Stosh

First of all I think Codger came up with a fantastic idea, and wished things had gone well for him. Yet, I find it always a struggle to have the boys come up with ideas and not follow through. I agree the ownership has to remain with the boys and even if they don't have the skill set to follow through, the adults can assist them in learning them. As long as they are involved there will be no bail out when it comes time to pull the trigger on the event. If we are teaching boys to take on leadership and all they do is toss the stick in one direction and then expect the adults to fetch, I don't see that as an effective approach to leadership. All they decided was what direction to toss the stick. If the dog just sits there and does nothing, the boy has to either retrieve the stick himself, thus accomplishing the activity, or walk away and not play the game because it wasn't that important. Either way the investment on the part of the dog is key to the follow-through on the activity. I like the idea that if all the leg work has been done on the activity, open it up to the district/council so that others have an opportunity to get in on a great activity. Just because my boys turned out to be slugs, doesn't mean that there are others out there that would jump at the opportunity for a great activity. A few participants from other troops may open the doors for other troops to get out there and do some great things in scouting. Stosh

Chazz, I'm not going to laugh at that comment, I've seen it done. Just tell the boys to make sure they staple backwards so the point ends don't stick in them when they get bumped around. Stosh

Youth run programs are NOT a normal part of the youth in American culture. They are told what to do by their parents, their teachers, their pastors, their coaches, etc. and when they show up at Venturing or Boy Scout programs, they are totally unaware and clueless what to do with running anything. I use the analogy of the youth standing at a buffet feast, starving to death. Until they are convinced that they really own the program, they are going to stand around with their hands in their pockets. Why? Because they know that if they do it long enough, some adult will jump in and make it work for them. This is how the system works in their world, that's what they are comfortable with and youth leadership is a foreign concept for them. Couple that with the fact that no one is going to venture forth anything with the tremendous peer pressure that these people live under and the qualification of win/lose, success/failure always lurking in the background. These people are not prepared to lead themselves. If it wasn't for frozen pizza and an oven, I'm thinking many of them would actually starve to death right in their own homes. Teach leadership before setting down program, otherwise the only program you're going to have is the one prescribed by adults. One cannot have the cart before the horse. Stosh

I have often wondered how much influence the idea that AOL and immediately being done with Cub Scouts has on getting the Eagle and immediately being done with Boy Scouts? When I was a WDL I had my first year Webelos boys earn their AOL by the first Blue Gold (end of Webelos I) and then they crossed over at the second (end of Webelos II). For the boys that didn't get their AOL at the first BG had plenty of time to get it at their 2nd. I had weekly den meetings and a monthly outing of some sort. That gave us plenty of time to accomplish this in a timely manner. It also quelled the idea that AOL was the "end" of their Cub Scout "career". It also gave the boys a boost at Pack meetings to have the AOL patch on their shirt for a long time before they moved on to Boy Scouts. Stosh

Another dynamic which is often overlooked is the fact that the AOL guys come into the troop in Feb and get 5-6 months to get ready for summer camp their first summer. The non-AOL boys wait until they are out of 5th grade in June and gets 5-6 WEEKS to get ready for summer camp their first summer. That's got "failure" written all over it. You're noticed as not having gotten the AOL, you got shortened prep time for camp, and all the other boys that used to be in your W2 den are already a rank or two up on you, and that kind of pressure on any kid of any age just isn't going to work well in the long run and by the end of summer they are making plans for something other than continuing the bad first impression they got in Boy Scouts. Just because a boy has gotten his AOL does NOT mean he has to cross over. He can wait along with his non-AOL buddies and cross over at the end of the 5th grade as a den. I'd say get AOL at Blue/Gold, and then enjoy it along with the spring Pinewood Derby and all the other fun things for Cubs. If they miss out on camp the first summer, no big deal, do a nice weekend orientation campout for them that isn't going to cost the parents $$$'s to fork over at the last minute because their son did not get a chance to raise money for camp during the year. There are a lot of excuses being tossed around as to how this transition shakes out and blame passed on to W2DL's who didn't get the boys ready, to age maturity issues, to financial, to time constraints, to they weren't interested in Boy Scouts anyway. Until people recognize these dynamics, the attrition is going to always stay high for the boys, and unfortunately it will be the boys who will miss out. Stosh

Needle and thread and 5 minutes of one's time. Not a bad price to pay for a patch. The pocket on the sleeve is no different than the pocket on the shirt. Now with the new uniform shirt why would it make any difference? Go down to the store, buy a pocket notebook. Stuff it in the pocket before one starts to sew and voila, you cannot sew the pocket shut! This is not a big issue. Every boy should be able to sew on a button and a patch. These are simple skills that anyone can master after an extensive 5-minute course of study that if he's a quick learn could probably master in 3-minutes. When I go to a reenactment with my uniform and they ask if I could fall in as a corporal or sergeant, it means I have to take off the old stripes and put on new. These are not small patches either. It can take me up to as much as 10-minutes to do this. This is not a big deal people! Have the Girl Scouts come in an do a "Here's how to thread a needle", "Here's how to tie a knot in the end of the string", "Here's how to stick a pin to hold your patch in the right spot" and "Here's how to sew around the edge". Just ask. When they get done laughing and wiping the tears from their eyes, I'm sure they'd be happy to help out. Stosh

Every boy deserves a second chance might be an honorable comment, and I'm sure to a certain degree it's true. However, BSA leadership isn't called upon, nor qualified, to make such judgments. If a boy is involved in a felony, it is not up to well-meaning vigilantes to make any sort of judgment call in the situation. We have people in our country who are better qualified to make those decisions. In today's society it is a very fine line between helping people in this situation and a large number of others who feel they have a say-so in it too. I for one wouldn't want to be caught on the wrong side of the line. Just one raised eyebrow and one's whole scouting career as a leader comes to a halt. There are enough zero-tolerant policies out there outlined by those burned by the system. Learn from their mistakes. Stosh

It is difficult to make a point about cold weather wear when the boy doesn't show up in his ineffective uniform while wearing a cotton t-shirt under a cotton hoodie, under his nylon windbreaker. Of course there were very few stocking caps and athletic footwear seemed to be quite prevalent as well. As an older person who does not have the body metabolism of a teenager, I stayed plenty warm wearing my full uniform along with other warm weather precautions. The temps were in the upper 20's and after a long cold winter, most of the boys thought it was a pretty warm day. I stood around most of the day with my coat open to my uniform anyway. Had my felt expedition hat on and kept my hands in my pockets. I was fine. Had the temps been down around zero with a negative wind chill, I would have given gold nuggets for proper winter wear instead of uniforms. I live right across the street from a high school, and from the kids walking by, now that it's getting up near freezing, it's time to break out the shorts and sandals. I kid you not! Welcome to Wisconsin! Stosh

Smoking pot is a crime, but selling pot is worse. If Scouts B & C did not purchase, but B reported it to parents, it is now a matter for the police to investigate. If B & C purchased they are culpable. If any scout witnesses a crime of any sort it needs to be reported to the proper authorities, i.e. the police. If the parents/scout leaders/district personnel try to handle this by themselves it could open the door for aiding and abetting. There comes a time when a scout may overstep a boundary where the scout leadership cannot rescue him. If it was me, I'd distance myself as far away from this situation as possible. I would support the scout and his family, but my involvement would be only that which the police request as part of their investigation. If the substance turns out to not be pot, following the police investigation, then the troop leadership needs to follow up with the appropriate disciplinary measures for the problem this situation involved the troop in. Stosh

If one wishes to clean up cast iron, DO or pans, one can toss them into their self-cleaning oven and run the cycle. Take a wire bush to them, reseason them and you're ready to go, just like brand-new. For those items which will be stored for extended periods of time, there is alway the possibility of the oils going rancid. If you do not wish to take that risk, use bees wax instead of oil. You can store the item for years and the "oil" will never go rancid. I bought a brick of the wax and have used it for years. Just remember that the wax needs to go on while the item is hot/warm. Oil can go on when the item is cold. Stosh

While there is only one BSA uniform there are many optional points, the necker and the hat/cap. That is a troop option. But then there's the red numbers vs. the green, etc. Add to that, even without altering the original BSA uniform there can and often times have troop carried expectations, i.e. handbooks and staffs. While neither of these are part of the actual uniform, there is a tradition that may go with them. It used to be patrol leaders had whistles, but that tradition no longer applies. Early literature indicated that even when the boy was not in uniform, wearing of the whistle identified his position in the troop/patrol. Does it have to be a BSA belt or can it be a Philmont belt? Do the hats have to match or can they be some caps, some hats, etc.? Can one patrol wear a hat and another wear caps? If they wear the expedition hat do they wear the 1" First Class emblem or the universal circular emblem? Can they personalize their hats with a feather or Philmont brand? If a troop can decide on neckers, do they all have to match or can each patrol have a necker of their own? Can they have a troop necker when they travel and do BOR's and a second necker when they do patrol activities? Is a scout in uniform if his pants are a Walmart knockoff that looks really close but aren't really BSA uniform pants? Even if one starts with just the basic uniform, problems arise. These "fine tuning" issues off the basic uniform will always arouse controversy, but when one cannot even come up to the minimum expectations, i.e. Hawaiian shorts or athletic sweat pants, others may have a reason to comment. Last month my two Eagle candidates went into their EBOR wearing full uniform with socks, belts, neckers, etc. One of the two bought a brand new centennial uniform just for the occasion, which was not what he normally wore at troop activities. Both carried their handbook in their left hand and a staff in their right. The panel asked about the staff when the first boy came in and he said it was part of the uniform in our troop. When the second boy came in, they didn't question the staff, but they did recognize and comment that they had a second boy from Troop ## doing a EBOR. We are a full-uniform troop. But with our boys wearing no hats/caps, garrison caps, baseball caps, expedition hats and campaign hats, the troop does not stand out as "uniform". Patrols can have neckers of differing colors, but must also carry a troop necker, and some of the boys tend to "forget" them a lot, too. So, again the troop does not stand out as "uniform." Our older boys tend to wear the red epaulets/numerals and the younger boys the green, the troop does not stand out as "uniform". Two of the boys wear the older all green uniform, but it's a BSA uniform. But if the boy is carrying a 6' staff with a hook in the one end, even if he's in blue jeans and t-shirt, people know he's from Troop ##. To a certain extent, if for any reason a uniform or some "part" of the uniform (i.e. necker, hat, staff) can create a sense of pride, maybe it would be a good thing to encourage. Right now for many, the issue of "pride" can be summed up in showing up for the meeting with the uniform shirt wadded into a ball, quickly put on before flags, only to be taken off and wadded up as soon as closing flags are over. It takes time to develop that pride, but when COH, BOR and EBOR rolls around, no one in the troop has to mention or remind anyone of the expectations on uniform for the occasion. We move forward inch by inch at the blazing speed of a snail, but we're getting there. Stosh

A Webelos II who has just come into Boy Scouts probably still has his Whittlin' Chip. That should qualify him to be able to take his pocket knife to activities prior to earning his Totin' Chip which will expand his education to include the safe handling of saws and axes. The goal for me is to have the boys annually re-take the training for Totin' Chip to keep the issue of safety foremost in their minds. There is nothing wrong with taking the training too many times. Have your son show his Whittlin' Chip and knife to the SM and have him affirm that it is okay to bring his knife to activities prior to doing the Totin' Chip training (which he should do just as soon as he has an opportunity). Stosh

My former SPL was quite bossy in his approach to leadership. I spent a lot of time working with him to develop more of a guide style of leadership rather than directive style. It did a lot to tone down the problem. The first "lesson" he learned was to always phrase his comments as only a suggestion to the PL's. This way it became apparent to him that the leadership lies with the PL not himself. This way he learns to develop leadership in others while doing so himself. I have often used the illustration of a coach who guides, directs, etc. in the game, but doesn't actually play the game. Same if I change it up to an orchestra conductor who guides/directs the group, but makes no noise him/herself. As an adult leader I can only suggest to the boys the program direction they might consider, I can't do it for them without taking away their opportunity to lead. I spent the last year assisting this former SPL to take on a more adult leader approach of guiding/suggesting to the boys rather than directing them. Some of my more successful PL's have begun to figure this out and have applied it in other areas of patrol leadership. I'm not getting the "bossy" or "pushy" complaints anymore and more and more of the boys are feeling they have ownership in the program processes. Also by focusing leadership on a smaller scope, it makes the jobs a lot easier. Usually the PL can handle 7 other boys if he's really good and the SPL with his background can assist 3-4 PL's without a problem. When your troop gets bigger you can consider an ASPL that takes care of training, leading, assisting the POR spots like QM, Scribe, etc. This way the ASPL gets leadership opportunities and the Troop Officers get someone they can turn to and not bother the SPL all the time who is focused on the PL's. I try and limit the focus/scope of all leadership to less than 7 others. That means the PL's most of the time have the biggest responsibility in the troop. The real TG is often times the SPL's right hand man who focuses his attention on the NSP developing and training the boys of that patrol in the PL responsibilities and is the liason person for the NSP who would be seeking much if the SPL's time otherwise and allows him to be more focused on the older PL's. Stosh

There's a reason why schools strive to keep classroom membership as low as possible. Trained, professional teachers have increasing problems trying to teach as the number of students increases. I have heard that 20-24 students per classroom was about right. Remember these are trained, experienced professionals that are taking on this responsibility. With that being said, I find it difficult to believe under any circumstances that any 15 year-old can deal with large groups successfully. Nope, I like the 6-8 patrol members recommended by BP for each PL be retained and that the PL be responsible for them. This would then imply that the SPL could comfortably handle the responsibility for 6-8 PL's (PLC) and that the SPL not have to try and deal with 64 people, i.e. "run the troop". Getting back to Chippewa29's original problem: No scouts were interested in being SPL. Instead they just had the 2 PL's do their job and if necessary, discuss any concerns they may have between themselves. The point being: They were doing just fine if left to their own resources and being SPL was not necessary. Why then as adults insist there be one? Chippewa29 was "nervous" about how well this would work, but to his surprise it worked well. Yes, the patrol method does work well, especially when the adults don't get in there and try and mess with it. I wouldn't take the SPL position, nor encourage any Scout to do so, in any troop that didn't have the role clearly defined and within a scope that a boy of 14-18 years of age could handle. I have often wondered whether the SPL POR is more of a prestigious patch wearing thingy than an actual functioning responsibility in the smaller troops. 5 boys in a minimum sized troop? 1 SPL, 1 PL, 1 APL, 1 Scribe and 1 Quartermaster. Yeah, right, that's going to work out well. But everyone gets their POR signed off, no problem. It may be non-PC to say so, but there does come a time when too many chiefs and not enough Indians does take it's toll on a program. Maybe what Chippewa29 is pointing out is: if left to their own resources, and without constant adult intervention, boy-led, patrol-method would naturally evolve on it's own. Stosh

I had a boy just aged out a couple of weeks ago. He is now an ASM, is currently taking the on-line training, is signed up for BS leader training and is planning on taking WB this summer/fall. He has been in scouting since Tiger, has AOL and Eagle, works well as ASM (is ASM for Council contingent to Centennial Jambo and will be the scout speaker at the Golden Eagle Council Dinner tomorrow night). I'd be hard pressed to tell him he can't take WB. By the way, he was held back a year in school, so he'll be finishing up WB class and doing his ticket while a senior in high school. Stosh

When I was a Webelos leader, I held den meetings once a week year around. Summer is the best time of the year to get out of doors and do the really fun stuff. We did a lot of the pins during the winter when it was too cold to be out and with the shortened days, it got dark before we could get going with anything out of doors after school. All winter long we made plans for the summer. In August, just before school started, we did a big "campout" with the dads. It was a blast and it gave the boys an opportunity to put to practice all that they had learned during the winter/early summer. I started right after Blue/Gold in February and by August we had this mini campout to "celebrate" all that they had learned. Once we got back into the school year we geared up finishing up on the pins so that at the end of Webelos I all the boys got their AOL. They weren't graduating anywhere because they had a second year yet to go. The "second" year of Webelos II's was nothing but fun stuff. By August of the second summer the boys had a major campout from Friday through to Sunday. It, too, was a blast. The boys then began to focus on Scout type activities getting ready for the Blue/Gold where they would cross over into scouts. Remember they have been AOL for a whole year now and so the idea of "graduation" didn't have any affect. What they were looking forward to was not getting AOL and dropping out, instead they were focused solely on crossing over into Scouts. That meant that they went into Scouts in February and immediately began getting ready for Summer camp 5 months out. By the end of March they were all TF and by summer camp many where well on their way to SC and some of the more motivated boys were heavy into FC. Out of the six boys in that den/program, five of them Eagled. Stosh

I'm thinking Chippewa29 has identified one of the biggest problems with the SPL and small troops. I am fully aware of BSA literature so I'm not going to address that, but what I will point out is how SPL is defined makes a difference in how he may or may not function well in the troop. BSA literature states that the SPL runs the troop. Okay, fine. I don't know of many pre-18 year olds that can run a troop of 30-40 boys and probably just as many over 18. SPL's tend to be political positions and are often elected to be head honchos of the group. This makes it easy for the PL's to consistently defer their leadership when it's convenient and to find themselves by-passed on occasions as well. Here's the rub. Scout A is a member of a patrol. Who does he answer to? His PL or the SPL? Both by definition are running the program for that boy. He has two leaders and often times that can be confusing. In my opinion there is a clear distinction between the two roles. The PL runs the patrol, the SPL coordinates the PL's. Surely the most senior and experienced PL should be coordinating the programs as defined by the PL's. If a PL has a problem who does he go to? His SPL for advice and assistance of course. I kind of like to suggest to the SPL he is the "troop guide" for patrol leaders. This way the PL retains his authority and responsibility to run his patrol and can do so without any interference from the "higher ups", i.e. SPL, ASPL, etc. If the SPL is going to run the troop, why bother with PL's? Just have sub-groupings within the troop and the SPL directs each sub-group individually. I'm thinking this isn't what BSA had in mind, but is often the method adopted by what is called a "troop-method" program. So one has a single patrol. Need an SPL? I don't think so. The PL is de facto the "SPL". So now one has two patrols. Need an SPL? Probably not unless the two PL's are mortal enemies and they need a referee. So now one has three patrols. Need an SPL? Could be if two patrols are ganging up on the other or the three patrols have weak or inexperienced PL's. It's a judgment call by the SM at this point. So now one has four patrols. Need an SPL? Now one could make a case for one boy that keeps his eye on four other budding leaders that will probably find themselves in need of a little assistance now and then and coordinating inter-patrol activities might need to be facilitated. It's getting a bit cumbersome to have more than a couple/three PL's sitting down chatting out problems and the SPL allows for some leadership for the QM, Scribe, etc. who will begin to find the burden of coordinating 4 patrols to begin being a challenge. So, who's the "SPL" in my 2 patrol troop right now? The TG! He's responsible for the NSP, but he's also to keep an eye on the older boys as they interact with the younger boys. He develops leadership for the NSP and assists with working with the PL of the older boys. Why TG? The boy is 16 years-old, Eagle rank and he was offered any position in the troop he wanted from JASM to patrol member. HE chose TG because he felt from that position he would be best able to help the others with their leadership development. He's not a member of either patrol, but is an "assistant" to both. He turned down SPL because he felt there was more hands-on with providing assistance to the PL's with the role of TG. Stosh

Our troop presently has two patrols with no SPL. There is no need for one. If something needs to be worked out between the two patrols, the two PL's work it out on their own. The patrols take turns doing the flags and for the most part split apart and do their own thing during the troop meetings. If an event requires an SPL, they decide between the two of them which one stands in as SPL for the event. I had a patrol of 4 boys show up at the Klondike competition last weekend with one the PL, one the APL, one the SPL, and the other was a patrol member. Kinda overkill here just for the prestige of wearing a patch and getting advancement credit along the way. I'm not seeing any of them actually fulfilling their POR responsibilities under these circumstances. I'm thinking that until one gets to about 4 patrols, there really isn't any need for an SPL. Stosh

When I was a kid, the school district's policy was to purchase a set of boxing gloves and let the boys wail away on each other. However, something along the lines of some sort of competition be used to determine who gets the stick, i.e. prize. Some sort of court with judge and jury could determine the outcome as well. There has to be a better way to demonstrate to the boys that physical violence is not the way to handle the situation. Which ever way is chosen should be designed to reinforce alternative methods to violence. Gee, when I was a scout it used to be the tent peg revenge that always settled it. With today's free-standing tents, that doesn't work as well... Stosh

Thanks for the feedback. Just a further point of clarification, the Scout Spirit issue was the focus on the "gold nuggets", it played absolutely no part in the judging of the competition. It was a Klondike and the scouts were pretty much bundled up with the ski pants, jackets, etc. and when I asked the question it was two-fold in nature. 1) were the scouts in full uniform, and 2) was the scout honest in their answer. One boy did ask me if my ASM and myself were in full uniform, in which we answered yes and showed the boys that underneath all the heavy coats it was possible to still have on a full uniform. Yes, in cold weather cotton kills, but was also conveyed to the boys that polypropylene/wool underwear was underneath the uniform and layered heavy clothing on over. One patrol that showed up in uniform (albeit not full) did receive more nuggets than those that didn't. Boys that were polite got nuggets. A boy from the troop at the next table who saw me eating only the Klondike soup (which was what I had planned on doing for lunch), came over and offered me some of their troop's sandwiches to go with it. One adult was doing too much hovering over their patrol's competition activity and the boy courteously told him that, "We have it covered, we're doing fine." Obviously , this PL got an extra nugget or two. Each station ran about a half hour and one troop decided they didn't need to show up on time, horsed around and missed out on the station. They didn't get a score, they didn't get a nugget or two, and instead got a strong suggestion that next time they get their act together and come prepared and on time. Much to my chagrin it was MY troop that pulled that stunt. By the way, a NSP that showed up with just two members of their patrol, but they did show up, did the competition, worked together, scored poorly, only one was in his scout shirt (half uniform), had adults hovering over them, didn't have a patrol flag, mumbled through the "yell", still walked away with nuggets. They were supposed to be "in with another patrol", but chose to go it alone. For me, they ranked right up there with the best patrols of the day, and that fact of patrol loyalty was conveyed to them. No one is "penalized" for doing it wrong, but many are rewarded for doing it right. My "nazi, uniform police" ASM came to me the week before his EBOR and asked me if the belt with the BSA brass buckle was appropriate for his EBOR the next day. I said I didn't know because I wasn't going to be on his EBOR panel. I pulled my belt off and said if he was worried about it he could borrow mine. He wore mine and returned it at the next troop meeting with a verbal thank you. He also went out and purchased a complete new uniform so it would be exactly right for the EBOR. That would make it his third uniform. It had the ASM position on the sleeve and the AOL knot with no rank. He had turned 18 between the time he turned in the paperwork and when his EBOR was held. Obviously he holds himself to the standards he promotes. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

Yesterday I was at our district Klondike and along with the competitions, they were handing out gold nuggets for scout spirit whenever we saw the boys doing something appropriate to scouting. Whenever a patrol would come for the competition I was judging, I'd ask the boys how many were in full uniform. One of the leaders when ballistic and went on an about 5 minute tirade about "bullying the boys". No all the boys can "afford" to have the pants, Scouting is not a para-military organization, etc. was the general gist of things. My ASM who was judging with me was singled out because he had "bullied" the OA boys about showing up at our troop OA presentation/vote wearing blue jeans and school sweatshirt instead of scout uniform with sash or OA regalia. He would also "bully" the boys by offering suggestions that E-Bay has pants for as little as $5-10 if you are patient with the bidding. Our SE has more than once thanked the boy for bringing up the subject and promoting scout uniforming in the council. Where does one draw the line with expecting a "full" uniform for scout activities? The leaders don't wear the full uniform, nor do they expect their boys to, and now in this situation were able are setting off on a tirade when there are boys that do. I suggested to my ASM to stop by the council office and pick up a handful of inspection sheets and merely hand them out when confronted rather than trying to explain to them the importance of a complete uniform. I know of no sport coach that would allow a person to participate in the game without full uniform. I know of no music teacher that would allow a person to participate in a concert without full uniform. I know of no drama instructor who would allow an actor on stage with a partial costume, and yet it is okay to show up for scouts half dressed? I've been thinking about this since the day at summer camp when our boys all showed up for opening flags one morning and were reminded that this was "no uniform" day at the camp. My boys walked off the field and went back to camp. They participated throughout the day in full uniform but did not participate in closing flags because the protocol for the day didn't set well with them and they unanimously voted to have flag closing in our campsite instead. Your thoughts? Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

Do like they do at Philmont. If items have been in contact with the food, they go in the bear bags. If the boys don't have a tent to sleep in, too bad. A couple of nights in the rain and the boys will police themselves. Also: when I was at Philmont in 2000, they had at least 3 incidents where boys were hurt. Our first night at base camp a string of lights were coming down from the Tooth of Time because the troop in the nearby site had a bear they couldn't scare off. That meant they had to leave in the dark down the mountain. If a bear is hungry enough they will defend their stash of food they have found. When that happens, it's time to leave the area. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

One must also emphasize that the activity does not mean one has to do it overnight. A bike hike, hike, canoe day, fishing derby, etc. all qualify for outdoor activities. And as one has pointed out, visiting and participating are two different things. I have always assumed that if the Boy Scouts are not at their regular meeting indoors, the activity qualifies for an outdoor Boy Scout activity which the Webelos boys could come and see what's going on and get an idea of what Scouts do when they are not at a regular meeting. Stosh

Working around campfires, give me wool any day over flammables. I have burn holes in the sleeves of my red wool that would have been disastrous had it not been for the retardant qualities of wool. Because "No flames in tents", is reflective of their nylon flammability, I don't hang around campfires with boys poking sparks into the night sky in a non-wool garment. Cotton, burns a bit, but will not burn the way melted man-made fibers do. Stosh

I had an interesting experience this past week. One of my boys had his EBOR and upon entering the room, stood at attention and gave the Scout salute to the Board members. They were all Eagle Scouts themselves, but two of them were not in uniform. The third was in uniform and finally feebly gave a salute. During the decision deliberations, the first comment from them to each other was: "How does one return a salute when sitting and not in uniform?" After the EBOR he went back up to the waiting area and saluted the Eagle Coordinator and told him of their decision. The Coordinator's only comment was that a Scout should salute only the Flag and he did not return the salute. The boy responded, "That's not what the Handbook says." and left it at that. What say ye? Stosh