Cambridgeskip

Can you phrase it slightly differently? Group mergers happen here and usually what you get is the two numbers separated by a back slash. So in Cambridge we have an 11th/9th (pronounced eleventh nineth), and a 6th/17th. Theoretically we have a 7th/23rd/13th but in practice it's too much of a mouthful and as they meet where the 13th always met everyone just calls them the 13th!

Can you be known as 5th/36th or something similar?

I've seen groups here that when they merged different sixes (what we call Dens) and patrols maintain the traditions of the predecesor groups. Different neckers and flags, that kind of thing. Is that possible?

But yes, I understand how history matters. My own group is 107 years old and has traditions so old no one even knows where they came from anymore. 

And as an update..... I've done a draft of a souvenier/promo film for those that were on the course. It's a draft version so it's unlisted on youtube, so you'll need this link for a look. The snow hole in/out scene is for real by the way. While there was some cutting for getting it down to length there was no funny stuff with putting people in and out between takes, they did get that many in there

Way back in 2007 when WSJ was in the UK I took some cubs for a day trip to the site here.

Access for day visitors was restricted. They were not allowed into the actual camping areas themselves unless they knew someone there who acted as their guide. They were though allowed into most of the communal areas like faiths zone, global development zone, all the various things set up by national contingents to showcase their country etc. 

How it will be with you I don't know but it would not surprise me if it was similar.

9 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:

And where do the English stand now on the subject of coed Scouting?  Not separate dens or patrols or linked troops, coed as in coed.  And @Cambridgeskip says they sometimes have boys and girls tenting together.  (!)

I'd add that in the UK boys and girls tenting together is still relatively rare but is increasing.

Hop across the channel to mainland Europe and it is far more common, especially in Scandanavia.

5 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

Not disputing that the activities can be done by anyone of any gender.

That being said, the first sections of the older SM guides are clearly about boys, male youths.  The intent is to focus on the boys, and the program is interpreted and (at the time) designed for boys.  The discussion is about boys.

From the British - About the Boy Scouts Association - Royal Charter 1912

The aim of the Association is to develop good citizenship among boys by forming their character -- -training them in habits of observation, obedience, and self-reliance --- inculcating loyalty and thoughtfulness for others --- teaching them services useful to the public, and handicrafts useful to themselves --- promoting their physical, mental, and spiritual development.

From 1913 Scoutmaster Handbook - The ultimate Aim of Scouting

Aim to secure balanced, symmetrical activities for your patrols. Remember your Scout is four sided, that he is physical, mental, social and religious in his nature. Do not neglect any one side of him, but get the proper agencies to cooperate with you for these ends. Let the boys do what ever they can. Merely insist on adequate adult supervision. Above all be patient, practical and business like and remember that old heads never grow on young shoulders. The Scout Master should take his place in the community by the side of the teacher of secular and religious instruction. He is an educator and is dealing with the most plastic and most valuable asset in the community — boyhood. Let him take his task seriously, look upon his privilege with a desire to accomplish great things, and always remember that the good of the boys is his ultimate aim.

 

The trouble is that the world has changed, beyond recognition, since those texts were written.

Two world wars, the rise and fall of Communism, man has been to the moon, universal suffrage, the admission of women to professions like law and medicine that wouldn't have been dreamed off 100 years ago, the internet. All these things have been massive changes to the world.

Someone from 1912 would probably struggle to recognise the planet if you brought them in a time machine to today. The same will probably be true if you were to find yourself in 2021.

Next month I will go to my cousin's wedding. She's 29 and a fully chartered accountant. She is finance director of the company she works for. Our joint late grandmother wanted to become an accountant when she was in her 20s, that was the 1930s, and she wasn't allowed simply because she was a woman. She had the necessary qualifications. It was simply being a woman.

I am not making a direct comparison with what was an outrageous piece of sexism and the argument that teenage boys and girls are different because there is no comparison. My point is that arguments about things being done a certain way in the early days so should continue to be done that way don't hold water because the world has moved on, massively.

2 hours ago, jamskinner said:

I agree to a point.  Life requires interaction between men and women.   But as you pointed out kids already have ample places to learn in a coed environment.  Boy Scouts has been one area where boys could be together as boys.  Now that is no longer available in your country through scouts.  Are there any other groups in the UK that are all girls or boys?

This is a bit off topic but I saw an article the other day where women are renting a women only office area.  Men are not allowed to rent space there.  Apparently even some adults want  gender segregation.

Thanks for the video.

There are some all boy troops that are theoretically coed but simply don't have any girls. This is partly a hangover from "local option" days. Groups that went coed became known among parents as the groups that would take girls and still have a higher proportion of girls because of that, even a decade on since everyone going coed. Hence other groups don't have as many girls an some have none. There are a few where, according to annecdote, girls are simply not made welcome so never hang around. Not acceptable.

As per another thread groups have the option for running separate boy and girl troops/packs/units but if they take that option MUST run it for both sexes and MUST provide the same opportunities. In practice these are rare, certainly there are none in my district, I've not even heard of one in my county. The vast majority are groups sponsored by conservative mosques or synagogues. Also it is permitted for what are called "closed" groups which are those that are officially part of another body and is only for those who are members of that body, typically it's a private school. They may be single sex if that body is itself single sex. So a boys school can have a boy only troop, a girls school a girl only troop. Again I have yet to ever encounter such a group although I'm told a handful still exist!

Your welcome on the video. There's plenty more on our channel here. Feel free to have a rummage

3 hours ago, cocomax said:

Well, I can tell you one thing after reading the news today and polls and comment sections and twitter, facebook, minds, youtube and gab . . .

The Boy Scouts was a really well loved group by most of America,  I read so many wonderful things about the Boy Scouts, many men that were glad they were Boy Scouts as boys. Many moms that had nice things to say about the Boy Scouts as well as the Girl Scouts.

The general public is taking the end of Boy Scouts pretty hard, as they say you do not realize how much something meant to you until it is gone.

The Boy Scouts will be missed, they had a good run, 108 years.

 

Comment sections are a pretty poor guide to how the public is reacting. They inevitably attract the negative. Take a look at trip adviser for your favourite restaurant, you'll find a surprising number of people giving it terrible reviews. That's because people are more inclined to post something when they have a bad experience than a good one.

Boy Scouts is not over, it's just changing. In twenty years time most people will be surprised it was ever single sex.

1 minute ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 If memory serves, and please correct me if I am not correct @ianwilkins and @Cambridgeskip, when The Scout Association went coed, you could have all male, all female, or coed. Over time there were fewer and fewer all male troops, and eventually everyone was forced to go coed.

I don't think all girl was ever an option except in very specific situations*

At first, from 1991, it was either all boy or coed. From 2003 all new groups had to be coed then from 2007 all had to go coed.

And I use the term "group" quite specifically as it is something you don't at present have, a group here conists of Beavers, Cubs, Scouts and Explorers (Ian, let's not do the complications of how explorers run, let's keep it simple!) run under a single unbrella and you can have multiple troops, packs etc within a group. My group currently has one beaver colony, two cub packs and two scout troops, all fully coed.  There is the option of having a boy pack and a girl pack and a boy troop and girl troop etc. However the emphasis is on the AND. If you separate the sexes you MUST have provision for both. In practice this is normally only seen at groups sponsored by mosques or synagogues.

*Very specific situations are "closed" groups which are formally attached to single sex institutions like a single sex school.

2 minutes ago, MattR said:

I have one very important question. @Cambridgeskip, did you win the bet or did I? I think you got one wrong and one right.

 

I'll buy you and Mrs MattR a beer next week!

As it happens looking at this I think the "Scout me in" is the only part of this that I would be very wary of.

Marketing is a two edged sword at the best of time, marketing to teenagers even more so.

As soon as you introduce a slogan for something that is most definitely not "cool" it can be used as a stick by the bullies to metaphorically beat kids that are scouts with.

I'll have a £5 bet on the announcement being;

1. The name of the organisation will change from Boy Scouts of American to either BSA or Scouts or America

2. The 11-17 program will change its name from Boy Scouts to Scouts.

Simples!

As per Ian's comments, once these places are gone they are gone.

I don't want the history your side of the pond is but here many scout campsites are the results of generous donations by often wealthy and benevolant landowners back in the early days of scouting, either as a gift or at a very generous price. The days where that kind of things happens are mostly long gone. And as populations rise and demand for housing goes up land becomes ever more valuable.

We sell it off at our peril.

2 hours ago, cocomax said:

From The Article:

Tatum Weir agreed. She had been to a few of her brother’s meetings — their dad is the assistant den leader — and was eager to join.

“I thought it would be pretty cool because I thought it would be a good opportunity to do with my brother,” she said. “There’s a lot of cool activities.”

Asked what he likes about Cub Scouts, Ian Weir ticked off a short list: going places, nature, and “Tatum’s in it.”

“I was a little skeptical because it was me and my dad’s thing, but when Tatum got in it was even more fun,” he said.

 

-------

 

Clearly Mr Weir is the assistant den leader and Mr Pescosolido is the den leader.  We have 2 men leading a pack of 8 kids,    4 boys and 4 girls.

This breaks YPT rules as well as the no mixed dens rule.

 

 

 

How do you know there wasn't a female assistant there as well who just isn't referred to in the article? 

It's what I'd expect.

27 years since the UK went fully coed and we get almost identical comments under any story that involves a girl in scouts.

Youve got decades of this to come. Enjoy!

Seriously? This is shocking.

For the most part students at university are legally adults. The occassional child protege genius, but the overwhelming majority are adults and surely should be being allowed to make their own decisions and take their own risks? If the club is causing damage to the enviroment, or becoming a nuisance to the public or such like then there may be an argument for the central university to intervene, but I don't see it as their place to tell their students that they cannot organsie themselves to do an activity based on risk.

Had 10 mins to full tonight so we ran something you might find useful for teaching knots.

Played as an inter Patrol race.

each patrol has a length of rope. Each member of Patrol holds it in one hand and one hand only. If at any point in proceedings they let go, use two hands, swap hands or anything else involving not having that hand on the rope the Patrol is out.

PLs come to see adult who demonstrates a knot once. And once only.

PL returns to Patrol, adds his hand to the rope and they then have to tie said knot without anyone letting go.

best to start off simple and build up.

The tangle of humanity they got into doing a highway mans hitch had to be seen to be believed!

My new scouts always love learning how to use hand axes (hatchets) for splitting logs. Not the most vital skill but one of the most fun!

I wish I was a glow worm, a glow worms' never glum, 'cos how can you be gloomy when the sun shines out your bum?

9 minutes ago, ItsBrian said:

I know at least 5 scouts in my troop wouldn’t be able to afford it as well.

Sadly the nature of these things is that they don't come cheap. As a group we are lucky in that we have enough money we can assist those families who struggle with the cost although there are still limits.

9 hours ago, ItsBrian said:

Our troop is too small to support a 10 hour trip... we don't even go past 4 hours for summer camp.

So is ours! Hence these kinds of trips in the UK tend to be organised on a district or county basis. Scouts and explorers tend to sign up on an individual basis, albeit you tend to get little clusters who go along from particular troops or units. To give that some context my district, Cambridge,  (which is big as districts go) has a total of about 1000 youth members and 200 adult volunteers in various roles. My county, Cambridgeshire, (which is small as counties go) is about 6500 in total. This trip is run by our neighbouring county, Hertfordshire, who have about 15,000 members (youth and adults) in total and they will take a few from out of county as well. Hence we got to send a contingent along. The Cambridge contingent was a total of 12 from one scout troop and two explorer units.

Does that make sense?

The place it's run from is itself wonderful. I think I've mentioned it before. It's run out of a disused railway station. It was an old railway line that closed in the 1950s. Hertfordshire Scouts, who were already sending scouts on mountaineering trips to Scotland identified and acquired the site in 1962 and developed it from there. In a couple of the photos you can see what I mean. The station buildings themselves are now the dining room, kitchen, office etc. The platform itself gives a nice shletered area for things like a brew when the scouts get back off the hills and for practicing with kit before taking it out. The accomodation is log cabins built on the old track bed. If you are a railway nerd like me it's absolute heaven!

1 hour ago, ItsBrian said:

Looks great! Wish we had that around me.

It's a bit further than "around", it's 10 hours drive to the Scottish Highlands!

Some of my scouts are just back from what I think you would call a "high adventure" trip to the Scottish Highlands. A mountaineering course run by our neighbouring scout county. I've put a load of their photos on our group website and some of them took some cracking pictures! There will be some video footage in due course as well. Just thought I'd show them off. I was there as staff, mostly on cooking, toilets and bins but did get one day out on the mountains in stunning weather.

Anyway photos here. Enjoy!

Edit - should probably add the photos with the spinal stretcher were a demo when the local mountain rescue team came in to do an evening talk with the trainees. They aren't for real!

Different side of the Atlantic but I'd agree with the broad thrust of this thread. If you are running a great program with the team that you have then you have the right number of adults. It's that simple. Don't let anyone else tell you that you must have more adults. 

Currently we have a teamof 10 adults with 37 scouts. Sounds like a lot but it doesn't tell the full story. 3 of them are away at university so we only see them during university holidays, 1 has a job as a sales rep so we see him if he can make it. Another we share with a Girl Guides unit so we see her alternate weeks. A couple of others work some evenings so over all we probably only have 4 or 5 adults on any given evening. If all 10 of us could make it every week we'd have nothing to do. So yes you need the number that works for you.

Don't forget though that it's better to be lining up replacements before someone eventually moves on. So yes keep it at what works, but do start warming up a few replacements for when that day comes.

5 hours ago, MattR said:

An important question not being asked about the UK scout/explorer division is how many older scouts are there compared to younger scouts. If the program was fantastic you'd expect roughly a 1/1 ratio. You can find those numbers ( http://scouts.org.uk/media/879334/Annual-Report-2016-17_WEB.pdf) and the beaver, cub, and scout divisions all have about the same numbers. The explorer numbers are just above 1/3 the number of scouts so there's a big drop from scouts to explorers. My guess is that's similar to the BSA numbers. I'm not picking on UK Scouts (they do some things much better than we do) I'm just saying splitting scouts in two is not a magic solution. If it were then venturing in the BSA would be much stronger than it is. Venturing is almost exactly what UK explorers are. Coed, 14-21 instead of 14-18. Do what the scouts want. It's collapsing. What scouts want might not be what they need.

My troop's ratio is closer to 2/3 older to younger scouts but I'm sure my troop has more older scouts than most in my district. From what I've seen of other troops we do a better job of working scouts into critical positions. Granted, I'll be the first to admit their leadership has a ways to go but they have fun together. Some of them just want to do high adventure but more of them truly enjoy working with younger scouts.  I'd certainly believe there are troops with as many older scouts as younger scouts and those are the ones with better scout ownership of the troop.

There's no easy answer to the drop off.

Stay on rates are improving but they are still a long way from where we'd like them to be. A few thoughts though.

Aged 14 means moving from year 9 to year 10 at school where they start studying for GCSE exams. The pressure on them in terms of school work ramps up significantly and only gets worse as they get closer to exams at 16 and then A level exams at 18. Many teenagers have to let something go in terms of extra curricular activities, for some that means scouts/explorers.

Image - the image of scouting has improved signifcantly in recent years but it's still a long way from where we'd like it to be. I don't know how we deal with that.

Structure - explorers is typically run at district level which means moving from a scout group a scout may have been at from age 6 and is all they have ever known to a different location with different adult leaders with scouts coming from different troops. It's unsettling.

Snowball effect - the drop off means there are fewer explorer units than scout troops so typically they have to travel further when they move up which makes it less convenient which results in further drop offs. There is an increasingly argument to moving explorers back to group level.

Ian may have other comments as Explorers are more his thing than mine!

Although in better news I have two Young Leaders with me who previously quit main stream explorers and decided to come back as YLs.