TAHAWK

I now see that only liquid, gaseous, or jellied chemicals are "chemicals" for purposes of G2SS. So the common practice -- in one place at one time -- of using C4 for fuel would be as off-topic for the G2SS prohibition as paraffin, "heat tabs," or wood. But might the B.S.A. share with us the reasoning that brought it to prohibit DIY "chemical stoves" while allowing, but not recommending, non-homemade alcohol stoves? Are DIY stoves more dangerous in experience? (More dangerous than axes?) Or are they, rather, less dangerous than purchased chemical stoves? The alcohol stove tha

"Count your blessings! If I was in charge, I would employ Baden-Powell's standards to prohibit Boy Scouts from using ANY tool that they have not personally backpacked 50 miles in to the job site. Yours at 300 feet, Kudu \" Having a hard time finding this standard, Rick. Could you help? Seems like they did a lot of work at Gilwell Park. Did they have to hike in from fifty miles away? Jolly good exercise, that.

Alcohol is "not recommended." Why? I hear there was an accident having nothing to do with a stove at all. Home-made alcohol stoves, including non-pressurized stoves, are "prohibited." Why? If I buy it off the Internet, is it "home-made"? Factory-made alcohol stoves, including pressurized stoves, are not prohibited, just "not recommended." Why? They are the most popular stove in Scouting. Renewable fuel. LNT. Conservation. Jellied alcohol? All-home-made "chemical" stoves are prohibited. Buddy Burners? They use CnH2n+2. Candles used to heat food? Chemical

I see a great future for three-wheeled carts in Scouting. 0___0 And the 4-wheeled ATV's featured at some Council camps? Do they get a "pass" because they are self-propelled? http://www.psrweb.org/

As an additional data point, one Scoutmaster informed of the new standards was extremely pleased.

We understand each other - and disagree. I see some forms of punishment as the role of the Scout leader - consequences for behavior. I see some forms of punishment as beyond the Scout leader's warrant and best left to a Scouter. A question of degree, I think, like many decisions he will face in life. Say a Scout is Patrol Scribe, but he consistently fails to attend enough meetings to actually do the job. He is not happy when replaced by another Scout. Is that really something the PL must leave to a Scouter? He can appoint but not remove?

The PL sees that Johnny's tent is a mess and tells him "Johnny, clean up your tent." Discipline. The Troop is in formation for Retreat, and Johnny is telling a joke. The PL says, "Johnny, sshhhh!)" Discipline. Discipline includes keeping order and that is very much part of the job of a leader, be he Scout or Scouter. As this is Scouting, as much of the job as possible goes to the Scout leader, not the Scouter. I suspect you visualized "punishment," and even that is the job of a PL (extra KP assigned when Johnny ran off to play and left Bill to do the dishes). Otherwise

Safety is the nondelegable duty of adults in Scouting. Youth can act as a force-multiplier, but it is not their responsibility to insure safety except in a moral sense. The Youth Protection AV even states that all "discipline" is an adult responsibility. That would seem to be a misstatement (AKA "blunder") in view of other current, more detailed and more specific statements about the responsibility of youth leaders.

If we judge by what BP in fact said repeatedly, it is difficult to see that "absolute mastery of Scoutcraft" was the goal or the method. In fact, BP warned against such thinking: "The examination for Badges is not competitive, but just a test for the individual. The Scoutmaster and the examiner must therefore work in close harmony, judging each individual case on its merits, and discriminating where to be generous and where to tighten up. Some are inclined to insist that their Scouts should be first-rate before they can get a Badge. That is very right, in theory; you get a few boys p

OK. Another day; another chance to read. They are "recommendations," not requirements or rules: "recommendations on the chart below." EXCEPT, that last paragraph ("Youth or adults are not permitted . . ." etc.) Still -- what? - lazy (good word.) Still, I think, for appearance sake to ward off the plaintiff's bar..

By adding "appropriate" as a modifier, there are no clear standards for protective equipment, but it sounds like there is a concern for "safety." Any decisions made locally are subject to institutionalized second-guessing. Pretty cynical. Citing O.S.H.A. without actually saying B.S.A. has elected to voluntarily adopt O.S.H.A. is equally cynical. Or inept. Likely inept. _________________________________________________ Couldn't lead a panic if the End of the World were announced.

The facts we are given include the fact that this scheme to commit battery on several children was foiled by this "person involved in Scouting." I see no facts to indicate that this concerned parent is individually responsible for "discipline" or that Commissioned Scouters cannot handle it. (All "discipline" is said now, unhelpfully, to be the exclusive province of "adults.") I do understand a level of concern that may not be totally satisfied by, "Let the SM handle it." Imagine that the planned battery had actually occurred. Whose non-delegable duty would it have been, accordi

The debriefing seems to absolutely be key to a growth experience. Our Scouts will face temptations that draw them away from good values. The perfect person may not understand. But if you have felt the pull of the Dark Side . . . The first time I saw it done, the staffer running the Game was dressed like Mr Scratch himself - black tail coat. You could almost smell the sulfur. ("You know you want it!) But he, too, was key. He had to know when to stop tempting and start turning the participants back to Scouting values. (He did a great job.)

If two Scouts don't fit in the patrol, why are they there? It's supposed to be a natural "gang" - a group that wants to be together (at least most of the time.) If they are miserable, change. It's the school system that forces groupings and Scouting is supposed to be very different.

Scouting starts with the patrol, not the activity. I would proceed as if this was a brand new troop. It was not a Scout Troop from what you say. It was an adult-run club for boys. Actually, it's a great opportunity. A patrol is supposed to be a group of boys who want to pal around together in the outdoors. Have each boy write on a piece of paper the names of the 4,5,6,7,8 boys they would like to be in a patrol with. With the SPL and several of the older boys, use this information to group the boys in provisional patrols with the goal that every boys is in a patrol with at le

"What did the other 73 staff do?" There were four other staff assigned to waterfront at all times. They had endless water-balloon fights at the waterfront building - a good 80 yards from the water -- when they ere not sun-bathing or napping. The rescue rowboat had its oarlocks locked up in the camp headquarters 'so they won;t be snitched." That was a good ten minutes round trip away at a good run. Beginners were allowed to take canoes out behind an island where they could not be watched. The Canoeing MB folks, on the other hand, first got in a canoe on Friday. Our troop's two former

goheelz, it is interesting how different camps make different use of the human resources that show up with units. Some survey in advance in the style of the old Troop Resource Survey. They then plan the week including these transitory "staff" - contacting you in advance to discuss what you can do to help. At the other extreme, one camp made it very very clear that the help of "outsiders" was neither required or desired. As it developed, the first opinion was very wrong and the second went away by Wednesday of that first week of camp. By Wednesday, one of our parents, a parame

I second the comments on "Friendly,"" "Courteous," and "Kind." Do not forget "Trustworthy," as it has customarily come to be forgotten in the interest of marketing Merit Badges. When it comes to Merit Badges, stress quality over quantity. If you don't have a qualified staffer, do not offer the badge - period. If the staffer can only handle ten candidates, ten it is. Since National Council has indicated that Merit Badges not given in accordance with the rules have not been "earned" for any purpose, the "Merit badge Mill" days appear to be on their way out. That means

Too true about the level of writing skill demonstrated. 0___0

But the "as indicated" at this location http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/Media/InsigniaGuide/06I.aspx suggests the beads may only be worn with the previously-mentioned Wood Badge neckerchief. As noted, the link to Wood Badge information here http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/Media/InsigniaGuide/topic-index.aspx is dead.

I find this language, or very close to it, at multiple Council sites, "Wearing the Wood Badge Beads After your beads are presented, you wear them only with the field uniform the main "official" uniform, with the khaki or yellow or green shirt. You do not wear your beads with activity uniforms, t-shirts, or any civilian wear. (If you are wearing the beads and then decide to take off the field uniform shirt and just wear a t-shirt, you can tuck the beads under the t-shirt so they dont show but they also dont get lost.) You may wear your beads with the Gilwell neckerchief (dove-g

Adjusted for inflation, that would be $121.65 short. ^___^

"Uniform" in the rest of the world: the same; distinctive common dress. "Uniform" in B.S.A.: sold by B.S.A. at some point. So what is it really all about now? My Council has had twelve CSP's from 2010 to date and is about to launch no. thirteen. The trouser circus has been mentioned , but there are also multiple Scout shirts currently, not to mention the back-and-forth on shirts and trousers since the 102d anniversary of Scouting in the U.S. I would be in favor of "uniform" in it's non-B.S.A. meaning because I think uniforming has benefits in a team sport.

And by what behavior do you "throw the axe"?

I do not see how submitting credentials years later is more "ripe for abuse" than the current system for Scouts. Implicitly, the same standards will be applied to the much-more-difficult task of credentialing late. One either can produce the goods to the present standard or not.