dkurtenbach

Oh, I think many of the posts here clearly state the opinion that someone who makes a contribution in their own name then and wears the James E. West knot "bought" the award for themselves -- that is, they didn't _earn_ it -- and that the only acceptable way to get one (if even then) is for someone else to give it. Perhaps what is behind this view is the notion that the James E. West Fellowship should not have a knot at all. After all, don't most knots require an extended period of service and effort, and meeting certain requirements and standards? There are plenty of other forms of r

Wow. I still don't get this attitude. The James E. West Fellowship represents giving (at least) $1,000 of hard-earned money to the Council endowment fund, for the benefit of Scouts and Scouters for years and years to come. In what possible way could doing that in your own name in any way be considered venal or boasting? Aren't we proud of ourselves for going to weekend campouts, and summer camp, and attending meetings? Why should someone who contributes to Scouting by doing a thousand dollars worth of his regular work, and then donating the benefit of that to Scouting, be regarded as doin

Of all of the Scouts I've known, I can think of maybe one over the age of 8 who liked wearing the Scout uniform. He was a Super Scout -- and is now a Scouting professional working for BSA. It's largely adults who care about the uniform, who want Scouts to look "sharp," who think there are character-building aspects and other positive psychological aspects to uniform wear. And the folks who have the stories about how well their Scouts in uniform were treated -- well, again it is usually adults who are impressed by the uniform and treat the Scouts well because of it, not other youth. Just my

I don't understand this notion that making a donation to the Council endowment fund -- a gift that keeps on giving -- is somehow "buying an award." Some folks have time to give to Scouting, and we honor them. Some folks have talent to give to Scouting, and we honor them. Some folks have money to give to Scouting. Why should anyone -- including the giver -- think that using their personal resources to benefit Scouting is somehow of less value, something to be embarrassed about, or even something to scorn? Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Well, these five pages capture every argument for and against that I've heard about the uniform and its various parts over the last twenty years or so. Personally, I think that whatever stated purposes (practical, symbolic, or psychological) that the Scout uniform may have served in the past have for the most part fallen away, and what remains is the Scout uniform as a marketing tool, both externally and internally. Externally, BSA wants the public to be able to identify Scouts, triggering at least a brief recollection of the other positive aspects of Scouting's "brand" -- good character

fred8033, I agree with the concept. I think I'd like some "accessory" (vest, sash, hat, necklace, whatever) with all the bling that could be just tossed on over the "everyday"/very minimal Class A, or troop shirt, or other Scout or non-Scout shirt, rather than a separate shirt, but that would be fine too. The main thing is your idea for a minimalist standard uniform shirt that you can wear out and about in public without looking like either a state trooper or a third world dictator. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

I have five pairs of the original Switchback zip-offs (I loaded up when they went on sale before the introduction of the current version). I wear them for all Scouting campouts, hikes, meetings, and other events, and for lots of non-Scouting purposes as well. But if they hadn't been on sale, I'd buy cheap nylon zipoffs from Campmor or Sierra Trading Post for camping and "everyday" use. I'd have one pair of Switchbacks that I'd alternate with the old-style Scout pants, wearing them only to meetings and other indoor and ceremonial events (as described in the Boy Scout Handbook) -- with my Cen

BrentAllen, thanks for your post.

Except for the part about using the buddy system (he didn't, even after a leader cautioned him) and staying put if you are lost (he walked 8 or 9 miles, and he was found 4 miles from where he started). Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Tampa Turtle wrote: "However all organizations have their cultures and prices of admission. And even if for no other reason the Traditional Skills are that for scouting." Good comments, and I think you've captured my thinking on this. Scouting has good reasons to teach traditional Scoutcraft. Some of those reasons have to do with history and tradition, some with providing a foundation for other outdoor skills, and some with the value of handiness and life skills. And so traditional Scoutcraft is part of our advancement requirements and we teach it to Scouts. Once that is done, there

Oh, I think it is pretty clear that there are some skills that are part of the Boy Scout T-2-1 advancement requirements that while inherently good and useful and excellent life skills to have, they just aren't needed as much in Boy Scout outdoor activities as they were 20 or 30 years ago. That is because gear has evolved and our outdoor practices have evolved (for better or worse -- that's another discussion). Yes, some of us may choose to use those skills daily or on every campout because they remain inherently good and useful; that is not the issue. The issue is that while we may like the

Well, I think I figured out why it bothers _me_ when a Scout at the rank of First Class or above can't remember basic skills or knowledge acquired in the course of earning Tenderfoot, Second Class, and First Class. First, someone spent a lot of time and energy teaching those things for the purpose of completing advancement requirements, and the Scout spent a lot of time and energy learning them. If the skills/knowledge are forgotten, all of that effort is wasted. (And if I was the one teaching, it is a personal disappoointment.) Second, I think that there is a certain set of skills

When the troop's ordinary monthly campouts consist of backcountry hikes in which the troop uses dome tents that don't need guylines, dining flies with those little thingys on the cords that serve the same function as the tautline hitch, internal frame backpacks with nothing hanging on the outside, and freeze-dried backpacking food, their fires (when they have them) are small and made up only of sticks that can be broken by hand, and they never, ever hunt around for sticks big enough to lash together "useful camp gadgets," it is no wonder that we have First Class Scouts that have forgotten how

Thanks, but I'm not really asking WHAT special activities you do to maintain traditional but otherwise unused skills found in the T-2-1 requirements. I'm asking WHY BOTHER? That is, for the Scouts who have already completed those requirements. (This does not include First Aid, which is always needed, even if seldom used). Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

We created a large wooden plaque (about 4 feet long) in the shape of an eagle head and outstretched wings. On the bottom and back are lots of eye screws with spring clips on them. We sorted all of the old ribbons we could find (back to the early '80s, though the troop formed in the '60s) into bundles of 5, strung each bundle on a safety pin (through the little metal grommet at the top of the ribbon) and hung the bundles on the spring clips so that they kinda sorta look like feathers hanging from the bottom of the eagle's wings. The eagle is hung on its own stand and displayed at Courts of H

Okay, so a Scout learns the "traditional" Scout skills contained in the Tenderfoot, Second Class, and First Class requirements, gets signed off, and completes First Class. He's already forgotten some of the knots and doesn't have much opportunity to use most of the other "traditional" skills unless the troop is preparing for the annual camporee competition or the Pioneering campout they have every two or three years. How much (if anything) should a unit do to "preserve" the specific traditional Scout skills found in the T-2-1 advancement requirements so that Scouts can practice those skills ev

Eamon, I agree with most everything you've said. I'm not arguing that traditional skills are outdated or no longer useful; just that in the ordinary course of camping with modern gear and with other practices that have now become standard (such as routinely cooking over stoves rather than fires), there is less _need_ for the ordinary use of many traditional skills. That means, for example, that Scouts are not automatically using the tautline hitch to set up tents, and therefore they don't automatically get practice in using the knot. That doesn't mean in any way that the tautline hitch

I should also mention that there are _some_ merit badges (for example, Hiking and Cycling) where the requirements call for enough practice/repetition/experience that by the end, most Scouts starting from scratch will be proficient in at least some of the skills and knowledge called for in the requirements and will remember them for a long, long time -- just by virtue of working on the requirements. I don't think that is true for any of the Tenderfoot, Second Class, or First Class requirements, except perhaps swimming. Dan Kurtenbach Fairfax, VA

Tampa Turtle, thanks for your comments. There is no question that "traditional" skills come in very handy when ordinary tools and procedures are not available, as in emergencies, survival situations, power outages, and loading new patio furniture on top of the car. (The store clerk helping me said, "We have some twine, but I don't know how to tie it. I'm not a Boy Scout." I replied, "It's okay -- I am. And I have my own rope.") I, too, find the tautline hitch and other traditional skills useful in a variety of ways on campouts. But usually, I could do the same thing another way with

SSScout wrote: "The requirements are not the problem. It is the holding to standards that is the problem. If the boy is a First Class Scout, should he not be able to tie a tautline hitch and know when it can be useful?" Since that is a Tenderfoot rank requirement (4b), it will have been long forgotten by the time a Scout reaches First Class. And that _is_ "holding to standards" -- at least the standards set out in the rank requirements themselves, and even the "competence" standards set out in the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures book. Tenderfoot requirement 4b states,

BSA long ago departed from Baden-Powell's standards for satisfying badge requirements. See Baden-Powell's Outlook, http://usscouts.org/history/bpoutlook4.asp#_Toc536191302 (below). In any event, our Tenderfoot, Second Class, and First Class requirements are not written in a manner that would require practice and proficiency, but rather ask only that a Scout complete a particular task once, or regurgitate information once, or have a particular experience once or a limited number of times. And then we bar re-testing. And a Scout never has to duplicate a skill or knowledge requirement i

Tampa Turtle wrote: "I am too depressed to address dkurtenbach's comments; I have gotten that response too from some parlour-types." "Parlour-types"? Hee hee hee. You might consider re-reading my comments. I believe in the fun and adventure of traditional Scouting skills, including the challenge of a thing as simple as hiking -- that the Scouts I am working with are salivating for. I'm scratching my head over the notion that The Summit is somehow the "professionalization" of Scouting activities or that it is syptomactic of a de-emphasis on regular monthly outdoor activities. Ra

Last week I had an introductory meeting for Scouts -- and their parents -- who will be taking the Hiking merit badge that I am counseling. We talked about each of the requirements in some depth, and about the amount of work that these boys would have to do. I didn't hear any complaints from the boys; rather, the more we talked, the more excited the Scouts got. Nor did I hear any complaints from the parents; rather, the more we talked, the more they looked forward to seeing their sons take on these challenges. They weren't excited about simply earning a merit badge. Since almost all of

I would humbly suggest that much of this discussion is looking at the merit badge mill problem in much the same way as nutrition advocates look at the McDonald's menu. The fundamental problem is that most consumers of McDonald's food aren't interested in the same things that nutrition advocates are. While the consumers appreciate their efforts, the consumers' interests are in inexpensive, reasonably tasty, and tummy satisfying food; if it happens to be nutritious too, well that's fine but not particularly important to the consumers. Naturally, the corporation is more interested in what

Packsaddle, thanks for your comments. I said it publicly to make a point: That other members should take advantage of this wonderful tool. Sadly, there are folks on public forums who make a practice of insulting other members, berating other members, inciting conflict -- and then of course denying it when challenged. Naturally, there are other members who respond to such provocations, and you end up with lengthy bitter exchanges and often long-term feuds. That sort of thing was one of the major factors that killed the newborn Scouting Community (formerly on www.myscouting.org) that BSA ha