ianwilkins

On a static camp, or dump camp, here in the UK, we (though I'm not speaking for the whole of the UK, actually, I am pretty sure there is no mandated right way to wash up) use the bin and three bowl method.

A bin at one end of the table

Then the three bowls...

1. hand hot water with washing up liquid

2. hand hot water with washing up liquid

3. hand water with no washing up liquid

Scrape as much food and sauce of the plate as possible into the bin

Wash off all remaining food in the first bowl with a brush/sponge/cloth

Clean it in the second bowl

Rinse it in the third bowl

Put it on the drying rack

When the middle bowl starts to get dirty from the food that didn't quite get washed off in the first bowl, or the first bowl is looking decidedly manky, get rid, get another bowl of clean hand hot water, and that becomes the new third bowl, third bowl becomes the second bowl, adding some washing up liquid, and the second bowl becomes the first.

Stuff on the drying rack either gets dried with a tea towel, or left to air dry, depending on numbers camping and number of drying racks.

That's because we happen to mass cater for everyone on camp.

If we were doing a patrol camp, we'd do it like you'd do at home, maybe two bowls, or probably just one, and left on the rack to dry. Or I know some specify each person has a "dilly bag" that has plate, bowl, mug, and cutlery in, and stuff goes back in there once dry.

Not killed anyone yet.

Classic. They all like pink too right?

Easy solved. Don't buy the magazine. If enough people don't buy the magazine, they will either try and work out why, and change, or fold. If people are buying the magazine, then that must be what they want. Just because it's not some peoples idea of what they should want, doesn't mean they shouldn't have it.

As Cambridge skip says, yes, we Explorer Scouts go winter camping, yes, south of england, it's commonly a very British winter, mild and a bit wet. Though last year we struck gold with a couple of inches of snow on the Sunday morning. Not enough to cause travel chaos (that's about 4", seriously), but enough for snowball fights. Usually though, it's mud that's the issue. We happen to use "tepees", though they aren't really tepees, more accurately called a Laavu, Finland again, or the Sami people of Lapland I think, shaped like a tepee, but one central pole, and lightweight modern fabric. An 8-10 man tent can fit 8 in realistically, yet packs up small enough for one person to carry, we keep each one in an army duffle bag.

The other issue, apart from mud, is when it is cold, the kids don't really have the kit. Some have a 3 season sleeping bag, and with an extra duvet and thermals, that can be ok, but some have very poor sleeping bags, and I'm sure 2 x 2 season bags does not equal 1 x 4 season.

We get plenty of leader help usually. The leaders seem to relish the challenge. And the winter camp we go on usually has loads of activities for the explorers, so we tend to hang around our campsite, drink tea, and chop wood. Who wouldn't want to do that?

I say shop around, if you can, Boy Led or not, the troop will reflect the boys and the leaders in them, what might be right for many, may not be right for yours. I've seen it a fair few times, when cub packs and scout troops have wildly different programmes, it can be difficult for kids to move up, as they don't like the new style. My son was the same, in the UK, loved Beavers (aged 6-8) like crazy, hated Cubs (8-10). Left. Not pulled on a woggle since. You can't change the past, so let it go, but you can influence the future.

@@qwazse my first downvote. Woe is me!

 

The more important questions (and harder ones to answer):

• are boys missing something important because certain classes are banned from attempting a program designed for them? And,
• do boys lose interest in scouting because certain classes are banned from that program?

Right now, I lean towards "no" for both. I'm not sure what data I would need for me to lean towards "yes."

Yes, I'm not sure there's any quantifiable answer to either of those. Over this side of the pond, co-ed and all that, we do have one local anomaly, a cub leader has refused to go mixed, as "boys need their own space" in her opinion, yet they were fine with their daughter being one of my explorer scouts. That's different apparently.

I can sort of see the point, if "boys need their own space", maybe they do, if the leader would change the programme to accommodate girls, scouts is no longer what it was. There's also a whole raft of discussion around how girls develop earlier, and the self fulfilling nature of girls being organised and boys not at a certain age. I.e. in the UK, as scouts runs to 14.5, quite often the girls seem to be better patrol leaders at that stage, so you could say that boys are missing out on learning how to be better leaders. Or you could look at it as "they're all scouts", and the patrol leaders are the best ones at the time for the job, their gender is irrelevant.

"do boys lose interest in scouting because certain classes are banned from that program?"

Well, the reverse of that same coin...are boys put off because there are girls in the programme? Possibly, some, maybe, but who knows? It's rather imponderable. Though it probably won't stop us pondering all the same.

Changing the requirements of the Eagle award won't raise the honor for girls, it will only take it from the boys.

 

If you changed the Eagle award so that someone without testicles could be awarded it, and changed nothing else, would that still take honour from the boys?

In my unit, in the UK, adults pay nothing, generally, unless the cost of the adults attending would add prohibitively to the cost for the kids. I think we (the unit, not speaking for all UK scouts) work on the principle that leaders give up their time, it's wrong to expect them to put their hands in their pockets. When we had an expensive trip to Portugal, leaders paid, when we have our normal camps, their costs, food, camp fees, are either divided and added to the cost of the camp for the kids, or the unit funds subsidise the camp. If the unit wanted to buy a tent, if a leader bought it on their credit card, I'd expect them to put in an expense claim and get the money back, this can roll down to silly things like pens, if you needed them for a particular thing. We take the leader's time, we take them away from their family, they also need to dip into their own pockets to kit themselves out, I mean, I probably wouldn't have a $60 headtorch, $150 boots, $100 rucksack, several tents, if I wasn't in scouting, some leaders choose what car to drive, and take scouting into account. Some leaders, including me to an extent, aren't so bothered about the money, don't do a good job of keep receipts for things, don't bother claiming for fuel when driving kids about etc.

I know there are other units and troops in the UK that will charge their adults for camps too.

In the UK, we went coed some time ago, and didn't change the requirements for our top award, the Queen's Scout Award. It retains the same honour as it always has (well, I'm guessing old Queen's Scouts, or indeed King's Scouts, not many of them left, many would say "ooh, it was much harder in my day", same with exams) I'm sure there were "political correctness gone mad" grumbles at the time, but not, as far as I recall, about girls becoming Queen's Scouts.

In my opinion, if you were going to let girls get eagle, it would only be by letting them take all the steps that a current eagle takes, i.e. the award is not watered down. Of course, from what I read here, that's...improbable...or rather, it's looking at it from the wrong end. Having slipped girls into Venturing, if you wanted girls to eagle, they would, in my limited understanding, need to be in the troop, and make 1st class. It's almost an unintended consequence, except they can't join the troop.

Question...Can a boy currently join scouting (i.e. not been a cub etc) at 14 and make eagle?

Girls is an interesting issue.

 

From 1991 each individual group could chose whether to be coed or not. From 2003 all new groups had to be and from 2007 all groups had to be. 

Certainly is! For the first time we had more girls than boys on our explorer summer camp. They're all just "explorers" to me, though one instructor did ask how come girls are in scouts...ooof he got the death stare from some of our young ladies. 

Small point of UK order. Ventures, which was a section started in 1967 for 15.5 to 21 year old, that was phased out when Explorers and Network started in 2002/3. Ventures was co-ed from 1976.

Ian

We had three hot days at camp this week. The clouds opened up this morning. My first year camper program where all my boys are are body surfing in the mud...in their full uniforms. It's a good thing I won't have to listen to irate parents until we get home Saturday noon. I sometimes wish I was eleven again, it sure looks like fun.

 

Ian, this was not part of the camp program, and I don't think it would be at any other camp either.

Yes, but neither was our explorers sneakily pulling an all nighter and/or sleeping in a nearby field on the last night of camp. Was I angry? Not a chance, no one is going to remember the night Ian sent them to bed on time are they? The night stargazing however... If nothing else we're in the business of making good memories. Like you say, if I could have laid in the field stargazing with them, and not been tucked up in bed so I was awake enough to drive the minibus home...damn straight I'd have been there with them.

We had a massive mud fight last year. As you say, not on the programme. Probably didn't do the local flora much good, and a few entries in the accident book read "there's mud in your eye", but...sometimes it's good to let the programme fly out the window and let anarchy reign for a while.

Ian

One more distinction that I learned about: firearms. I heard that Brits only had access to air rifles.

BSA camps try to at least provide a range with BB guns for Cubs and .22 rifles for Boy Scouts.

In addition, shotgun and muzzle loaders may be available at certain camps ... Pistols and large bore rifles may be available to venturers.

You're right, mostly, many scout campsites in the UK will have a shooting range, it will almost certainly be for air rifles. I had to look it up, and  we can use air pistols, but I haven't seen one in a long time. I'd guess it's easier to run a safe range with a rifle than a pistol.

We are allowed to go to a government approved small bore range with an affiliated and registered club, and shoot .22 rifles, full bore rifles (no, I don't know what that means, .303 I suspect). I know our County Scout shooting club runs a day at Bisley (basically, UK shooting HQ) where they get to try these in competition.

We can also go to external activity providers and clubs and do shooting with shotguns, clay pigeon shooting, stuff like that. Expense prohibits most of the time though.

Two years ago we hosted some portuguese explorer scouts, who were very keen on doing air rifle shooting, as they just didn't do it in Portugal, apparently they always used shotguns for their shooting.

Ian

Hello! This is the UK calling! Nice to meet you.

Ian

A question from the other side of the pond...spurred on a little by that youtube video someone posted on differences between UK and USA...

So, in my head, I've got the image of a BSA scout camp, but I've no idea how accurate that is.

Part of what is in my head is the hollywood version of "summer camp", there's always a lake, it's always in the woods, kids are sleeping in dorms, or huts, or something like that. Maybe I've watched Addams Family Values one too many times. Part is what I've read on here, merit badges are done, kids go swimming, kids do stuff. It sounds like there's an organised programme of events run by the campsite, so lots of kids from lots of troops go, and they do stuff laid on by the staff. But there's also "high adventure", and Philmont, but Philmont seems like hiking between activities or something. I'm being deliberately vague.

In return...in the UK, I'd say it's a broad church.

Last week we took 27 explorer scouts up to the Peak District here in the UK, it's rather picturesque, we did some active stuff, canoeing, climbing on proper rocks not climbing walls with artificial holds, caving, abseiling off an old railway viaduct 90' high, went for a swim in the local public pool, and they also did a two day lightweight expedition, carrying their kit, and feeding themselves with what they took. They also had two nights cooking for themselves in teams, using dutch ovens on open fires, and most days one team would be cooking breakfast for everyone, and another would wash-up for everyone.

On the other hand, a friend of mine has taken his scouts to a local site with no activities, where I think they will be in their patrols all week, playing team games, learning scout skills, probably cooking and looking after themselves as a patrol.

One year we went to Portugal, and did a lot of sightseeing, as well as activities. One explorer described it as "great fun, a brilliant holiday, not what I'd call a scout camp exactly", and another year we hosted some Portuguese scouts, who we took sightseeing in London for a few days.

Other troops might take their scouts to something like Essex International Jamboree, where there are thousands of scouts all together, while others might borrow a farmer's field that has not much more than a tap.

Do you have the same variety in the states? Or is it that most do one thing, and a few do other things?

Ian

And in an parallel thought, when I learnt software design, we got taught that some sort of funny bubble diagram of whatever methodology it was should have 7 +/-2 items on them, i.e. between 5 and 9, as the theory was that any more than 9 was too much for the brain to take in, and 5 too few to really show anything.

Then if you look at how the army patrol Baden Powell would have sent out was formed, I'm sure I saw a diagram with the patrol spread out like a cross. Tricky with 5, too noisy with 9?

8, any more than that and you won't fit in a big patrol tent.

An even number so you all fit in two man tents.

Can split into two teams of four for tag team wrestlemania.

Thanks 'Skip, I figured British scouters could furnish more details and corrections.

We can wait until next week for your reply, or maybe other Brits will round things out.

 

How much do you think the workings of Scout's UK has penetrated the market? For example, here we can't go two weeks without some reference to "Boy Scout" or "Eagle Scout" in reference to some service project or rescue in news or theatre. It's hard to have a conversation with anyone who doesn't ask "Did you earn Eagle?" the minute they got wind that you were in BSA. (GIrl Scouts, on the other hand aren't nearly as well known for their Gold award.) how widely recognized is queen scout?

Arrrggghhh! That British kid! STOP SAYING  "LIKE"!!!!!

Anyway...deep breath...

Queen's Scout. I would say everyone in Scouting knows about it. I would say most Human Resources/Personnel people in large organisations would have heard of it, and it would be an interesting point to bring up in interviews, and for some it might well be the difference between getting an interview and not. If you spoke to the man on the street, and told them you were a scout, the first question wouldn't be "are you a queen's scout?" they'd probably say with a laugh "DYB DYB DYB eh? Ho ho", last time we did that was in the early 70s I think, but still it lingers somewhat. Do Your Best by the way.

It looks like there's a wide difference between scouts, both within and without countries.

Maybe the main differences between The UK Scout Association* and BSA is girls, and maybe god. We have a version of the promise that is ok for atheists to say. I've just come back from summer camp with my Explorer Scouts (14-17) and we had more girls than boys.

We sort of have skill ranks like you, sort of. The Chief Scout Awards you get as you work through the sections. Beavers can earn Bronze, Cubs Silver, Scouts Gold, Explorers Diamond and Platinum, and then it's Queens Scout Award which you can get in Explorers or Network (18-25).

Like I say, it's a broad church, different groups and troops will have a different approach and a different slant to their activities. We have a local scout shooting club, though we only shoot air rifles (handguns banned in the UK except for fairly specialist olympic pistol sports) we have a climbing tower at our local campsite, so we get to do that, some groups will do the Chief Scout Awards, some won't, same with Duke of Edinburgh awards. Some will do a lot of camping, some, not so much. Some major on teamwork, some play lots of team games, some like to go out in the woods and pretend to be Bear Grylls (up to a point). I know scout groups that have learnt how to construct kitchen cabinets, and learnt tiling and painting, while others are off on bike rides and wide games in the woods.

We have a walking weekend in the "mountains" in south Wales in September, but also a weekend where there are discos and a trip to a theme park, and a weekend helping car parking for a sponsored horse ride. We've just run a summer camp where they did climbing, abseiling, caving, canoeing, a two day hike, and for some of the time were cooking their own dinners on fires, and sometimes cooking and washing up for everyone.

The younger sections are keen on our equivalent of merit badges. Explorers generally are not, but then again, some are!

From what I pick up on here, it's a lot more leader led in the UK, with the leader often setting the programme to an extent, and the patrol leader leading the team in that activity. Once you get to Explorers, there isn't officially patrols, but some Units will run with Patrols because that's how they think it should be done. I personally just make up teams on an ad-hoc basis. Neither is wrong as such. In Explorers we work together with the young people to decide what we're up to for the term, but usually it's the leaders that organise it. Some other units will have more young people running things.

* At the start someone referenced British Boy Scouts. An organisation of that name does exist, a much smaller organisation than the main one. As I understand it, split from the main scout association in the late 60s, still wear shorts, lemon squeezer hats, cut their own staves, long socks with garters. To me, they look like a historical reenactment group, but I'm sure if we sat around the fire we'd find plenty of common ground.

I guess you ask two different people about their scouting, and they'll have two different answers, possibly even if they were in the same troop!

Ian

I went to a massive Explorer Scout camp in the UK the other weekend (about 4000 explorers). The Police were there, showing off riot gear and chatting to the Explorers. Just as we walked past them, one turned up with a bag full of donuts for his fellows. I laughed, and suggested to them they may be pandering to stereotypes.

Whenever I eat a krispy kreme, which isn't very often, I feel kinda dirty afterwards.

 

I feel Scouting should be an inclusive organization and Mikosay is the closest thing to being a "secret society" within the organization. Most of the ceremonies and all their buildings are closed to non-members. Members are sworn to secrecy. It creates a "your not one of us" situation unique to this one scout camp.

"Most of the ceremonies and all their buildings are closed to non-members. Members are sworn to secrecy."

I hope I'm not just being overly politically correct, but this rings massive alarm bells with me. Maybe that's just because, as someone else says, that kind of secret society schtick is "not my gig". It just doesn't sit well with me. If a scout is friendly and considerate (or kind and courteous), or a brother to all scouts, or part of the worldwide family of scouting, whatever your wording of the law, lording it over others because they aren't in your special club that you have to be invited to join doesn't sound like fitting the brief.

And when the kid goes home, and tells his folks he joined a secret club run by the grownups and he's not allowed to talk about any of the things that happened in the club....

Maybe I see monsters where there are none, but it seems ripe for potential abuse.

Ian

I once had an enforced wait of about an hour on the bank of a slow moving river in Ireland, with a small group of friends. The sun was out, it was a calm day, so the water was flat as a pancake. The shingle beach where we wandered along seemed to consist almost entirely of flat round stones of various sizes. It wasn't a case of searching for a skimmable stone, they were there, by the hundred, by the thousand maybe. I have the knack of stone skimming. I might even be so bold as to suggest I'm not too bad at it. That hour was total and utter bliss. If I need calm in my head, I try and remember that scene, that feeling. The calmness of the river, sun reflecting off it, the company of friends, and the simple pleasure of skimming stones until my arm ached.

With all these people aimlessly wandering around with blood shot eyes, making no social contact with anyone in their way, how are we "normal" people going to know when the Zombie Apocalypse comes for real?

That's what scouting is isn't it? Preparation for the zombie apocalypse?

_{They are not just staring at the phone, they stop when they find something and get it and move on. This is what we can only hope happens with everyone else. I know there are people who will just stare at their phone and wander around not looking at anything else while in a place that invites you to go to. I just hope it will not always be that way.}

I think it was ever thus. There are people who look up and out, and people who look down and in (and yes, many on the scale from one end to the other). There's people who like to observe things, people who are interested in stuff, and those that seem to let the world wash past them. No doubt Pokemon Go will be no different, some will play it, and only see the game, some will play it as and take an interest in why some things have been marked out as places of interest.

It got released in the UK yesterday. My local scout hut is a pokestop, and after a 1/2 hour game of it with my boy, I almost know what that means.

Not sure, and I know I'm looking at this from a fair distance away, but are the people who comment on fox news articles that representative? Is it unfair of me to suggest that many fox news readers would only think the BSA is ok if there were merit badges for stocking up on canned goods, testing water for fluoride, and semi automatic rifle maintenance? Anything less is liberal namby pamby hiding behind mom's apron nonsense?

Of course, it could be a fine upstanding impartial news broadcaster, but that's not the impression I get.

Ian

Probably the way you face? I don't know much, and maybe it different in the US to where I am in the UK, but I thought rowing was where you had your back to the prow of the boat. 

Actually, the difference is rollocks! Or oar-locks.

Rowing - the oar is attached to the boat

Canoeing - you hold the paddle in your hands, and it's not attached to the boat.

Rowing could be anything from tubby little row boats to sleek race boats

Canoeing is probably what we in the UK would call canadian canoes, open, long, you use a one ended paddle.

Well done to him. Congratulations. 

 

Today:   "you can't say X" and "you hurt my feelings."

 

Sign of the times.

You mean...there's more special snowflakes about?

[i'm joking....JOKING! Sheesh!]