Stosh

bacchus, congratulations, you have hit the nail on the head. The two often times are mutually exclusive. A boy can earn his Eagle and show very little leadership or leadership skill. All he has to do is go through the motions, meet the expectations and get the prize. On the other hand some of the most powerful leaders I have met are fly-by-the-seat-of-their-pants people who somehow get the others to follow them no matter how difficult it might be. This person doesn't worry about requirements or expectations, only getting the job done and everyone safely through to the end. If it means bending rules and cutting corners, they don't hesitate. What they end up with is others that will follow this scout anywhere he needs to get them to. They don't care what patch is on his shirt, or what skills he possesses, but what they do care about is believing in his ability to care for them and champion their needs. That's not a skill listed in any requirement for the Eagle rank award. I have seen Eagle projects where the scout only cared about himself and his success on his project to the point where he bullied and badgered his helpers to get the job done that they resented him. Somehow that got translated into "show leadership". Yeah, right. Stosh

I guess I'm of a different opinion. "The scout owns at least 50 percent of his fate in scouting." If he's learning maturity and leadership he owns 100% of his fate in scouting. No Eagle Scout has ever said to me: "My mom and I earned my Eagle," or "My dad and I earned my Eagle." If they do, it's not theirs. I have always evaluated every scout that comes through my troop on only one dynamic of leadership that will insure success. That is "Caring". If the boy doesn't care, even if he gets his Eagle because he walked through all the requirements, it will be only marginal in value in the years ahead. If only the parents care, or the SM cares, why bother with the award, it is of no value except as resume fodder. Give me a boy that cares and I don't worry about whether he has an Eagle pin to wear, he's going to be a successful leader. Stosh

Hmmm, my experience is far different. I haven't started a Pack, but I'm thinking that with the amount of adult participation required it would be by far the most difficult, especially if that participation didn't materialize. A Troop on the other hand would require far less adults because all the boys should be the one's developing the program and putting things together. Of course if the boys wanted to be treated like Cubs, then I'm thinking it would be more like starting a Pack. My Crews and Posts I have started were the easiest because the maturity of the scouts helped in initial stages. Tents, trailers, flags and such don't make a Troop successful, the boys make the troop successful and the adult's main responsibility to to make that opportunity available to them. Stosh

"I am one of the Good Old Boys." - I'm not, I'm just a SM with one or two ASM's to assist me. "I am one of the Good Old Boys who make sure your scout is advancing." - I'm not, I'm just the person who works with the SPL/ASPL and PL's to make sure your scout is advancing. "I am one of the Good Old Boys that makes sure the wet troop gear is dried" - I'm not, but I'm the person who trains the troop and patrol QM's to make sure the wet gear is dried. "I am one of the Good Old Boys who takes the patrol to the grocery store to buy their grub." - I'm not, the older boys take the younger ones to the grocery store and assist them in the purchase of their grub. "I am one of the Good Old Boys who brings extra sleeping bags, rain coat, coat, long underwear for the scout who is unprepared." - I'm not, but as SM I emphasize to the PL's to make sure their boys are properly prepared for the outings they will be going on. After 20 years, I have never found a scout that would want to wear my underwear.... "I am one of the Good Old Boys who has a loaf of bread and PB&J just in case the Patrol meal doesn't turn out." - I'm not, but my Grubmaster is reminded that not all boys like the food prepared and to have extra PBJ and other items available for those that don't eat what's served. It is also suggested that the Grubmaster take a survey of their patrol members to make sure the food is what the boys want to eat. If the meal bombs, there's always the PBJ. "I am one of the Good Old Boys who responds to the cry in the night at camp." - I'm not, but I do get up to help the PL take care of his boys (YP issues here!) "I am one of the Good Old Boys who fills out the tour permit" - I'm not, but by BSA policy I have ASM's and committee members that take care of the paperwork. "I am one of the Good Old Boys who scouts new places to go and see and camp" - I'm not, but I do allow my boys to scout out new places, research them and see to it that they have whatever it takes to get them to where they want to go. "I am one of the Good Old Boys who hauls gear and scout to camp" - I'm not, but I do have helpful parents and ASM's that see to it that travel logistics are covered according to BSA policy. "I am one of the Good Old Boys who stays up all night with your home sick scout." - I'm not, but I do sit up the the PL as he handles the problem (YP issues here) "I am one of the Good Old Boys who helps the boys put on a program." - I'm not, but I do assist the boys in their development of their program. "I am one of the Good Old Boys and I will not apologize for it." - I'm not so I don't have to defend my position as to being one. "I enjoy each and every youth I serve, But I enjoy the moments shared with friends that I have hiked hundreds of miles with, camped in monsoons, bled and sweat and watched the boys grow together. Shared successes and Failures with. I am sorry you were not their for all of that, there is nothing I can do to change that. If you want to join the GOBC get off your can, roll up your sleeves, slip on those boots and get going." A Scout is Friendly. Don't need a GOB designation to follow the Spirit of Scouting. If there's someone there who wants to help my boys succeed, they're my BFF.... "Cub leaders, just because your a Type A personality and previously were a CM, ACM, CL, CC or any other acronym doesn't give you an auto entry into a circle of friends. Get over it." Being interested in my Scouts gives you an auto entry in my circle of friends. If they need a designation, I'd use BFF instead of GOB. "I promise, if you camp with us, haul boys, hike, go to round table, attend meetings, and PARTICIPATE. You will be one of us before you know it." Why must there be a separate designation given and some sort of "membership" hoops to jump through before one can become "part of the group?" I have had parents pull up at an activity and ask at the last minute if anyone needs a ride to an event. They volunteer for the committee meetings, sit on BOR's, make sure the boys have what they need for fundraising events, and bend over backwards to make sure the boy have what they need to succeed. Anyone who has even the minutest interest in offering their help in the troop is my BFF.... They don't get a pin, they don't get recognition very often, they don't always wear a uniform, and don't have to sign a registration application. They don't wear patches on their shirt, but if they come up, roll up their sleeves, and say to the boys, what can I do to help, they're my BFF... Never take an opportunity away from a boy to do for himself! I guess if one were to get right down to it, my GOB's all tend to be under 18 years of age.... Stosh

Somehow I still can't get my mind wrapped around any acceptable adult grouping (GOB or otherwise) that is "for the boys' sake". Too often I get the feeling that some of these "groups" are basically "Boy" Scout groups/patrols for the 18+ generations. There are three "groups" in our Troop's activities. 1) the Boys, 2) the adult leadership (registered) that monitors the boys' program, and 3) visitors/guests (non-registered). The boys participate. The leadership monitors, suggests, protects, etc, but does not participate, and the guest/visitors observe. Occasionally a guest/visitor with special skills may do more than observe. We had, for example, skilled watercraft personnel accompany our troop on a whitewater canoe/kayak outing. Other people have been invited into activities such as Eagle projects (Forester/Master Gardener - habitat restoration) and (Professor of Biology - pond cleanup/restoration). Obviously these people didn't come and hang out as GOB's, but came to assist the boys in their activities with their expertise. Stosh

"As a former CAP Cadet, let me tell you they didn't have much flying for the youth either." This varied from one squadron to the next. As a former CAP Cadet, I got a lot of flight time and had I not been radio-operator trained, I would have had a lot more on the search/rescue operations. Stosh

Like morality, one cannot legislate stupidity with rules. If people aren't going to protect themselves, then all the rules in the world aren't going to make one bit of difference. All the rule does is fills in the legal "fine-print". "I told your son he needed to wear his shoes and he didn't so now he's got 10 stitches in his foot." You may be off the hook, but sonny boy is on crutches for the rest of the summer. I wear my red, wool jac-shirt whenever I'm around fire unless I'm reenacting, then I wear a wool uniform coat. I have small burn holes in the arms of both. But I don't have burn scars on my arms. I wear boots around camp, maybe sports shoes on occasion. In snake country I wear leather gaiters, and yes they are hot and uncomfortable, but they have deflected snakes twice. Am I paranoid? or cautious? or stupid? The jury is out on all three, but I haven't been hurt camping for many years now. Last time was I twisted a knee while reenacting. Now I wear a leg brace, which like gaiters is uncomfortable, but I haven't hurt myself since. Lead by example... ? As long as all the first aid I do is on other people who aren't paranoid, cautious and stupid, I'm a happy camper. It's not going to be too far off in the future that I'm going to be needing a walker, crutches or wheel-chair. I'm just not in any hurry to move it up on the calendar. Yes, one can still get hurt with shoes on. I distinctly remember the day when I was out playing in the field across the street from me and looking down and seeing the nail I stepped on poking up between the laces of my shoe. It turned out to be a bummer day. Stosh

After 55 years of camping I have had only one foot injury. I was at the beach, in the sand and there was a hidden piece of quartz just under the surface. 10 stitches, I was barefoot. I was about 10-11 at the time and have never walked the beach without hard-soled shoes since. That makes 40+ years without an injury while camping. I have seen the effects of the angle iron and now wire stakes, re-rod stakes, and hot stones, sharp sticks, etc. over the years and fortunately for me they all occurred on people who refused to comply with the shoes only rules of camping. I know first aid and use it a lot but saying "I told you so" doesn't cut it for most boys. If Mom can't get them to clean up their room, how does one expect the SM to keep them in shoes? The nice thing about it though is that after 40 years of youth work, I have never had a repeat offender. Stosh

Hmmm.... I don't often disagree with Beavah, but I don't think a boy is spoiled because he doesn't feel it necessary to courteously wait three months for the adults to convene a BOR. The program is FOR THE BOYS. If it takes 3 months for the CC to get a couple of adults together to make it happen for a boy, then there's something wrong with the system. I do SM conferences whenever a boy asks. I don't have office hours where it must be done at a certain time and a certain place on my schedule. So too with the CC. He is aware that it might take a week or two to pull something together, but 3 months? I don't think so. A certain amount of courtesy needs to be given the boy as well. It's a give and take thingy. We must be courteous of the boys' needs as well as they understand it might take a while to pull together a BOR. If the adults would think it ridiculous to sit around on May 24th until midnight to approve the boy's request for a BOR, why would they question the expectation for the boy to sit around for 3 months of his time. 5 hours of their time vs. 3 months of his???? Give me a break! Am I the only one that think's that kinda dumb? If I had to guess on this one, my gut feeling is that this is more of a power thingy and not so much a scheduling problem. This is something a strong adult-led program might want to promote. Stosh

Scout? Why wouldn't Cub Scouts qualify for a DC to apply EDGE? I'm thinking the intent of the requirement is to teach a younger scout using the technique, not to determine the "student's" qualifications as whether or not he's a scout.... Stosh

"As has been said a few times Stosh, this is more likely not an anti-female rule, but more of an anti-parent-coddling approach for this troops adult leaders. If I remember right, you almost brag to being a very strict anti-parent-coddling troop leader." "I spoke to my friend today, and the SM has sent out a correction email. He said he was wrong, and mother and fathers are equally welcome on the trips. (So, I think he DID mean "No women allowed" but now understands that doesn't work.)" And sometimes it is as it is stated. One can't assume anything until all the ducks are in and counted. My kudos to the SM for getting the situation straightened out with minimum impact on the program. Sometimes a SM inherits a tradition that may not be up to snuff, but it's difficult to make changes and to have to back down and make changes both is difficult. Stosh

Sometimes stupid rules create missed opportunities for our boys. A few years back I was taking a canoe/kayak trip with the boys and needed a second experienced water-craft expert. SHE came along and the boys treated her like a queen. All of her kids are grown and gone from home so she's a "mom" but she's also a forester by training and a master gardener. Her expertise has gone a long way in some of the more important Eagle projects and service projects along the way. Plant and animal identification? She makes most people look like kindergrtners when it comes to knowing the great outdoors. I'm sure the years she worked with the US Forestry Service in Alaska helped out. Any unit that has this rule of no females in the field are missing out on a ton of possibilities out there. This woman now works as an accountant in the tax department of a multi-billion dollar international corporation. Who'da thunk? If one is to help their boys grow and develop in leadership, I'd say it would serve them better to provide them with quality support and not stupid rules. Stosh

If this became an expectation on the unit level, here's the abuse that can happen. Each boy can only earn one rank per year. This will keep the multiple rank advancement from going wasted and now showing in the numbers. This means that the 7 years of scouting with one rank per year means that the boy who stay until they are 18 will not need to exit the troop early. But because they don't have an opportunity to contribute to the troop's numbers/statistics, any scouter who has Eagle more than a year before they turn 18 will need to quit. Makes sense to me..... Seriously, folks, any scout that gets his FC at the end of the first year is really going to put the troop in the dumpster over the next 6 years when he has only 3 ranks to achieve. Stosh

A physical can give indication that a person is capable to certain activities. What if a person can't pass such a physical? Not turning in a physical because one can't afford it and not turning one in because they can't pass it are two important issues that one needs to consider. I wouldn't take a pass on this and then find out half-way through the trip that the diabetic and hypoglycemic person can't handle the menu choices. To think the rules are only to protect the troop is a rather narrow perspective. As SM, I'm responsible for ALL the people on the trek, not just the boys, not just the registered adults, not just who I pick and choose to be responsible for, but ALL the people. Stosh

I'm with LisaBob on this one. There's a rule in my troop that no moms are allowed. This means that any adult that attempts to help out in the hovering parent mode is asked to go sit in the corner until the urge passes. This is not limited to only women, but guys too that can't behave at a campout and allow the boys to run their own show. The term as we use it may be politically incorrect, but one can be assured that it is not just the female of the species that gets singled out. Defined for us Mom is anyone who feels it necessary to coddle, pamper, pickup after, etc. (mom traits) that run contrary to the program we are promoting. Stosh

I realize it's old fashioned and rather out-of-vogue, but one does have to take into consideration a scout's word of honor. It might have a passing note in the Scout Oath, but coupled with the old fashioned custom of shaking hands, a person's word once meant something. In today's world I don't know if it's as important or if it's even being taught as important. If a scout says he'll be there, I kinda take him at his word (Scout Oath) and trust he'll come through (Scout Law). If I as leader expect anything less, I don't know if I am upholding my commitment to the Oath and Law. I would much rather have a boy say no, he can't go and then change his mind and work things out to come rather than say he is coming and then leave his buddies holding the bag on expenses and program. It's a discussion area when reviewing Scout Spirit during SM conferences. Stosh

If the SPL reports to the committee, what does the SM do? I would think if the CC wants info from the SPL, he can chat before the meeting and not waste the SPL's time. Anything the CC wishes to convey to the boys he should be doing it through the SM. I don't see any purpose in the SPL meeting with committee unless specifically invited to do so for a special concern they may have. Stosh

Of the three camps I am familiar with: 1) Has the money, nice new facilities, does the standard programs. A few high adventure programs, but weak on them. Pool, no lake, but river nearby. Full MB offerings 2) Old established camp, all the amenities, good program, nice lake for all water MB's, couple of nice high adventure opportunities. Full MB offerings 3) Old camp run as if it were 50 years ago, patrol method, nice lake. Reminds me of my scouting experience back in the 1960's. Site cooking, no mess hall, have to set up wall tents on arrival, quite primitive. Full MB offerings. The boys unanimously picked #3 for this summer. They sought out this camp from all the available options in the region, went last year and fell in love with it. Instead of planning council camps based on what adults think the boys should have, maybe ask them what they want. Stosh

Proper protocol was not followed and a warning was issued, end of discussion. If one does not follow through with the warning this time, this type of activity will become the norm. It also may show some complicity in the issue if credit for activity if one changes at this point. Honesty and integrity are a difficult position to take at times, but I'd hold fast and take the slings and arrows on this one. (Been there, done that, and it's no fun) I'm not thinking you are punishing the boys for the stupidity of the parents on this one, but you might be teaching the boys to stand with integrity regardless of who's taking stupid stances and cutting corners. If they learn that, it will be a major step in their leadership development. Sometimes one has to stand against some status quo and lead. Next time maybe the boys will insist that proper protocol be taken regardless of what the parents say. As ASM, I don't know if you have a leg to stand on and may lose this battle if the SM decides differently. But at least make it known where you stand on the integrity issue before dying on that hill. Stosh

What do the boys want to do? I would use their preferences in this issue. If they have bonded well and have been together since Tiger Cubs, then breaking them up might not bode well in the long run. If they are a mixed bag from a couple of different packs, then let them decide what they want to do. Our only "rule" is: 6-8 members, figure out what you want to do. Stosh

Remember the good old days? One teacher, one room school. With all that is said and done over the years, there are a lot of educators say that such balance and simplicity is preferable to today's 30+ classes of same aged kids. With everyone trying to fix the "small" problem with today's solutions, it just isn't going to work. You have 6 boys? Take them hiking, take them swimming, take them anywhere they think would be fun out-of-doors. Learn about the trees, animals, build fires (boys love this). Rely on your Bear/Webelos boys to help the Tiger/Wolf boys. We are celebrating 100 years of scouting, why not emphasize what it was like before the mega-packs and mega-troops dotted the landscape? If one ever sits around bemoaning the fact they have a small pack/troop, just remember there were a lot of boys that came up through the ranks in the Lone Scout program. Having a small pack is not a problem, it is an opportunity to do something that the big packs can't do...give personalized one-on-one attention to each one of the boys. Stosh

I put together a complete camp kitchen with bowls, pans, condiment containers, spatula, slotted and solid spoons, whisk, various knives, table cloth, plastic container etc. that all fits into an old BSA Yucca Pack. I keep adding to it as time allows and have added garbage bags, wash cloths, sponges, small containers of oils and spices, soaps, bleach, matches, can opener, hot pads, welding gloves, towels, etc. everything imaginable to make a camp kitchen. All the bowls are stainless steel as well as spatula and spoons and I put the bowls right on the stove and heat the water in them. Yep, even done stir-fry in them. Stack the big bowl on little one, double boiler for scrambled eggs. I don't think I've hit the $100 mark as of yet, but it holds 10 times the equipment than most patrol boxes. Whenever I'm grubmaster for an outing, it gets strapped on my chest and the backpack on the back and I'm good to go. The only thing the kitchen does not do is hold a Dutch oven. But if one is canoeing instead of backpacking, the aluminum Dutch oven gets dropped into a duffle along with the kitchen and we're good to go. Stosh

I do believe the tie was for adults and Explorers. From the pictures one sees the square neckers were folded into a triangle and then gathered rather than folded/rolled. I don't seem too much evidence of fold/roll until the 50's and 60's. I also think the necker under the collar is a rather newer convention, i.e. 70's-80's-ish time period. I would also think that to a certain degree with the very old tunic uniforms being made of wool (pre-1940's) could cause a bit of irritation around the neck. If one were to tuck the top part of the necker inside the collar while the rest hung out over the collar. This would not work well with a rolled/folded necker. Stosh Stosh

Hmmmm, I guess from my perspective as SM, it's not my place to judge what a parent should or shouldn't do for their children. Eagle or MB's it's just a matter of: "Because I said so..." should be sufficient for those in the BSA program. Stosh

Gee, when my boys give me that exposed underwear look, I simply make reference to how nice his plumber's butt ensemble looks. However, I suggest that if he really wants people to notice his underwear, he should consider the whity-tighty look. Far more attention getting than colored boxers. I usually don't have to comment again afterwards. If I do, I have pictures of a lot of older gentlemen who prefer the waistband at the armpit level that I use to compliment them on their retro look. That usually solves the problem. What I can't understand is how the temptation for every 12-14 year old boy can be resisted. Dang, when I was that age, that waistband above the belt was the biggest wedgie target ever created. Stosh