Stosh

The only thing I can think of that has as much paperwork are 6-Sigma green/black belt projects. Most of the people here dred the paperwork and it extends the workload 2-3 times just to get it documented. Boys that are good with their leadership skills may not be good at paperwork and thus it makes it more work than many may think it's worth. How many scouts have done the project and found the paperwork and approval process more work than what they did for the project? Stosh

The first and foremost question that has to be is: "What are the boys interested in?" This places the onus of any subsequent goals and vision development on the boys themselves. I run a boy-led, patrol-method program and I still get the "I'm bored" response from the boys. They lack the leadership that can take any interest they find and develop it into a program that the boys want. I constantly ask, what is it you want to be doing and what's it going to take to get you there? Then by breaking it down into small steps, the boys can start working towards those things that they already have an interest in. It's a little like herding cats, however. Not all boys are interested in the same things and a good leader does well to prioritize these interests and to balance them out so everyone gets a stake in the process. One boy likes camping, another likes visiting museums. Well, how about a trip to the museum that involves an overnighter. This way both boys get what they want and each can focus on those areas that interest them. A good leader will be able to organize and delegate the goals/tasks to the correct boys and make a good outing for both. Stosh

This thread is so remenicent of the dad's building the Cub's pinewood derby car. This process starts early and sometimes never goes away. As a SM, I start right from the beginning announcing to all parents and leaders that I expect the boys to be running the show, for good or bad. If a parent has a problem with the progress of the boys, they talk to me and I'll handle it. If they choose not to follow this plan I'll visit with them about it individually. I don't know how many "If you do it for him how's he going to learn?" lessons I have had to repeat over the years. Unless the parent wants to keep their boys from growing up, they normally see the benefits of such an approach. I do this as part of every parent/leader orientation. If a parent interferes, my ASM and/or I step in. If they don't like this approach, I have suggested enrolling their boys in another program where growing up isn't expected. So far no one has taken me up on that option. As a scout leader it is my responsibility to help these boys mature and grow into productive adults. If this goal interferes with the goals of a parent, they are free to choose another program. Have I signed off on an Eagle project hand-written with poor spelling and incorrect grammer? Yep. Surprisingly the Eagle Board appreciates such projects because they know that it is really the boy doing the project and not something that has been reviewed and analyzed to death by a handful of adults. When a project comes before me 100% correct, I will allow that little red flag in the back of my mind to question more about the project and assure myself the work was really done by the boy. Stosh

Cherry picking verses has been a pastime for many generations. Maybe one doesn't like Leviticus, but other verses deal with murder and stealing, but unless those things are goring my ox, I guess they must be irrelevant as well. Human free-will has always allowed everyone to be their own god and make up their own rules by picking a few things here and there from a variety of different resources. This works well for the individual, but anytime two or more get together, there's always going to be a difference of opinion. It simply boils down to if all I'm worried about is myself, things will be ok, but if I have to live in a world with other people, there's a possiblity of varying opinions on just about any issue. Stosh

I have had experience in both business and military management and neither is guaranteed to produce the results necessary to satisfy the group being led. I find that unless there is some awareness on the part of the leader to recognize the aims and goals of the group and the group's interest, the group will not follow unless forced to. If the group does not feel their leader is leading them towards a goal they feel is important/necessary, they will not follow unless coerced. If it is a leader's responsibility to teach compass knowledge and all the boys want to do is go camping, unless the leader can problem solve the situation and show how important compass work is to being able to go camping in new and exciting places, the boys will not hunker down and work on the compass. Unless the leader can assist the boys in recognizing the importance of eating well on their campouts, they aren't going to jump in and learn how to cook. It is the responsibility of a good leader to help the group see how each of these tasks are in their best interest and meeting their needs. Too often business management and/or military command is given a task and must pass it on to others and the attempt is done without giving appropriate explanation. If the group doesn't understand the why's and wherefore's they are more reluctant to pitch in and do the task. Measurable goals with everyone's knowledge and understanding fare much better than just going through the motions. It's a little bit more understandable when the Grubmaster asks some scout to, "get some water we'll be needing to clean up afterwards," than to just say, "Go get some water for me." If the task being done can quickly be translating into something that's going to benefit me, it's going to be done quicker and better with far less resistance. Eventually if this process is followed initially, eventually the group will trust that the non-explained request may indeed be in their best interest and will do the task without complete explanation. These boys that have laid the groundwork of trust will fare much better than the domineering directive of a leader the group feels or even suspects might be clueless. Even the military knows that a soldier will follow a trusted leader into hell if he knows the officer is doing his utmost best to keep them safe and wouldn't be asking unless it was absolutely necessary. Stosh

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them. (Leviticus 20:13 - RSV) Same verse using 20th Century translation of the original manuscripts (Revised Standard Version) rather than the 16th Century translation of the original manuscripts (King James Version) Obviously the original manuscripts spoke clearly enough for the people of that era as well as to ours of today. Stosh

I guess I don't see it as romance as much as I see it as stories that reinforce the value characteristics of scouting, i.e. honor, courage, etc. Each week the boys say "On my Honor...." yet for the most part they can't give a basic definition/understanding of the word. It's just a noise that comes out without thinking. I had a parent take me to task one when I told their child that their word and honor was their value as a person. If their word was of no value because no one could trust it, then their value as a person quickly disappeared as well. They said I was ruining their son's self-esteem. I said I wasn't here to build self-esteem in these boys, I am building honorable men that don't need self-esteem, they will have self-confidence instead. The parents were angry but that was the end of the dialog. Their boy went on and became a great scout. Stosh

There's always a balance that must be kept between humor and harassment. Even in serious situations, I have found that a little humor at everyone's expense can go a long way to defuse the situation. Whenever I get a boy that is homesick they get the standard answers from me such as: "Homesick? I'm homesick too! That's why I'm here, I'm sick of home, too." Or: "Sorry you can't go home, your mom rented your room out for the week." That one always gets a smile. If that doesn't work the "Your mom and dad paid good money to get rid of you for the week, I wouldn't want to disappoint them and have to give them a refund if you leave early." This opens the door for more serious discussion of their feelings. If the boys are complaining about their food they get the: "Who made the menu? If it was me, I'd make sure I did it next time." or "Maybe you should go over to the troop next door to see if they have anything better." Many of the new boys pick up on these comments as intended and it opens the door for further discussion in a more relaxed venue. Does that mean I'm hazing the new kids? They don't seem to think so. What humors me is when the boy comes to me and is homesick and I drop one of these lines on them, sometimes I get the: "Yeah, yeah, that's what my patrol leader said, too!" By that time, we're both laughing pretty good. Yes, I have had the occasional joke get to a sensitive boy and he's come to complain. By reinforcing the rules and assuring the boy that you too had this pulled on you when you were young and how dumb you felt, it assures them that it's a survivable situation. I also remind them that now that someone's pulled it on them, they can wait until next year and pull it on the next kid, but remind them that those new boys may feel bad about it like they did. If they do pull the stunt, they tend to be more sensitive when they do it. I find it does a lot to build commradarie rather than break it down if done in a spirit of fun rather than meanness. My boys can tell the difference and assure the newbies that they are now part of a fun, but caring group. On a canoe trip a few years back, I was with a new boy in the front of my canoe. I've never tipped my canoe after many years of whitewater canoeing with the boys. Well, we got into trouble and we were swept out of the canoe by a branch. (I really rolled the canoe to make sure he didn't get pinned). He came up crying and I thought he was hurt, but he was crying because he had ruined my perfect record. I assured him that it wasn't his fault and the only reason he was in the canoe was to be ballast and hold down the front of my canoe. I told him he made a great box of rocks. Well Box O'Rocks is still his name to this date. Once I called him by his real first name and he reminded me his name was Box O'Rocks. I never made that mistake again. :-) Stosh

Crew21-Adv, From your explanation, I see you doing it correctly. I'm not advocating a total hands-off policy by the adults and let the kids run amuck. Your choice of words such as assist and advise are excellent. The need is not to do it for them, but constantly keep pushing the weight of leadership towards the boys and not creating mandates that will interfere with that process. Initially all the weight on the balance is on the adult side, but can the adults relinquish that and shift it over to the boys? Some simply can't let go, others rush it too much and overwhelm their boys. My boys, as well, waste a lot of time with jaw-jacking at meetings, but I, too, am constantly reminding them that they are wasting my time and the time of the boys they are supposed to be working with. I constantly ask the question, "how can you lead when you don't know where you are going?" Planning is left to the boys, yet I provide calendar suggestions, activity suggestions, report forms, menu planning guides, etc. for their use if they so choose to use them. Slowly but with a few set backs here and there, the weight of leadership is moving over to the boy's side of the balance sheet. The real eye opener happened last summer when another adult and I announced we would be going on a white-water canoe trip and if there were any boys interested, there were X number of seats available in our vehicles. Filled up the seats right away and off we went, no menu's, no plans, no canoe rentals, nothing. We went anyway. It's surprising what the boys can do in an emergency. Fortunately we did camp within a half-mile of a grocery store (yes, they walked) and they were able to get their rentals in at the last minute, but it was a major hassle. Yes, I did pack enough PBJ to feed the boys for the weekend. As we rode home, the only question I had for the boys was, "What are you going to do next time so you don't waste so much of my time?" There wasn't much jaw-jacking going on after that. They did agree the canoeing was excellent, but everything else sucked. They also agreed that it didn't have to be that way and the solution to their problems rested in their hands. When adults seriously view their boys as capable peers, they will eventually step up to the plate. My crew operates very differently. We run totally on military protocol in leadership and some of the kids have stepped up and taken over some of the NCO positions in the group. Our group consists of both the adults from the chartering organization as well as the crew. I was "grooming" one boy for more leadership and he told me face-to-face he wasn't interested. He's the same boy the members of the CO/Crew eventually elected as senior officer at a national event because I had been promoted to brigade level command for the weekend. That same boy is now in ROTC basic training. Boys don't naturally seek leadership, they all wish to be babysat for the most part. Hey, so do I! There are times when I want the world to cater to my every whim as well. But then there are those who will roll up their sleeves and make it happen for others so that they themselves can have a good time. Every adult leader knows this, and when the boys share in that understanding, things begin to fall into place because the balance can and eventually does shift over to the boys as they will take on leadership when they are finally convinced it's possible. Then the blance shifts and it's a great thing to see happen. I get nervous with the words rules, mandates, directives, not because they aren't useful for the adults, but because they inhibit the shift in trust of the boys necessary for real boy-led processes. I have only three rules by which my troop operates 1) Safety First, 2) Look and act like a scout, and 3) Have fun! The only time an adult can step in and correct a situation is if the boy is breaking one of these rules. No by-laws, no behavior contracts, none of these instruments that let the boys know that we don't trust them and we have to do these things because we think you're going to screw up and this is how we are going to keep you from doing so. My record is unbroken. I have never told my boys they had to do something in a certain way or in a certain amount of time. But I have suggested a lot of things to the boys over the course of every meeting, event, activity and outing to recommend, assist, and support them in THEIR efforts. The only time I played the parent/trump card was when one of the boys complained to me about something his PL had asked him to do, I answered: "Because he said so!" :-) Boys appreciate knowing the adults back them in their efforts and it encourages them when things get shaky, knowing that someone's covering their backside. Stosh

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. KJV Doesn't sound contradictory to me. The interpretation people put on it may be contradictory, but KJV makes it pretty clear. People can anything about what they think the Bible says, but it's always just an opinion when all is said and done. The reason one doesn't find gay and homosexual is KJV is because those words weren't being used at that time to identify the situation. Thus one is not going to find fagot, queer and homo in today's vocabulary as it was when I was a kid. Stosh

Taking OGE's story one step further. While driving to an event last spring I glanced out into a field and made the comment, "Well, I see the farmer's got his summer cows out in the field finally." My boys, suspected a prank but didn't bite. About 15 minutes later one of the boys, (not even knowing the prank) chimed in, "Neat, more summer cows over here." Again no one said anything. I could sense the tension in the boys, all wanting to spring the prank, but not having the nerve. Finally the SPL couldn't take it anymore spoke up and asked how I knew they were summer cows. I chuckled and said, "Summer brown, summer black, summer white". No one got hurt, only one boy was willing to risk embarrassment, but they all laughed together when they finally found out the joke. Did I lose credibitity? Did I lose respect? Did the boys not trust me after that? Did we all have fun? These are all questions that have to be asked to make sure the prank was not harassment. Well, now that they had all been duped, they can play it on the next guy. When we got to camp and the boys were setting up the tents, the SPL commented to some of the other boys, "Well, spring sure is great, the summer squirrels are finally out and about." No one said a thing, but the ball was rolling again. Surely if the SPL had thought for one moment such a prank would detract from his credibility, reduce his respect among the others he wouldn't go out on a limb and make the same mistake the SM made. It was amazing how straight faced his patrol members held while the prank sank into the new guys. There was a common respect that no one was going to jump in and ruin the joke because the SPL had earned the opportunity to play the prank having taken the bait in the van. By the way, I fell for the prank full force when I first heard it too! Did I feel dumb? Yep, 100% dumb! But it's a great prank for those who have the patience to let it play itself out. OGE's problem would have been that no joke is allowed to go on for more than 15 minutes. If my SPL pulled an all night joke on the new kid, there would be hell to pay the next morning. If Charlie would have been my SPL, he'd be demoted for the weekend and the new boy would take his place. Need firewood? Check with the new SPL, I think he's got someone in mind for the job. Need water? Check with the new SPL. If Charlie wanted his SPL position back on Monday, he had better toe the line and do his penitance after a very sincere apology to the new boy. Stosh Stosh

No one seems to be jumping in on this so I'll put a couples of cents into the ante. "My definition of a leader is someone who develops a vision or identifies the direction for the group based on values." I guess I look at it quite a bit differently. A leader for me is someone who is able to identify the needs of the group and works at assisting them in fulfilling those needs. Yes, a vision and directives are important, but if that vision and directive is only for the leader, then he's going to have an uphill battle convincing others of their importance. If the group has ownership in their needs and don't have anyone to assist them in attaining some satisfaction of those needs, they will seek out someone who will. "My definition of a manager is someone who develops a mission or plan based on a leaders vision and implements it." Here again I focus more on the needs of the group in relationship to management. Is the leader able to identify the needs and then devise/implement a plan of action to accomplish meeting those needs. Is the plan able to assist each group member with their specific problems? Is the leader able to manage the task/plan that is necessary and can he find the appropriate resources to apply to the group. Can he problem solve the issues and devise ways that may work? Managing requires a dual effort of managing people to organize into problem solving and managing the tasks necessary to attain the goal of having the problem solved. I guess in the long run I don't see leadership as working in the ownership of the leader's visions/goals as much as I do working with the ownership of the group's visions/goals on their behalf. I find a bit more validity in the leadership if the group is taking some ownership in their problems and looking to the leader for assistance rather than having the ownership in the hands of the leader and then trying to coerce and direct the group to do follow along with issues that they don't care about. Just my 2-cents worth. Maybe it'll get this thread rolling. Stosh

I realize that the title of the thread indicates the two extremes in the program, but I also mentioned there is a fulcrum point, i.e. balance point that sits in the middle. Surely we are all tending one way or the other just tipping the balance. At what point does one step in with adult dictates and tip the scale over to a more adult led situation and maybe it might be only one or two small issues that can (as most adults can testify) become major problems, and how can a troop know when they make the effort to be boy-led know that the tables have finally tilted the other way and the ball begins to roll for the boys. This "fine-line" is often difficult to determine for each group and at other times efforts to tilt it one way only to have a small issue convince the boys that they're no longer running the program, so why try. Have we put so many adult mandates/guidelines/by-laws/rules/regulations on the program that we in fact convince the boys that it's never going to be enough to become a boy-led program so they quit before they even start? Or have we relaxed our adult efforts in certain areas and reinforced the boys' side to help tip the effort of leadership over to their side of the balance sheet? To worry about the extremes isn't very productive, but worrying about the balance point just might be enough to trigger some real growth for the boys if we as adults can help shift the weight over to their side. How is that done in your troop or is there no effort on the part of the adults to do so because things are going smoothly with the adults running the show? Stosh

The main reason we don't use a fixed budget is because it varies depending on the event. When we travel a long distance and then have to rent canoes/kayaks, the food budget drops, i.e. no steak and lobster. This process takes into consideration that there are more expenses than just food. If registration is higher, or rentals, or gas, or other factors, the fancy foods go by the wayside. However, if they decide to go on a local hike, leave from the meeting hall and hike out, do a wood-fire cooking requirement, I'm not all that concerned if they do the steak and lobster thingy, because it'll only be food that is costly. When we go to a local camporee and they have a Saturday night cookoff between troops, there have been some pricy items purchased to try for a prize, but then these types of things don't happen every time either. The boy's chocolate chip cheesecake runs about $13/dutch oven. This is a lot more expensive than even a single meal. One has to add that onto the cost of the meal which really spikes the bill. But there's been occasions where the SM forked over for the treat and wrote it off on his taxes, too. I like it when the boys can take all these extemporaneous factors into consideration when dealing with the menu budgets. The more they deal with the better they become in planning out the whole activity's costs. Last year with the price of gas twice what it is today, there were some pretty Spartan meals. No one went hungry and nutrition was not shorted, but PBJ instead of luncheon meat got us through with no problem. Doing this often hones the skills of the boys to constantly be aware of the whole package of cost, not just the menus. They have even gone so far as to ask the adult drivers what their gas mileage was for the vehicle before asking them to drive. They quickly learned that a gas guzzling 12 mpg vehicle means PBJ and a 30 mpg vehicle means luncheon meat. If 4 boys from the patrol are going because 4 couldn't make it, how is the 30 mpg car going to affect the menu part of the activity budget? The more involved the boys are, the better they are at figuring out what works best for them. The latest question? Does the DVD in Mrs. Jones' gas-guzzling conversion van out-weigh the cost of PBJ's or do we go with Mr. Smith's mini-van and have luncheon meat? Stosh

Horizon - you make an excellent point. There will always be those out there that can't afford steak and lobster at outings. And here's the "but" - but shouldn't the boys in the patrol be aware of this and be sensitive to the needs of everyone in their patrol and not just the adults making the "rules"? If the adults were to say $15 budget (because they know the financial constraints) this doesn't allow the boys to know that not everyone can afford scouting expenses. I want all my boys to know that not everyone can cough up big bucks for expensive trips so they need to work on this as a patrol. This then will lead the boys to the next step beyond the menu's and when they make activity plans they include freebie activities like hiking and biking, and that when the Philmont trip rolls around they as a patrol will need to evaluate the situation so that ALL the boys get a chance to go. As a patrol, they have bake sales, wreath sales, etc. and they go the extra mile to make sure everyone can go, not just the rich kids. I don't see it as a good thing that the rich kid doesn't roll up his sleeves to help his patrol buddies because his parents can fork over the $$'s to cover his expense and his buddy whose parent can't afford it gets left behind. Looking out for your buddies is a prime requirement of any aspiring leader. Stosh

The more I see posted here, the more I'm sure there must be something wrong with me. After 40 years of working with youth, 20+ with scouting, at age 58, I still look forward to, and am excited about going to any and all scouting activities. I am antsy that my boys are dragging their feet and not wanting to get out in the woods, camp, hike and/or canoe whitewater. We're going to a new summer camp this year and I can't wait. My church youth are restoring a cemetery scatter garden and I've already been out there twice to witness seeing the daffodiles, crocus, and hiacynth's breaking through the ground. Last Monday we had a COH and had a boy get LIFE and the first thing I asked him was what he had in mind for an Eagle Project. My cross-country skis are still on my front porch just in case we get a late winter snow storm, yet a month ago I was already dodging ice flows to get my kayak wet. Do I get tired? Sure, but I'll have plenty of time to rest up once I get to the nursing home. Just yesterday I was driving down to a small town's smelt fry on Good Friday and noticed all the fishermen out in boats and along the shore that I was saddened by the fact that I need to get my fishing gear out, it's been too long since the last time I used any of it. Without the leaves on the trees, I also thought it would be a good idea to spend more time learning how to identify trees by their bark, too. The garden's calling my name too! There's just not enough time to do it all, but I'm going to give it my best shot! Stosh

I was hoping that the thread wouldn't get bogged down into just one or two examples of specific issues that require adult intervention. Obviously safety issues, application of the Scout Laws, and other programatic requirements will all apply. I was also hoping the thread would avoid any troop competitions as to who's got the better troop, too. I do find that there is a fulcrum point at which adults and boys take the initiative of actual leadership of the program. A troop could start out with high expectations of boy-led and yet a bit here, a piece there where adults step in and take over initiating a slippery slope dynamic that eventually has the boys doing less and being more and more restricted in their options. Every troop has this internal issue, not "is my troop more boy-led than the next". Budgeting food might be a positive issue from an adult perspective, but do the same "mandates" apply across the board for all patrols? Or could the same be said for a "goal" or "target" budget level that will assist the boys in making wise choices for food purchases. Does it have to be an adult specified mandate? Maybe the venture patrol will need to go over budget to purchase specialty back-country meals whereas the NSP might find the budget goal an appropriate target to shoot for when learning how to set up food purchases. These issues, too, teach boys how to make responsible choices within certain guidelines/goals. The question for me always goes back to the issue of who has the authority to make responsibile decisions? Do the adults make authoritative mandates and then expect the boys to fall into line by being responsible? How can one ever learn leadership responsibility if all they do is follow adult mandates/directives? It kinda reminds me of the great artist who got where he/she is today because they learned how to color outside the lines of conventional norms. I, too, often fall prey to the "my way or the highway" mentality of the average parent/adult. But if the goal is to develop leadership responsibility for their parol/troop members if all they ever do is follow along the lines of adult mandates. I guess in the long run I would rather have the boys learn from the mistakes of the older boys rather than the adults. If the NSP PL is teaching meal budgets to his patrol, would it not be better to have the PL tell the boys that certain purchases are not a good idea because he tried it and it didn't work rather than having an adult (who of course knows it doesn't work) stepping in and saying "No can do!" without the boys experiencing the why's and wherefore's? Is true leadership being taught if every time the boys ask "Why?" the standard answer is "Because I said so."? I realize that it's rather uncomfortable for SM's with helicopter parents, but doesn't the same dynamic occur when the boys have a helicopter SM? Stosh added comment: Buffalo, I like that RAA policy, I hadn't always added the second A onto it, but I'll be using all three from now on, great idea! Stosh (This message has been edited by jblake47)

While listening to many of the posts being discussed on this forum it has come to my attention the number of times adults "mandate, direct, guide, etc." policies that are not required by national or council directives. This leads me to wonder just how much authority the boys do have in attempting to lead themselves in the program. Surely every attempt is made to assist the boys in taking responsibility, but without any authority to do so, it's a rather unproductive effort. Basic management techniques teach that without any authority to make changes, having been the responsibility to make those changes is a formula for failure. Are we setting our boys up to fail and how quickly do they pick up on this process and give up in frustration? I know as an adult how difficult it is to allow the boys to run with their own program. Loss of control may produce a total disaster, but then by adult micro-managing everything may produce a similar disaster. Thoughts? Stosh

"I think imposing a budget does teach the boys a valuable lesson" I think it, however, teaches the lesson that they are not boy-led. It's not a lesson I wish to teach. Stosh

One of my WB patrol members was an elderly gentleman who grew up in the 30's and 40's with scouting. They went 2 years without a SM before national caught up to them and made them register an adult as SM. One of the boys' dad signed up, but never showed for any of the meetings or activities the boys planned. It would never happen in today's world. Stosh

Lord Jesus Christ (or appropriate variation) be now our Guest, Our morning joy, our evening rest, And with our daily bread impart, Your love and peace to every heart. Stosh

Simulated weapons? I "require" all the boys that have the 6' walking stick in our troop to mark them off at 1' intervals and one of those intervals "has" to have 12 - 1" marked. This way when the boys screw around with them and use them for weapons I can take them away and use them to beat them to within 1" of their lives and know when to quit. Rumor has it that I'm serious. (see thread on practical jokes) Please don't take me seriously on this and be sure never to tell my boys either. Stosh

My CC organizes, communicates and works with the adults of the program in support of the boys. The SM is the contact with the boys that maintains support of the actual boy program. The CC does not participate in the program of the troop other than to support what the boys are doing. If he/she has concerns on who, what and where the boys are doing program, he/she, like any other adult, can express these concerns to the SM who then can pass it on to the boys. Stosh

As a practical joker myself, I find it difficult to categorize a true practical joke as harrassment. Harrassment is singling out someone with continual tormenting of another person and a good practical joke only works once. I have boys play harmless pranks on me and I return the favor and as long as everyone is having fun with it the boys enjoy it. There are a few of the rules which must apply. 1) No one gets hurt or endangered. Rule #1 Safety First!!!! I.e., if boys go on a snipe hunt/tornado watch/smoke shifter they have to go with a buddy. 2) You can play out the prank as long as you have already had it pulled on you. You can only send someone on a snipe hunt if you have already been a "victim" of such a prank. If you witness a prank, but weren't a victim, you cannot play that prank on someone else. New pranks must be approved by the SM. Usually this is done by playing the prank on him first. If you wouldn't do it to the SM, you shouldn't be doing it to another scout. 3) If you play pranks, expect to get one back. 4) No prank can last more than 15 minutes. 5) The prank must be age appropriate and focused. Yelling "BEAR IN CAMP!" on the Webelos' first outing isn't allowed. But staring out into the darkness just before bed with the Venture Patrol and when asked what's going on, you reply, "Oh, nothing, I just thought I saw something out there." is. Just remember, to inform the boys it's a "gotcha" after 15 minutes of them staring intently into the darkness. 6) Inside inside any tent is off-limits. I don't know how many times I have gotten up in the morning with my staff SM flag removed and replaced with underwear (or no staff at all!) Is that harrassing? Nope, but the boys have fun and so do I. Of course when the rope under the tent trick is played by the SM, or mink in the back pack or mess kit, or tastes like mint is done, it's fair game, too. Harrassment? Some of my boys take pride in being the victim and have often bragged about how well someone was able to dupe them as if it's a badge of honor to learn a new prank. A boy can declare himself neutral at any time and he cannot participate in the game, he's then off-limits to any prank. If a boy has claimed neutrality, and then wants in on the game he has to wait until he's been gotcha'd before he can "retaliate". Stosh

The argument that patrols of 2-3 boys can't buy as efficiently as patrols of 7-8 is bogus. I can out plan and out resource my meal menus by myself better than 8 boys can. The only real area of concern is the purchasing of perishables. Dry mixes can be saved from event to event, this includes pancakes, waffles, potatoes, grits, cereals, rice, pasta, popcorn, etc. Canned goods can as well, same for condiments. Yes, I buy a sizeable box of spaghetti of which I only take 1/8th, but then it lasts me 8 outings. Just leave it in the chuck box. Same for rice and instant potatoes. Over the course of 8 events, I can outsave a patrol of 8 anyday. Planning for the extras is just as important as the menu itself. Very seldom do I ever take milk, butter, eggs, or bread, but a small little carton of Egg Beaters works just fine. A person can put together great meals with no waste regardless of the size of the group. First class scouts should all know how this process works. If not, how did they get the rank badge? Stosh