desertrat77

Eagle94, best wishes! I too enjoy going to summer camp, just as much as I did when I was a scout. Maybe more so now. I'm an old camp staffer myself, but I've found that camp staffs of today somehow function well without my input! :)

Though it isn't always overt, I've noticed the BSA has steadily tried to distance itself from its military roots.

+1 Scout salute! Would welcome the opportunity to sit around the campfire and listen to him share his perspectives and experiences. Old scouters like these could advise the BSA on how to succeed.

Even hobbling along on crutches, summer camp is a much healthier place to convalesce than at home. Friends, camp activities, clean air...all much preferable to sitting at home on the couch. The logistics of getting around camp are manageable. It's been done before and whether it was my experience years ago in a similar situation, or helping other scouts with health issues, I haven't heard of one case where the convalescing scout regretting going on the trip. Keep in mind this isn't a Green Beret selection course...it's BSA summer camp. Challenging but definitely not debilitating.

By all means, send him to camp! I've seen scouts rally to help others who are on crutches, or in a wheel chair. They'll help him with his food tray at the chow hall. No one will have to prompt any one, the boys do so on their own. When I was a scout, I attended a three day camporee in the middle of nowhere...on crutches. Recovering from a bad bout of blood poisoning. No issues. I was with my comrades, having fun. Couldn't participate in some events, but I was there cheering them on. Very glad I went. Lots of good memories.

Uncle P, thanks for sharing the great news!

I thought about our discussion as I mowed the lawn this afternoon.... At the end of the day, it isn't about the various organizational contrivances that can be made to accommodate a certain outcome. It's about the scouts. We know two things: scouts like to be with their pals. And scouts want to be outdoors. Anything that takes away from these two things is bound to demotivate the scouts, and we know the results from there. PLs lead the patrol and look after their scouts. Patrols plan and execute activities that are fun and if possible, also fulfill requirements for advancement (as DuctTape said so well earlier). When a patrol leader teaches, he's really growing as a leader as well.

If the scouts don't want NSPs, then any attempt to nudge them towards the NSP concept will no doubt cause friction. And it will disrupt the natural cohesion of the current patrols. If there is no NSP, there is no need for a TG. Especially four TGs! I'd give them instructor patches and assign them a variety of duties. But I'd keep them out of the PLs' lane. The BSA operated for nearly 8 decades without NSPs nor TGs. The PLs can handle advancement if a) they know it is part of their job description and b) if they are trained.

Scoutldr, I agree. When I was on active duty, and moving frequently, I did not find an active NESA chapter. At best, I'd get an email once or twice a year for the annual Eagle dinner or asking for money.

Post script: I realize I'm painting a very rosy picture of camp. But we know it's not always perfect. There will be cuts and scrapes. Disagreements. Meals that aren't so good. Afternoon downpours when you've forgotten to put down your tent flaps and your sleeping bag is soaked like a sponge. All part of the plan. Overcoming. Adapting. Learning to turn the page. And laugh about it.

Uncle P, your concerns are reasonable. But I believe your nephew will do just fine at camp. He'll be away from home and home-related baggage. In the fresh air. Different dynamics than he's used to. I've seen kids with similar traits really grow at camp. He'll meet scouts like himself, and many others that aren't like him at all. Yet they'll connect on a level that brings about mutual respect and camaraderie. Good call re the first year program and swimming. Just enough to achieve/progress, yet with enough free time to roam around the woods with new pals. If he's got the gumption to a) want to go to camp and b) has the sense freedom and self sufficiency, summer camp is just what he needs. It's a safe environment to learn a bunch of things, be it merit badges or making friends or figuring out what he wants in life.

This is right on the money. It's natural for new scouts to become apprehensive about going to camp. A solid push is fine.

By all means, he should go to camp! The right age when every camp activity seems like a big adventure. Impressions will last a lifetime. Many moons ago, I went to my first summer camp as a rather shy and unsure Tenderfoot. It was a great experience. Very busy, fun days. Didn't earn a single award or merit badge. But that's okay. The experiences were invaluable and the memories still clear. @@Stosh brings up a good point: don't sign him up for everything. Heck, he may not bring home a single merit badge. Or earn anything for that matter. No problem. The intangibles--making friends, the skits at the closing campfire, open swim at the pool, getting a bull's eye at the rifle range during open shooting, looking at the constellations--are just as important for a scout's growth. If he comes home with the camp's 2016 attendance patch, that is ample evidence enough of an important milestone in life.

The PLs can handle the duties. Train and encourage. Then stand back and be amazed. Once a scout is actually allowed to lead, there's no stopping him.

There is no need to invent anything to solve the problem. Scouting's past has all of the answers. Pride keeps the professional decision makers from acknowledging it.

Hedge, I may be a bit old (heck I am old), but these were normal duties for the PL prior to the BSA's push for NSPs (Eagle94 summed up well). Stosh's point is right: to have both TG and PL is to have neither. If the TG and PL are really leading and have initiative, they'll be stepping on each other. Scouts in the patrol may be more loyal to one over the other. Saw this dynamic in the military--squadrons with two first sergeants had more issues than those with one. Best to just let one go-getter take on the extra duties than have the confusion and overlap of having two. Recommend letting the PLs lead their patrols, and find challenges for the other leaders.

This is worth re-quoting a second time: "Materials by committee, with limited editing. " I'm reading the new edition of the Boy Scout Handbook. The quote above sums up the writing style and content thus far.

I haven't been active in OA since the early '80s, so this conversation is an eye-opener for me. I recall paying for: 1. Annual dues (a very low figure) 2. Events (meal cost and the patch/neckerchief you received for attending) Financially, the ultimate goal was to keep the costs as low as possible to encourage all scouts to attend and not take resources away from the troop or families. In fact, I was recently going through my footlocker and found a conclave neckerchief that was all homemade. The committee had pooled their resources and figured out a way to make it in-house to keep the cost down. Some lodges seem to have taken on a life of their own.

Uncle P, I think your synopsis is right on the money. I was a scout in the '70s, and went thru the ISP. It was not a pretty sight. Thankfully enough old school scout leaders stuck around, and many of us scouts were in the outdoors all the time. We received the traditional approach to scouting that the BSA tried to abandon. However, the way the ISP was implemented, and the ensuing results, ran many leaders off. And they never came back. I concur, organizations that forget or think they they've outgrown their core mission are destined for failure. So the BSA in the late '70s/early '80s bit the bullet and brought back the outdoor emphasis. However, it seems in recent years there are a number of scout leaders at all levels that want to minimize the outdoor aspects of scouting. Many of them have no interest in the outdoors, even at the paid professional level. Remarkable, given the BSA has historically been an outdoor-driven organization. Kind of like someone hiring on at JP Morgan yet hates working with numbers. Excellent question re the studies/after action reports...I haven't heard of any. And I rather doubt National learned anything from them, if the studies do exist. We see efforts locally and at the national level to emphasis STEM, career-focused scouting, etc. All worthy endeavors but they appeal to a small segment of the youth population. The BSA's tried and true recruiting/retention selling point--outdoor adventure--is timeless and still sought after by youth. However, more and more homework/busy work/indoor/sedentary stuff has been added to the Scout Trail in recent years. Frankly, much of the homework stuff is of little value to the scout...strictly a matter of perseverance to get it done. A scout can be an excellent, well-informed citizen without enduring the monotony of the three Citizenship merit badges, for example. Those three could be combined into one or two.

@@skeptic, I encountered a similar issue. Corrected it a few years ago (via phone call), and now the data are incorrect again. I haven't bothered to correct it again. The BSA has a knack for contracting with sub-par IT outfits. @@qwazse, as time goes by, I'm not sure if they have value. I have a life membership with NESA, and other than the newsletter, I can't think of anything else. Even the newsletter is hit/miss...if it arrives twice a year, I consider myself lucky.

It seems the GS Cookie Syndicate will be fiercely protected, at all costs. So the girls who want to hike and camp, as a scout, will have to wait till they are 14 and join a Venture crew.

No sweat Q, I hit the green to make it all even.

Haven't used either myself, but the folks I know that have Duluth drawers say they are wonderful (the drawers).

I've worked with some control freaks in the BSA over the decades, but they were pikers compared the ones I encountered in the GSA. @@mashmaster, I wish you and your daughter the very best, and when she completes the Gold, please let us know so we can pass along our congratulations.

This is one situation where I'm all for a parent giving "directive" advice. "Tighten up those cleats and get back in the game." Nothing wrong with a nudge, or even a shove, from a well-meaning friend or loved one. Helps clear the brain of emotional fog or fatigue. I'm not saying mom should carry the scout down the trail. Just do what needs to be done to get the scout back on the trail. He'll hike it himself. In this age of "feelings are so important" we've lost the fine art of a good rah-rah speech. Or a good butt chewing. We have many options in the motivational play book, and directive advice certainly has its place. Several years ago I worked for a colonel, a brilliant man, who had a PhD. He related to me at one point during his quest for the doctorate, he talked to his wife and expressed doubts about completing the program. She gently grabbed him by his lapels, and with quiet but steely determination said "You will finish the program." He said that is exactly what he needed. Far better a kick in the pants now that a life time of wondering "what if." The best advice I've received has always been "knock it off/get off your butt and get moving."