Twocubdad

I think the point is government seem to have forgotten the source of their revenue. In NC, the state government is down-right giddy over a "free" half-billion-dollar federal grant to improve passenger train service. The result will be to shave 13 minutes off the train ride between Raleigh and Charlotte. Of course the train will still take 40 minutes longer than by car. But who cares? Tax dollars are like manna from heaven. No one really had to go out and earn that money. And it's not like they'll put a tax lien on your house and sell it out from under you if you can't pay your taxes, right?

Understand that adults are nominated to the OA not as an honor, but for what they can contribute to the Order. Why does the OA need this lady? It could be as something as mundane as she's willing to drive the brothers from your troop to OA functions.

Today, I think all Americans owe a great debt to President Obama and all our Senators and Representatives who last night reduced the federal budget by 1.09%. The $38.5 billion they cut means the federal government will live within it's means for the next 11 days. We won't add to the national debt again until -- ready for this -- Patriot's Day, April 19.

Right, Beav, neither add nor subtract. The requirement says USE the EDGE method. Doesn't say explain it, doesn't say recite what E.D.G.E. stands for. Doesn't ask anyone to cite scholarly research on the topic. Just generally go about teaching a basic skill pretty much the same way most of us would do if the top of our heads -- we'll introduce the topic, show how it's done, help the student through it a couple times, then sit back and watch while he practices. I assume most of us agree with the overall notion of including a requirement to teach someone else a skill. If you accept that, then I don't know how you could write a requirement any less specific than this. Specifying that the teacher discuss, show, help and watch is simply another way of saying you must actively teach the skill -- as compared with sink or swim or screaming at the other kid until he finally figures it out on his own. Don't laugh. I've seen it. I've also watched boys teach tying square knots by spending 20 minutes on Granny knots.

Why EDGE? Because it was already in the BSA lexicon. Leading EDGE and Teaching EDGE has been in the Wood Badge syllabus since at least 2004 (and I assume since the course changed in 2000) and was added to the NYLT syllabus not long after. Our troop includes it in Troop Junior Leader Training for the very simple reason that the adults who are WB trained and the boys who are NYLT trained already understand the term. Why create a new phrase when many of the leaders are already familiar with EDGE? Everytime BSA issuse a new manual people here go nuts over the inconsistencies with the old material. As if BSA had the people to undertake a complete top to bottom remake of all program literature at once. They finally use an existing concept which is consistent with existing programs and we go nuts in the other direction. You guys are putting WAY too much emphasis on this. If you believe it's been declared the be-all, end-all teaching method, then it's just that -- your belief. I sure don't see it that way. This is not the equivalent of specifying the Diamond brand matches to build a fire. It's like saying using a knife, ax and saw to prepare tender, kindling and fuel for a cooking fire. You guys would be wiggin' out because you already have a stack of firewood which was cut by a chain saw, or because it disallows breaking kindling over your knee. Read Second Class requirement 3d. Does anyone interpret that to prohibit breaking kindling over your knee? EDGE is not some sweeping change in methodology, like when Youth Protection was insituted or the way First Aid protocol was changed to include universal precautions. It's just a new mnemonic for an age-old method. If your troop really prefers teaching using -- I don't know -- sock puppets, go for it! Do you really think the EDGE police will shut you down?(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

I disagree. Somewhere in the 20 years between the time I aged out as a youth and returned to the program with my own sons, Courts of Honor where Eagles are presented joined the ranks of other over-the-top, I Love Me celebrations. Right up there with $10,000 birthday parties, $25,000 bat mitzvahs and $250,000 weddings. Why is an ECOH "his day" to do as he pleases? Why not for Life? Star? Tenderfoot? We all -- especially on this forum -- give great lip service to "the journey not the destination" and that "Eagle isn't the goal of Scouting" and the like. So why do we feed the beast? I received my Eagle along with five very good friends and a bunch of other kids who worked hard to earn the awards they received that night, too. My Eagle wasn't dimished by sharing the spotlight. In fact, the photos from that night with the six of us backed by 12 parents is a pretty good memory of my Scouting career. If you have a new troop and are starting new traditions, why not start the tradition that the Eagle is an accomplishment shared by the whole troop? That because the journey is as important as the destination, it is fitting that the other Scouts still on the trail are recognized too. Certainly there can be added pomp and traditions surrounding and Court of Honor with an Eagle, but why not make that in addition to the other ceremonies and traditions of the troop?

At one point, and I don't know if it's still the practice, pack committees were referred to as "leaders meetings" in recognition of the fact that most are comprised of den leaders and more conventional committee members. I think that's still a good way to look at it. Most of the pack program occurs in either den meetings or pack meetings, so it makes sense those leaders are part of the "committee." Beyond that, you need to build your other committee members around functions. You need someone to take BALOO (Basic Adult Leader Outdoor Orientation) training so they can lead a couple pack campouts a year. You need a treasurer. Then you need folks to handle the one-off activities, like Pinewood Derby, popcorn sales and Blue & Gold Banquet. But really, as others have written, your first priority should be recruiting scouts. Call your district executive and find out what recruitment opportunities the district has you can plug into. As CM, the committee really isn't your problem anyway. When you recruit Scouts you recruit parents. Begin on Day One building the expectation that the pack is parent led and all parents must contribute.

My first stop would be to have a cup of coffee with the founding CM. He knows the program and my hunch is he knows the church and community. At 78 I wouldn't expect him to do a lot, but he can be an incredible resource. Ask his advice and for suggestions for some folks like himself who may be "retired" Scouters but may be willing to lend a hand on the committee. How big is your pack? What sort of parent involvement do you have now? I mean do you have a lot of parents who could help if properly motivated and organized or are you in a depressed with a lot of single-parent homes who really don't have the means to get involved (or obviously something in between)? How big is the church? Are they appointing someone to replace the retiring pastor as you laison (aka Chartered Organization Representative)? In other words, what resources do you have?

It's been a while, but when I took pack committee chairman training and again with Troop Committee Challenge, we were taught committees are run by concensus, but ultimately decisions are the responsibility of the individual committee members responsible for particular areas. The purpose of the committee is for those individuals to come together and report to the group and coordinate with each other when those areas overlap. For example, advancement issues should be decided by the advancement chairman and committee chairman in consultation with the unit leader. Money issues should be handled by the treasurer and committee chair. A multi-faceted decision, like a major purchase may involve the committee chair, unit leader, treasurer, equipment manager and fundraising chairman (who technically should report to the treasurer according to published BSA job descriptions). All of which gets reported to the full committee where other committee members offer input, especially if an issue impacts their area of operation. Saying you run by concensus doesn't just mean you hope everyone agrees -- you have to work at it. Neither does concensus mean unamimity. Generally speaking, it means you don't do something unless most folks are generally okay with it. If a whole lot of folks are somewhat unhappy, I wouldn't move forward. Or if a couple people are really upset, I'd keep working the problem until a solution that most folks are comfortable with can be reached. That doesn't require a formal quorum, designated voting members or a quantative majority. The leadership simply needs to have the pulse of the committee and work to reach concensus. Of course that always works that way if you happen to be in Troop 1, Pleasantville, USA (or maybe Stepford, for the older generation). What's the real-world application? As it happens, Beavah, our troop has been discussing the need for a new trailer for almost a year now, so you hypothetical situation hit home. Since we don't have any sort of by-laws which address the sticking points, I been thinking through how we would handle it just given the guidance and training from BSA. It can be done. After a year of talking about it, the key leaders (meaning the folks who are inconvenienced by the current small trailer) are in general agreement of the need for the trailer. My self (Scoutmaster), the CC, the dad responsible for equipment and the handful of adults and ASMs who camp regularly all see the need and support buying a second trailer. Yeah, we tend to move slowly and have been talking about it for a long time. That's a distinct advantage in an organization like this. If the CC and I pushed a proposal through the committee in one meeting with little notice or debate and had the trailer two days later, that's likely to breed suspicion and dissent. If nothing else, after a year of struggling to find space to transport kids and gear, most parents have been around one or two Friday nights to see and understand the problem. Consensus building takes time. But just for yucks, let's say that at the meeting we finally pull the trigger on a new trailer we have a couple parents who object to the expenditure generally and the one mom who wants the money to fund jamboree participants. First, the idea to pay jamboree fees would be dispensed of rather quickly. Our budget is built on al-la-carte philosophy. We generally don't spend troop money on things which benefit only a few Scouts. Our Philmont crew is 100% self funded. Every campout, the Scouts who go camping divide the cost of the weekend's food and pay it themselves. This is a generally accepted -- although unwritten -- operating principle which is understood by the folks who have been involved with running the troop. While the group may want to revisit the principle in the long term, it would be highly unlikely that our committee would fund a few scouts going to jamboree instead of buying a trailer which would benefit the entire troop. But let's say there are a fair number of parents generally against buying the new trailer. The trailer is not the problem, the trailer is one possible solution to the real problem, which is the inability to efficiently transport the volume of gear we have. Last weekend we had 42 kids and 13 adults camping in two separate trips. At best, we had two pick up trucks stacked high with gear. Securing lots of little pieces in the back of a truck isn't easy and it's not protected from rain. Rain is one thing, 65mph rain is another. As the driver of one of the two pickups, I'm not comfortable with the current system. So, committee, if you don't want to spend money on a new trailer, how do you propose solving the problem? We're already struggling to have enough drivers for the BOYS, so simply saying we need more parents driving to carry the gear means more parents need to step up than are currently doing so. And if this means we're going to have 15-18 car caravan to go camping, someone needs to step up and serve as transporation coordinator. Volunteers? Really. Anyone? Anyone at all? You can play games, hypothetical or real, forever. We will do what we can to build concensus among the committee and parents and find a solution everyone can live with. But the bottom line is this -- there are a few leaders who either by official position or simply their willingness to step up and take responsibility, who have the responsibility to look out for the best interest of the unit. If the COR, CC, unit leader, treasurer and quartermaster feel a particular purchase is in the best interest of the unit and it's long-term goals, it's going to get done. If there are a few parent/committee members -- or even a majority -- who disagree with the leadership, they can either find a new unit or go through the COR to effect a change in leadership. But give the unit leaders credit for knowing how to manage a volunteer organization. If all decisions are made by fiat from the top, sooner rather that later there won't be a volunteer organization to manage.

Long term, having gear provided should reduce the cost. I mean, the local councils are paying for gear now only to see it disappear into the ether every four years. For such a big change it has to be figured into the development cost of jamboree to some degree -- at least you would hope. I hear you about the sandwich crammed in the bottom of your day pack. But it really wasn't a problem at World. And that's about the only way to handle lunch for the off-site programs. Sodex (am I remembering that right?) handled food service at World and grub was pretty good. Lunch was usually a prepackage sandwich (in the little, semi-rigid tray so it didn't get squished), a bag of "crips", piece of fruit, a cookie and a canned drink. I thought it was fine. I was on staff at world and didn't spent a lot of time with the troop during meals, but if I'm remembering correctly, after a couple days doing the patrol thing, my son's troop started cooking as a troop anyway, with patrols taking turns cooking for the whole troop. Part of their problem was a lack of familiarity with the food. They had a lot of old-fashioned rice which is almost impossible to cook on a camp stove in a thin aluminum pot. The Scoutmasters took the attitude that no one paid $4000 to hone their re-heating and cleaning skills so they stepped in and provided alot of help. I wouldn't do that at home, but it's probably not a bad approach at jamboree.

Except for the J-phone (sounds like a sponsorship deal) this is 100%, up and down, just the way World Jamboree was run in 2007. Not surprising since Jack Furst, the guy heading up 2013, was the BSA contingent head at 07 World. It worked well, including distributing lunch at breakfast (although I liked the kiosk system at national better). The big difference, and what drives much of the logistical changes, are troop activities. Instead of two Scouts looking at a map and deciding what to do on any given day, troops will attend a variety of activities they will attend together. Some will will be full day activities -- like going off site for rafting, climbing or a service project; some may be a few hours, like the OA explorium-thingy which was such a cluster-flub last year. Personally, I like the random assignment of troops to campsites. I attended the 1973 jamboree as a youth along with my regular troop (not a provisional troop like they do now). It was a bummer when we arrived and camped smack in the middle of all the other troops from our council, the same guys we camped with at camporees on a regular basis. Smaller subcamp staffs is a "duh!" It seemed like half of the staff at our subcamp this year was devoted to supporting the other half of the subcamp staff. The extent that staffs seemed to compete with other staffs for the most over-the-top meals and amenities for the staff area. I thought it was an embarrassment. Good riddance. Having everything provided but one duffle, and one daypack is great. The amount of gear our troop traveled with to national was ridculous. Flying internationally to World, the boys only had the two bags. Everything else was provided, including material for building a gateway (identical poles and rope for a pioneering project). On the down side, I think one of the big losses at the jamboree will be the big ticket, "natonal scout show" aspect of the jamboree. I've heard the number 20,000 participants quoted. That's about half the number of past jamborees and the 6-7000 staff a little more than half the number of staff. It seems to me jamboree will be much smaller, much harder to get into. Because of the high adventure slant to some of the activities, they've said the medical requirements for jamboree attendance will be as strictly enforced as for the high adveenture bases. Seems like they're trying to build an exclusive event, instead of one where just about everyone is welcome. That would be a big loss.

"[i volunteered for the Troop committee. I put myself in charge of new family/Webelos orientation] " That's probably the best way to handle it. A number of years a go we had a WDL/dad in your same spot who took that job and developed our parent orientation. We basically repeat the same orientation to the parents during the Webelos campout in the fall and again at separate meetings for the parents during troop meetings the first few weeks after cross over. Every year we try to include at least one second-year parent just to have the perspective of someone who has just been through it. I'd be glad to send you a copy of our outline, if you're interested. (BTW, Eagledad, I did respond your post about communicating with the parents, but when I hit submit I got an error from the server an the post was lost. Per the above, I feel like we do a very good job of communicating with the new parents -- if they show up, pay attention or read the material we give them. I know I explained the patrol alignment at least four times myself, which was a good part of my frustration.)

I appreciate the point of view, but that's not the situation here. The annual whinning about patrol make up is a parent issue. Yes, this year I know the problem was initiated by the boy complaining to his mom, but that's not usually the case. More often than not we get parents gripping before the patrols are even formed! After five years in Cub Scouts they are generally happy with their sons' dens and den leaders and would be perfectly happy if they could sign up for a Webelos III program. If we have 13 new scouts, that means we have about 39 opinions about how the patrols need to be formed -- few of which consider the needs of the troop and program. I can only imagine the outcry if we wanted to furtherndivided all the new scouts into six or seven "regular" patrols. "My little darling camping with that hairy, hormone-soaked ninth grader?" Good grief. My philosophy is adult problems need adult solutions, so yeah, I get involved in this more than I like. I'm not going to feed a 14-year-old Troop Guide to unhappy mom. I will -- and did -- however, have the Troop Guide work with the Scout to solve the Scout's problem. A good NSP program is all about having great Troop Guides. Troop Guide has become a fairly prestegious and sought-after position in the troop. We generally get our best Scouts wanting those positions. I think they like the focus on basic Scout skills and that they can really make a difference with the younger guys. It's self-perpetuating. Boys who had a Troop Guide want to build that relationship with the new scouts in their patrol and work hard at it.

Your relationship with you ex is not my business, but you're all over the place here. A few months ago in a thread which devolved into a similar conversation (I wish I could find it, I have no idea of the original topic) I specifically asked you that if you feel the way you do about Scouting why don't you pull you son out? Your response was that if were up to you, you would, but your ex insists he stay in Scouts. So which is it? If you want him out, how can your ex blame you if she wants him in? Maybe the woman is just insane or has a particularly vicious lawyer, or maybe you have a really bad one, but if you want the boy out of Scouts, but your ex wants him in, how can she blame you if he's hurt on a Scout activity? File a document putting your wife and the court on notice that you're son's participation in Scouting is recklessly endangering him and you want him out. If he stays in, it's on her. That won't allay your fear of an accident, but at least you wouldn't have to worry about your ex coming after you over it.

Actually, the new scout patrols function very well, once we get through this annual down draft from the helicopter parents over patrol alignment. We did come to some resolution with this fellow, at least temporarily. At one point during the exchange of emails, he was dropping out of this weekend's campout because his "only friend" couldn't go. I asked his Troop Guide to help him find a suitable tentmate for the weekend, and the TG suggested that this Scout take one of the three-man tents and tent with two of the other fellows who were already tenting together. I used Venivedi's suggestion as a basis of a fairly long email response. I tried to be both sympathetic (which is a bit of a stretch for me) but also clearly explain our process and purpose (which comes more naturally). I wrote that although she and I were obviously already communicating, I really wanted her son to be the one to initiate a solution. Longer term, it seems one of the boys in the other patrol may be moving out of state, and this Scout is willing to wait and possibly take is spot in the other patrol then. No, that really doesn't address the whole concept of team building, but my experience is that once we get through summer camp, everyone has forgotten about who is in what patrol anyway. By buying some time, I'm gambling the problem just goes away. I was able to have a nice chat with the Scout and made the point that he had numerous opportunities to join which ever patrol he wanted and to change patrols had he just spoken up. His explaination was that at the time the patrols were forming, he was standing with the other group of guys and didn't want to hurt their feelings. While that was a really nice thought, and I commended him for thoughtfullness -- a Scout is Kind, afterall -- I told him being kind to other people doesn't mean you have to take it on the chin yourself. His own interests or other's feelings isn't an either/or choice. You can have both, but you have to go about it the right way. "YOU GUYS ARE JERKS AND I WANT TO CHANGE PATROLS" would not be the right way. But given the circumstances he could have simply walked over to where his buddies were and joined their group, or come to me and quietly shared his concerns before the patrols were finalized. It was a good, positive outcome. Hopefully the young man's first two lessons in Boy Scouts are that it's okay to stick up for yourself and that his Troop Guides and Scoutmaster can be trusted to help with a problem. Barry, can I steal you tag line?

Actually, I agree with Eng61. (GASP!) A program which places an emphasis on self-reliance and encourages young men to work together to solve their own problems is not a good fit for her and her son. Her expectation is for 24/7 eyes-on supervision, perferably her eyes, and that is not how the program works. Anyone who wants to find a solution to this situation can. An experienced Scouter sees numerous avenues which could lead to good outcomes all around. But Singlemom has already decided she doesn't want a solution. She's not here asking for help or advice, but to warn other single moms about our little testosterone-club. And even that's specious. The most telling part of her post was the last: I feel so guilty for encouraging him into boyscouts." This is about Singlemom, not about the troop or her son.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

Now that you mention it, SP, we do check for Scout socks. Hats and neckerchiefs, too. We don't do it often, occasionally our committee chair shows up with a couple boxes of Klondike Bars (he really likes Klondike Bars) and conducts a uniform inspections. Full uniform (hat, necker, shirt, belt, pants and socks) earns ice cream. We occassionally do similar campsite inspections based on a model campsite -- fire buckets full, kitchen area clean, gear stowed properly, duty roster posted, etc. It's a reminder of what best practices are and a check to see if they're being used. I think one reason folks tend to get so wrapped around the axle about uniforming is it's really the only objectively measurable method there is. And it's easy and doable. Kinda like why we bomb Lybia and invade Iraq but not North Korea or Iran. Unfortunately, that also makes it susceptable to abuse from folks who are looking for a method of thowing their weight around (sorry, bad pun.) So why worry about official scout socks? Because it's a matter of discipline. It's about following rules and doing as we are asked. It's about realizing there is more going on than whatever the heck we feel like doing. If everyone in my patrol is in full uniform, but I feel like wearing my favorite Whinnie the Pooh socks, then I need to take one for the team. And it's about acknowledging that there are greater things in the universe an ourselves. I heard a Rabbi give a great explaination for keeping Kosher once. Why do folks keep Kosher, he asked? No cheeseburgers? We've slaughter the cow and ground its flesh into patties and we're worried that the cow will be offended it's cooked long with its mother's milk? Really? And when was the last time you heard of someone with trichinosis? The original purpose of food sanitation is pretty much obsolete, so why go to the trouble to keep Kosher? Because God tells us to. There is a greater power than ourselves to which we should listen and obey. Scouting explicitly requires that in its religious principles, but I believe it is implicit in other areas, like citizenship. We obey the speed limit even though we're the only car in sight on a straight, flat interstate highway. Your speed may vary.

I'm more of a single-malt guy myself, but thanks, I'll keep the suggestion in mind. Vinny - I'm taking your advice and have sent the email. I'll let you know what happens.

Boomer -- we've been preaching this since November when we took the Webelos camping. Mostly with the parents. And not just "heads up, here's what's coming" but really trying to explain the NSP program and why this shouldn't be a big issues. Clearly, this is just helicopter parent angst. I've even started working with the Webelos I DL for next year. I sat down with him in January to talk about how the troop and den could work together to on the transition. I was thinking in terms of den chiefs, joint meetings and activities and maybe an extra campout. Guess what he wanted to talk about? "You know these boys have been together since Tigers and all the parents are really worried about them getting split up into different patrols when they join the troop." 14 FRIGGIN' MONTHS OUT AND THAT'S THEIR NUMBER ONE CONCERN?

I'm frustrated, so my apologies if this devolves into a rant. 13 new Scouts crossed over from Webelos last month. We intentionally let them hang as a group for a few weeks before forming patrols. We're camping this weekend so at last week's troop meeting we asked the boys to form themselves into to patrols. We explained the new Scout patrol system, that it's not like being in different Cub dens and only seeing your buddies at pack meetings, that for instruction and activities much of the time they'll all be in one big group, that the patrols mainly tent and cook together on campouts, there's plenty of time to hang with your mates regardless of what patrol they're in, etc., etc., etc., yadda, yadda, yadda, blah, blah, blah. So we asked the Scouts to divide themselves into two groups of 7 and 6 Scouts. Dumb looks, no movement. The Troop Guides looked at me and shrugged. So I stepped in (normally I would not have, but the TGs are rookies and the ASPL in charge was out sick) and told all boys to buddy-up with the guy they wanted to tent with and hold hands over their heads. Of course there would be one group of three, but that's okay since each patrol has at least one three-man tent for just such a purpose. That worked. I then asked each set of buddies to join with two more sets to form the patrols. That worked too. Then I told the boys, these are your two patrols. "Is everyone okay with this? (Nods) Now is your chance to make a change. Everyone has their buddy in the patrol patrol with them, right? (More nods). Because I dont' want to get phone calls from your moms this week that you didn't get in the patrol you wanted to. Everyone is happy, right, because this is your last chance....." Next I walked around the corner to where the CC was meeting with the new scout parents. I explained to them the process we had been through. And I specifically told them not to call me complaining about the patrol assignments because the boys made their own decisions and had every opportunity to make changes if they wanted. Everyone chuckled and smiled. Well I don't have to tell you what was in my inbox this morning. In part, "these boys have been together since kindergarten, they hang out together and live in the same neighborhood. (He) felt squeezed out from his friends in the way the patrols were formed because of who he was standing next to and felt it would not be appropriate to speak out because he would hurt the others feelings. (He) is disappointed he will not be camping with his buddies for an entire year.... I would suggest a closer look be made at the patrols." Sigh. In the past, I've created the patrols myself and had complaints. We've let the PLC and/or Troop Guides create the patrols and had complaints. We've let the old Webelos den leaders create the patrols and had complaints. We've let the parents have input into the patrols and that was a bloody mess. Now we've gone old school and let the boys decide and we still get the same results. Six weeks from now, no one will care. Once everyone settles into the patrols it will be fine. Through all the different methods of forming patrols, it's always worked out in the long run. I'm just sick of going through this crap every spring. Thoughts?

No. And I've never seen anyone carry a Scout handbook in the pants cargo pocket either.

Our council requires project proposals on a par with business plan for a SBA loan. I've had Six-Sigma Black Belts scratch their heads over them. Conseqently, the only "Eagle Advisor" function we have is in helping scouts with writing and editing their proposals in such a way that they can get approved by council. Our former Advancement Chair did this, but since he's retired I've taken the job. The same guy who counsels Drafting MB works with the boys on any drawings which may be needed (and usually finishes the MB in the process.) I used to spend anywhere from six to 10 hours meeting with the scout helping him to develop the proposal and then editing and polishing. Of course it was not uncommon for the Scout to spend 25 or 30 hours at it. Over the past few years we've created a proposal template which includes detailed instructions for each section, examples from past, approved proposals, and cut-and-paste samples for things like MSDSs and safety guidelines commonly used materials and tools. I've found the template cuts my time involvement in a proposal easily in half. I can give it to a Scout on a thumb drive or CD, spend an hour walking them through the important stuff and they can generally come back with an 80-90% proposal. But getting the project proposal past the council committee is the only thing we do for Life Scouts we don't do for everyone else.

Ya know, Acco, even though we come to different judgements on the mentor pins, I pretty much agree with that last post. As I posted earlier, we're a full uniform troop. Your story about the flag ceremonies is pretty much an annual thing for us. Our guy are trained that a complete Scout uniform requires all six parts -- hat, necker, shirt, belt, pants and socks. Unlike your troop, at summer camp, you don't leave for dinner until you are in uniform. (And frankly, that's not so much about the uniform as it is about following rules and keeping up with your stuff.) But if you've got those six basic parts, we don't really worry too much about the detail. As it relates to things like patch position and what insignia to wear or not to wear, my approach is to let the boys know what is proper and let go from there. If a boy is especially proud of a patch he earned as a Cub or maybe he's wearing a mile swim patch as a temporary activity patch, good for him. At an appropriate time, I'll make sure he knows that the mile swim patch is intended for his swim trunks not his uniform, but if he leaves it the uniform, I really don't care. I have two brothers in the troop who both earned two levels of religious emblems as Cubs. They both wear two religious emblem knots on their uniforms. At different times, I've struck up conversations about the knots, usually starting with what they did to earn the awards and what a big deal it is. And I mention that instead of wearing two knots, they really should wear one with the two devices indicating the program in which the awards were earned. It was not big deal for either of us. A couple months later, the older brother came up and asked me to explain the devices again. Viola! Learning has occurred. Not long after the older brother showed up with a new uniform shirt with one knot and two devices. Of course the little brother inherited the old shirt, but I'm sure we'll cycle through eventually. I think that's the way it needs to work. We're here to teach boys to make ethical decisions. We teach them what is right and let them practice their decision making skills from there. Getting screamed at by someone pounding a knuckle on copy of the Insigina Guide doesn't allow room for ANY decision making, only compliance.

Reluctantly, I have to agree with desertrat.

The insignia guide isn't that much of a deal. There's four or five pages of national policy, then a page or two per program level on the actual uniforms -- really not much more than than what's on the uniform inspection sheets. The bulk of the book is a description of all the various patches, badges and awards. It's really more of a catalog than a policy guide. Not sure of the value of that.