EagleInKY

We've done the "one patrol cooks for the troop" approach. It has its advantages in certain situations. I don't think it's best, and I think some troops may use it as an excuse to avoid the hard work of building the patrol method. If the PLC is thinking through the process and making decisions based on sound logic, then I don't have a problem with it.

You want to make sure it's something light, easy to fix, and won't be ruined if it gets wet. For dinner, I'm assuming you're going to fix it once you are at your overnight spot. Personally, I'd go with dehydrated meals. There are a lot of varieties. The only down side is the cost. It probably runs an extra buck or two per meal. For lunch I'd go for a series of snacks and maybe one small meal. Energy bars, fruit, and pre-prepared sandwiches are all potential ideas. It depends a lot on your schedule.

Brent is correct. Lots of things to consider and they are fairly well spelled out. As for other things, like travel, if it can be done, it should. Of course, seldom do you have the exact number of seats in a vehicle to match your patrol sizes. I find, however, that to an extent, this happens somewhat naturally. As I said, I'm always looking back and finding ways I could have emphasized it more. BTW, I agree that there are situations where it might be valid, such as the health and equipment reasons already stated. This was not the case in this situation and several posters indicated that they did not see the connection between tenting together and the patrol method.

"And I have found two things that dismay me. First, most people don't want the boys to have to go out of our troop to find counselors. And second, our district and council MBC list are rather lacking once you get past the 20 or so most commonly sought after MBs. " Lisa, I can't agree with you more. And, I'd say, it sounds like your district/council is better than mine in regards to this topic. 1) We have no district list. 2) Our DAC has told us to build our own list (in the troop) 3) There is no need for approval if the MBC is already a registered leader. Consequently, most of our boys MB experiences are either at camp or with someone in the troop. The side-effect of this is that it is nearly impossible to get a boy to want to go outside of the troop for any MBC. I've resigned myself to make it work as well as I can. Like you, I already have enough irons in the fire for now.

"90% of the time, "boring meetings" is mentioned. When I explain to them, that the person who should fix that is in the mirror, I get the blank stare...rather than conform to the boy-led concept, which doesn't fit what they've been conditioned to expect, they would rather drop out. It does not compute and makes them uncomfortable. " I had the exact conversation with a scout six months ago when he dropped out. He was the oldest, most mature and possibly most respected scout in the troop. Yet he could not get the handle on the idea that he could change things. He constantly waited for the adults to make things happen. Stosh - I and other leaders have thrown the "I'm going hiking this weekend if anyone's up for it?".. I'm going down to look at places to backpack this fall if anyone's interested.... I'm.... I get the same blank stares that came from the lad I just spoke about. And, the best part is (and this fits exactly into what the other posters are saying), the excuse we get 99% of the time is "I don't know what my parent's have planned this weekend".

Now, I have to preface this by saying that I'm one of those types that doesn't like to see 12 and 13 year old Eagles. Okay, I said it, now let's move on. I've had some of these go-getters (not enough of them, I might add), and I try to steer them into helping out in various areas to improve the overall program. Is there a particular POR that really needs work getting back on track? Maybe the go-getter can help make that happen. Do you have a big fund-raiser that has too much adult involvement, maybe this young man can help show where boys can take more responsibility. Do you have a patrol lacking leadership, maybe he'd be willing to join that patrol and make a difference with them. No apparent successor to your SPL??? Maybe there is now. You get the idea. While advancement is the measuring stick many use for the program, I see it as just one of the many tools we have to help develop young men. And, by the way, I've used every one of those examples in the previous paragraph on a young go-getter or two.

For those who don't see the big deal about tenting with his patrol and how it is relevant to the patrol method, I'd ask these questions. Assuming, you're okay with sleeping with family instead of patrol: 1) How about eating with family instead of patrol? After all, it's just a meal. 2) How about hiking with his family instead of his patrol? It's just a walk. .... endless examples could follow. No, the patrol method is about living, breathing, eating, sleeping... as a patrol. Anything you do outside of it detracts from it. I find myself after every activity thinking back on about a dozen things we could have done different to strengthen the patrol system. And we're actually ones that try to live by it.

We don't completely emulate a patrol. For example, we don't have a patrol leader or any other POR. But we do separate the adults and try to keep them working, playing, eating & sleeping separate from the boys. We refer to our adults as the "Old Spice Patrol" or "Team Old Spice", which goes back to an occurrence at Summer Camp a few years back. (Although last year it was suggested we should rename ourselves to "Team Motrin".) I find that, especially with setting up camp and cooking meals, the adults can model good patrol behavior for the other patrols.

On our campout this weekend I found myself talking with some of the older scouts about where they might go to college, what majors they were interested in, etc. It's not the first time we've had the conversations. I find myself having it with many of the boys that are of high school age. So, while not spelled out per se, I still see it happening in my normal interactions with these young men.

Ditto scoutldr & Beavah.

Welcome frank. Pull up a log and stay for a while. You didn't indicate what your current role in scouting is. Can you tell us more?

Did 38 miles down Haleakala on Maui last week. 38 miles, 400 yards of it uphill (and you coast through most of that). We started at just under 10,000 feet and ended up at the ocean. Pretty cool, eh? If only I had them take me 12 miles back up the hill, I guess we could have gotten a 50 miler in.

I wish you luck in this. I hope it does work out for your troop. Here's a cut & paste from what I wrote in the other thread on this topic. We've tried both approaches (rotating and not rotating). Here's my experience. We started the first two years by electing PLs. The first went from shortly after crossover (usually in April) until August, and the second term for the full six months. This worked pretty well, and usually the "natural leaders" of the bunch were the first elected to position. I then went to Woodbadge and we used the rotating PL idea. I talked to some of the other scouters who said they did it with their NSPs. I thought it sounded like a cool idea. We implemented it for the past two years. Our results have been pretty disappointing. My general feelings are (1) the boy doesn't get to stay in position long enough to learn it, so the TG ends up having to do more than he should, (2) the boys don't take it seriously because it's just a temporary position and (3) it inevitably rotates to the most unreliable young scout who chooses that month to not show up to anything because of (fill in your favorite sport/activity excuse) If we ever try it again, we're going to have to do some things to address these issues. They changes would likely include rotating every two-three months (even if every scout doesn't get an opportunity). We'd work with the TG to do more coaching of the PL instead of standing in for him. We'd have to make sure the parents of the scout understand the commitment to be PL before he signed up for it. I'm sure this will work with some troops in the right circumstances. It just hasn't panned out for us. Good luck.

I agree, but have a couple of scouts that are holding out for hiking. They can swim well enough to pass the swimmer's test, but are generally not that comfortable in the water. If you troop hikes a fair amount, you probably do 1-2 10 mile hikes a year. Given that, it would take a typical scout 3-4 years to complete the requirements. The 20 miler is a real challenge. We have yet to complete a 20 miler in a single day. (And probably won't if I'm with them). :-) It does seem a little lopsided. But I haven't seen the BSA do anything to make MBs tougher. The trend has been in the other direction. I wouldn't bring it up to national, or they may trim out some requirements from the other two. :-(

We've tried both approaches (rotating and not rotating). Here's my experience. We started the first two years by electing PLs. The first went from shortly after crossover (usually in April) until August, and the second term for the full six months. This worked pretty well, and usually the "natural leaders" of the bunch were the first elected to position. I then went to Woodbadge and we used the rotating PL idea. I talked to some of the other scouters who said they did it with their NSPs. I thought it sounded like a cool idea. We implemented it for the past two years. Our results have been pretty disappointing. My general feelings are (1) the boy doesn't get to stay in position long enough to learn it, so the TG ends up having to do more than he should, (2) the boys don't take it seriously because it's just a temporary position and (3) it inevitably rotates to the most unreliable young scout who chooses that month to not show up to anything because of . So, this year we are going back to the election approach and giving it another try. If it works as well as it did the first two years, we'll leave it in place.

Elections every six months, we encourage SPL & PL to serve for two consecutive terms, but it's up to the boys to decide. No rank requirements, but we "prefer" 1st Class for PL and Star for SPL. That said, we have a 2nd Class PL in one of our older patrols right now and just had a First Class for SPL. We also prefer the SPL to have experience as ASPL, PL or Troop Guide. Our process spans the better part of a month. But doesn't consume the whole program. Here's an overview: Week 1 - The SPL and an adult explains the process. This is mainly done in August, when you have a bunch of new scouts. It's a pretty quick overview in February. Week 2 - Boys turn in self-nominations forms to express interest in the positions. These are done on a simple form that allows the scout to pick PORs of interest (in order of preference). I have veto rights on any boy wanting to run for SPL. Week 3 - SPL & PL elections. If we have no one running or need additional boys to run, we open the floor up for nominations. We've had boys "talked into" being PL by their peers. I think that's great for a boy that doesn't have a lot of confidence to have his peers tell him he should run. The SPL election is run by an ASM who is not related to anyone running for the position. After the SPL election, the new SPL usually goes ahead an announces his ASPL(s). Then the Patrols have their elections. Patrol elections are overseen by the SPL or ASPL. Week 4 - Troop POR appointments by SPL and patrol appointments by PL. This has worked pretty well for us for the past couple of years. The formality in the election process was introduced a couple of years ago after a parent-interference fiasco. We worked with the PLC after that incident to put together a more formal process. It's worked a lot better since (but have still had some challenges).

Hey, I'd just like to find where these scouts are that actually seek out MB counselors outside of their own troop or Summer Camp. I can't get my guys motivated to work on MBs outside of Summer Camp or the occasional MB offered within the annual plan. We've hashed that out before, so I don't want to re-open that can 'o worms. My problem with the rule is that I am in a district/council that does NOTHING to help with MB Counselors. There is no district list, their is no council list. When I started the troop I contacted the DAC and asked, and he said it was up to us to get our own counselors. I asked about approval, he said if they weren't already registered adult leaders, we should turn in the paperwork to council. He said that the only reason they would be denied the right to be an MBC is if they failed the background check. He said if the MBC was a registered adult leader, we didn't have to do anything. They could do as many as we wanted. It was up to our troop to decide. I followed up with the DE and have brought the issue up several times, but to no avail. Apparently this is the case in most of the districts in our council. Also, I know at Summer Camp the MBCs are "technically" the adult in charge of an area. So, while Johnny Life Scout may teach Pioneering, the Scoutcraft Program Area Director is technically the MBC. In this case, wouldn't it be possible for a scout to get many MBs from the same counselor (if he were at the camp for several years)? Finally, what happens if a scout moves from my hometown to yours. He's a Life Scout with 28 MBs, but almost all of the counselors fail your council's rules. Do they approve his Eagle? It seems unfair to the boys who grew up there if they do, but unfair to him if they don't.

Wow, tough problem. I've had issues with problem-making adults and have had to go to the woodshed a few times. Thankfully I had the complete support of the CC and the ASMs to back me up. I'm a "high road" kind of guy and like to approach things above board. When faced with a similar situation a few years ago I came out at a committee meeting and said "hey guys, I have to apologize, we've stepped on each other's toes more than once lately. I'd like to improve this and suggest we do it gradually by learning how a troop is supposed to be run according to the BSA. It's not for me or for you that we're doing this, but for the boys. I suggest we start with New Leader Essentials and Youth Protection Training, and then have Troop Committee Training (Troop Committee Challenge)." In our case, I was the one who delivered the training, but you might not be in a position to to do that. I'd seek out someone from the district, a trainer or maybe a unit commissioner, to come in and conduct the troop committee training. In our case, things turned around quickly. The one problem-maker ended up going into hiding. He stlil causes trouble from time to time, but is essentially gone. The rest of the committee really fell into place and worked well together. It's been two years and we've nearly doubled in size since then, so we are in need of doing it again, as I see other "betty's" on the horizon. Good luck.

E- Congrats to you and OJ. I'm sure you're every bit as proud as you sound. I know you have probably wondered a few times if this day would ever happen. Also, thanks for the words about those scouts that we've lost.

C-bold says "VIDEO GAMES ARE NOT BAD!! It's the addiction that is!!! " But if a scout can't go a weekend without his video game, he's addicted. I'm sorry, but it's the truth. We recently went on a long weekend trip where we allowed video games. I was stunned at how many had them and kept their nose in them the entire trip. We drove through some beautiful countryside, and couldn't get them to take a minute to look out the window. One kid kept turning the volume up on his (he was sitting right behind the driver). We'd say turn it down, and he would... then over the next 30 minute he'd slowly turn it back up again...

I agree that in a perfect world, we'd have more than enough adults to accommodate every situation. John's approach of having 4 adults is great, but not perfect. Playing the "what if game" you can come up with endless opportunities to get into 1-on-1 situations. What if the team broke up for some reason (having two adults each) and then there was an injury and you had to split up again??? The point is that there is always a point where you may not have the coverage you need. I believe the underlying principle is to follow the scout motto, Be Prepared. Try to be prepared for most situations you run into. For example, I try to have a minimum of three adults on a trip. That leaves us some outs if something happens. Sure, I'd like to have four, and often do. But three is my minimum. I believe we can also all understand that there is a difference in emergency situations and planned activities. Let's say three scouts and two adults head out on a day hike. A serious injury happens to one of the boys. You're going to have to have a 1-on-1 situation (unless you send the two remaining scouts alone). In this case, breaking the YP rules makes sense, and I believe any reasonable person would understand that. In this particular case in NC, it doesn't sound like an emergency to me. I believe the only reasonable alternatives were to either force the lad to go, or have another scout stay back as well. I've had adult leaders in my troop break the rule. I've called them on it when they did. For example, we had a homesick kid at summer camp one year. He walked back with one of the adult leaders to the campsite. This was a mistake on the part of the adult. He and I disagreed on it, but I made it clear to not let it happen again. In that situation, he should have grabbed another adult to go with him so it wasn't 1-on-1.

Each patrol chooses their grubmaster. Some use the same person for a six month period, others rotate it each campout. Our budget is $3 per person per meal. They can spend up to that much and get reimbursed. So, if a campout has four meals provided, and six scouts are going, that's $72. The scout turns in the receipt after the activity and the treasurer reimburses it.

What a great opportunity you are confronted with! This is truly a time where scouts can learn the pains and challenges of making important decisions that affect others. I'd suggest getting your PLC together for a "special conference". The SM may have to help lead this if your SPL isn't experienced. But use it as a teaching opportunity. Have the SPL list the options on a board. I can think of several: -Do Spelunking / no camporee -Do camporee / no spelunking -Offer both, with boys having an either/or option -Offer both, but limit spelunking to older boys -Shift the date of spelunking back to May (or another month) and do both Have them list the pros and cons of each. I think they'll come to a good decision. Then, let them explain the decision to the troop. Use opportunities like this to teach these important life-skills.

GernBlansten - Actually, if it happened as it was described, it would be a YPT issue. One scout staying back with one adult while the rest of the troop hiked is a violation, unless than one adult was his parent. JM_Ecuador - I've certainly seen boys who passed the requirements for 1st Class but would still not be ready for a situation like this. It's hard to equate learning the basics with the ability to survive. He's "equiped" to do it skillwise, but who is to say if he is mentally equipped for it. As for kids who wander off, we have several that have that problem. The most severe ones actually do have mental disabilities which cause them to lose focus. It's definitely a cause for concern. I pray that this scout is found soon. I also hope that it wasn't an issue of negligence on the part of the leaders, although it sounds like there's a good chance of it.

Semper dude - you crack me up. Good one, I can actually picture that episode.