Stosh

MEpurpleWBfox, Once again into the fray, you are again opening the biggie can of worms for the patrol method/boy led concepts. No problem, you're new and it'll give you some good insight. First of all, from my perspective you have hit the nail on the head and have identified many of the problems with the current model of BSA leadership and how easily it can be distorted by the "powers to be". My unit is boy run/patrol method because I insist on it and I as SM constantly block adults from interfering in the operations of the patrols. First of all the highest ranking officers in my troop are the PL's, NOT the SPL. The SPL's job is not to parrot the program prescribed by the SM, but is to support the PL's in the operation of their patrols. The SM assists and supports the officer corps of the unit (SPL, ASPL, TG, Scribe, etc.) The operative word is SUPPORT, not direct, not lead, not "mentor/coach" (which are code words for telling them what to do). If they need help, the SPL is there to assist them get back on track. Contrary to popular programming, my SPL does not run the troop, he is the PL to the PL's. His job is to only work with PL's and assist/teach them in being successful in their patrols. His patrol (PLC) coordinates the efforts of the patrols with each other. The PLC does not dictate to the patrols what is or is not going to take place, it is a forum where ideas are exchanged, information assimilated, and cooperative efforts are organized. If 3 patrols want to go to summer camp and the 4th patrol wants to do something else (high adventure, for example) they all do their own individual things. All patrols are independent of each other, function independantly and with the assistance of the SPL stay independant of each other. There's nothing worse to kill off a patrol of older boys than to drag them off to summer camp for the 6th time because all the younger boy patrols voted they had to. Ever wonder why the older boys leave scouting? I don't. My older boys hang around and do some neat things instead because they are leading, directing, and deciding their activities themselves in their own patrol. There's a lot of talk that floats around concerning this patrol method/boy led stuff and there's a differing opinion from every person. If the boys are going to really lead, the adults have to let them and this is very difficult for most adults because they want a successful program as defined by the adults. They glory in strong units, Eagle Scout statistics, etc. but what the boys want is to learn to lead and no 14 year old boy is going to be able to lead a "strong" troop as well as a seasoned adult. But, a 14 year old with 3 years training in leadership will put together a far better, self motivated unit than a 14 year old being told every step of the way by the SM what he has to be doing to run the show. The older boys will eat him alive as you can attest from the situation in your troop. Once people realize that boys, if properly trained, can at that age run a very successful program if the adults (especially parents) get out of the way and let them. As far as the elections are concerned, a patrol that elects based on popularity will soon find that down the road a vote based on leadership qualification is a far better idea. How often do patrols vote on their leadership? Each patrol can decide that for themselves. If their newly elected PL isn't doing his job, they, if they wish can put someone in that position that will do the job. Boy led is really boy led. No adult need interfere with that process. Who's the one that wishes to step down from the PL position to be a supporting SPL? I would think the patrol of PL's (SPL) could easily decide that for themselves as well. Of course the boys, if they wished, could also just pull a name out of the hat too. It's boy led, remember? They decide what's best for them and the adults either support them through their decisions or rein them in and make them toe the line. Stosh

Age and treachery will win out over youth and exhuberance any day!!! Stosh

"Taint militia, thems those dam**d black-hatted fellas again!" Have a nice time at Gettysburg? Stosh

It's rather unfortunate that people read and understand what they want to read and understand. I have for many years written numerous articles on various subjects, spoken to many different groups in thousands of different settings, posted on multliple and somehow don't seem to be as misunderstood as some on this forum insist on being. I'm just going to mark this up as either 1) will never understand, 2) refuse to understand 3) cannot understand or 4) are having too much fun playing Devil's Advocate. Constantly having to prove every thing, belongs in a court of law not friendly conversation. When someone can tell me why they think 25% per year attrition rate, a small percentage of those actually finishing the program, and units are constantly frustrated and boys are frustrated with disillusion, and this is not acceptable for the scouting program, then we can continue the discussion. Reinventing that which does not need reinventing is a valid sign that what's on the table at the moment just isn't working. Well, it used to work and it worked just fine. If the world changed, maybe it's time to just shut the doors and forget about scouting because it no longer relates to the youth of a changed world. I guess the slogan "Timeless Values" is just one of a hundred gimmics the PR boys have tried to promote. Until then I guess I'll just have to use my "made up as I go" program because that's what my boys seem to want and keep coming back week after week to get. Stosh

Aww, gee... What people don't realize, including BW, is I'm not trying to disprove any of his ideals as written on the pages of the BSA epistles. There are many that see only the paper and the words written therein and are myopic enough to not see beyond. Yes the BSA program has always promoted the right stuff. But instead of changing things in the program, wouldn't it be a better idea to try and translate that program down to the boys in a more efficient manner. As I have said over and over and over again: the boys are leaving because the units are not providing the program that BSA puts out there. If the boys are promised leadership and character development and all they are getting is patches and fun games, I'm sure it isn't going to take too many of the boys to figure out that what's shown in the ad is not what shows up in the box. Until that happens, the boys will become disillusioned and leave in droves, as membership statistics of the BSA have shown year after year. 25% attrition per year is not a number I made up. The only positive thing about BSA's venture into the Hispanic culture seems to be more of a membership recruting effort than an attempt to fix the problem of program deliverance. I say go for it. Why shouldn't the Hispanics, or any other group, be as disillusioned with the BSA program as the next guy. Every Webelos cross-over for me is going to be an Eagle scout. I don't buy into a 25% attrition rate, nor do I accept a 5% Eagle rate. That boy will be prepared (kinda catchy phrase) to meet the challenges of adult life, marriage, family, work, church or anything else life throws at them. As a SM/Advisor that's my responsibility to get them ready for real life. Is that learning curve going to be all fun and games? Nope, but it will be for real and that's what the boys want, they want the program as promosed. Stosh

Any time the boys create, organize, plan, and do something that challenges their skills is high adventure. Any time the adults create, organize, plan and so something for the boys it is not. If a Tiger Cub comes up with the idea that his den should go to the museum and he calls up their museum for ticket prices and then calls his fellow scouts, he's on his way to high adventure. Even if the boy doesn't call the museum, but dad does, he's still making a huge step of challenging his skills to think of the museum idea for a trip. Every simple stretch step makes it high adventure. Stosh

Jblake47, I see you have been visiting Kudu in his fantasy land. >>> Sorry to disappoint, but I really don't find any need to visit Kudu and his fantasy land. I find very little to discuss with him, but I have asked a couple of questions of him for further clarification. I don't think that makes me his disciple. I just fully understand many of the scouting principles he is promoting. >>> On the other hand I see you have been visiting BSA Madison Avenue and their fantasy land. You did not answer the question. Not onlyare the things you say the program has switched to not exist in the training or resources of the Boy Scout program, you failed to give eveidence to your own claim. You said that the "old ways that the BSA has abandoned has cost them membership. >>> Eagle scouts that don't camp? Boy leaders that don't lead. Eagle projects designed, directed and implemented by parents. Eagle projects that are basically a total waste of time. But you have completed avoided telling us which old way that is. >>> Back in the days when the boys lead and implemented the program rather than just participate in an adult directed program. It is isn't the Patrol Method because that is still taught and supported. It's not youth independence because if you pay attention during New Leaders Essentials, it explains specifically that the the programs of the BSA are designed to move a youth from reliance on adults to self-reliance. >>> It may be taught, but it surely isn't norm. The adults still have to relinquish their control of the program before the boys can lead. Ever wonder why the BOYS aren't being taught the NEW LEADERS ESSENTIALS? Isn't it the boys that are supposed to be the leaders and shouldn't they be taught the essentials? I would be happy if the boys actually led, but they don't. In theory of education in the BSA they should be leading, but they don't. Plain and simple. It doesn't get translated to the boys. So where is your evidence to support your fantasy? What "old way of scouting no longer exists that you say you can directly link to membership loss. What can you find in any BSA resource or training that supports your view that the BSA no longer uses the youth led patrol method? >>> If a patrol wants to go to summer camp, 1) they can't register at camp as a patrol, 2) they need 2 adults and 3) I don't think this is boy led, patrol method, being promoted in any sort of fashion. You have no such evidence because none exists. You are making it up in hopes that those reading it will be as unwilling as you to research the facts and simply be swept away by your emotional make-believe. >>> BW you may be an excellent source of quoting from BSA materials, but it is obvious that the practical application of these theories is NOT getting down to the boys. Teaching Business Administration, Finance and Accounting in the Ivory Towers of our prestigeous colleges in America does not put food on the table, manufacture the vehicles we travel in, nor provide goods and services to the masses until someone translates it down to the level where these things are happening. It looks good on paper, makes sense to the learned, but once people figure out that it doesn't work, not many people are going to tell the Emperor is running around naked. >>> I hear people complaining about electronics the boys are glued to. I hear about the parents that force their boys to get their Eagles. I hear about all this crap and yet very little about the boys that want to be there and want the program and don't get it because some bozo adult leader can't reliquish responsibility to the boys to run their own program as they have theoretically been taught. >>> Until that happens, I'm very pleased in my fantasy world of non-parlor scouts where they lead, direct, organize and run their own program. Where I as a SM am constantly working my self out of my job. When I have boys that have spent the big bucks and a weeks worth of time to attend NYLT and come back and complain that it wasn't worth neither the time nor the money, then there's something seriously wrong with the program. When I see year after year scout troops that recruit 20-30 new boys every year and at the end of 12 months have the same 15 scouts they started out with, it's obvious that something somewhere isn't working. And after putting my ear to the ground on this forum, I'm sure it's not just the units in my area that are struggling with these kinds of problems. >>> Yes, I have had all the training BSA can offer. Yes, I have read the literature and manuals carefully. Yes, I have had about 40 years experience with working with kids both in scouting and outside of scouting. The #1 thing I have learned in my journey was that kids will hang around a program as long as the program provides what is promised, they will hang around. As soon as it doesn't, they're gone. Well, people, they are leaving Scouts in huge numbers. Maybe it's time to quit looking to National for the answers and start looking to the boys. I have. I have a successful program and my boys are excited about their new fantasy world of real scouting. >>> Yes, I teach TLT and send my boys to NYLT, but they still insist on the old teaching courses from the 50's and 60's as well. If one doesn't provide the boys with what they want, they will not hang around. That roughly translates to the point I have been trying to make, but doesn't seem to be soaking in. (i.e. "So where is your evidence to support your fantasy? What "old way of scouting no longer exists that you say you can directly link to membership loss. What can you find in any BSA resource or training that supports your view that the BSA no longer uses the youth led patrol method?") If they were, the boys wouldn't leave. Stosh

"The numbers are down, why do you think the BSA is trying all sorts of gimmicks to get the boys interested?" Which "old ways" would that be? Hiking? Camping? Citizenship?, Nature Study? Woods tools? Cooking? Emergency preparedness? Swimming? Archery? Firearms? Climbing and Rappelling? Caving? Boating? Youth Leadership? Knots and Lashings? Fitness? Orienteering? Horseback riding? Backpacking? Sports? Patrol activities? ALL of course are still a part of the Boy Scouting program today as well as in the beginning of the program. How could you possibly not be aware of that So which specific "old way" that the BSA supposedly no longer has are you referring to? >>>>>>>> Boy led, patrol method

I'd like to see a show of hands here of the SM's and ASM's who currently don't teach traditional outdoor skills and self-suffiency as part of their unit program. Go ahead, I'll wait patiently for you to raise your hands. When you do, please tell us what you have replaced those elements of your program with, whether it be staying at the Holidome or PS3 gaming or microwave cooking. Don't be embarrased. Anyone? >>> And will all the boys interested in contemporary scouting as it is applied today? Raise your hands! Anyone? Done be embarrassed. >>> The numbers are down, why do you think the BSA is trying all sorts of gimmicks to get the boys interested? It would seem that there are still boys out there that wish to learn the old ways. They want a program that teaches real things that mean something. They don't want to be parlor scouts. New uniforms, special emphasis, major celebrations, and fluff and hype. It'll attract a few, but for the most part, from what I have seen in my council and what seems to be common threads on the forum, it just doesn't seem to be doing the job. 2-3% of the boys Eagle. If the schools were accepting that as an acceptable gradutation percentage, one would surely find the school board under intense scrutiny. We accept failure as standard operating procedure and write it off as cars, girls and sports. Sorry, I don't accept the numbers that the rest accept. Stosh

American Indians called them "bull boats" and were made of a ash frame and buffalo skins. There are plans for them on the internet as well.

Well, you are correct. Life has always been about choices. I didnt say it wasnt. Im reminded of that every day when I see the homeless people on the sidewalks outside my office. But the fact that life is full of choices really has nothing to do with the inevitability of change. >>> As I commented before change is neither good nor bad, it's just different. However, what people choose to do with that change is open to judgement. Things are going to change around us regardless of whether or not we chose to embrace those changes. Change provides additional choices. My point was that my mom didnt have a choice between cooking fresh ingredients over a stove and not doing so. That was the only option available at the time. Microwaves were not invented yet. Fast food joints were few and far between and an unacceptable expense with a stay at home mom and four children on a blue color pay check. Prepackaged foods were pretty basic. Today, the options have multiplied exponentially. Yes, you can still choose to cook and live like 1957.but you dont have to. Right or wrong, most people choose progress as it comes along. Im sure you could use a horse and buggy as transportation if you so chose, but Im betting you find modern transportation a better option for getting around. >>> And unless the boys learn to cook as they did back in 1957, they aren't going to be able to function in a traditional Boy Scout program. As far as I can tell there are no backpacking microwaves and fast food joints aren't very popular in the Boundary Waters. Yes the world has changed and while modern transportation is great, I still get many compliments on my 1974 Nova I continue to drive. Does driving to work in a 2008 Kia any different than a 1974 Nova? I can't tell. >>> Science has also indicated that much of the processed foods we have chosen to accept as the norm, lead to childhood obesity and eventual diabetes. So I'm under the impression that all change, no matter how convenient, isn't always a good thing. >>> Yes, carrying a nylon tent is better than a canvas one, but sleeping out under the stars beats them both. The last time I camped out it was with a single wool blanket with a rubberized ground cloth. Worked just fine. It's a bummer when it rains because you have to roll everything over to get the ground cloth on top. No one here is making an argument against an outdoor scouting program or continuing the traditions and values of Scouting. Scouting began in Victorian England. It appealed to the boys of that era for a variety of reasons. But times have changed. The youth of today have literally hundreds of different options than those boys did. That isnt to say that some of the same activities or methods of doing things wouldnt attract boys today.....but it will attract far fewer. We can be a purist organization that still operates as Baden Powell did in 1909 and have a very small membership or we can adapt to the times and promote a program that interests boys in 2009 and spread the values, traditions and lessons of scouting. Sleeping in a canvas tent over sleeping in a nylon tent wont make an iota of difference in the character a boy develops thru Scouting. >>> But when a boy learns the true basics, not microwave basics of cooking they can cook on a fire, on the stove or in a microwave. Kids today haven't the foggiest idea how to heat up left-overs on a stove. They are self-sufficient as long as there's an outlet somewhere. Change is inevitable, but you have a choice of changing with the times or not. Me, I appreciated driving my heated truck to work in 20 minutes this morning as opposed to freezing in a buggy for an hour and a half after hitching up the horse. Call me crazy. >>> I hate horses so I don't have a buggy, but when a major snow storm hits, I can still get to the grocery store on my cross-country skis or snowshoes which I have in my garage. >>> Back when the Y2K scare hit this country, everyone was in a panic over everything shutting down. When Asked what I would do I simply said, start a fire in the back yard, make dinner and think about it over a cup of hot coffee. >>> Self-sufficiency and the added dynamics of leadership of leading a group in group-sufficiency is not a skill being brought to the forefront in today's BSA program, as it has in the past. Madison Avenue slick isn't going to put leaders out there who can take care of themselves let alone someone else like family, friends or Scout Troops. >>> Yes, change in inevitable, but choosing to change when it isn't necessary isn't always the best plan. Stosh

Change is enevitable. When I was a kid, we had a big black and white console TV with 4 channels that went off at midnight and I got to be the channel changer. Today I have a 48 inch HD flat screen with well over 100 channels 24 hours a day and can record and play back any show I want on a hard drive. >>> Change is not inevitable, it is what people choose to make happen. Just because I have a TV with 100 channels 24 horus a day doesn't mean anything worth watching is on any more than when I had 2 channels. Mom used to cook every meal from fresh ingredients on a stove. Going to a restaurant was a couple of times a year treat. Now frozen foods, microwave meals, delivery, carry out and multiple trips to eateries per week is the norm. >>> I live alone and yes, that is exactly how I choose to live my life. I make my food from fresh ingredients every meal. Occasionally, when I'm in a hurry I'll have a TV dinner followed by two Rolaids. People used to dress in their finest clothes and go to a house of worship and show reverence toward their God. Today many churches have laser lights, smoke, rock band music and people attend in their shorts and t-shirts while drinking a Starbucks and watching their "worship leader" on a big screen at a satellite location. >>> Suit and tie for church, still applies here. The list is endless. >>> The list is what people make of it. Times change. Society changes. Organizations change to stay relevant to the times and society. If not, they become footnotes in history. >>> And yes, it is inevitable that Scouting will become a footnote in history according to the definition prescribed. However, my boys DO enjoy the older arts, the emphasis on real leadership, self-determination, life skills, group dynamics and all those things that the program has dropped in the past 40 years to inevitably change to try and attract a crowd. Unfortunately the old crowd wasn't any more impressed than the new crowd. So now what do they do? Become like everyone else because they don't want to be a footnote in history? Do I like it? No. But that is the fact of the matter whether I like it or not. >>> If one doesn't like it, make different choices. No one is forcing anyone to drop the intentions of Victorian Scouting. The day will return, as it always does, when chivalry, honor, pride, and self-determination come back into vogue. Hopefully, Scouting will still be around when it does. Standing around complaining that kids are not what they were when we were young isn't really doing anything to fix it, and going along with the crowd isn't going to do much either. Stosh

I guess I don't see it so much as a Chicken Little type of approach in as much as a slow altercation of the original intent. Whereas the program had a certain boy-leadership focus, over the course of the past 40 years it has "changed". For good or bad it has changed. So one must step back and evaluate the situation. Is Scouting as strong as it was 25 - 50 - 75 - 100 years ago? If not, what happened? Did the world change, did the people change or did the program change? Scouting used to be a prestigeous, honorable entity throughout the world. It marked it's path by it's own definitions. Can it still be said for today's program? If one cannot answer these questions, one must wonder what happened along the way and if it isn't what it once was, can be resolved? Stosh

Hmmmm... Let me get this straight. In 1972 when scouting was at it's peak, the powers that were re-invented Scouting and they've lost half their membership. Now the powers that are want to re-re-invent Scouting with less individual achivement and more family orientation. My Mamma the Eagle Scout. It's sounds catchy, maybe they'll use it in their promotional material, translated of course. Yep, sounds like a plan to me.

As far as eating things they don't like, many times we have prepared multiple dutch oven dishes, one with onions and one without, only to toss out 75% of the one without. We quit that practice and now the boys eat what they request. Only adjustments that are made are for allergies. As my mamma used to say, "there's peanut butter and jelly in the cupboard and you can check with the neighbors to see what they're serving, otherwise, sit down and eat your supper." Stosh

Why would anyone want to join a Christian, Islamic or Hebrew organization just to get in their face and challenge them? Or worse yet, join so they can get the credibility that comes with the organization without ever intending to honor that credibility. Surely any Eagle that does such, is in fact in name only and has not fulfilled the requirements of the award. And yes, it specifies that the scout is to live according to the Oath and Law in the scout spirit requirement. If he's lying and has no intention of following the expectations of those oaths, then he has in fact not fulfilled the requirements for the award. If one has no intention of being an honest scout, then why go through the motions unless they are seeking the recognition for selfish gain. Yep, that's always possible, but surely a parlor scout with such credentials is not really an Eagle scout any more than me buying an Eagle medal off of E-Bay and wearing it on my uniform. Character is not something one wears on a shirt. Stosh

As a scout leader for many years, YES I have promoted "other faiths" over the years to insure the boys have an opportunity to fulfill their obligation to the 12th Law. When I have a Muslim family in my unit, the boy is encouraged to earn his religious knot just as if that boy happened to be of my religion. If a scout leader cannot be tolerant of the beliefs of others, he/she needs to move on to a program that doesn't deal with multiple religions as does the BSA. Stosh

How would one vegetarian affect all the boys when the boys are patrol cooking? I'm sure that patrol can do what is necessary to take care of their members without affecting the rest of the boys. Stosh

BP: Yes, you are correct, I was only stating that for many in the Scouting program, especially as they progress into Boy Scouts, a "don't ask, don't tell" attitude is producing Eagle Scouts, who should be an example of religious, moral character that don't actively participate in any religion, have stated it as such, and basically defy the Eagle Boards to challenge them. If the issue of religion isn't addressed in Cubs, it surely will remain an issue throughout the scout's journey. The DL's can encourage the boys to pursue their religious knots, yes, but when the boy says he doesn't go to church, parents don't go to church, etc. the DL has a responsibility under BSA to address the issue with both the boy and the parents. Instead more often than not the DL ignores the issue and figures someone else will deal with it later on. BSA by virtue of it's program has a mandate to produce boys that adhere to the principles it has designated towards that program. To shirk responsibilities towards those goals by any of the adult leadership in any of its programs is to demonstrate that the laws and oaths of the program are a "pick and choose" option. Well, sorry, I just can't and don't buy into that process. If a boy wants to be Islam and the DL is Christian, the DL has a responsibility to do everything within his responsibilities as part of the BSA program to assist that boy in being a Muslim. Outside of the program the DL can do whatever he wishes. Stosh

If it's just an issue that is between the parents and the scouts, why does the BSA program get involved by having a law concerning their duty to God? It surely seems to be more of an issue than "don't ask, don't tell" which seems to be implied here. If one doesn't believe in a God, then there can be no duty to them and the whole basis of the scout's oath is pretty much just lip-service. Duty to God, country and others is the basis for the scouting program. If that doesn't float in your world, not a problem, pick another youth program that promotes a different program. Stosh

One must always remember the regardless of what is read, the interpretation of the requirements is just that, an interpretation. The requirements still stand as the requirements and the directive is to neither add to or detract from them. Obviously there are those who do read it all and still conclude that's what's best for their boys may involve mileage that varies. Just remember an ax is an ax, whether it is used to cut wood or a weapon, the ax remains the same. If a SM asked a boy to retrive an ax and he returns with a battle ax, it's not the boy's fault, he did what was necessary to carry out the task. End of discussion. If someone wishes to make more of an issue than what was done, it is merely adding to the situation. Stosh

What I am hearing with this discussion is an ego-centric response by the youth. I got what I wanted out of Cubs. I got what I wanted out of Scouts, now it's time to get what I need now out of Venturing. No where along the Scouting journey did the boy ever learn leadership of others, it's all about self. What I want/need to be entertained because otherwise I'm bored. Obviously 13-14 year-old scouts in this scenerio haven't the maturity to really understand what Eagle is really all about. I have just received word, two days ago, that one of my Crew members got his Eagle at age 16. He's active in his troop, OA and my crew. That makes 9 Eagles following that same pattern from a variety of different troops all over the council that have earned Eagle while a member of my Crew. When Eagle is just a recognition of accomplishment, it means just that. When Eagle is a recognition of leadership, it means something quite different. I push for leadership, it's more enduring than being able to tie and teach others the square knot. Even as this last boy told me about his Eagle he never once gave any indication that he's done with Scouting and will now focus just on the Crew. None of my Eagles ever said that. Only one of the 9 "dropped" out of scouting before they turned 18, but they also dropped out of my Crew as well. Stosh

Very good BW, but where do the boys go to learn WHAT to identify. There are a ton of boys out there that have a major chore just identifying simple birds and dandelions when they are in bloom. Otherwise they know nothing. What 10 plants and animals are they going to identify? I tell my boys that a little time with a field guide, library books, internet, and museums/interpretive zoos will give them the background to actually DO the requirement. I have spent way too many hours standing out in the woods with boys who can't identify the simplest of plants and animals. There's a squirrel, a bird, a tree, a bush, a fish, a snake, etc. This is not identifying anything other than their own ignorance. Boys do not learn in a vacuum and one boy who can't identify jack, won't be able to teach another scout anything either. Maybe this is just one of those times when a SM can impress his fledgling little impressionable scouts how mysteriously learned he is by identifying so many things in the great outdoors. For me, the boys learn best by doing, I'm not ready to turn the outdoors into a lecture hall for me to expound my knowledge. The boys will have to actually identify plants and animals and they're going to have to learn what they are first and they do that just like the rest of us did, books, libraries, museums, internet, tv, etc. If a SM points out a bird on the way out on a hike and the boy parrots back that he identified when they return the same way they came, this is not learning, this is going through the motions to get a rank badge. Sorry, museums are vital to the knowledge base of the boys because they can get a intense amount of information in a small space of time and place whereas he may have to wander around for along time looking for a species of animal he happens to have learned from some childhood book he once had. One of the problems I have with the requirement system traditionally pursued by many units is that it produces more patches than it does knowledge. Stosh Stosh

Of course a scout can "complete" the requirement at the museum. If he goes out into the woods, finds collects, presses and mounts 10 different tree leaves, returns home to the library/museum and thus learns to identify them, he will not "complete" the requirements in the woods but he will definitely complete them once he has learned about them from the resouces available in the library/museum. Interpretation of the question varies from one person to the next. Take the requirement, and have fun with them, scouting is supposed to be fun, not just another school assignment they have to do to get their patch/grade. Stosh

Maybe it's because the hundreds of pages of explanation are not the requirements. Requirements for advancements are the requirements, explanations are just that, they are not requirements. They may offer some suggestions to fulfill the requirements, but again, they are not the requirements. Even the requirement itself has different meanings to different people. Some say this requirement in question is an introduction to the outdoors. But so is camping, and hiking, and a ton of other things the boys do. In an urban setting, when mom says she's not going to give you a ride today in the SUV and you're going to have to walk to school, that's the outdoors, too! So is recess! Duh! I say it's more for observation, learning and understanding the environment the outdoors has to offer. Museum? Maybe, it's hard to understand a bald eagle if one has only seen pictures of it, but a stuffed bird will give the boys something to consider. Interpretive center/zoo? We have one where all the local animals are in our zoo. I'm thinking it's a stupid idea, but hey, the city paid for it and the boys can go and see the animals alive. Out in nature? Sure, some sort of animal walked through the snow here. Let's all guess what it might be because no one really knows for sure anyway. There's a bird, a sparrow... Okay, is it a barn sparrow, field sparrow, English sparrow? or any one of a couple of dozen sparrows in the area. And of course the hole in the ground. Who dug it? Maybe a badger, or a fox, or a... Let's all guess, but give him credit for it because it's evidence of an animal, at least a digging animal. This past week some environmentalists were in court with a case complaining because the caretaker/ranger of the local wildlife refuge was not doing his job. Someone had come into the preserve and had been harvesting some of the nicer trees for lumber (about 20 trees were in question). They were all cut down and piled nicely and would have been carted off if some of the more observant environmentalists hadn't stumbled upon them. The court threw the case out of court when it was show that the trees had been gnawed off at the one end by an "alledged" beaver. Simply being out in the woods and being observant are two different things and one can very easily learn what a beaver does from a museum, a nature center, interpretive zoo or the outdoors. I learned how to identify all the different sparrows at my bird feeder, identifying over 30 different kinds on my feeder one winter and yes, I did it by looking in a book! and comparing it to the different birds. They're called field guides and I have a bunch of them and I have learned a ton of information sitting on my sofa so when I go outdoors I can be more observant of my surroundings. Is that cheating? Is that an "on my honor" thingy? I don't see the comparison... Take a 18"X18" picture frame. Go out in the woods and toss it. Then have the boys "identify" everything they see inside that frame. Every leaf, bug, animal, plant, seed, etc. If they don't know what it is, draw a picture of it, take it home and look it up in a book. Take a picture of it, digitial cameras are on every boy's cell phone. Do your boys know the difference between an earthworm hole and an ant hole? Look for the worm poop. Duh! When the boy's are done have them wood burn their names on their hiking sticks with their magnifying glass. Perhaps they could learn to start a fire with that magnifying glass using the cattails and milkweed plants they find. Better yet, if their picture frame had a piece of chert in it, they might be able to have fun with that too. Stosh