fred8033

A few key points have been missed. You'll have enough problems at camp that you don't need to hunt for more. Scoutmasters should't be enforcers. SM job is to relate to the scouts. Baden-Powell said ... “I had stipulated that the position of Scoutmaster was to be neither that of a schoolmaster nor of a commander Officer, but rather that of an elder brother among his boys, not detached or above them individually, able to inspire their efforts and to suggest new diversions when his finger on their pulse told him the attraction of any present craze was wearing off." — Robert Baden-Powell, Lessons from the Varsity of Life, 1933. This situation ... IMHO ... how I view it ... there is nothing to report. you don't have liability. Usually if the scouts have medicine, the parents provided it. If they didn't, then you have a larger issue. the phones absolutely could have waited until the scouts were there or until there was an obvious violation. the scoutmaster created a wedge between the scouts and himself. Maybe this is a learning experience for the scouts, but it will be something to work through.

There is no requirement to type. Our district requires the proposal to be typed or in pen. No pencil. But I'm not sure there is even a requirement to be in pen. The key point is the project is required. The paperwork is supporting material. The paperwork should reflect the quality that will be in the project and in the scout. Beyond that, it's the "plan, develop and lead" that we are looking to agree on in the proposal. But the paperwork itself is NOT the rank requirement and it absolutely does not need to be typed. I highly suggest reading BSA Guide To Advancement beginning to end. Also, subscribe to BSA Advancement News Publication Index --> https://www.scouting.org/programs/scouts-bsa/advancement-and-awards/advancement-news/ Topic Index --> https://www.scouting.org/programs/scouts-bsa/advancement-and-awards/advancement/ The Nov/Dec 2017 Advancement News article on projects jumping the gun has some applicable quotes. Page 8. Last paragraph. The Aug/Sep 2013 Adv News has an article on keeping project proposal approvals simple, encouraging and mentions not getting stuck on technicalities. The Jan/Feb 2019 Adv News has a great article on what is expected in a proposal review. The Guide To Advancement section on Eagle projects and ranks is critical too.

COR - Charter Org Representative ECOH - Eagle Court of Honor GTA - Guide To Advancement POR - Position of Responsibility Other attempts at abbreviations BSA's ... https://www.scouting.org/resources/los/abbreviations/ US Scouting Project ... http://clipart.usscouts.org/ScoutDoc/Acronyms/abbrev.pdf

FYI ... Guide To Safe Scouting, middle of page 6. If in doubt, Guide To Safe Scouting. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34416.pdf

There is always a "common sense" facet too. We need to follow BSA's rules, but that doesn't mean we check our brains out at the door. The key point is will the kids be safe and BSA's rules exist because adults differ on what "safe" means.

Safe swim defense says ... Safe Swim Defense applies to other nonswimming activities whenever participants enter water over knee deep or when submersion is likely, for example, when fording a stream, seining for bait, or constructing a bridge as a pioneering project https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss02/ Key point ... can the scouts drown? It can happen in moving water over knee deep depending on flow and rocks. Take the training. It's online at scouting.org and easy to do.

I'm confused. "The first troop above" ? What first troop? Do you mean the first patrol definition? Or something else? In my experience, any of the definitions (mixed age, same age, new scout, traditional patrol, other) can be muddied in many different ways. Reorganized. Impromptu combining. Etc. . My preference is that patrols are the standing default organization. They don't change because of low numbers or to re-balance patrols. A new scout patrol is nice by-default. But if a scout wants to switch patrols and the receiving patrol accepts him, then he can switch ... *** at any time *** ... *** his choice ***. The only ask I have is it's a publishable switch and not an event-only switch. If for a camp out, two patrols want to team together, sure. But it's the patrols choice, not the troop. If a patrol has one member and he's on the camp-out and he wants to camp as a patrol of one, fine. That's his choice. I once saw a 17 year as the only member of his patrol. I had no issue with it. All his buddies had aged out and he didn't want to switch for the last several months.

@SSScout ... Until I read more, I was going to protest. Like your description, I agree "traditional" has an attribute of "mixed age", but it's because the scouts are his buddies or pull from the same neighborhood. The attribute "mixed age" is related to buddies being different ages or pulling from neighborhoods. But the emphasis is on finding a connection between the scouts so that they may hang together or see each other and have a reason to be together as a unit. Often these days "mixed age" infers forcing a spread of the scouts so every patrol has scouts of different ages to enable the patrol to have scouts at many different levels of development. This often also implies re-organizing the patrols periodically take keep the balance. IMHO, this was very different than the "traditional" patrol concept. But your definition of "traditional" matches much more with my idea that is often pigeon-holed as "same age". My emphasis is less on same age or mixed age. My emphasis is that these scouts should have a reason to hang together. Otherwise, the patrol is an unnatural, work-only structure not reflecting anything in real life. @RainShine ... Scouters get passionate on their ideas. Baden-Powell was right to emphasis patrols. Patrols work and are key to making a program more "scout"-like. BUT, I would separate that from your immediate concern, i.e. the quality of the program your scout experiences. If he camps. If he has adventures. If he builds friendships. If you can see his maturity develop each camp out in some small way, then he is benefiting from the program. Beyond that, be careful to not pick battles that will affect his experiences. Help. Volunteer. And, when you are in the right position as SM or CC or ..., then slowly help affect change to create the ideal scouting program envisioned by Baden-Powell and BSA's program guidance. But the key is ... keep it fun for you and your scout.

There is "approve" and then there is approve. It depends on the activity. Often "approve" is more hot air than something meaningful. But I agree, charter org officially does "approve", but that should not limit you too much.

After years in the program, my hindsight is if you do something, do it sooner than later. We are often in scouts to benefit our sons. Though the whole experience could be years, the time window for our sons (and daughters) to have a great experience is really short. Spending too much time battling can destroy our scout's experience. It's why I'm a deconstructionist. Get the scouts out doing things (camping, exploring, building friendships). Once you are doing that well, I call that a quality program. From that quality program, look for opportunities to meet BSA's AIMs using BSA's methods. But keep the program first and do it now if possible. I really don't know what power people have to deny a group of scouts goes camping or does some activity.

So so cool. That's the type of MB activity that I want my sons and my scouts plugged into.

I agree Eagle is out of balance. Earning Eagle without having the deep scouting adventures is like getting a college degree without growing your knowledge and capabilities. But I strongly disagree with the assertion that adults don't spend enough time discussing aims and goals. All adult scouters ever do is discuss and debate the aims and methods. We are constantly discussing patrol method (boy led), Ideals (oath and law), outdoor program (how to setup camp), advancement (Eagle), adult assoc (call your MB and get things approved and ...), personal growth (take responsibility), leadership development (when did this sneak in as a method ??), uniform (etc). IMHO, we should discuss those but after we fully discuss ... What do the scouts want to do? What do the scouts like to do? What is new that the scouts have never done or never seen? What's our next small adventure? What's our next big adventure? Here's a pattern our troop has fallen into ... Every year ... A bike trip A ski trip A cave trip A canoe trip Summer camp local Extended weekend camp during summer Other fun stuff as we can find Others are mainly simple weekend campouts

You brought back a great memory of my child hood and a fear from scouting. Great memory ... We gathered as neighborhood kids and would often go to the local pond to catch crawfish. I always got excited when I caught a blue shelled one. Great memories sticking our hands down at the edge of the pond to get them. I doubt any kid on our street or near by has ever done that. Sad. Great fear ... We had a scout that borrowed a five gallon bucket from the troop trailer and spent the afternoon filling it with garter snakes. Must have been dozens and dozens in it when he returned. From then on, I was careful to never upset him less I got a bucket of snakes in my tent.

I fully agree. I do believe there is a difference between packs and troops though. I think Packs have an easier job keeping the focus on the kid's view of scouting. I've been in many pack committee meetings and there's always "oh the kids would love that" or "that would be cool". Cub scouts are energetic and so are the parents. They are fresh to the program. So they keep the program focused on interesting things. When we get to troops, it's like we forget the fun and friendship. It becomes "leadership" and "boy run". We forget the scouts often just want to burn things, hang with their friends or just be away from home on their own for awhile. @qwazse's comment hit me because I've seen that repeatedly. Troops talk a lot about BSA's goals and often dismiss the scout's goals.

Never heard of TL/USA. @qwazse ... I keep re-thinking your comment. It's always been in the back of my head. "the promise of scouting". I fear we, as adults leaders, get so focused and passionate about the BSA aims and goals that we forget why the scouts choose to be in scouting. Personally, I think it's ridiculous to think scouts show up to scout meetings to learn leadership, develop character or become better citizens. Even to learn skills is a big stretch. BSA's "Why scouting?" talks to parents and charter org representatives, but it does not talk to the scouts who are the main audience of the program. https://www.scouting.org/discover/why-scouting/ I fear that we also forget the why of scouting. Scouting offers the scouts A structure to build friendships A program to try new things and get new experiences A home away from home KEY POINT - We as adult leaders need to spend way more time and energy discussing and planning how to help the scouts meet their aims and goals. We already obsess on BSA's aims and goals. Let's help the scouts achieve theirs.

I often wonder if this has to do with the terms we use. Scoutmaster implies "master" as in-charge. Committee chair infers "overseeing". But the scoutmaster is more a coach or even a friendly mentor. He is only "master" when safety is the issue. Committee chair implies focal point OVER the SM and scouts. But in reality, the CC is more a logistics focal point. He's not in charge of any scout, the SM or any ASM.

LOL ... We've had to do that before. Scouts were very aggressive in their plans. I was impressed with their vision. I just didn't want to be the guy driving. ... but they did find the needed leaders.

Well ... In my view ... You have a get-out-of-jail-free-card when BSA can't document it's own rules. If one says ok and the other says no, use the one that says ok. It's up to BSA to get their own rules consistent. Personally, I question why BSA still publishes the golden-color age-appropriate. It should be in GTSS period. One source. Contradictions are often created by having two sources.

Removed.

As much as I admire the uniform, it's pricey and more about image than function. Price approaches $150 for full uniform and at least $65 for just the shirt with appropriate patches. (world crest, position, council patch, unit numbers, trained patch, OA patch, etc). Canvas pants are too heavy, easily damage and don't breath as needed for hot humid summer camp. Forces you to unzip leggings to cool down. My older nylon Oscar De Larenta pants never tore, never wore out and were good for a hot humid summer camp. IMHO, BSA blew it by not having their own "reasonably" priced class-b program. Our pack used ClassB.com for over 15+ years (???) buying new t-shirts for the scouts each year. Cost was manageable and we always saw the shirts all over town on kids and adults. It was the best money our pack spent. Made those scouts easily recognizable and the t-shirts were usable for activities.

You are dead on right. An 11 year old is not the audience for the theory of learning. Rank and MB requirements should not say EDGE. Instead, say "Teach a scout" or "Show a new scout". As scouts mature and age, then NYLT can reveal that BSA's preferred teaching method is EDGE and here's how it works. Learning is a continuum. (leadership, teaching, etc). At the earlier levels, learning starts with doing. This matches Baden-Powell saying that advancement is the natural result of being active. So, learning EDGE should be a natural result of helping each others. At those earlier levels, we encourage confidence in their new knowledge and confidence in reaching out to help others. ... Plus, teaching EDGE makes the learning too dry and boring for the scouts. I think there is a corollary with teaching leadership. Troops would be more successful teaching leadership if they stopped staying they are teaching leadership. I cringe when I hear it. Plus, It kills the buzz and is clumsy and inconsistent at best. Rather, units should focus on a quality program. Then advanced leader training can explain the meta-learning objectives and methods such as leadership.

I agree with your comments. Recruitment. Agreed. It would be good to help units do better recruitment. But I'm not sure if bad recruitment is a cause or a result. Out dated district programs. I hugely agree. The district structure is reminiscent of a 1970s pre-online support program. I'm not really sure districts are well suited to support units anymore. Program delivery problem. I hugely agree on this. I've seen many many scouting offerings that are not good and often less than acceptable. District events. Training. Advancement. It's way too hit-and-miss with lots more miss.

I don't see fewer distinct and council volunteers. I see volunteers everywhere in scouting. There are other driving reasons for mergers and larger councils / districts. Membership losses. The pure number of scouts is half what it was 15 years ago. Our district merged ten years ago or so and membership is still smaller than it was in 2004. The numbers just are not there anymore. Online resources. Units just don't need as much direct support due to online resources. Training is mostly online and not requiring the large basic training events. Schedules, calendars, communication is all online. It makes round table and direct support less critical. Money losses. Donations are way down compared to 15 / 20 years ago. United way, corporations, community FOS and family FOS just are not donating like they did in the past. Demand for more opportunities. Larger councils and districts can provide more resources. Our council's merger doubled the number of available camps and allowed the council more opportunities due to their size.

30-48 was good when the packs had Wolf, Bear, Webelos and Webelos II (8 to 12 per rank, four ranks ). A pack of 30-48 spread over six ranks (adding Lions and Tigers) years has too many holes (5 to 8 cubs per rank). That makes specific ranks very thin on membership. That will promote higher drop out rates and probably holes at at specific ranks or soon-to-be holes at those ranks. I'd argue with the addition of Lion and Tiger (6 school grades), straight math says a healthy pack is now 48 to 76 cubs (8 to 12 per rank, six years). I actually believe you also need to factor in attrition rates. If you have 10% or 20% attrition over four years ... and you want to cross over six scouts each year ... and now you have a six year program ... and now you start with Lion dens ... then to get the same cross-over numbers, you need to start with higher initial numbers. I'd argue a new a healthy pack is 60 to 85 cubs.

Cool. I've loved trips like that. The key is you still have to provide qualified supervision.