mrkstvns

I would first do the basic online courses on myscouting, then find a local "classroom" IOLS course (Introduction to Outdoor Leadership Skills). If you can't find it locally, you might be able to find it at your troop's summer camp --- most offer some adult learning activities, and IOLS might be one.

After you do the position-specific training and IOLS, you will be deemed "Trained".   Now it's time to start looking into more advanced training (including Wood Badge).

17 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Bicycle.  Scout disassembled and had each of his friends pack a piece of it in their gear.  Then it was reassembled at camp.  Hard to hide.

Ingenious!

I might have to let the SPL chastise that scout, but deep in my heart,  he'd be my new favorite scout....the kind who can think outside the box.

2 hours ago, qwazse said:

Some first-years brought their own tent. Which they set up okay except for in a bit of a dip and with some tarp sticking out of one edge. Rained the first night, and SM got a call from a scout's mom saying her son called home because he was wet and chilled but too embarrassed to wake his PL or and adult up to ask for help.

Yes, I would be quite upset if I found that a scout violated a standing troop rule, ignored his SPL's specific pre-camp instructions, and brought a cell phone to camp. I think our SPL would be quite within his rights to assign that scout to a couple days of latrine cleaning duty.

17 hours ago, elitts said:

Keep in mind that completing this requirement doesn't require a backpacking camp-out.  Our troop sometimes schedules a 10 mile hike during lunch on our normal weekend camp-outs for the express purpose of letting scouts working on the cooking badge prepare a meal. 

You're right, the requirement does say it can be done on a trail hike, but it also says that the scout is to cook 2 meals on that trip....but that's not too tough to manage.

11 minutes ago, perdidochas said:

The solution to the above is to have the 14 year old tent alone, and the 11 and 12 year old in another tent.  In my boys' old troop, they had a rule that Star and above scouts could tent alone.  Most did.  That said, had I been creating the rule, I would have had it be First Class and above, but it was troop tradition long before I was an ASM there. 

Our troop has the same rule. After my son earned his Star rank he made me take him to REI to buy the same small, lightweight tent that his friends got. No rule telling them what kind of tent to get, but fitting in with your peers is evidently its own motivation. Now if he were a hipster like me, he'd buy a heavy army surplus tent....

1 hour ago, fred8033 said:

So ... not to be the slow guy but ... I'm assuming you're joking.  ... I'm asking because it would be really cool to regularly camp with horses.  

I am joking...but yeah, it would be REALLY cool to camp with horses.

There's a Cavalcade trek at Philmont that lets you do just that, and close to home (for me), the Sid Richardson Scout Ranch does a horse camp, but the BEST horse adventure I'm aware of in BSA is run by Cascade Pacific Council.  They do a high adventure trek where you ride 165 miles over 8 days.  Info is here:  https://www.cpcbsa.org/horses 

11 hours ago, mashmaster said:

Can I guess that you just finished with LNT training?   I noticed you recently changed your profile pic.

Nope.  Did it several years ago.  I just occasionally bump into the odd nuance (like shirt colors) that makes me stop and think about boundaries, definitions, and philosophies.

11 hours ago, mashmaster said:

I believe that is a term used for nudists, which is probably more distracting to true outdoorsman.

Oh, dear!  I was thinking of people who study, observe, and learn about the environment over a lifetime (regardless of education credentials, certificates, etc.)  Kind of like this definition:
https://www.environmentalscience.org/career/naturalist

11 hours ago, mashmaster said:

My point is, most people don't agree with you and no matter how much you berate everyone.  

I'm not trying to berate people (or even really to change anyone's mind), rather, simply raise the point and let people ponder it on occasion and maybe understand that "Courtesy" has nothing whatsoever to do with our own perspective or tastes, and everything to do with what somebody else might think.

Frankly, I've always considered point 7 in the LNT principles to be the least convincing, and the least relevant to protecting the environment. After all, why on earth should I care whether I offend some thin-skinned human?  They'll get over it and the forest will still be the forest.  But still, it's there, and I want to understand the most subtle nuances.

See you on the trail!!

13 hours ago, chief027 said:

I'm in California to and most of those rules fall into 2 categories: a) paper rules which are written in the Leader's Guide or other literature and aren't actually enforced or b) allow food to be taken to the campsite but must be stored overnight in the dining hall.

I suppose it depends on where in California you camp.

In Yosemite, there are definitely bears and they have been known to rip up tents, rip the roof of convertibles, and break into steel toolboxes in pickup truck beds to get at food.  The National Park Service now provides reinforced steel lockers where campers can store their coolers. 

Had a great camping trip in Banff National Park in Canada. They had a lot bears there too, and they had the same kind of lockers as Yosemite, where campers could secure their food from marauding bears.  They also required trash to be quickly deposited in a lockable dumpster. Kind of a pain to deal with latches etc every time you wanted to throw stuff away, but it's better than having a bear destroy your campsite.

Food storage rules in remote areas shouldn't be treated as "paper rules"...

Info:
National Park Service:
https://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/lockers.htm
https://www.nps.gov/yose/learn/nature/bears.htm

Parks Canada:  
https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/mtn/ours-bears/securite-safety/camping-propre-bare-camp
https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/mtn/ours-bears

As you may know from the multiple threads in this Forum, there are official guidelines for BSA uniforms, an official guide to placement and appropriateness of badges etc., and. there is even an official uniform inspection form, complete with scoring system and notes for feedback to individual scouts.  The uniform is one of the "methods" of scouting and Scoutmaster position training these days includes a module about the uniform per BSA guidelines.

It has me curious.....does anybody really USE the inspection form or demand adherence to the guidelines?

I constantly see scouts wearing nylon basketball shorts with their class A, blue jeans, unofficial socks, no belt, etc. Sometimes, it seems more scouts are non-compliant with the guidelines than wear the uniform correctly.  But it's never seemed like a particularly big deal to me, especially for routine meetings and troop activities (though I do encourage my own son to dress sharper for things like Court of Honor, Board of Review, etc.)

But INSPECTIONS?  Hmmm.  Scouts isn't the military and I'm not sure that level of discipline is helpful.  But maybe some others do uniform inspections....maybe...

Do any of y'all EVER inspect uniforms?  Know of any units in your district that do so??

BSA Guide to Awards and Insignia
https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33066/33066_Section_1_WEB.pdf

BSA Uniform Inspection Sheet:
https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34048.pdf

56 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

I think I’ll have to go into hiding after sharing this link.  I’ve tried a couple of these.... they are identical cookies to the point the space between chocolate drizzle lines are identical.

I hear that Aldi sells knock-offs of all the popular Girl Scout cookie flavors. 

I might have to give 'em a try.

8 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

Hammocks.  That's the only solution...hammocks

Here in Texas, many of our state parks don't have trees bigger than cacti and scrub mesquite. Tough to hang a hammock.

Not really a problem though, since we just lay our bedrolls out on the ground near our horses.  Naturally, we make sure kids sleep next to kids and horses their own ages and we always have at least 2 female horses in any girl troop. 

On 4/30/2019 at 11:18 AM, fred8033 said:

It seems that BSA should

• Have a Microsoft Word version
• Have a Google doc / form version
• Remove PDF restrictions blocking non-Adobe PDF editors
• Create a web site that enables form-based authoring.

There's some good ideas in this thread...

I particularly like the LAST of those 4 bullet points (web site with form-based editing) for several reasons:

• It doesn't assume or require scouts to pony up a lot of money (Microsoft Word is common, but a license can be expensive)
• It doesn't require creating an account anywhere or being forced to agree to onerous or unethical "Terms of Service" (Google doc might be free, but Google/Gmail account info is just as hackable and exploitable as Facebook, and corporate data abuses just as likely, even though it is true that Facebook seems to have hogged all the bad tech press lately)
• It doesn't require any special license
• It doesn't require installing extra software (not even a PDF reader)

By the way, PDF is more likely to print correctly across platforms and devices than other formats, though it is still frustrating when PDF creators block users or features from functioning, or worse, don't know how to make fields editable. A form that can be filled out online is a whole lot friendlier than one that must be printed out to be used.

10 hours ago, chief027 said:

Here is what I don't get we (Boy Scouts of America) are trying to be the bigger person, and welcome female scouts, and in return what do we get a thank you NO.... we get a lawsuit. The GSUSA should have had the changes to there program years ago when their members said they wanted to camp and not just make crafts and "World Thinking Day"

It saddens me to think that my past donations to GSUSA might be wasted on fat legal fees instead of on programs and equipment that actually help girls learn and grow into competent, confident young women.

I sure am going to miss those Thin Mints next year when I have to politely say "No" to the first girl to ask me for a cookie order... 

8 minutes ago, willray said:

My big worry is when we get the lone, just-crossed-over 10 year old scout on his or her first campout, ineligible to tent with any of the other attendees, alone and terrified in a tent in a thunderstorm.  I don't know what we're going to do when that happens - plans and first-contact and all that make it not worth trying to strategize much before we get there - but National can show me to the door any time they like, if they think I'm making that scout sit alone and cry all night.

How often does that particular scenario really happen?

In most troops, the largest age group is the 11-12 year old. They're the most eager to go on campouts and the most flexible about helping out their fellow scouts. In our troop, we usually get at least 10 new 10-11 year olds joining each year. There's almost always enough to pair up a newcomer with a scout who is the same (or close) in age.  The older scouts tend to be the ones who are less willing to tent with anyone but their friend.

9 hours ago, Liz said:

While I suppose that's possible, I think it's best to take the original post at face value and come up with solutions assuming there really is an allergy going on here. 

Most troops already do that, and I doubt there is a scoutmaster on this forum who would not bend over backwards to help any kid who really had a problem or issue.

In our own troop, probably at least HALF the campouts have no campfire. That's not always by design, it just works out that way because our state is often plagued by drought so we get "burn bans". 

We also don't do campfires on backpacking trips.  On advanced backpacker trips (longer with LNT practices used), we might practice a "campfire alternative", like using candle lanterns (this works well with small groups, like patrol size groups, but is an exercise in futility when we start getting 40 or 50 participants).

Lots of ways around the problem without ever deliberately sabotaging the traditional campout experience...

Have fun!

Nice article!

It's a credit to the organization that they'd have a female scoutmaster just a scant year after BSA was founded.

16 minutes ago, willray said:

Personally, I think the rule is asinine, and there are circumstances where I believe I would come down on the side of National can go suck a lemon, but it behooves people to be aware of where "Oh, that's just too complicated" is almost inevitably going to result in flouting of National's rules.

Hard and fast rules are asinine. No doubt about it. But all adults should be aware of the rules, think about why they might be in place, and do their best to observe the spirit of the rules to the extent it benefits the boys.

There are absolutely situations where the "2 year rule" won't work for a particular campout or for a particular troop (I suspect they are particularly onerous on small troops where you might not have enough scouts to buddy up a given age).  There might be solutions that work though:  like have buddy pairs in most tents, but 3 scouts in one....or letting an older scout have a tent to himself. Most of the time, a solution can be found, and it's best to share the objective with the PL and SPL and let them make the call.

Since we evidently won't all agree on a perfect mode of outdoor dress, here's a rather, errr, immodest proposal.

Everyone should always be buck naked whenever they're outdoors!   

That way NOBODY can complain about what color your shirt might be...problem solved!

1 hour ago, CherokeeScouter said:

Oh, and I would have ONE signature page for the entire project.

You rebel!

Simplified workbook....ONE signature page....where does the insanity end?

Next thing we know, you'll be advocating that EBORs focus on the SUBSTANCE of a scout's project and recognizing their SUCCESS after a long road to Eagle instead of their time-honored practice of spotlighting typos in the application and worrying about whether or not National updated the workbook version number.

After all, what life lesson could possibly be more important than perfect paperwork?

Just now, desertrat77 said:

I agree...but are bright colors part of the annihilation process? 

Of course not. 

And many of y'all are missing the point of the whole discussion.

There is absolutely NOTHING inherently wrong with any particular color. A color is just a color.

The point is that all of us can stand to better understand all 7 of the Leave No Trace principles and to think about how our outdoor manners affect the environment around us.  Usually that means respecting life: the flora and fauna we find outdoors. Point 7 is a bit different. It says "Be considerate of other visitors"

That means we're talking about people. Two parties: you and whoever you encounter.

Being "considerate" can mean different things to each of you, and it depends greatly on the circumstances.

We all know that some people are more easily offended than others. If we are aware of what factors *MIGHT* offend somebody else we are likely to encounter, then we can show courtesy by avoiding that person, or trying to respect them to minimize whatever behavior it is that offends them.

Today, I mentioned that loud colors offend some serious outdoorsmen, such as naturalists, bird watchers, backcountry adventurers etc.  Tomorrow I might share with you the fact that playing loud rap music on your boomboxes might also offend those people. And circling your jet ski around their kayak as they fish might offend some others. Next week I will share a thought about how stargazers would appreciate the courtesy of dimming your flashlights as you approach them instead of waving your new super duper Maglight in their eyes.

Obviously a few of you will say, "Screw 'em if they can't take a joke. It's their problem, not mine."

A few of you might actually ponder how many behaviors you and your scouts take for granted that might be perceived differently by others. One or two of you might even understand that the simple principle to "Be considerate of other visitors" is not an attack on your fashion sense or love of pop culture. It's not even about saving the planet. In fact, it's the last (and arguably least important) of the 7 LNT principles.  And it's just courtesy. (Which is already one of the points of our Scout Law.)

It's fascinating how this simple principle can so easily be misunderstood and argued over with such passion.

Imagine what could happen if we start talking about the first 6 principles!  Now I understand why it takes a full week to get through the LNT Master class... 😉

54 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

Humans and the Earth are more resilient than we give credit for. 

And the closer we get to annihilating life on this planet, the sooner we'll get to find out if you are right.

1 minute ago, perdidochas said:

The point is your blanket statement is incorrect. There are plenty of serious outdoorsman who like bright colors.  If you had said "most" serious outdoorsman in your earlier statement, I wouldn't have quibbled.  The way you stated it implied that you weren't a serious outdoorsman if you liked bright colors.  Also, what's in a store is primarily what the store's marketing department likes, not necessarily serious outdoorsman.  

I suppose it depends on what you call an "outdoorsman".  If you just mean people who like going on weekend campouts in state parks, then maybe so.  But I'm referring to people who are naturalists. Or backcountry adventurers. Some of those people do, indeed, like bright colors....after all, taste is very individual. But aside from personal likes and dislikes, they understand the reasons why most serious outdoor enthusiasts refrain from wearing loud colors in the context of a natural environment. They can like whatever they want, but they respect nature, harmony, and the importance of courtesy towards those who try to find the illusion of solitude in America's dwindling natural spaces.

42 minutes ago, ianwilkins said:

Can't think why the UK doesn't* celebrate American Independence Day. 😇

 

They could call it "Bloody Traitor Day".   

22 minutes ago, perdidochas said:

So now you're saying I'm not a serious outdoorsman?  Basically you are saying that anyone that disagrees on this issue with you can't be a serious outdoorsman.  

Not at all!!

I'm simply observing what is generally true. Just walk through any outdoor store in the world. I'll bet you find a WHOLE lot more camo jackets and khaki shirts than you do brilliant yellow and red shirts...

Similarly, I find that serious auto mechanics tend to have a lot of wrenches...

12 minutes ago, MattR said:

Barbecue. (Where are all the people from Texas?) Burgers with good stuff mixed into the meat will work but marinated something is my favorite. The least expensive is probably chicken thighs. They taste good and have enough fat in them that they're a little more forgiving if they get too much heat.

Howdy MattR!  Ya got your heart in the right place, but y'all friends across the pond can't really be trusted to do barbecue. 

Good barbecue is a work of art. It takes hours and hours of slow smoking with just the right spices, just the right kind of wood and just the right amount of humidity in that smoke. It is not a skill that can be mastered by a new chef reading a few quick messages in a Scouting Form....not in any way that entitles such a dish to be rightly called "Barbecue".

If you want to call your meat covered in sugary sauce a " barbecue", by all means, slap together some quick and dirty recipe using bottled "sauce".  That approach works just fine for chef imposters in Kansas City and Carolina, but it sure don't feed the bull in any part of the Lone Star State!