ianwilkins

I had a great day the other week, a leaders only skills day. Basically for newer leaders to have a go at stuff, without having to worry about small people in their charge. We had people doing archery and shooting, back woods cooking, rafting, and me, I was "teaching" hammock skills. 

I say "teaching" in quotes, because I'm not really that much of an expert myself, I'm not writing books on the subject, I haven't even read books on the subject. Thing is, I think a lot of experts like to make things seem more complicated than they really are, or maybe rather go into a whole lot of bewildering depth as it's their specialist subject. Me? I fancied a day at the local campsite playing with hammocks. 

Anyhow...my tip? Learn a tension knot. Something like a prussick knot*, a taut line hitch*, midshipman's hitch*, or similar. It seems, in the UK at least, this is not top of the list when teaching knots. So I had leaders putting up a tarp and needing guy-lines. The simple joy of learning a new knot that was clearly going to be useful was great to behold. They attached one end to the tarp, put the other round a peg, then tied a knot you could move up to tighten it up, and it stayed there under tension. Job done. It's not even a tricky knot/hitch to learn. And knowing you can now always make a guy-line if you don't have one, or your silly bit of plastic breaks.

* Your names might differ. 

A turks head knot, made with anything from string to old charging cables to light up glo wire.

A nice bit of wood bored through and polished up

The aforementioned 1" plastic pipe with a lego minifigure stuck to it

Beads threaded together

One of my Explorers going to the Jamboree is selling a 3D printed woggle but it won't be a cheap option ;).

A rectangular patch or two sewn together into a tube

I would guess pinterest would have...[goes and looks] yes, pinterest has hundreds, possibly thousands, of ideas too.

Would it be beyond the pale to tie a friendship knot in it instead?

On 3/10/2019 at 9:58 PM, MattR said:

This is so different from when I was their age. We made model rockets, planes, boats, etc, explored the nearby woods, played games at night, went fishing, played pickup sports, made radios, and the like. My guess is these scouts have also done some of these things but it's a bit odd that when I asked them what they did for fun they really didn't have an answer. And nobody said that video games are fun. Is it that video games are just a way to create dopamine and sate their brains?

Were video games even a thing when you were a kid? When everything was sepia?

I'm not being funny, but I'd guess they'd pick up on your negativity, and wouldn't want to talk about their enjoyment of video games and risk further scorn or disbelief. Of course they enjoy them, otherwise, why would you do them? Maybe they enjoy the dopamine if that's what you think, but it's still the end result. Video games can be fun, can be social, can be a way of testing yourself against others, testing yourself. Yes, not the same as the outdoors, obviously, but there it is.

12 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

BSA needs to spend more time understanding retention and promoting OUTDOOR PROGRAM, then if you build it they will come.

Nail hit right on the head there.

1 hour ago, malraux said:

https://members.scouts.org.uk/supportresources/4618/gender?cat=377,786&moduleID=10

 

That's from the UK scouting association. Roughly a 3:1 ratio of boys to girls. I don't know that those of us strongly in favor of these changes expect to reach 1:1, generally I expect it to end up at something like 2:1 for a variety of reasons. 

The interesting thing for me is that as you go through the UK sections, the proportion of girls goes up

2018 census gender ratios:

Beavers (aged 6-8) it's 81:19
Cubs (aged 8-10) it's 80:20
Scouts (10-14) it's 75:25
Explorers (14-18) it's 68:32
Network (18-25) it's 63:37

I don't know what to read into that, but my gut feel is boys are sent to Beavers, and as girls find their voice, say "I want to go to Cubs/Scouts/Explorers/Network" increasingly.

Last year we had 18 girls and 24 boys on our Explorer summer camp.

6 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

Just like a council that invited Charles Barkley (not a positive role model) to speak at a fundraising dinner. They raised a lot of money to help Scouts, but we don't point to Sir Charles as someone to pattern themselves after.

A knight of the realm not a good role model? Personally anointed by her Majesty The Queen Elizabeth II? Blimey guv'nor you've got some high standards ain'tcha?

Ian

P.s. 😉 (just in case)

15 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

So he gets a pass for his poor behavior because he's famous?  Really?  Do we want to teach our scouts, "you have to be really trustworthy, at least until you get famous!"  

I would guess he's probably been poorly served by his production company, and maybe the Bulgarian authorities. I wouldn't be surprised if the first he heard of it was shortly before it hit the press. Someone in an office, some fixer somewhere, had to get permission to film there, it wouldn't have been Grylls, that person or persons either missed the national park restrictions, or chose to ignore them, or maybe even bunged officialdom a few lev. Who knows? I don't. But I'd guess by the time Bear got briefed before the trip it was like "we're off for the usual schtick in Bulgaria with celebrity X, see you on the 14th, bring one of your branded knives". At some point a minion should have gone "wait, we can't do x y z here, will that be okay?" so they could then either change the location, or not do it, or yes, I suppose, choose to ignore it. I mean, if they're filming it, they're hardly going to get away with it.

Of course, the cynic in me wouldn't be surprised if the frog killing bit was done outwith the National Park (ok, yeah, or just done anyway) at a different time, all is actually by the book, and all this is just free publicity.

The actual truth is probably lost in the murky grey fog.

10 hours ago, qwazse said:

oh no! Maybe the cookie police have her in interrogation!

Ah HAAA! Nobody expects the Cookie Inquisition!

Our Chief weapon is Samoas! Samoas and Thin Mints! Thin Mints and Samoas! Our two weapons are...

3 hours ago, Mom2Scout said:

To explain a little more...

The boys had this sprung on them.  Imagine being told two weeks prior that oh, we forgot to mention it, but... we are essentially marrying you to a girl troop in two weeks in an arranged marriage.  You have to share all the equipment and troop funds.  Our boys, by the way, had an extremely good popcorn sale season and have typically had a very healthy bank account. On top of that, they are told, not asked, how they are going to mentor this new troop and invite them to events, along with sharing meeting space, which is already kind of tight.

The adult leadership for the new troop so far consists of 3 female leaders that were formerly leaders of our boys and our SM will act as an  ASM for them as well.  Meanwhile, we are constantly worried about events getting cancelled due to not having two deep leadership signing up for things like camping.  There was no real advertising of the girl troop. 

Yes, I know the CO owns everything.  But a Scout is courteous.  A bit more transparency and advance information (like we have a lot of parents concerned about dual campouts, the girls encroaching on activities that might ruin the male bonding experience, etc. -- none of this addressed more than two weeks in advance) would have been nice.  Effectively, if you have your Scoutmaster telling you how you are going to welcome these girls, teach them skills, have them come to troop activities, etc. it is expected (and thus not really a boy troop decision).  They are not being treated like just another troop in the local area where you see them from time to time.  They are linked so tightly that they are nearly one.

Some people aren't very good at communicating. Some aren't very good at putting themselves in others shoes and seeing how someone else might view things, or be so wrapped up in the excitement of what they see as a good thing that they never see someone else might have qualms and reservations.

Into this vacuum, people will talk, assume, jump to conclusions, fret, worry.

Maybe it's all in hand, maybe none of it is, maybe the powers that be don't understand there's a groundswell of concern, worry, which could easily, if not already, morph into frustration, anger, resentment, etc.

The answer is jaw jaw not war war, as ever.

Are the boys genuinely concerned? Or is it just the parents getting het up?

I would suggest talking calmly to the ScoutMaster or the ASMs about some of your concerns. Probably little point talking about the poor communication as that would probably come across as critical when what you should probably focus on the practical concerns of what you're most worried about. So if it's popcorn money and cancelled campouts, focus on those in the first instance. A long list will just be tiresome, and doesn't usually end well, in my experience (memories of one parent answering every answer I gave with "but what about this?....and what about this?"  getting more and more shrill. (I'm NOT saying that's like you by the way) It wasn't pleasant.

That's my recommendation as a UK Scouter that has been a leader since before the UK went fully co-ed, and heard very similar worries to yours, and who also got blindsided by a presentation we all had to attend where I thought a new programme was coming, but it was a new programme, in new sections, new age ranges, and had to get busy allaying fears of kids that thought they might be split from their older friends, and ensuring I spoke in the right ears to ensure that didn't happen, while realising my current role had been done away with. We got through it!

18 minutes ago, Saltface said:

 

I'm curious, do your scouts have the same silly restrictions we do about not shooting each other with toy guns?

Why is [clay pigeon shooting] so expensive?

Sorry, not trying to derail the topic.

Not sure what you mean by "toy" guns. If you mean, literal kids toys, I don't see why not, but they're not firing projectiles. We can use nerf guns, that use foam "bullets", we just need to risk assess it. We can use water pistols, squirt guns, for summer water fights. We can play laserquest. We can go and play paintball (though generally the sites restrict it to over 14 years old for normal power guns).

Clay pigeon shooting is expensive, well, I don't know anyone with a shotgun license and land enough to shoot on, we probably could, with a bit of work, sort something out cheaper than going commercial, but I'd guess the cartridges and the clays would still soon add up.

Anyway, back to WSJ...

16 minutes ago, ShutterbugMom said:

I so disagree with this.  If BSA wants to start a separate girls program, that doesn't both me at all.   And that is what they say, but that is NOT what is being done.

I think a previous reply has put one side of the picture and so...

As I understand it, there's a range of options. The scale goes from

1:  A CO that has a Boys and Girls Troop that share everything except an SM. They might meet same place same time and share the same gear ASMs committee etc. This walks like a co-ed duck, and quacks like a co-ed duck

to

50: A CO that only has a Boys troop, or indeed only has a Girls Troop. They may never go on any big campouts anywhere that ever have any opposite gender Troops at it.

There will be every shade in between.

All points on the scale are allowed under the rules.

No point railing against 1, when if what you want is a 50, go find it, or go make it happen.

7 hours ago, qwazse said:

Not too worried if the American scouts miss out. Most can get range time at home. For those Brits, on the other hand, this might be their only chance to shoot something besides air rifles.

Small point of order...some of our leaders have just got qualified to teach air pistol as well as air rifle. No snickering at the back. Not regularly, but ours have had the opportunity to go to Bisley and shoot all sorts of things, .303 rifles, 300yrd ranges. We could take them clay pigeon shooting, but it's very expensive. 

Oh, and paintball, and nerf guns, and water squirt guns 😛

2 hours ago, Cambridgeskip said:

Interestingly over the weekend applications to join IST as part of the UK contingent reopened at the weekend. No mention of shooting instructors specifically but it does look like they are running short.

Quite right it's a big commitment. I would love to be part of it but throw in travel time and it's the thick end of 3 weeks, I can't commit to that kind of thing.

Yes, I saw that and thought...oooohhhh, yes....then thought...awww, no. Would drop my other leaders in it for our explorers summer camp, and don't have enough leave for near three weeks, and it may put a little grit into the familial wheels, so on balance... it's a no from me.

6 hours ago, Treflienne said:

I think we should view this as having been temporarily helpful for the sake of getting the new girls troops started.   You cannot start a troop unless you find five girls.   The general public already knows that Boys Scouts is a good program for boys.   They just needed the opportunity to realize it was for their girls too.  

(In our new troop,  less than a quarter of the new female scouts have a brother already in Boy Scouts.  So that was a bunch of new families.)

This. As I've said before, in the UK, we went fully co-ed in every section in the early/mid 2000s if memory serves, and still almost every time we go out in uniform someone will comment "oh you have girls in scouts now?"

15 minutes ago, T2Eagle said:

That was a really interesting week;

That's code isn't it? Like "that" summer camp being "such an adventure", or "that didn't quite go to plan"?

13 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

A bunch actually. Most camps in the UK are open to any Scout groups. From what I've heard so is most of the European ones too.

 

Yep. They'd be only too glad to have visitors from a distant arm of the scouting family. Of course, there's Brownsea Island. I mean, physically, I'm sure you must have all bases covered in the US, but going abroad, and if it's done as more of a cultural thing, meeting foreign scouts, visiting old stuff, castles, all that, would be a different dimension to things. I must admit, some of my most vivid and wonderful scout memories have been those when we've been abroad, or hosting foreign scouts.

In the UK there are many Jamborees every summer, which would be a good way of meeting, well, lots of British scouts, and they usually have international guests from many countries, of which you could be one. 

There's a European Jamboree in 2020 in Gdansk Poland.

https://members.scouts.org.uk/supportresources/3234/international-opportunities

I suspect over the next year or so the dollar could get stronger against the pound, so it could be a good time to do a trip.

Oh, and we've also stayed on the Lord Amory, which is a pretty good base for visiting London, sleeping on a boat moored opposite a huge bunch of skyscrapers, and probably half an hour or so from most of the London sites. 

https://www.lordamory.org

That combined with Brownsea, and maybe Gilwell Park, or a UK Jamboree, would be an amazing trip.

Is there any requirement to do anything to earn that world crest?

I know the badge police won't like it, but I would encourage that enthusiasm, light that fire, don't damp it down. Let her wear the badge until the uniform is sorted. Why not?

Or I guess it's an opportunity to express how it's what's inside that counts, that being scout-like doesn't rely on badges and uniform, it's just what you do. Or something.

Sorry, I've probably not helped.

26 minutes ago, perdidochas said:

Don't think so.  I think the story is that Phillips was the disrespectful one.  

I think the story is...thinks are never quite as simple as they first appear. 

It's one of the more dispiriting things I find about modern life, that there are people whose first reaction to those disagreeing with them is to issue a death threat. What's that about? [shakes head sadly]

If only Bill and Ted's "Be Excellent to Each Other" had really become a worldwide mantra.

32 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Will begin my missive tonite. 😁

Secretly, you actually love the drama don't you?

13 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

Thanks for the save. As to @DuctTape point, I misunderstood the incident and thought a scout act of kindness directed towards one of the groups might help. I should have been better informed; I failed the "Covington Catholic Test". 

Good link, and oh so true.

I was reminded of this story from 2017:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/girl-scout-threatened-neo-nazi-protesters-photo-far-right-rally-czech-republic-a7723756.html

Though that was much more straight forward so it seems that this latest culture clash.

Social media and the press seem to lap up these clashes of opposites, it makes a good story, it makes a good contrast, it's a striking picture.

3 hours ago, WAKWIB said:

I agree with the whole "Be Prepared" thing.  Scouts from around the country will be visiting D.C. as a side-trip while going to the Jamboree this summer. It's pretty much a tradition.  In the past, there has not been quite as much "programmed and professional protesting" at the Washington sites. That has drastically changed in the last couple years.  Those Scouts who visit there really need to be taught how to not engage, but ignore.  

Yes, I believe at least one of our county units will be doing that. I think their itinerary is

UK->New York->Jamboree->Toronto->Washington->New York->UK

And yes, it's a tricky skill that you need to learn when people take an interest in you, for good or ill, because you're in a scout uniform. It has varied from cafe owners seeking me out to praise my explorers on their behaviour, to people in almost apoplectic rage that decide your scouts are the source of all their troubles. I prefer the former I'll be honest.

3 hours ago, WAKWIB said:

IMHO, the streets of our Capitol, and other major cities, have become sort of a demented Piccadilly Circus. 

Last time I went to Piccadilly Circus (just last year I think) it was partly pedestrianised, and there were loads of tourists sitting about on the statue and/or taking selfies. Mostly Harmless.

If the older boys was more backpacking or canoeing or other non-car camping trips, surely they need to impress this upon the PLC themselves. I'm pretty sure the adults muscling in and telling the PLC what camps they should be having will be dispiriting and demotivating for the PLC. 

As for the SM demanding everyone go on 50% of camps? You ever been on a camp when some people don't really want to be there? It's not a joyous occasion. Trying to force attendance is fixing the symptom, not the underlying problem.

15 minutes ago, Monkeytamer said:

IThey feel like they should have earned the right, through many years of hard work and endurance to go out as Boy Scouts, not as some name that doesn't even make sense to them.  One of them asked me: "what even is a Scout BSA?  Tat's not even a noun!"  They feel like they earned the right to earn their Eagle Scout and take the mantle as a Boy Scout, just like their brothers and fathers and every other man who ever reached that pinnacle of Boy Scouting.  So they looked at the timelines and realized that by getting their butts in gear, they could make the deadline and stand among the last remaining Boy Scout Eagles instead of as one of the new "Scout BSA" Eagles.  I think they took proactive steps to make something they wanted happen instead of howling at the sky.  I think it was a pretty mature reaction.

What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other word would smell as sweet;

- Shakespeare

As an aside, nice to see in that article the old trope that Baden Powell would be spinning in his grave. [eye roll]

18 hours ago, SSScout said:

I suggest one look to the wonder of the human eye, and convince themselves that it was created totally by an accident.  Evolution directed by a "designer"?   Unthinkable.

It was evolution, no designer. It took all the time in the world.

Current science says earth is 4.51 Billion years old, and life first started about 3.8 BILLION years ago. The first fossils with eyes date from about 540 million years ago...so that's 3.3 billion years to evolve the eye...seems eminently feasible to me.

On 12/15/2018 at 9:50 PM, walk in the woods said:

WaPo article criticising BSA on the last G

 

It's an opinion piece. As we in the UK would say, tomorrow's chip paper. And arguments about god's place in scouting? That's nothing new. I mean, usenet used to have a ggg group, and a pretty unedifying place it was too.