Stosh

"At the Cub level, it is more of a parent's concern than it is at the Boy Scout level." To this day I remember sewing on my Wolf patch along with the arrow points. Granted I sewed the pocket shut, but I learned, nonetheless. Mom made me pull it out and do it right. Stosh

When did it become the parents' responsibility for the scout's uniform? The boys should be taught what the uniform is supposed to look like and left to them to get it right. While at the cub scout level, I wouldn't advocate the use of a sewing machine, but a needle, some thread and a thimble should be a lot easier to operate than a jackknife. To this day after 50 years of scouting, I still hand sew all my patches just like my mother taught me to when I was a cub scout. Give a man a fish..... Stosh

Standard question: "When are you going to start treating me like an adult?" Standard answer: "When you start acting like one." So when does the process begin? From the time you are born. Children who are pampered and cared for learn to be pampered and cared for all their lives. Patterns of behavior taught or not taught in the family unit at a very young age will carry forward on into "adulthood". Because of this, there are some 13-14 year-olds that are very mature/adult like in their behaviors and there are some 45 year-olds that act like 3 year-olds. By the time many of our scouts reach 11 years of age, the process is not as much to help develop them into adults as it is to break bad habits taught in prior years. Soccer Moms and Helicopter Dads go a long way to retard the development of their children and heaven forbid anyone teach their child to be independent, caring, and focused. Boy-led, patrol-method is designed to develop our young people onto responsible adults, it runs counter to everything a parent wants for their child and thus we have 29 year olds still living at home. Stosh

Common sense should take over at a certain point and make the decision for you. Drinking too much water does not prevent dehydration and it's associated problems. I have had people go down around me simply because their body temperature was too high and they had been drinking plenty of water. Vigilance and common sense should over-rule rules that are not doing what they were intended to do. Stosh

Be Prepared! I was in scouts in the 1960's and by then they had dropped the subject from the BSA handbook. However, in my lifetime, having read the book, I have used that skill twice. On a more modernized note, I use the CPR of today rather than the back push and lifting elbows that was part of the old book, and which was still being taught when I was a kid. Stosh

If trained properly and with the right amount of maturity and no adult interference, why would there be terms at all? If leadership was filled more with qualified scouts rather than "who needs to advance", there would be far less problems in a lot of troops. Stosh

No mess hall for a starter. All camp competition by patrol, not troop. Flags line up by patrols, not troops. Etc. There is a definite pattern when you see it being done right. Stosh

I have been a moderator on a lot of other forums over the years. It's pretty much a thankless job and one gets heat over the most trivial issues. With that being said, this forum is by far the most civil of any I have been involved with, even the politic section. I was a moderator on a Civil War forum once. You can be assured the war is not over for some people. I'll let everyone in on my nickname Stosh. It was given to me by someone on a forum who later became quite a friend over the years. It is the name of a donkey from a book entitled "My Royal Polish Ass". Like most nicknames, it is one of my favorites and it is used exclusively on the forums. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

Heck I prefer being an adult where 100% of the cooking responsibility falls on me! I get to pick the menu and if the other adults don't like what's being served that night, they always have the PBJ option, I never have to settle for PBJ. Having cooked for myself for 50 years around a campfire, it's no big deal and with the dutch oven, even cleanup is a breeze. Over the years I have learned all the shortcuts to meal prep/cleanup. I teach them to the boys and some pick up on it, others don't. Not my problem. Occasionally I have sometimes suffered through a polite response to have a meal with a patrol. I survived. I even got yelled at once as an ASM by a SM of an adult led program that was upset with me when I did the breakfast prep/cooking for the boys. I really missed the opportunity to cook for a large group. I let the boys do the cleanup because the SM insisted. I find that most camp chores are a "burden" to the boys because they have not been trained properly. We shoot through the advancement requirements that most boys have an "exposure" to camp chores, but no real experience. If I didn't know how to campfire cook, I'd be miserable on the outings as well. I find that most boys balk at chores because they really don't want to admit they are in over their heads. Stosh

Whatever works for your boy! Stosh

I'm old school and wear the necker over the collar. In the summer time when it's really hot, I just get it wet with my canteen and it feels really good on the back of my neck, something that wouldn't do if it were under the collar. I use the necker as something that is function, not just looks pretty. Stosh

Being a stickler for 6-8 boys in a patrol means that if there are 3 17 year-olds out there that want a clique group to hang out in, bothers me that the resources those boys possess go wasted for the younger boys. If there are 3 17 year-olds out there that want to hang together, at least put them in the "troop/honor/leadership" "patrol" with POR's assigned to them. They don't belong to any patrol, but they still have responsibility for the others in the troop. The leadership corps group of SPL, ASPL, TG, QM, Instrutor, etc. have no minimum number of members, but camp, hang together so as to not interfere with the work of the PL's in the patrols. Stosh

For me it's easy. I would ask the boys if they liked the way the patrols are set up now, are they getting enough boys at the activity to function as a patrol, and if not, give them permission to make whatever changes they wish. I just use the 6-8 framework to begin with and they usually do a pretty good job of figuring out what works best for them. For me there's nothing to really "discuss". However, if the boys think that they are locked into a patrol structure set up by adults, they will be intimidated to leave well enough alone. Otherwise, I would simply state, "The patrols are kinda messed up with only a couple of boys showing up for patrol #2 and #3 running a bit short, why don't you guys all sit down, and make up patrols that work for you." Then I'd go get a cup of coffee. Of course, that's what boy-led, patrol-method means to me. Otherwise, feel free to make up a ton of rules and regulations so that the boys are fully aware that the adults are running the show. Stosh

One has to also remember that there are times (me included) where I have written something I thought was well within the boundaries of civility only to have it interpreted in a way it was never intended to be. One then goes back and re-reads the post in the way they interpreted and the only conclusion one can draw is they're right, I am a jerk. I try (sometimes successfully, sometimes not) give the writer the benefit of the doubt the first or couple of times they try and explain something. Then if it is a bit harsh, I just move on to another topic, there's plenty out there that are interesting. Stosh

Random thoughts... Don't use dining flies except for summer camp. Patrols do sometimes. For those who feel that having a dining fly for safety reasons, may want to consider why the BSA is adamant about no flames in tent, yet the average troop out there thinks nothing about flames and cooking under dining flies. All outing need to consider leaving the fly at home and planning on rainy day meals with no cooking. On an average, it's about 50/50 as to whether or not I even use a tent let alone a fly. If I need to travel light, the tent is usually the first thing that gets left at home. A standard military poncho works just fine for fly/tent most of the time. My one trip to Philmont required us to take a tent on the trek. We hauled the stupid thing around for the whole week and never put it up. Did it rain? Yep, but the rain poncho kept us and our packs dry on the hike and nice and dry at night. The contingent used the rain fly once because of a hail storm. Otherwise it, too, was never used. BWCA is about the only time a tent was required because of the mosquitoes. A dining fly did nothing for those pesky little critters. A prepared scout does not need a fly to keep his gear dry while he sets up his tent, it should be packed correctly and it can sit out in the rain with no problems. Once he has his tent set up the gear shouldn't go inside anyway. Heavy storm? A scout should be looking for more protection than what's offered by a dining fly. Stosh

Create problems? Who me? All the time. My boys knew to expect the unexpected. Once we were hosting the Webelos boys for a winter campout. We were touring the scout camp which was one of their pin requirements. I had one boy at the back stop with his parent and told him the boys will be back to help him with his "broken ankle". The boy smiled and dropped out of the hike. When the boys got back to the cabin about 10 minutes later they did a buddy check and realized one of the Webelos boys had "lost" his buddy. Of course they came to the SM and asked what they should do. I simply said, "It's not my problem." Search and rescue followed by splinting, and extrication followed. They weren't happy, but they figured it out. NSP with no older leadership? Again, not my problem, but it was suggested to the SPL unless he wished to train up someone in the NSP as PL, he had better consider getting a TG to step up. With something as critical as this situation, suggestions from adults are always an option. Just because the boys are the functional leaders doesn't mean they are expected to do it in a vacuum. Options, suggestions, recommendations are always in order. It's called coaching, assisting, supporting, but never doing. Chao: from the breakdown you have in your troop, it appears you barely make the 2 patrol requirement I would have in place. 12 active boys means 2 patrol of minimum numbers. A patrol of 1 active boy doesn't leave much room for leadership development if there is no one there to lead. To say one has boy-led, patrol-method means the patrols need to be functional. I would suggest tossing out the current structure and let the boys have at it to set up patrols with the 6-8 membership. Yes, you could possibly have 3 patrols, 4 with 2 place holders for a boy who's coming back as soon as the sport season is over, etc. The goal of boy-led is to maximize boy participation. If they're not there, that's pretty difficult to do. The 1/9 and 3/10 sounds like the older boys. And at the last campout you needed to combine. Well, why not let the boys figure out this problem and take ownership of the attendance issue? Why do ad hoc patrols when it would be better in the long run to keep them combined all the time, not just for campouts? If one is striving for patrol identity, that would facilitate that process to quite a degree. Ownership goes a long way to strengthen patrol identity. If the adults pick and the scouts have no ownership in the process, they will tolerate, not bond. If they pick and control the process, they will make it happen. Stosh

Hmmmm... Isn't John used as a nickname for Jonathan? Or Bill for William, Jim for James, Jack for John (never figured out where those came from....) Peggy for Margaret for the gals out there..... I wonder if shortened names are acceptable for nicknames. What do you think, Virginia? Stosh

Probably.... However, I carry one all the time. They're kinda useful too.... I was doing winter camp with my boys and they got all their backpacks on, skis and poles and when it got to me I said I didn't need poles, I had my staff. They thought I was nuts. A SM standing in line just laughed and asked how I was going to get around with that. I said, I'm not as worried about that as I am of having the hook on the end of my staff to get me through the weekend. Sunday afternoon, that same SM looked me up and said I HAD to give him a second look at that staff, he had to have one. With a backpack on, helping the boys pick their poles up all weekend long had worn him out. Me? I just turned my staff around, hooked the pole and hiked it back up to the boy. I'm just too old to be bending over on skis, with a backpack, to pick up anything anymore. I learned that trick many years ago by and old SM.... Just passing on the legacy.. Any time the boys get to even thinking about using the staff as a weapon and there's no bears in the area, I just remind them I have one too, and I've got a lot more experience using it than they do. So far no one has ever even considered pushing the issue. Safety is always my highest priority and their staffs are strictly tools. Just as neckers are consider a vital part of a first aid kit, so true for the staffs. My boys can come up with a stretcher in less than a minute with the gear they have on them at any time. So, what happens when a 250# man goes down with a broken ankle? No problem 4 poles to make the stretch, 2 on each side and 2 more across, one just above the head the other under the knees (Think elongated tic tac toe). That gives 8 lift points. I have seen 8 medium sized boys lift a 250#+ man without any problems. Stosh

"What did the PL do if, say, a couple of members stopped participating? With a limit of 6-8 and a few only go on 2 campouts a year that PL might want a different mix. It sounds like if a PL takes on a scout the PL has him for the duration. What's that duration?" >> The PL's in the troop were the "highest" ranking officers in the troop. No one could step in and over-rule a PL unless it was counter to BSA policy. If a PL was having difficulty keeping his boys active and it was becoming a pinch to keep the minimum of 6, he could declare the position open. This usually occurred only after the PL had long talks with the inactive scout. Usually the scout would give reasons for his absence. If the absence was only temporary (i.e. sports season) they usually held the position open and put up with the short numbers. But if the boy was no longer interested in scouts and didn't plan to return any time soon, the PL declared the position open and took on new members. The boys always know first if someone has lost interest in Scouting. The adults are usually the last to find out. If the inactive boy returned he could always hook back up with any patrol that had open slots, including his old patrol if it had a slot. "What happens to scouts that don't or rarely participate?" >> As I mentioned, the PL and other patrol members usually pressed the boy's attendance especially if it was causing problems for the patrol. The responsibility for attendance stayed with the patrol. It was never the job of the leadership (youth and/or adult) to press this issue. More often than not, peer pressure was always more effective than anything anyone else could do. "What happens to scouts that are not wanted because they never help out? Some kids get a reputation. Hopefully this is a way to teach them something so I'd like to do this." >> Yes, this happened a lot and eventually the boys learned that unless they carry their load, they would be asked to move. As I mentioned in my previous post, if there was a problem, either the boys worked it out amongst themselves or they moved to another patrol. It was unfortunate that the offender didn't realize that the only place they would be welcomed would be the smaller struggling patrols who were short members and that meant carrying a bigger load than staying with their original larger patrol and stepping up to the challenge. "What happens to scouts that are not wanted because they're socially awkward? If a scout doesn't have friends then it may be hard for him to get into a patrol." >> Never had this problem for the three years we ran under the system. That doesn't mean we didn't have "problem" boys, it just meant that the smaller patrols, needing members usually stepped up and gave the awkward boy a chance to belong. Kind of a mutual agreement, You need members and I need a group, let's work it out. "Does the PL need to come up with some sort of plan or goal for his patrol before he goes recruiting?" >> Generally there was a consensus in the patrol for new members. We have 5, we need one more, we need to beat the bushes for another. Who from your friends might be interested, etc. Except for the boy that wanted to be a PL did I ever see a PL trying to recruit on his own. Everyone in the patrol knew the scoop and worked on the problem together. >> These boys knew that they needed to work together to not only get members, but also to keep them. No one wanted to drop below the 6 member threshold. They worked hard at keeping everyone in the game because their patrol's survival depended on it. Either we work together or we will need to split up. Not many were fired up to face that without trying their best to keep their numbers up. >> The stronger patrols always drew in the more dedicated scouts, which would naturally occur anyway. However, if a boy needed a POR, he might drop out of that patrol for a while to take on NSP or a group of disenfranchised scouts. That meant that the best scouts ended up with the others, even if only for a short time. The first year we tried this, it was a building year, but the second year, a boy (and even his buddy) would drop out of their patrol and take on the NSP. More often than not, the patrol they left had 8 members and so it dropped that patrol to 6 which they held their spots opened for a while or plugged them with new boy overflow from Webelos cross-over. At the end of a certain period of time that felt comfortable, the older scouts would go back to his original patrol and the two overflows would go to the now more mature NSP. The third year there were two boys needing POR and so the patrol split in two having 4 older boys and 4 new scouts in each. At the end of a mutually agreed on period of time the 8 older boys regrouped and the newer boys all formed up their own patrol. I did notice that even though the patrols were separated at events, the older and younger boys did a lot of inter-patrol activities with each other. The older boys still wanted to spend at least some time with their friends. To a lesser extent that interaction seemed to continue between the two patrols even after they went back to older/younger patrols. (They had made new friends with the new guys.) >> It was quite remarkable of all the different options the boys selected to handle their specific problems. To a varying degree all the options they chose seemed to work out in the long run. As the SM I really didn't worry about the patrol structures. It was never my problem, it was the PL's. It was up to him to find a solution. Stosh

When I took over as SM of a troop, they were used to calling the leaders by their first name. Of course they called each other by their first names as well. I completely changed that culture of familiarity to one of respect, and it only took about 6 months. I had one boy who started out calling me by my first name and as is my practice with all boys addressed them by their title/position and their last name. After a half dozen meetings the boys were addressing me as Mr. B____. I didn't tell them they had to, they were merely reflecting back what I was doing with them. My boys were Mr. A___, Mr. B_____, PL C_____, etc. After establishing a level of respect, "nicknames" were added. For 20 years I had canoed a certain river and never spilled into the drink. I had one of my boys on the front (newbie) who was doing quite well until we got to a tough spot. I thought he could handle it, but he panicked and we were heading for a sweep. So instead of risking getting pinned, I rolled the canoe. He came up crying and I said, it's no big deal, the water is only 2' deep and he was safe. He said he was crying because he had ruined my record of never getting wet in the rapids. I told him it wasn't his fault, that the only reason he was in my canoe in the first place was for ballast and he could have just as well been a box of rocks for all that mattered. Well I said that a bit too loud and that boy's name was and still is Box o' Rocks. As I struggled with learning everyone's name, I had one boy that I just couldn't remember and I had to ask a few times what his last name was. He kept telling me which was fine. Eventually, I began to keep asking his name as a bit of a tease. Finally I was feigning ignorance of his name, I asked him, "And you are?...." to which he responded, "Your Favorite Scout." Yep. it stuck. The last example was an arrogant, self-centered boy that was son of the former SM. Thought he was better than anyone else. He wanted the prestige, but didn't do any of the work. Out of frustration I called him a slug. He walked out of the meeting. He came back, though. Next time he didn't do the work I called him a slug again, and he walked out. Came back, again. The third time around he got up got in my face and in an angry voice, said, "I don't appreciate you calling me a slug." I said, "Do you know what a slug is?" To which he replied, "Yes, a slimy little bug." I said, "No, it's short for Sluggard, ya know, someone who is too lazy to even bother to look the word up in the dictionary." He gave me the deer-in-the-headlights look. Slug completed his Eagle, went on to complete SM training and by the time he was 19 he had WB beads. Even though he has been asked to call me by my first name, he says, he never will, that I'll always be Mr. B_____. Yes, I use nicknames for the boys quite a bit, some of them could be construed as offensive, but with an underlying level of respect, it is something the boys revel in. As a matter of fact, I often wonder if the boys who do not have nicknames might feel left out. It's sometimes difficult to know, but each boy's situation is different. If a strong basis for respect is first established, then the nickname is never seen as disrespectful and isn't understood as name-calling. Stosh

In my former troop, the process Tampa mentioned, is what we did. The only "rule" was a patrol had to be at least 6 and no more than 8.... Have at it boys! Once we were formed, there was no time limit/restrictions applied. If 8 boys wanted to join together in their first year and stay that way through to Eagle + they could. If someone had a falling out with their patrol, they either worked it out or they moved to another patrol that had room. Everyone had a spot, knew where it was and had the option of moving or staying if they wished. Patrol identity was very strong. They maintained distance as Kudu suggests and hung out together as a patrol. Whenever there was a lack of participation, it was up to the PL to call his boys and get them to an event. No matter how many boys were absent the patrols never combined for an event. The two boys at a time issue was addressed in a 100%, all the time, buddy system. They hung out together, took MB's together, tented together, etc. They were responsible for their buddy to make it to all events. If there was absenteeism, the buddies for the event may pair up differently, but it was always within a patrol. If there was an odd number of boys for an event, the PL was on his own. The Buddy System was used all the time, not just the waterfront. PL's were 100% responsible for their patrol. They made the final decisions of who is in their patrol and who isn't. The only exception to this was the "troop" patrol which consisted of SPL, ASPL, TG, QM, etc. These boys knew that if they accepted these positions they would need to drop out of their patrol and focus their attention on what's best for the whole troop and not "play favorites" with their own patrol. Once their POR was over, they could rejoin any patrol that had openings. One boy wanted to be a PL and it was acceptable to go out and recruit a patrol of their own to lead. One boy did this and tried to "steal" members out of other patrols, found it too difficult and took on the NSP of new cross-overs. Patrol identity was so strong only one boy (is patrol buddy from his former patrol) was the only boy to jump ship and go with him in his new patrol. I was surprised how fast this patrol identity formed once the boys realized the adults wouldn't step in and mess with what they had put together. As long as things were going well, as SM, I didn't have any reason to mess with it. Basically the only "rule" I ever stuck to was 6-8 members per patrol. Occasionally we had one small patrol that had to wait until the Webelos cross-overs came around. They worked hard on recruiting these new boys because patrols with 6 or 7 members could also try and pick them up when they came into the troop. The small patrol generally had better success because they could take on a group of the new boys rather than just one or two. The new Webelos boys always had the option, if they had the numbers to form a patrol of their own, so the competition for these boys tended to be quite "intense". Stosh

Welcome to the fray! Best of luck with the transition, it is really neat, but fraught with parental land-mines. I'm beginning to think that there are a lot of parents out there that really don't want their children to actually grow up. Maybe this is why there are so many 30 year olds still living at home. Been there done that.... Eventually the parents of the troop had me ousted for "expecting too much leadership" out of the boys. I went into BSA retirement and the wife and I began doing all the outing stuff we couldn't because we were always busy with the boys. Hiking, kayaking, camping, traveling, etc. etc. UNFORTUNATELY, my reputation preceeds me and another struggling troop has come to me and asked to take it on as their SM. I was wondering, at my age, did I have it in me anymore to take on such a challenge. Then I got to thinking, if it's really boy-led, how much work does it have to be for an old man? Moving to boy-led is really a big challenge, but then again a kayak floats just as well in whitewater rapids as it does in a swimming pool. Keep your nose pointed down stream and your paddle in the water and enjoy the ride! Stosh

Wingnut and Barry have it correct. I didn't mean to imply that recruiting is ignored, just not the focus of the program. Many moons ago I had a major trip planned (not scouting,... church related). The parents of the kids put the kybosh on it saying it was too far to go for their kids. However, I said I was going anyway by myself. After the meeting one parent called me and said that her son wanted to go. He and I went (Many moons means way before YPT). We had a great time. I didn't say anything about it until 9 months later when I said I would be going again this year. I rented a 66 passenger school bus to haul all the kids...(from 5 different churches). A little planning is good for the Webelos visitors. It was standard operating procedure that if a group of Webelos walked through the door one of the patrols was geared up for a "pre-planned" activity just for them. It was usually knots and rope making. Each Webelos walked away with a knot tying "kit" and a 6' piece of rope they made. The scouts then take a bit of time to replenish the visitor inventory. What I see far too often is the "Woe is me, we have a troop that's too small!" attitude that somehow seems to affect just about everything the troop does. I have had as many as 2 adults and 3 scouts on a high adventure in the BWCA. The trip almost got cancelled, but those five wanted to go and they did. There was inner incentive to recruit in my old troop. Patrol sizes were 6-8 boys each. The boys decided who was in their patrols. If they did not have 6, they were disbanded and moved to other patrols where there were openings. That option was not liked by many of the patrols, and they worked hard at keeping their numbers up for their patrol. I had one boy wanted to be a PL. I said, good, go find a patrol. He did.... When I took over the troop it had 4 boys and was on the verge of disbanding. After 3 years their number was 25 with 4 patrols. They visited Blue/Golds (three feeder packs in the area) and had visitor plans for when the Webelos came, and one boy wanted a patrol to lead, and twice one of the Webelos dens invited the troop to come in and demonstrate something for the cubbies. One patrol volunteered and did a nice job, And for the most part, that was the sum total of our recruiting, With outings, leadership training, advancement, MB's we just didn't have much time to recruit. Stosh

Only half that video was funny, the other half was true. Stosh

Occasionally someone will recruit their friends to come and find out what's going on. That's always ify. Sometimes some big recruitment push will pick up one or two. However, if you have a program that the boys want, they will seek you out. Too many troops spend all their time recruiting that they have not time to have fun themselves. Just do program, get the boys there fired up with what's going on and the word will get around quickly. Of course the opposite will happen too. Start running a poor program and they will head for the exits. Stosh