desertrat77

Horizon, it is wonderful to read your post--glad to hear sheath knives still have a place in scouting. For whatever reason, in the mid '80s, there was an anti-sheath knife movement (at least where I was at) that seemed to spread throughout many areas. (As a scout I carried a Buck sheath knife, 102, that served me well for many years.) As for the pop tart/ramen "bans": working at troop level in the '80s, we prohibited these items from patrol menus on car/tailgate campouts. If the scouts had their full patrol box, we wanted them to actually cook something instead of snack. If they cooked a "real" breakfast, it was fine to have pop tarts between meals. On more rugged trips, they were allowed any time. I have no problem with SM "bans" if they promote a richer scouter experience for all, and doesn't violate policy or law. If any man or woman takes on the mantle of SM, they should be entitled to establish a few personal standards/hobby horses that bolsters their leadership style and outlook.

Hawk, good point--seems I've hijacked the thread a bit. My screed is over, thanks for your indulgence. Re the knot: seems like a worthy effort--getting some old timers back, be they former scouts or scouters, would inject some new lifeblood into the movement.

Eagle92, you have always been scoutlike in every post, and I read your comments with interest whatever the topic might be. HawkUH60: Nothing wrong with the guide, or pointing to it. To clarify, I was addressing tone and the effect it has on conversation. It was starting to go that way in this thread, and has been pretty bad in others from the past. We all want to comply and be good scouts. But, speaking in general, there is a tendency on the forums for some uniform police to get condescending to anyone who a) doesn't know the IG and b) dares to disagree with the IG, and c) dares to disagree with a uniform police opinion on something that isn't clear in the IG. Merry Christmas all! (And Hawk, I salute you up there at Ft Drum--I was there for an exercise two years ago, and that was the coldest September wx I'd ever experienced in the field!)(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Eagle92, you raise a good point. As long as folks (including Uniform Police, or Uniform Guide Gurus or UGGs for short) treat folks with respect, and recognize that uniforming is a method, and not the end goal of the BSA, then things seem to flow correctly. It's when folks beat others about the head and shoulders with the IG in a humorless, unscoutlike manner, that's when we start to lose focus. I'm approaching 27 years in the military. One thing I've learned is limitations of any regulation that deals with uniforms. The simpler, the better. But uniform zealots love to address every little nuance and possibility ("No one shall wear shower shoes on the east sidewalk of A Street between the hours of 0800 and 1300, unless they are wearing official PT gear and transiting from their quarters to the shower. On Tuesdays and Thursdays these hours will be restricted from 0900 to 1200 unless utilizing the west sidewalk, in which case...."),which turns a simple publication into a monster and surprise, most folks won't read it. Nor comply with it. Because all it does is satisfy the "itch" of a few uniform gurus. Everyone else has better things to do. The other thing is the spirit with which the rules are enforced. A condescending, "gotcha" tone turns off most folks. Appealing to ones' sense of unit and personal pride works wonders. Also, quietly approaching someone, as you mentioned, with the viewpoint of helping them rathering that lording over them, is always appreciated. I'm sorry the girl endured that boorish behavior from the karate guy. Sounds like he forgot who pays his light bill, or feeds his family.

Eagle92, I'm completely on board with you. 100 percent. Not only in this thread, but other uniform threads as well, a member will ask a legit question, some discussion will ensue, or perhaps a declaration will be made that runs contrary to current policy, and you can count on a few Uniform Guide Gurus to pounce on the matter. It's the tone, and the upshot any dissent makes one A Bad Scouter, that's what I'm addressing.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Cubbing is too long, and too indoors. Webelos should be solely a one year ramp-up to being a Boy Scout. Uniforms should have some semblance of ruggedness, style, and simplicity. And be made in America. BSA should be co-ed. While Boy Scouts are still enjoying outdoor-driven programs in some areas, in many areas it's a sedentary, indoor focus (often the direct reflection of the scouters of that area). Stop the emphasis on high-priced gucci camping gear, and start respecting the pocketbooks of the parents. Delete several (you pick) of the Eagle required "homework" merit badges (the infamous citizenship series, etc) and replace them with challenging outdoor choices. As mentioned previously, there is a huge gulf between the outlook of the corporate folks at National, and the numerous sedentary units sitting in a church basement going over stuff in a book. Regardless of where we stand, there is much work to be done.

For an interesting read, check out some old Boy's Life magazines, circa '60s, and you'll see page after page of military school ads. Most of these schools have since folded, but a few remain. As I understand it, scouting was a staple at some of the schools. For example, the original buildings at the secret atomic lab at Los Alamos, NM, during WWII was a boys school before Uncle Sam acquired it. They used BSA principles as the part of their cirriculum. In fact, the uniform each day was the BSA uniform, with shorts, even during winter outdoor activities. Part of the school's program was to toughen the kids up, which explains the shorts. (My source is a superb book on Los Alamos that I read earlier this year, but don't have the title and author at hand.) Also, many years ago, there was a version of the Eagle medal that did not have the silver scroll a the top, just the silk ribbon and the pendant. This was designed for use at military schools so scouts could wear the Eagle medal with their other school medals, thus making the row of medals, well, more "uniform."

Drmbear and Scoutbox, As observed, there are a few forum members who believe the BSA Uniform Guide is Holy writ, carved in stone, and should never be changed or challenged. I am not one of them. In their zeal to protect the sacredness of the Uniform Guide, and the Perfection with which It was written, they often stifle discussions. It can be a bit tedious at times. I was enjoying the discussion before the yellow caution flag was flown--I too have the old Philmont bull, '77. Lore at the time (sorry Uniform Guide Gurus, I don't have a notarized copy of the ranger's comments for your perusal) was if you go to Philmont in some capacity, wear the bull on the left shoulder of the red jacket. Hike over the tooth of time, sew the tail above the shoulder. Desertrat77 (This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Eagle92,Scoutbox, Just finished a long walk with the dogs, blustery night, wearing my old red jacshirt ('60s era)...warm and comfortable! Desertrat77

Scoutbox, I don't have any info on a new edition, but I sure like those old ones as well. On my 11th birthday, I got the '67 edition, '73 printing, as a gift--I have read and re-read that many times. Found a copy in a used bookstore and still use it today. Lots of old school scoutcraft in that book, and the writing is superb.

After returning from a year long deployment, here's a perception of America today: - "Wants"--tatoos, nice cars, electronics, expensive clothes, eating out every meal, vacations--have become "needs" and "rights," and folks just gotta have them no matter what - "Needs"--paying bills, feeding your kids--now considered optional because someone else (Uncle Sam, local charity, you and me) can be depended upon to provide. (Naturally this is nothing new, but I'm floored by the scope of it all, even after three months back.) There are many cases of genuine need in America, and I think we should do our best to help as we are so moved. However, I do not view our scouting principles of helpfulness and kindness as blanket policies that universally apply to every soul who proclaims a need, and that we must fulfill it, or risk being considered falling short of our scouting values. Discernment is important. When we provide charity to people who really don't need it, the truly poor go without. Resources are not unlimited. Who is qualified to decide who is needy and who isn't? You and I. Our assessment of any given case might differ, but you can support the charities you wish, and I mine. We each possess a finite amount of energy, money, and time.

BSA24, well said, thanks!

My vote: the official BSA hot pot tongs, for no good reason other than nostalgia.

Love the old school patch blanket, Mom! Very cool. Seeing those memories every day beats hiding the patches in a shoe box. The blanket concept was more common years ago, as were patch vests.

As a military brat many years ago, I had the privilege of attending scouting events in Panama and Arizona. Scouts and Scouters from both Mexico and Panama impressed me greatly. Can't speak for any community, but I think there are common root causes that deter folks from joining the BSA, regardless of ethnic background: financing and programming. Financially, scouting in America seems targeted towards the upper middle class family. Examples: Expensive, tacky uniforms and the emphasis on "gucci" camping gear. As for programming, adventure is often missing. Sedentary, predictable, and comfortable seem to be the desired outcomes for many scouting events I've seen over the last few years.

Mr. Boyce, you raise good points--especially how adult pushing detracts from the program. I've seen Life scouts, fully capable of making Eagle, purposefully stop advancing because of mom/dad/SM driving them, or they are overshadowed by an overachieving older brother who made it.

Stosh, I concur--parents and scouters that drag/push often have some serious ego on the line if Johnny makes Eagle or not.......

Encourage, support, frank feedback? Yes. Drag by the collar across the goal line? No.

Well said, DWS.

Beaveh, Actually, we have alot of folks in uniform that get hurt at the skateboard parks--limited duty, medical costs, someone else picking up their duties--and not much fitness is gained as they aren't skating, but going down ramps and rails for short distances, falling, etc. Not alot of fitness at these parks, and many military safety and legal folks cringe at the very mention of them. I applaud the "maximum level of protection" principle. But the average man or woman isn't going to get that from the get-go. As Basement stated so well: "Everyone gets named and the courts sort it out." So citizens may get justice--but they will spend a bunch of money and time worrying till "Justice" or that max protection arrives. And the attorney who quoted $250 bucks an hour to help mdl's son achieve "maximum level of protection" is a prime example of the journey one must take to arrive at justice.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Shortridge, I absolutely agree that SM feedback has to happen, and happen on the spot. What I took exception with in John's post was his theory of saddling of the SM with the responsibility for ensuring standards are kept. Seemed everyone else got a free pass, including the people who are paid for keeping standards. I understand how busy camp staffers, particularly directors, can be (was a camp staffer myself as a scout). However, SMs are busy too. They go to camp, often at the expense of their family vacation time. They shouldn't have to bird dog paid staff in addition to running a troop. As for the council president, agreed, a rarely seen person. I got this title from John's post where he charged the SM to "have your COR tell the Council President...." I think the SM deserves more respect, not only in this scenario, but in many other facets of BSA practice today as well. PS I believe you are right, council president isn't a paid position, I stand corrected.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

John, let me get this straight: according to your post, the SM has the responsibility to inform or correct, or ensure others coordinate with, the following people to keep standards high: COR Council President Camp management Lodge Director/AD/MB Counselor Parents CC/COR Unit commissioner If I read your post right, the SM is the only person in this equation that is supposed to have the backbone to tell all these folks how the cow eats the cabbage? Aside from the parents, what responsibility does the council president, etc., have? Some of these folks, like the council present and camp management, are paid. And you suggest that a volunteer SM has to follow up after them, to remind them to do the most basic elements of their jobs? Sounds like you are cutting them a bunch of slack. Except the parents, all these highly-trained scouters serve the SM, and the troops. Together they keep the standards high. For you to castigate an unpaid SM for the failure of paid professionals, and silver/gold loop volunteers, is frankly breathtaking. The SM is indeed the keeper of the flame. The folks that serve in the org chart above him have jobs to do--primarily, to enable the SM to keep that flame lit. If the SM has to bird dog all these folks to keep them from being slackers, the BSA is clearly in a pickle.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Eagle732, I wonder if some summer camps make MBs easier as part of a unofficial marketing scheme to get more scouts back next summer. I applaud SMs to hold their scouts to the standards. The scouts are talented and bright enough for the challenges. If not at that moment, perhaps next summer. They will prize that MB all the more. There are still camps that keep MB standards high--not impossible, not adding to the requirements, but when a scout passes that last requirement, they know they earned the MB fair and square.

Beavah, I'm fully on board with the good samaritan principle. I just don't see the parallel between providing the indigent with food/rainment/water/medical care (necessities) and skateboarding, which is optional, and a hobby, and a dangerous one at that. Your knowledge of the law is superior; however, my original point is "do you even want the risk or hassle." Even in your run down, we have these qualifiers: "...there is almost no risk." 2. "...doesn't likely have any personal responsibility." 3. Most states...cap your responsibility...." [One still may have responsibility, and while it may be a small amount, it will still entail legal fees, etc.] I agree that we shouldn't teach our children to be afraid. But if you'll re-read Mdlscouting's post, she has concerns about future liability. I think her concerns are well founded, based on what I know about skateboard parks and the injuries that kids get from them. Everyone has a different risk tolerance level. Agreed, we should teach our kids to be afraid. But we aren't talking about feeding the hungry and worrying if someone is going to sue us because they got sick from a bad egg salad sandwich. We're talking about a high-risk activity where kids often fall and may be quite badly hurt. One last note--with all due respect, the men and women in uniform that I work with every day aren't kids, and their parents didn't send them. They signed up on their own. And their risk is not at the hobby level--they took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. They represent the best our country has to offer. To compare their willingness to lay down their life with the risk a skateboard takes when he jumps off a stair railing--well, there is no comparision.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

True, the horse has left the barn. Nothing can be done now but to take it as a good lesson. On the other hand, I respectfully disagree with Scoutfish: Sir, the swimming MB isn't a familiarization effort, or a gold star for showing a jolly good try. It's a MB that counts for Eagle, and if the scouts can't satisfactorily swim the prescribed course, they they aren't ready to swim anywhere that might require some effort. It's also a safety issue. No doubt a few of the scouts now think their swimming is pretty good because they got that MB. Overconfidence in the water without the skills to match is a recipe for trouble. If memory serves, swimming MB is a pre-req for lifesaving MB. But as others have pointed out, their inability to swim with any confidence and strength will be fully evident the first time they jump in the pool and swim a lap under the scrutiny of the lifesaving instructor. If they are still weak swimmers, they'll be excused from the class.