and that it wasn't the job of teachers to judge the students. The middle and high school teachers all quickly gave up on the idea of actually improving on what the elementary teachers were doing, since they obviously couldn't understand that if kids couldn't read, they couldn't learn, and that as nice as it may be to pass them in 2nd grade, it would be worse on them to find out they can't get a job some day. I am in no way opposed to teachers, or to unions, but I am opposed to most of the teachers unions. (My father has been a long time member of a labour union, and my mother taught school for many years.) All this being said, the NEA is not a terrorist organization. It is not in legue with terrorist organizations. It doesn't want the terrorists to win. The Secretary shouldn't have used that term, either seriously, or in jest in such a forum. Perhaps in the back yard with close friends while flipping burgers and putting back a few cold ones making a joke like that would be OK, if not in particularly good taste, but that was very unwise for a meeting with the governors. Now on the other hand, this isn't the first time since September 11th that very serious sorts of words have been used in ways they should not have. I know the ACLU has taken flack. At least one "civil rights" group refered to a certain local police department as being a fascist organization and engaging in terrorism against "their people". How many times have various people been accused of fascism, Nazism, or McCarthyism over the years, even since September 11th? I am not attempting to justify a wrong with another wrong, but I do find it intersting how selective the outcries, uproars, and outrage about these things can sometimes be.(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

There are a couple of other positions that can/should be filled, depending on the situation. If there are any youth OA members you should have an Order of the Arrow Troop Representative. This position counts towards advancement and is a member of the PLC. It would probably be an appointed position. The OA Troop Rep. must be an OA member. Also, position patches are available for the following other positions: Den Chief Musician Bugler Instructor Troop Guide

I certainly wish you the best of luck. You have done much to improve the image of the BSA professional in my mind. If you are as capable at what you do as I think you likely are, your new boss will be very glad to have you.

I have given this some additional thought. I have realized one thing about my thinking- I seem to automatically favor the way the military treats uniforming. Part of that has to do with my general attitude toward the military, my brief ROTC experience, and the fact that I know the military is one of the primary users of uniforms, so they should know what they are doing. Scouting is not combat. The BDU may be great for the Army (actually the Army is already looking to new things, the Striker (or is it Stryker?) Brigade Combat Teams have been issued a new type of uniform from what I understand), but would they be great for BSA? I think we need to do a more careful analysis of why we use uniforming, what the uniform does, when and where the uniform is worn, and the various other factors. Unfortunately these are difficult questions that require much more thought than what is usually put into such things. Do we want a uniform for winter camping? or summer backpacking? or regular meetings? or something that can be layered and mixed to create everything from a winter uniform suitable to Alaska, to a summer uniform suitable for the most challenging Philmont trek, to the most formal awards ceremony based on some common elements? What does the uniform need to tell us? What characteristics of the wearer do we want to be most obvious by looking at the uniform? All that being said the uniform we currently have is most like the Army class B uniform. (Green pants, light green shirt, belt w/brass buckle, dress shoes, tie required w/long sleeve, optional w/short sleeve). This is the uniform you most often see office workers, recruiters, ROTC instructors, and other such personnel wearing. The greatest difference between the BSA field uniform and the Army class B is that the Army B has far simpler insignia, providing a cleaner look. Now the Army is somewhat clever. They are able to create a second uniform by simply adding a green jacket to the class B. This is the class A. The class A has far more/fancier insignia and looks more formal at the same time. (I don't really like the class A or B. They serve their purpose well, but I don't like the look of them at all. I greatly prefer the look of the dress blues. Incidental there is at least as wide of a range of opinions about the Army uniform as there are about the BSA uniform.) Now if I had to pick something close to an off the shelf solution to the current uniforming issue I believe I would make the following changes: (D)allow units to create their own "activities uniform" with very simple guidelines ©create a "field uniform" consist of solid OD BDUs w/simplified insignia (B)re-designate the current field uniform as the "general purpose uniform" (A)add a jacket to the current uniform to create the "general purpose dress uniform" These changes would obviously require at least a few additional regulations. There would need to be some new insignia created for the field and dress options. Obviously the dress uniform would need a tie. Also, caps would not be appropriate headgear for the dress uniform. There are several problems with this new scheme. First it creates too many different levels and types of uniforms. This level of complexity could cause problems on its own. The expense that would be added would be relatively small, seeing as a new scout would probably only need the GP uniform at first. The relatively low cost and high availability and durability of BDU type uniforms would make that a low cost option in the long term. The dress jacket would almost certainly be unnecessary in the first year. It could even be made a purely optional item. The second major problem would be the non-optimized nature of BDUs. They are supposed to be a sort of catch all uniform for work details, combat, field training, and other activities. They are designed for the widest possible range of conditions, but optimized for none. The greatest weakness would be on outings such as backpacking trips. BDUs are, compared to many new things such as nylon hiking pants and shorts, relatively heavy, very slow to dry, less breathable, and more likely to mildew if damp. (summer BDUs fix this to some degree) Third, BDU patterns and fabric is far from the most comfortable thing to wear in most conditions. It will sometimes be too tight, or too loose, or the heavy fabric will chafe, or some other problem. Movement, while not prevented by BDUs, is sometimes bogged down by the heavy weight fabric and the cut of BDUs. So, perhaps the easy off the shelf solution is not such a good idea. Perhaps the best idea is to start by answering those fundamental questions about the uniform, questions that reflect the fundamental nature of Scouting. I don't know the answers to those questions yet, but I will be thinking on it. Perhaps BSA needs to do some organization wide soul searching about the uniform and then attack this question again. It seems to me a top to bottom, inside and out, review of the uniforming scheme used by the BSA, as a whole, (Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, Venturers, volunteer leaders, and professional staff) would be in order. This shouldn't be hurried, and it certainly shouldn't be led by pollster or fashion designers. It should be led by those foremost of experts: those carrying out and participating in the program. After those fundamental questions about uniforms have been answered and evaluated we can move on to step two. Here the BSA should evaluate the current uniforms based on those answers. If the uniform is found to be lacking in some significant way then BSA should move to step three, evaluating the options. BSA should undertake a study of the uniforms used by foreign scouts, by uniformed professionals such as the military, police, forest rangers, and others that regularly wear uniforms. Then BSA should analyze the "civilian" attire appropriate to the various uses that the uniform should be able to fulfill. After all of this is done the decision can be made to alter or replace the uniform. Unless we do this right, we are all just speculating, musing; in short, wasting our time.

I for one am all in favor of everything that can be done in house, being done in house. If running food services for summer resident camp is something that can't be done in house, then it is necessary, not preferable, but necessary, to find outside assistance. There are also times that economics can make contracting with outside providers more cost affective. However, keep in mind there are costs not found on the accountants ledger that come with buying outside services. You will be giving up a measure of independence and loosing some control to your new partners. There is a danger that in time your new found partner may be dictating terms to you because your own ability to do the job atrophied from disuse. I feel I know a little about this subject because last spring my lodge (no I don't own it, but I am a member and was the Lodge Chief for a year, so I feel I have as much of a stake in it as anyone) hosted the section conclave. This event attracts about 700 Scouts from 9 lodges. Unfortunately we are not one of the larger lodges, nor are we one of the more resource rich councils. We soon discovered that while it would be possible to host the conclave at either of our council camps, neither had the facilities necessary for conclave to be a true success. (One has the space needed, while the other has the modern facilities needed, rather unfortunate combination.) That left us in the position of looking for a third option. That option was found in conference/convention center located at a regional fair grounds. Those facilities were far from perfect, but they came closer than our camps and it was at a price we could pay. (We did however end up a couple thousand dollars on facilities that could have gone to program, or that could have been invested in improving our camp facilities.) Then there was the food service issue. The facilities available were capable of being used to produce meals, however we found several problems I won't detail here. In the end a catering company was employed to provide most of the food for several meals. The costs were kept down by having the company deliver the food in sort of a bulk arrangement and then doing final preparation, serving, and/or repackaging with our own staff on-site. Also, certain portions of the menu were prepared on-site using our own staff. In the end this enabled us to serve menu items that could not easily be prepared on-site, while still making full use of our own recourses. What I am trying to suggest is, there is a time and a place for outsourcing within Scouting, but it should only be looked to after carefully evaluation of available recourses. If available recourses can not provide what is needed the first option should be to increase the quality or quantity of available recourses, the second option should be using internal recourses supplemented by external ones when required, and the third option should be making exclusive use of external recourses. Perhaps the conclave requires the assistance of a caterer, the summer camp a food services company, but the JLTC, Wood badge, and lodge functions can all still be handled with available recourses. [N.B. It is generally the case that kitchen staff at summer camps are paid. Therefore there are labor costs if done in-house or outsourced. However, it would be extremely unusual for the staff at OA events to be paid. Therefore replacing volunteer workers with paid employees of the contractor is a potential source of increased cost. Unfortunately inept volunteers can be just as dangerous to the budget as a contractor. (Locally we are fortunate to have many experienced cooks in our midst. We also have others with less experience willing to plan carefully, think clearly, and use common sense to achieve good results. I personally have had the experienc of being head cook, menu planner, and chief shopper for an OA fellowship weekend attended by 90 people. I will admit that it was quite a challenge. It had me seriously stressed for a while, but it all worked out in the end. We ended up just a bit over budget, but people still remember things we did such as an Italian theme dinner, complete with decorations and music. Now if a high school student with no food service experience can pull that off with the assistance of only those Arrowmen in his own small home town, then others with greater expereince and more recources can do that and far more.)] The second issue brought up was the co-opting of council property by various individuals. This seems to be a very tricky issue. Council property should be clearly defined as such. There should be no confusion by anyone as to what is owned by the council and what is owned by individuals. I know we had some misunderstanding about ceremonial supplies within our lodge. Some people made personal property available and it was mixed in with lodge supplies, and over time no one remembered exactly what was what anymore. If on the other hand the handicraft director at the camp is taking home all the tools for "safe keeping" over the summer you have potential for the exact opposite situation to occur. There may be cases where placing council property into the care of an individual makes sense (specialized equipment requiring special care and maintenance), however it is not a good idea in most cases. In all cases there should be careful tracking of the custody of all property, weather owned by or on loan to the council. Receipts should be used when property is transferred (even if just for "safe keeping"), inventories should be made, and other measures should be used to ensure that there is no confusion as to what is and isn't council property and who is responsible for that property. (This need not be in the form of overly complicated legal forms that would withstand a legion of lawyers (though that would be advisable for major items), but rather it would be better to have simple, easy to use measures.) Now I must point out a few cases where the co-opting of council property may not be such a bad idea, at least from the point of view of the co-opter. If you are the rifle instructor every year at camp, it is in your interests and the camps to make certain the rifles are in good condition. Therefore, it may be decided that they should be locked up so that only you may access them. That could present a problem if some unit wishes to use the range and weapons on their own, but that would be a rare and easily solved problem. (Have the ranger keep a key and require the rifle instructor be contacted ahead of time regarding specific instructions on care, use, cleaning, etc.) Perhaps the astronomy instructor wishes to keep the camp telescope in working condition after discovering that during weekend use it was poorly cared for. Or the ecology director wants to keep the collection of mounted butterflies from becoming a less complete collection. The key things seem to me to be: 1. Ensuring that council and personal property are distinguishable. 2. Maintaining a "chain of custody" for property so that someone is always responsible for it. 3. Keeping inventories that allow easy determination of the availability or recourses. 4. Balancing the need to maintain and safe guard equipment with the need to make it available to those with the ability to use it properly.

I guess no one believes the administration when they clearly set out the goals in Iraq. That has been done several times by several officials. I guess people will only be satisfied if the press publishes some sort of "secret plan" for Iraq. The objectives in Iraq are pretty easy to figure out, it isn't rocket science: allow the Iraqi's to create a new system of government for themselves (with at least basic democratic characteristics and recognition of the most basic human rights) help the Iraqi's restore basic services to their country help create the various capabilities needed for Iraqi's to secure their own country transfer power to the new government progressively pull out as the Iraqi's become capable of fending for themselves Now I didn't cut and paste that list from some "secret plan" leaked to the press, but rather compiled what I remember of the objectives outlined by the administration in press conferences, Congressional testimony, public documents, etc. The suggestion that there are no clear goals, or there is no plan is completely false. It is a lie. The plan in place may not be a good one, but there certainly is one. Obviously providing the operational details of the various plans to achieve the objectives could compromise the ability to achieve the objectives in some cases, so not all will be revealed. Also, any single lengthy, detailed, all inclusive plan would probably be ineffective and inflexible. Instead those charged with meeting the objectives are given guidance on how to achieve them, and then allowed to work out the details as best suites the actual situation on the ground. (Thus there is no 20,000 page "secret plan" to leak to the press.) I would certainly agree there is still much work to be done in both Iraq and Afghanistan. However, most of the work to be done in both countries is work that must be done by the citizens of those countries. We cannot do everything for them. Even if we could and did do everything for them, it would be like feeding the man when you could have taught him to feed himself. These things will take time, they will take money, patience, and a willingness to see our friends in these countries make mistakes from time to time. It is sort of like teaching skills to a Scout. If older more experienced Scouts set up all the tents for a camp out, the job will be done right this time, but what happens when those older, more experienced Scouts move on? Instead we choose to demonstrate how to set up a tent, then let the Scouts try it for themselves. Certainly they will make mistakes this way, things like forgetting to tuck ground cloths under the tent, and so they will get wet a few times, but they will learn how to properly set up a tent. Perhaps a better analogy could be made to leadership development, but tents seemed a bit easier to write about. The thing to remember is that instead of getting wet, or friends in those countries may sometimes make mistakes that cost lives, or leave people without jobs, or other very unpleasant outcomes. We have to have some tolerance to those mistakes if those countries are ever to become self sufficient. I suppose we could take on full responsibility for providing all government services in those countries. We could create an absolute, permanent, military dictatorship run by generals and administrators from America. We could police every corner with American troops. We could staff the utilities and schools with American employees. We could turn those countries into colonies of the new century and only give them back their futures one tiny piece at a time, so as to prevent mistakes. However, neither America, nor Iraq, nor Afghanistan, are willing to suffer through such a process. The price would be too high. The locals would have to suffer the indignity of being told they can't run their own country, of being deprived of the rights of self governance. The American people would have to be willing to suffer not just military casualties, but large loss of civilian administrators and functionaries. Those things, and the economic price, we would have to be willing to pay for many decades. I think if I was an Iraqi, I would want to have my country back as quickly as possible. I would want to do as much for myself as I could. If the choice was mine to make I would choose liberty rather than security. Perhaps the people of Iraq would choose the security of a foreign dictatorship, but I would guess they would rather have a home grown anarchy than a foreign occupation army.

I for one am no fan of world government, or global organizations, or things of that nature, but the world Jamboree sounds like fun to me. Hopefully the public health officials won't be setting up condom distribution stations at this one. OK, now lets all recite the World Promise: On my self esteem, I pledge to try to do what feels good for me, and to make others feel good too.

There are some far better posibilities: Request the library aquire a copy for its collection. (It may be necessary to provide information on how to purchase a copy, since it probably wouldn't be available from their normal suppliers.) Local Scouters and supporters of Scouting could purchase and donate copies for their local library collections. This is probably the best option since it saves both the library and the council time and money.

There is nearly a page in the Guide for Officers and Advisors on adult membership qualifications (page 21). I am not going to retype that here, but I will summarize as best I can. Adults and candidates for adult membership are those members of the BSA 21 year of age or older. Individuals shall be selected as candidates based on the following: 1. Adult leaders in units: Units that elect at least one youth candidate may recommend an adult candidate. The unit committee may recommend one adult to the lodge adult selection committee based on every 50 registered, active youth members, or fractions thereof. The lodge adult selection committee consists of the lodge advisor, the lodge staff advisor, and the chairman of the council committee on which the lodge advisor serves (normally camping or boy scout committee). "Recommendations of the adult selection committee, with the approval of the Scout executive, ..., will be candidates for induction, provided the following conditions are fulfilled: * Selection of adults is based on the ability to perform the necessary functions to help the Order fulfill its purpose, and not for recognition of service, including current or prior achievement and positions. * The individiual will be an asset to teh Order because of demonstrated abilities to fulfill the purpose of the Order. * The camping requirements set forth for youth members are fulfilled. * The adult leader's membership will provide a positive example for the growth and development of the youth members of the lodge." 2. Adult leaders in council and district positions: "The lodge advisor, district chairman, council president, or members of the professional staff may recommend adults to the lodge adult selection committee. Recommendations of the adult selection committee, with the approval of the Scout executive, ..., will become candidates for induction. All requirements set forth for adult leaders in units must be fulfilled, with the exception of the camping requirements, which may be waived at the discretion of the lodge adviser and Scout executive." "Adults may be recommended for membership only one time per year as either unit Scouters or district/council Scouters, but not as both. How they are recommended depends on where they maintain their primary registration." "Because the Order of the Arrow is principally a youth organization, unit, district, and council Scouters are not elected to membership as a recognition. Election into the Order should take place only when the adult's job in Boy Scouting or Varsity Scouting will make Order of the Arrow membership more meaningful in the lives of the youth membership."

I really intended this to just be a bit about the possibility that some of us may cross paths in the future, but since we have gotten on the subject of camps I will share a bit. I must say I agree with all the comments about the camp itself. The facilities are excellent. The location is quite nice as well, being just an easy 30 min drive from downtown Louisville, yet still feeling like it is the middle of nowhere when you are there. I know of several SM and ASM from my home council that have been to Crooked Creek in recent years and seemed to think it was a quality camp. Some of the Scouts from my troop will be attending McKee this summer. I have never been there for anything, but will be going there for the conclave this spring. Another SM in my hometown loves the place and recommended it. My own experience with summer camp in Kentucky is limited to Camp Roy C. Manchester (featured recently in Scouting magazine). I went to that camp four times, including once for the high adventure sailing program. That camp has the massive advantage of location. Being on on Kentucky Lake, or a similar body of water, is certainly something only a few camps can boast of. The facilities are neither the best nor the worst I have ever seen. The most unique feature of normal camp life is the fact that troops must bring and use their own tents, unless they get one of the two sites with cabins. The program also has a few unique items (some new for this year) such as a high adventure sailing program on Kentucky Lake, biking and backpacking at Land Between the Lakes. Unfortunately a couple of years ago there were many bad reports about program, though the past year seems to have been a considerable improvement by most accounts. The first camp I attended Old Ben in southern Indiana. The camp is nice for the most part. It is an old partially reclaimed coal mine. The camp layout is interesting with the dining hall on a large hill in the middle and everything else built around it in a circle. The greatest problems at the time were severe mosquito infestation and some organizational problems that hampered staff effectiveness and camper enjoyment. The second camp I attended was Camp Daniel Boone in North Carolina. It was a fine camp. The facilities are all old and somewhat grand. The program was great, though aquatics were challenging due to the very cold water temperatures. The camp was built in a long, narrow valley with the major building and lake near the bottom, the camp sites arranged in more or less a line going up the valley. A cool mountain stream runs the length of it. It can make for long walks to and from camp. The most interesting program feature were a white water rafting trip run by the camp and a 50 miler trip. More recently I attended Skymont in Tennessee. I can think of no complaint about the camp on my part. They have good facilities, staff, and program. They do have standard merit badge classes and other programs. The neatest features is they take one day, have no classes, and instead have patrol and camp wide games. The most recent camp I have attended was Walwood in Florida. The best thing I can say is that the staff meant well. Unfortunately good will was about all they seemed to have.

Are you telling us to stop the activits or are you telling the activists to stop? The title suggest the former while the post content suggests the latter.

I became part of the 6th generation of the family to be born in this Commonwealth on what was by the accounts I have been told a fine September day in the Methodist Hospital in a nice little city that sits where US 60 and US 41 intersect, and where the Ohio and Green Rivers meet in western Kentucky. That was, by my reckoning, in the two hundred eighth year of the Independence of this Republic. It was also one hundred ninety-six years and ten days after the Ratification of the Constitution of the United States. My 15 min. of fame, thus far, came in kindergarten when my class sang "Oh What a Beautiful Morning" live for Good Morning America. History would seem to indicate I will almost certainly become part of the 8th generation to depart from this state (in life or death), the first having gone when a tree crushed their wagon during a night storm in the Cumberland Gap in 1808. (I must site the work of John Egerton, Generations, for some of the facts contained here.)

I noticed at least two members mentioned they will be going to Crooked Creek for camp this year. (It is a fine camp facility. Everyone I know refers to it as the "state park" of summer camps, because it looks like every detail from buildings, to trails, to signs were designed by the park service. However, I have never experienced the summer camp program there.) Anywase, I happen to be in Louisville for the time being. I sometimes drop in at Talligewi Lodge events. (I can also be seen at many White Horse Lodge events.) So if anyone happens to be heading to one of those events, let me know since I may see you there. (This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)