Stosh

Ok, I'll start because I have been deemed by some on the forum as somewhat of a Kudu disciple. Maybe I am, I don't know... but my boys are. So now what do I do? Insist on NYLT or teach Kudu's materials? I have boys that attended NYLT and came back really disappointed. So disappointed they are encouraging others not to fork over the $200 to attend this coming summer. Instead, they asked me to teach what I know about leadership and the Hillcort material off of Kudu's sight instead. They also avidly read old scout handbooks they get off of Ebay. My SPL wears the new uniform and my ASPL wears a green one from the 1950's - 60's. They use the bullet shaped patrol flags from the earlier years, most of which are made, one was purchased off of Ebay. All PL's carry a 6' staff for their flags and all the troop officers carry one as well. All but a few of the newer boys carry and learn how to use them. One of my boys even wears the "scoutmaster" hat as part of his full uniform. I see scouting as a tool to reach boys. Sports does a pretty good job, but the dynamics of what is taught is rather limited. Schools teach a lot, but not much for critical thinking and/or leadership. I like the broader base of scouting dynamics in that it offers more opportunity than any other program I have worked with. Other than scouting, church groups and at-risk youth have been the majority of my work. I have been involved with sporting teams and a wide variety of "educational" venues as well. Now, scouting offers both contemporary as well as historical tools. I have encouraged the use of the more contemporary tools, but for some reason the boys seem to move more towards, and get more bang for their buck with the older methods. They seem to take a sense of pride in not doing it the same as everyone else. They evaluate and make decisions based on the more Hillcourt dynamics. For example, they attended summer camp in a troop-method camp. They were one of two units that did patrol cooking. The other patrol stayed in their campsite except for doing merit badges and making use of camp facilities. My boys did the same thing but attended every flag ceremony (in full uniform, even on the "no uniform" evening) and program the camp had to offer. They struggled with the cooking, cleaning, and camp inspections all the way through the week. We had a handful of older scouts and the majority were webelos crossovers. This year they elected to find a camp that will fit their needs better and will attend a patrol-method camp, but they will insist on their own menus instead of cooking camp food. It would seem that either I have created a monster, or these older dynamics have turned my boys on. Now it can be said that the modern program does in fact teach the boy-led, patrol-method. It most certainly does, but the Summer camps, the camporees, and the traditions of the majority of troops I have witnessed in my council do not practice what is being taught by BSA. The historic and contemporary material may in fact be the same, but the boys are understanding and/or are being taught differently, at least differently enough that they gravitate to the older materials for understanding. I do suppliment my style of scoutmastership with other dynamics that I have learned along the way from other programs. US Army (Lead by Example, where do you think Scouts got it from?) and Servant Leadership resources (Christian program). I use only a few teaching mantras. One being the 3 rules everyone must follow 1) "Safety First", 2) "Look and act like a Scout", and 3) "Have fun". If one is aspiring for leadership they must also take the 2-second lesson for leaders... "Take care of your People". Now, I know for the most part in one way or another both the historic and contemporary programs teach basically the same thing, but they do so in different styles/approaches in attempting to inspire the boys. In spite of the contemporary world, it would seem that my boys prefer the historic approach better and at least understand it better. Their biggest complaint, however, is not the program, but the traditions of scouting demonstrated in the practice of scouting that do not adhere to the program. Stosh

The coldest camping that I have heard about is from a number of local troops that went to Tomahawk Scout Reservation for their Winter Survival Training and the actual temperature was -43. The staff went out to the various sites to get the boys to come into the lodge and all refused and preferred to stay in their little snow caves they had built for the night. None used tents, so I was probably too cold for tents for these boys. Stosh

My officer corps boys wear a 36" square Meyers flag as a necker and it works great for any first aid issues as well. Stosh

This is why I make my own. Stosh

When the other equipment isn't sufficient. I would suggest that when it goes below zero with a significant wind, getting into a snow cave would be a better idea than a tent. I have winter camped a bit and found snow caves more comfortable than tents. Tents do well in knocking down the wind but do nothing for temperatures. When I was a kid, a wall tent lined with bales of hay was pretty nice to cut down the draft and offer plenty of ground insulation. My cheap sleeping bag was wrapped in a plastic sheet and canvas pup tent and was lined with another wool blanket. I was fine. Stosh

My boys all know who I am on this forum and are encouraged to particpate and/or at least lurk and learn. Other scouters who know me in real life recognize my posts and have asked if I am the one posting. With that being said, I don't think I would do anything different if I was more annonymous. Stosh

Poaching to one SM is recruiting to another. Just depends on whether one's going to sit around waiting for Webelos boys to walk in the doors or whether they are going to get up off their butt and go after them. Poaching implies those un-earned Webelos somehow "belong" to a troop before the sign on the dotted line. Nope, until they sign, they're fair game for any troop. Stosh

I've got it covered in my neck of the woods. Peace! Stosh

If everyone went by first impressions, I would lose everytime. I use boy-led, patrol-method. No two patrols are doing the same thing, off in each corner some are playing a game, others are reading their books. It looks like chaos for the most of the evening. I had one older boy looking to transfer into a troop visit and head for the hills after one visit. Well, this past weekend I just got back from a winter cabin campout. The one stove did service for 4 patrols. Each group took their shot at the kitchen, no hassles, real mess left by each group. The patrols bunked in separate areas of the huge cabin, clothes all over, a real mess. Yet in spite of it all, the SPL stepped down Saturday a.m. and did nothing for the rest of the weekend. One patrol leader stepped down (SPL's buddy) and did nothing for the rest of the weekend. Yet the younger boys stepped it up, another boy stepped up and took over as PL in the patrol that lost their "leader", ASPL stepped up immediately and began to function correctly as SPL, advancement got done, plans were made, sledding was great and at 6:00 am this am I figured I was in big trouble with parents scheduled to begin picking up their boys at 9:00 am. Well, the breakfasts were made, (one patrol had bacon/eggs) and the place was immaculate by 8:15 and the boys sat around quietly playing cards, getting in a last minute slide down the hill or sitting on their bunks quietly talking. Was it chaos? Yep for 2 hours I would have placed a bet with anyone that these boys would never have been ready by 9:00. Never judge a book by it's cover and never underestimate a Scout. Stosh

I agree that the terminology of Boy Scouts is far different than with Cubbing. However, the message I wish to get to the new Webelos boys is that they have been part of a small group (den) and that often times when crossing over into a huge troop is often overwheming. When a Cub joins in first grade he has no idea he's joining a Pack, it's the Den that catches his focus, a small group of his buddies. Well, in Boy Scouts, shouldn't the dynamics be the same? I'm joining a patrol of my new friends and not some huge organization that has sway over what's going to be going on with me for the next 6-7 years. With patrol recruiting, each grouping takes an interest in just a few of the boys and focuses their attention on just a couple of boys they will be welcoming into their group. The contacts, even if minimal show that a personal interest is being taken into consideration directed just to them. When they finally cross over, they are not joining a patrol, they are joining in with a small group of boys they already know by name and face. If the Den of 8 wishes to stay together, then the SPL welcomes the whole group of boys into the Troop with the help of maybe the TG who's going to be taking them under his wing and setting them up as a NSP. I see nothing wrong with this either. What would be fantastic is their DC welcoming them over and then becoming their TG for the first year. The bonds are being set up to promote a patrol-method program and the whole process is being run by the boys. Stosh

The early years would include those that were in the first 50 not the last 50 :^) I wouldn't press the issue at the ceremony, this would be something that should be clarified when the invite goes out. "Mr. SM we would like to invite you to our crossover ceremony" "We are a boy-led, patrol-method troop, would it be better if I sent over the patrol leaders and maybe the SPL instead?" That should open the discussion with the pack as to what kind of troop they are preparing their boys for in the years to come. Like I said, it's the message that needs to be brought forward, not the hassle. If they insist on just the SM, so be it. Instead of recruiting the webelos dens as a troop, recruit as patrols when they go and visit and when they come and visit, break them up and introduce them to patrols, not a huge group that may overwhem them. If I had 2 - 3 patrols wanting me to be a member of their patrol it may offer more mileage than joining a huge troop and getting what someone else says you get. We had a pizza party for our boys at Christmas time and invited the Webelos. They tried to sit with their parents, but eager patrol leaders snatched them up to sit with them in their patrol grouping. The parents had to sit with the adult leaders, where we had a nice discussion about boy-led, patrol-method while the boys were off enjoying their pizza together. Stosh

I guess it just boils down to whether the method being promoted is troop or patrol. What got me thinking about how we think about troop vs. patrol method and how important or unimportant the patrol concept is in today's scouting. The real kicker was that the pack was inviting only the SM which of course shows how much it's still assumed that adult led is acceptable. If one is going to promote, maybe some of these subtle and not so subtle messages need to be reevaluated. I have read many books from the early years of scouting and it was always the responsibility of the patrols to recruit their own members to fill out their 8 man patrols. Stosh

I ran across the situation recently where the Cub pack with Webelos crossover scouts invited the SM to attend to be part of the ceremony. I found it rather strange that this process would be considered in light of the patrol method of Boy Scouting. When my troop attends a crossover ceremony, the PL's are the ones to be invited. It is their patrols that will be recruiting new boys and should be the ones to welcome their new members into their patrols. I as SM attend with the PL's in case there is a group of Webelos that wish to stay together and come into the troop as a NSP and haven't decided on their PL as yet. These boys are welcomed into the troop by the SPL who will assist them the selection of their PL. Has anyone else found this to be an issue? Stosh

Wow, and now a-days, getting the boys to hike to school is a chore. It sure shows how much things have changed and how different scouting is today in spite of those who say it isn't. Stosh

An RV with a helicopter pad on the roof!??? Now that's gotta be cool! Can you say "Aviation MB, Baby?" Stosh

Duh! Duct tape! Otherwise, if you wish, put plastic bread bags between the layers of wool socks and don't worry if the boots get wet. (Triple the socks, polypropelene against the skin, then wool, then the bread bag, then the second wool pair. Same size as 2 wool, and will keep feet nice and dry both from within and without. Then wrap gaiters (5'x3" strips of waterproof material secured by duct tape) on the lower leg also keeps the pants from getting wet. If one has a sewing machine and grommet tool, lace-up snow gaiters can be made very quickly and will stay put better than wraps. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

Our council has "limits"/"expectations"/etc. on the projects, but it varies from one project to another. I had one project that was questionable in their estimation and they called to validate the scope and appropriateness of the project. After conferring with me they approved the project and the project eventually went on to receive state-wide recognition for the effort. The project was at no cost, involved no physical "labor" and was solely an issue of organization, scheduling and leadership on the part of the candidate. Later I was told that the conversation I had with the Board opened up some new and different opportunities for Eagle projects in the future. Stosh

If a boy is putting up a pavillion in the local park and needs someone more than the NSP members to professionally pour a cement slab to start the project, of course it would be a legitimate leadership decision to insure the best quality for the project and would hire qualified laborers to pour the slab, paying for, of course, their wages for their work. The rest of the pavillion could be all volunteer considering there are more people out there that could do carpentry work rather than cement work. Each Eagle candidate should as part of his leadership decision process evaluate each step/process of his project and if professional expertise is required at a cost of labor should be properly acquired. A boy can lead a work crew of professional experts just as well as a work crew of amature volunteers. It's his leadership that is being judged, not his work force. It would be a saavy leadership decision to select the best workers for the task, in my humble opinion, of course. Stosh

I do believe there are camps in my area that have family camp areas, so I don't think it's too far in the future that there will be more, especially with the emphasis on family scouting that seems to be coming down the road. After all where are camps going to be putting all the stage-mothers, soccor-moms and dads that need to live vicariously through their sons? Stosh

Yeah, it's part of the new RV merit badge for the scouts that are having trouble putting up a tent and tying the knots. The Garmin on the dash board takes care of orienteering, the kitchen facilitates cooking, the holding tank promotes no trace, the on-board shower promotes a Scout is Clean, and getting in a 50-miler is a piece of cake. Stosh

Oh my! SMT224, your boys actually expect the SPL to be functional? to be proficiently trained? Does that mean that if the boy has all that and holds the POR for the first six months of the year and it's not a leap year he won't get credit for it? Oh my, what's the world coming to? Give my congrats to your boys for going for the best! Stosh

Hmmm, if leadership is a goal of scouting and teaching leadership is a fill-in activity, it's no wonder there's problems. Surely watching other screw up isn't as effective as teaching how to do it correct in the first place. As far as NYLT's effectiveness? Well, I didn't attend it, my boys did and they came back thinking they wasted their time and money. And by the way, that occurred BEFORE I took over as SM of my present troop and the boys wanted "other" training to make up for it. I suggested the older traditional program materials and they reviewed it and said they wanted it taught to all the boys in the troop that wished to sit through it. Not all the boys did, but those that did appreciated it and are implementing many of the items emphasized. I'm assuming that the suggestion is not that too much leadership training is too much or the training the boys request should not be taught or that leadership should be taught only as a fill-in activity between games, maybe? Stosh

No one fights dirtier than a church, but Scouting comes in a close second. This is why it is important to carry a multi-million dollar umbrella clause on your homeownders. At any given time I take the field with Scouts, I have $5M of coverage and with Venturing I have $7M coverage. When I'm driving the boys around I have even more. When they kick me out of scouts for something I've done wrong, then I guess I'll just have to find something else to do. However, it's going to be tough on my Venturing Crew in that I'm the IH of that organization and will be doing the same things I did before but without any say so by the BSA. What people don't realize is that I can sue anyone on this forum for divorce. I can't win, but it's going to cost you a few bucks to have your say-so in court. If I ran around living my life in fear of being sued, I wouldn't be doing anything except escorting people up and down my sidewalk in front of my house in case it might be a little slipper at this time of the year. So, do I trust Scouts/Scouters? Yep, up to the full extent of my liability insurance. Does that sound paranoid? Yep, but just because you think everyone is out to get you, doesn't mean that they really aren't. Stosh

Because after attending NLYT, the boys came back disappointed and asked me to teach the "traditional" patrol method and TLT for their patrols. They think it's different, so I teach it. If it inspires the boys, what's the big deal? I figure too much training isn't going to hurt anyone. After all the big complaint normally is not enough training, now it's too much? Stosh

Telling the boys they have to have elections every 6 months vs. no tenure definitions, vs. appointments, vs. qualification requirements, vs. popularity contests, vs. ???? So, what does one tell the boys? I teach all the different options and then let the patrols decide what they want to do. No, they don't all have to do it the same way, they don't have to have scheduled elections, if they get one boy that does a great job, he can stay as long as the patrol wants him to do so. Teaching them Greenbar, JLT, and TLT/NYLT gives them all the options for their consideration. As it has been pointed out, there's a lot of myth floating around and even more adult interference in the processes. (after all where does one think is the #1 source for these bogus myths?) And who says the boys all need POR's for advancement? Re-read the requirement... carefully. A POSITION OF RESPONSIBILITY is not necessarily leadership... it's a functional duty and a scribe and historian doesn't lead anyone, they just fulfill the responsibility. A bugler leads no one, they only announce activities for the boys based on a time-piece or when their leadership told them to sound the call. And if the patrol has a crackerjack PL, why would they be so dumb as to trade him out for someone who needs to wear a patch for 6 months? If the patrol comes to the SM and tells him/her that the PL for their group is someone new, so be it. Why would the adults ever want to know why or how it was done? It's a done deal, live with it, the patrol members are planning on it, mark it in the book and move on. Stosh