AltadenaCraig
-
Content Count
131 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Store
Posts posted by AltadenaCraig
-
-
On 6/17/2018 at 3:59 PM, Eagle94-A1 said:
The problem is that it appears that National no longer trusts our Scouts, and wants to make BSA to mean Baby Sitters of America IMHO. From 1910 to 2012, National trusted Scout patrols to do ANY activity, including patrol over night camping with the SM's permission. And from 1910 to October 1, 2018, Patrols could, and continue to do until October 1, 2018, have patrol day activities without adults present.
Some of the things I have done as a Scout, or have seen done, that will be forbidden after October 1, 2018 are the following:
Patrol day hikes without adults
Patrol meetings without adults
Patrol service projects without adults
Patrol shopping trips without adults
Patrol practices for camporee without adults
Patrol fishing trips without adults.
Seems like BSA doesn't trust Scouts, nor us Scouters as far as I am concerned.
I've begun floating to my Troop Committee the idea of establishing one or more Venture Crews for our older scouts.
I'd avoided it previously because I foresaw the boys continuing to work toward Eagle while any girls who'd joined didn't have that option. Moreover there didn't seem to be all that much that a venture crew could do that a scout patrol couldn't. Now with girls able to pursue Eagle, as well as the murky G2SS impending requirements, it's dawning on me that Venturing will be my Underground Railroad to freedom for my older scout patrols.
Such a transition might be a little more complicated for troops with mixed-age patrols, but as all of my troop's patrols are age-based the Venturing option is pretty straightforward. The risk to my troop, however, is a Venture Crew is supposed to be 100% venturer-lead. While my hope would be that any venture crews we establish would function as senior-scout leaders/trainers (meet on the same night as the troop, split-out during patrol-meeting & game-time but otherwise hang-out with the troop), the truth is that any such lingering troop-affiliation would be at the discretion (mercy?) of the venturers. They might fly the coop entirely.
Anyone else seeing Venturing as the answer?
-
On 8/3/2018 at 7:16 PM, Setonfan said:
I heard him and the CSE at the Council of Chiefs. Seems like a real guy, just served as Council President, has a good vision.
Anything in particular regarding his vision that you're comfortable sharing?
-
5 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:
... But I think that while the timing probably is a “sop,” National really does believe in the “belief” requirement ...
I think they do, too, which is what scares me.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a closet atheist - far from it - but I do agree with the earlier posts that Duty to God is redundant given our other values. Moreover, singling that duty out from the others (and without providing additional training or strict limitations on how to discuss that duty), is an invitation to our more fervent scouters to infuse their beliefs into other aspects of the program. My District has already had to remove one Eagle BOR chair for his grilling of candidates' beliefs. With National's doubling-down on the policy I expect other Councils will find themselves wrestling similar problems.
-
7 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:
Has no enterprising Scouter tried to create an unofficial modern day document that details the patrol method?
Queue Clarke Green at Scoutmastercg.com
-
On 5/7/2018 at 11:58 AM, NJCubScouter said:
I can't help but wonder how much of that kind of attitude really originates with the boys and how much of it is generated by parents and leaders.
I heard it at our last Commissioner's meeting and I about blew a gasket - for all of the reasons stated earlier.
Any Council with any sense will try do what the service academies did when they graduated the first females in 1980: They'll bundle all of those with eligibility (based on a range of birthdays) into a "class". There won't be any "first" individuals, just the first class.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, ParkMan said:
Makes me think the BSA had too many eggs in one basket.
Bingo. I've enjoyed - and hope to continue to enjoy - the camaraderie of my LDS Scouter friends (they can still enjoy scouting independent of their church - if they can't, that's another problem). But I've long felt the "LDS Scouting" publications and special classes at Commissioner College made me feel not only that the "tail was wagging the dog", but frankly I felt a tad resentful at the apparent exclusivity.
-
2
-
-
Well that’s what I get for relying on my memory; nice catch NJCubScouter (I’ll swear that strip read Cub Scouts BSA in my day ... but that was 50 years ago!)
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, NJCubScouter said:
That is probably one of the reasons the BSA is not using "Scouts USA" now, they are using "Scouts BSA."
Nothing in this post constitutes a legal opinion or advice nor does this post create an attorney-client relationship. Contact an attorney in your state for legal advice.
More likely the ribbon above the uniform right breast pocket, which for Cubs and Venturers says "Cub Scouts BSA" and "Venturing BSA". Seems reasonable that "Scouts BSA" would be a logical fit between the other two programs.
-
1 hour ago, cocomax said:
The sad thing is the groups of girls out there that are reduced to wearing a simple sash or vest as a "uniform" that are stuck doing safe things like selling cookies and doing arts and crafts . . . meanwhile the Boy Scouts of America just quietly lifted their brand name clean as a whistle.
No kidding. Note that nowhere in this thread do we see "Camp Fire Girls" or "Campfire". Mark my words, GSUSA, you're about to become similarly irrelevant ... and you've brought it all on yourselves. My goodness, with the NY chapter of NOW thumping on us on the one hand and apparently genuine appeals from young ladies seeking "Eagle Scout" on the other, the BSA was straining credulity to ignore the situation. Talk about a gift horse.
If the GSUSA had promoted their Gold Award half as effectively as they've marketed Thin Mints and Do-Si-Do's we wouldn't be having this conversation.
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
-
15 hours ago, SSScout said:
Oh, that's all great. Trombone was my first instrument too. Let him have fun, give him some Tommy Dorsey and Glen Miller, if not Slide Hampton .
Play in the Band: like Scouts, it will get you places and opportunities the other kids won't (can't!) have. Even if you do not become a "music major", the school band /orchestra is a neat place to be (Purdue Marching Band, Rank Captain, Rosebowl 1967).
A real Bugle? Look for an OLD one, they will be a heavier caliber metal and sound stronger. Replace the original thin mouth piece with a Bach 12C, expensive perhaps but much better embrouchure and comfort. Look for "Captain Gallant of the French Foreign Legion". They used the bugle a lot in that show, learn the "Tatoo" from it. If you get tired of the American "Call to the Colors" you can always play the French , And "Boots and Saddles" old TV shows, but neat bugling....
LOVE this! Dorsey, Miller ... and Slide Hampton!!
Our Troop meets near the Rose Bowl and annually attends the parade. Big-10 bands are ALWAYS the best - hands down (something to do with the weather, maybe?) I remember Purdue at the '67 Rose Bowl; later that month your school lost two great alums in Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee.
I made a fuss about the beauty of 'To the Color' followed by 'Retreat', IMHO. But Tatoo beats them all. Though not a MB required piece (likely because its too long) it's lovely nevertheless: http://www.music.army.mil/music/buglecalls/tattoo.asp
-
Wonderful stuff, TAHAWK; thank you so much for the scan and the share. I'm reading it carefully and notice that pages 14 & 15 appear to be missing from the scan, above. If you have access to those pages, would you be so kind as to include them as well? Thanks again for your kindness -
- Craig
-
Wow, congratulations to Bugleson ... and to your Troop for having a Bugler - super!
I'll risk being nit-picky (just because I'm bored right now) and suggest a few modifications to SSScout's wonderful post, above. Note, all of the bugle calls in the links below are required per the Bugling Merit Badge: https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/Merit_Badge_ReqandRes/Bugling.pdf
1. I like the idea of alerting the Troop with "First Call", but as it's officially a "warning that personnel will prepare to assemble for a formation", perhaps the SPL could announce the call with "Ladies & Gentlemen, please find your seats as we'll be starting in a moment". http://www.music.army.mil/music/buglecalls/firstcall.asp
2. I'm not in favor of the bugler blowing "To the Color" as the colors advance, as officially the call is to "render honors to the nation" and "commands all the same courtesies as the National Anthem." Instead, following on the "First Call" warning, I might suggest the SPL invite the audience to "Please rise for the Presentation of the Colors and the Pledge of Allegiance" followed immediately by the Bugler blowing "Assembly" http://www.music.army.mil/music/buglecalls/assembly.asp
3. Upon the SPL (or Honor Patrol Leader) commanding the colors to "...Advance!" (to the front of the audience), "...Halt!" and finally, "...Present the Colors!" at which point the Honor Patrol either presents the colors at the audience front or goes directly to the flag-stands - your choice - and upon "Scouts, Salute! Guests please honor our flag." the bugler plays "To the Color" in full (the most beautiful call there is, IMHO): http://www.music.army.mil/music/buglecalls/tothecolor.asp
4. "Ruffles & Flourishes" for the Scoutmaster? - first, that's not a required call; and second, we're supposed to be Scout-lead. Blowing "Attention" for the awarding of ranks might have the scouts jumping to their feet (and confuse the audience as to whether or not to stand). Instead, the SPL might use "Attention" to get everyone on their feet in preparation for Retreat (as noted, it's an exceptionally brief call): http://www.music.army.mil/music/buglecalls/attention.asp
5. I agree that "Taps" is a tad melancholy and doubly agree "Retreat" is the proper call with which to end the ceremony (the next most beautiful call, after To the Color, IMHO): http://www.music.army.mil/music/buglecalls/retreat.asp
Hope this is helpful and once again I'll add my congratulations to Bugleson and the tip of my hat to SSScout's post -
- Craig
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Eagledad said:
She wrote a detailed Troop Parents Guide that explained the hows and whys our troop functioned. It took her months and she had me review it dozens of times to make sure it was exactly what new parents needed to understand our troop.
I don't suppose you have drafts available that you would be able to share on this thread? Would make a wonderful Christmas present to us!
-
1 hour ago, Tampa Turtle said:
'Thorns and Roses' is always a good campout wrap up--you can get some pretty good raw feedback. Our PLC is always right after the monthly campout and the boy leadership can give their views as well. I really liked someone on here who used "Thorns, Roses, and Buds" -- the Bud representing encouraging signs or opportunities.
We're a "Thorns & Roses (& Buds)" Troop as well. Yep, a great way to clear the air around the final-night campfire; each scout gets to contribute and be heard.
At the following troop meeting we pull from another old-school (JLT ?) tradition: the "Par-18" evaluation. After the opening ceremony, the SPL calls for a voice-vote on each of the previous weekend's activities, requiring consensus on each question (from one to three ... you know it was really awful if they yell "zero!"):
- Was the job completed?
- Was it completed On Time?
- Was it completed correctly?
- Did everyone in the group participate?
- Was everyone in the group pleased with the effort?
- Is everyone in the group eager for the next job?
Activities receiving "all 3's" results in 18 (thus the name). The last question usually results in some scouts shouting "what IS the next job?!"" at which point the Scribe points to the calendar.
-
2 minutes ago, Tampa Turtle said:
One year in our Troop we sent some senior leadership boys to NYLT and they came back all fired up and into the patrol method and youth led. It was all fine and dandy until the boys started planning things some adults didn't like (a movie/nacho night and a gaming night lock-in overnighter) because "It did not seem to fulfill a purpose" and the next year there was no more money to underwrite NYLT.
I had a similar experience. One year our Troop sent a critical mass of scouts to NYLT who came back all fired-up, etc. That was the last time our troop sent any scouts to NYLT until I took over as Scoutmaster four years later. Thus the need to promote attendance and in include that as part of the "grade".
Potential "gaming"? No doubt. I expect that happens across all organizations and industries. But it shouldn't stop us from trying.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, RememberSchiff said:
Glad no one has mentioned JTE yet.
29 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:What, like we all agree?
My view of proper Boy Scouting would be that the PLC plans, the leaders lead, and the adults are resources, safety officers, and coaches - period.
Under that view, the desire of some adults for an easier activity is something for the leaders (which excludes adults for planning purposes) to consider and decide, recalling that the program is for the Scouts, not the adults.
I'm actually rather fond of the JTE as a balanced scorecard. At a high level it emphasizes a sustainable, fiscally responsible organization with a program providing overnight camping and service projects. All good metrics at the organizational level. But an organizational scorecard provides only one view. Nearly all of the concerns expressed in this thread are with operations (Scout-lead vs. Adult-lead) ... for which the JTE can't measure, nor was it designed to measure.
I strongly agree the BSA should take longer strides at QA of the operational component, along the lines of "the view of the scout". As a strawman, I propose the following: a) Infuse NYLT with a stronger dose of the Patrol Method. Run scenarios with scouts & staff role-playing the right-way vs. wrong-way to run Patrol meetings, Troop meetings, PLC's, Campouts, Day-outings, Service Projects, and Annual Planning. Emphasize that Scout-lead is the only way to run these activities and "a troop is posing if it's not being run accordingly". Next b) measure Districts by percentage of 1st Class scouts who attend the bolstered NYLT. Really push attendance. After all, Sec. Robert Gates claims NYLT (or JLT, whatever back in the day) was "the only formal management training [he] ever had." Finally c) subsequently eMail each attendee an online survey against which he compares the operations of his troop with what he'd learned in NYLT. The questionnaire should measure all of the scout-lead suggestions provided by TAHAWK and others herein on this thread - grade the actions of Scoutmasters, PLC's, ASM's, meetings, outings; etc.. Provide Districts with feedback on each of their Troops. If anonymity is compromised because enough of a Troop's scouts didn't attend NYLT, return some kind of "no grade" until they do. Publicize/Promote those troops with high grades and I'll bet not only will the strong survive and flourish, the weak organizations will either improve or perish.
Perhaps provide such a questionnaire to ASM's for a 360 view of each Troop. As Scouts & Scouters are expected to be Trustworthy, etc., I'd expect legitimate responses - else some kind of link allowing whistle-blowing of any manipulation etc.
Expensive? Probably. Worthwhile? Absolutely. My $.02
-
I'm more sympathetic to mentorship.
I agree we should avoid "checklists" and "policies", etc., which in my experience result in tying my hands as Scoutmaster more than they compel performance in a POR. On the other hand I do see value in the mentor idea in order to "set a scout up for success" when refocusing or starting a troop anew. At the risk of taking some quotes on this thread out of context, here are a couple of examples:
...
A Committee has three major roles and one minor role:
...
Major 2: Provide logistical, financial and administrative support to the Troop.
...
In providing logistical and administrative support, a fully staffed Troop Committee typically has an Equipment Coordinator and a Chaplain. Isn't it reasonable to expect these adults to have some interaction - mentor, if you will - the scout Quartermaster and Chaplain's Aide?
The committee is responsible for the SM guiding the program toward the vision and goals.... I have no problem with them asking questions or suggesting ideas ...
As for who mentors who, it really depends on how much the program is using the patrol method and the maturity of the youth leaders. 11 and 12 year old PLs need a lot more mentoring than 15 year olds. Who does that mentoring depends on the maturity of the older Scouts.
..
Mentoring is important to our program, but the goal is for most of the mentoring to be done by Scouts.
...
So, to answer the OP, I would suggest the mentors should approach their role as mentoring future mentors. Not leaders.I agree in a fully operational troop the prior holders of POR's would guide and mentor the incumbents. But for those troops just starting out, or for established units undergoing a major shift (I can't imagine how a major equipment purchase, e.g., wouldn't require coordination between the adult Equipment Coordinator and the scout Quartermaster) I think temporary mentorship is a worthwhile idea. With a little creativity, I would expect other adult and scout roles could be lined up as well. Not for evaluation, simply for guidance.
Respectfully -
Craig
-
Could GS/USA have built troops based on charter partners, removed size limits on units, and highlighted multi-age units that engage in outdoor activities? Yes. They didn't. So here we are...
... And could the GSUSA have promoted their Gold Award as effectively as they do their Thin Mints and Doe-si-Doe's to bring it on par with our Eagle (as it should be), and worked with the NYC chapter of NOW to retain their support of single-gender programs instead of badgering the BSA to open its ranks to both? Yes. They didn't. So here we are ...
-
1
-
-
Be reminded, this is NOT about serving girls, or other altruistic pursuits. This is purely about numbers and fee paying participants and ultimately money. BSA is down in numbers and thus money to National.
...
Remember what they said in All the Presidents Man...Follow the money
No doubt there's truth in your argument, Jameson76, the BSA & GSUSA are each facing a Donner-Party crises (and we know what happened to them). Nevertheless, you can't deny the media drumbeats the BSA has heard from organizations such as NOW http://nownyc.org/press-releases/national-organization-women-calls-boy-scouts-america-end-discriminatory-policies-let-girls-join/ and from compelling individuals such as Sydney Ireland http://www.npr.org/2017/04/29/526021195/meet-the-teenage-girl-who-wants-to-be-a-boy-scout.
MattR and mds3d, above, perfectly articulate the flaw with the GSUSA model relative to the outdoor program. Coupled with the GSUSA's inept marketing of their Gold Award (I have a Gold Award recipient daughter as well as an Eagle Scout son and I know she put every bit as much into her achievement as he did his), I'm surprised the clamor to join the rest of the First World in providing a co-ed program hasn't been louder.
I would, however, like to see more media focus on the GSUSA and how they brought this on themselves. The BSA may be playing a numbers game, but between the media drumbeats on the one hand, and the GSUSA's indolence on the other, they would have rightly been accused of looking a gift-horse in the mouth had they not taken steps to go co-ed.
-
2
-
-
Would somebody please reference the BSA source material for "manly" or "turning boys into men"? I've read and re-read the "Aims and Methods of Scouting" and the word "man" doesn't appear and the only derivative that does is "humankind".
Just as the Guide to Advancement delineates the requirement as written - no more and no less - as the standard by which a Scout's merit badge or an advancement is attained, I believe Scouters are bound to the Aims and Methods - no more and no less - as our purpose.
We get ourselves into trouble when we invent our own aims & methods. We're much better off when we stick to the book.
-
1
-
-
Here's a link to a rather interesting article which "Kim" posted over on Scoutmastercg.com: http://www.scoutcollecting.co.uk/post-girls_in_scouting___when_did_it_all_begin.html
This UK article is dated 2013 and chronicles Robert Baden Powell's early thoughts on girls in scouting. It features a 1908 letter (5 years before Girl Guides) from Baden Powell replying to a girl who wished to become a Scout:
I am glad to hear you are taking up scouting. I think there can be girl scouts just as well as boy scouts, and hope you will form a patrol, and let us know as yours will be the first girl scout patrol.
Most surprising (to me) is the picture from the 1909 "Scouting for Boys" which details uniform requirements ... for girls!
-
2
-
-
qwaze: here's a more thorough excerpt from her book: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/has-the-smartphone-destroyed-a-generation/534198/
I share Eagledad's opinion that Scouting is an antidote to Twenge's thesis (and should be vigorously Marketed as such). However my prescription differs somewhat in that what's needed is a healthy dose of the Patrol Method.
Agreed that the Patrol Method should occur primarily outdoors - though occasionally indoors for some Service Projects - but my point is that Twenge's argument is that peer-to-peer interactive social skills are at extreme risk. Plucking boys out of their computer-coma's and plopping them in the Outdoors is definitely a step in the right direction; however the cure (in my mind) is the interaction demanded by the Patrol Method.
Jean Twenge is also quoted in this Time.com article from yesterday: http://time.com/4974863/kids-smartphones-depression/
Additionally the article highlights "the latest statistics on teen mental health":
Between 2010 and 2016, the number of adolescents who experienced at least one major depressive episode leapt by 60%, according to a nationwide survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The 2016 survey of 17,000 kids found that about 13% of them had a major depressive episode, compared to 8% of the kids surveyed in 2010. Suicide deaths among people age 10 to 19 have also risen sharply, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ... All this followed a period during the late-1990s and early 2000s when rates of adolescent depression and suicide mostly held steady or declined.
Elsewhere though, the article makes an observation which should be a caution to all of us (and work to avoid being "one more thing" in busy parents' lives):
There are doubtless many factors contributing to teen depression. Parents say kids today are busier than ever before—their lives increasingly crammed with the extracurriculars required to gain admission to a good college.
-
What I find interesting is that girls will be admitted to Cub Scouts in the "2018 program year" (question: Does the "program year" start in January, or September?) but the new girls' Boy Scout-age program "will be announced in 2018 and projected to be available in 2019." I believe that in the famous video, CSE Surbaugh said this is what they would NOT do; he said the change in Cub Scouts membership would NOT be implemented until a new program was in place for the girl-Webelos to cross over to. My interpretation of this is that National is really anxious to start signing up girls for Cub Scouts but they realized it was going to take some time to work out the logistics of an entirely new program - even if it is identical to Boy Scouts in program, advancement, etc., and the reference to Eagle suggests that that may be the plan. Also notice the word "projected", which means they will TRY to have the program implemented in 2019. Projections have a way of changing over time.
It also gives the GSUSA some breathing space to make some decisions. The tone of the announcement suggests the BSA agrees there's value in preserving single-gender programs, which has been the GSUSA's primary objection to the BSA's forays. With this announcement the GSUSA should think seriously about the BSA's offer to partner. Their days are numbered.
-
I'm throwing-in my $.02 here as we just completed a planning exercise that appears to work for us. Up until a few years ago our annual planning was a marathon event held on our Scoutmaster's backyard deck. The Scoutmaster reigned over the process (as he kept the planning calendar in front of himself). Enthusiastic Scouts and their parents would arrive and begin the process in earnest planning for the following January. By mid-day they'd completed planning up to Spring but energy was flagging so pizzas were ordered. With goodwill still strong and after a second wind the session continued. We eventually managed to get through the Summer planning but by then energy was completely depleted and the Scouts were out horsing around and the thing devolved into chaos. The Scoutmaster wound up planning for Sep through Dec. And every year it was the same.
When I took over as Scoutmaster I was determined to make the process more Scout-lead and less grueling. As our tradition is to elect SPL's twice per year - thus two PLC administrations for 6mos, each - my plan was to give each PLC administration an equal bite at the planning "apple" by splitting the annual planning into two sessions and each PLC administration gets to plan a six-month bloc. It has since proved to be not only more equitable, but also more manageable as the Scouts only have to focus on half a year at a time instead of a twelve month marathon.
For the past few years now we've set each of the planning sessions on a weekend afternoon, inviting the PLC as well as the Staff (Quartermaster, Chaplain's Aide, etc.) as well as the Scoutmaster Corps and Troop Committee Chair. We start at 3:30pm and incorporate a Bar-b-Que. I purchase a desktop calendar from an office-supply store, as well as several bright post-it colors (representing Overnighters, Service Projects, Meetings, Hikes & Outings, & District Events) and Sharpies. The other adults and I sit back while the Scouts have at-it with the Sharpies and post-its. Along with the Bar-b-que it seems to have met my goal of being more Scout-lead and less grueling.
Nevertheless I'm always looking for ways to improve and finding a way to reinforce the Patrol Method is now a key focus of mine. Consequently I'm intrigued by @Stosh/@Lurking's method, above, and I'm running it through my head to try it on and see what fits. Meantime, for those of you who are planning at the Troop-level, but are frustrated by marathon annual planning sessions you might consider aligning your planning horizon with your PLC administrations and break-up the marathon accordingly. YIS -
- Craig
-
1
-
Oct 1, 2018 - GSS ends Patrol Method?
in Issues & Politics
Posted · Edited by AltadenaCraig
specified "within the upcoming G2SS"
I really like ParkMan's "stages". Parkman may not have served, but I was an active-duty regular US Army officer for several years, and Parkman's model works into my thinking. But I guess that really shouldn't be a surprise given Scouting's development. Arguably it was Baden-Powell's Boer War leadership skills that gave context and structure to the wonderful outdoor experiences which Beard and Seton were introducing to the youth of their day.
I gather the "problem" we're trying to solve here is the Patrol Method for "Stage 3" or thereabouts within the upcoming G2SS. I'm envious of those highly developed troops with experienced 15-17 yr old scouts - and I wouldn't want to prescribe anything to derail what's working for them - but for those of us who are still building up the inertia, I'm contemplating adding something compelling for our >15 yr olds. Something to help give a boost to the flywheel that will both keep the Stage-3'rs engaged while also allowing them to serve as "officers" for the rest of the troop.
So I've suggested to a few in our Troop Committee that we consider establishing our senior (Stage 3) patrols as Venture Crews. G2SS allows for higher-caliber and pistol shooting in venturing, as well as activities such as search-&-rescue, etc. The upcoming registration changes will soon allow ALL venturers - both boys & girls - to continue pursuing Eagle together, so there would be complete commonality of advancement as well.
@Sentinal, what do you think of that idea? My biggest concern is that true Venturing suggests allowing the crews near autonomy - and while I agree that "Scout Lead" is not a license for Scouters to abdicate - can Scouters at least compel the crews to meet on the same night as the troop, and also mentor them to fulfill their "Stage 3" troop officership while also allowing them as Venture crews to pursue extreme-high-adventure activities? Clarke Green over at Scoutmastercg.com has mentioned his troop is running along these lines. Others?