Stosh

Call me stupid or not, but wouldn't it be a bit more thriftier if one would just skip the questionable plastic bag and just boil the egg in it's own natural shell? And if this is the Sunday am rush to break camp meal, why not just cook in the mess kit, put it back together, drop it in a plastic bag and take it home to wash. I can do an bacon/onion omelet faster than most people can boil their huge pot of eggs. If the boys do the big boil breakfast thingy, it's nice to have the hot water to rinse off the mess kit before tossing into the plastic bag. Otherwise, use a steel frypan and eat breakfast right out of it, wipe clean, heat over fire to disinfect and head on out with a dirty fork. It just sounds like somebody's trying to make something quite simple, very complex. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

Just a suggestion: Why not just leave the numerals alone and go with a patrol patch and flag to designate the difference between the two. As long as one is chartered as a number, I see no reason to alter the standard. Go with 2 "patrols"/troops and have the boys do a combined vote for SPL if you feel one necesasry, otherwise have the two PL's just work things out in a mini-PLC. This is a great idea, and gives boys in small troops the feeling of more numbers. I'm glad it is working out for you. I have been pushing the patrol-method so long that our boys have no interest in having a troop designation as much as they are proud of their patrol. Because of the two troops, there's no "troop" flag for the boys to carry to the flag ceremonies. Maybe one ought to put together a huge "troop" flag with Lightning designation on that and leave the two troop flags at home. When in doubt, let the boys decide what they want and then back them up. Stosh (This message has been edited by jblake47)

My boys have also chosen to take this same route of both the TLT and inquiry.net training. Stosh

But do the buglers know what and when to blow the bugle calls? or do they just do what someone tells them to do? Works both ways. Stosh

If one is going to a scout event and they are currently registered in the scouting program, they wear their program uniform regardless of the event. If one is registered in multiple programs and is attending a district or council event, then one may choose. If I am a SM attending a Blue/Gold, I wear my Boy Scout uniform because that's where I'm registered. If one were to accept the logic of not registered in a Pack, no uniform, then I as SM would need to wear no uniform, ... not gonna happen. At scout events, wear the uniform one is registered as. Stosh

They may not apply in Canadian waters, but I do know that if one is in US waters, the rules apply. There are also some lakes where mechanical means, including motors are allowed. Better know the area and where one is, ignorance of the law is no excuse. The rules are provided with the permit applications. Stosh

We have always bypassed the outfitters and done our own thingy. It gets the boys more involved in the planning and execution of the event/trip. Planning a 9 day expedition without resupply and support is quite a challenge to plan out, but half the fun is the planning. By the way, if one get's caught setting sail in the BWCA waters, they will have a fine and their permit revoked. No mechancial means to propel watercraft, paddle only. A sail, even if jury-rigged is mechanical. And of all the National Park Service people, the BWCA are by far the most sneakiest. They will appear in your camp and have looked over your stuff long before you even notice they're there. Great people, but don't be doing anything against the rules. Stosh

Hmmm, I invited an experienced kayaker who wasn't even a scouter to assist with getting my boys down a whitewater river this summer. She was SM invited, and did the troop a great favor. I guess I messed up really big time because I didn't have her fill out any forms. I found it strange that the other adults and/or boys didn't complain and kinda appreciated having an extra safety person along besides just the SM. And when all was said and done they didn't charge her for food and gas for the trip as they did all other adults. Kinda makes one wonder if we're not defining guest differently. Stosh

Getting back to the topic.... This is the kind of group dynamics that occur when a troop and crew try to co-exist under the same adult leadership. I'm sure the crew was created to keep the older boy's interest and when it did, it began to threaten the leadership of the troop. #1 rule, never use the same CO for a troop and a crew unless one is looking for a headache. The two units will either 1) compete with each other or 2) one will dissolve. From the tone of the original post, it would sound like the SM/CR has pronounced the death-knell for the crew. The SM/CR is going to sabotage the crew out of existance with all the special rules he's making up. One cannot hold loyalty in two different directions. My crew meets at least monthly if not more and has a large amount of activity opportunities that are far more than once a quarter. Unless the crew can have a vision of its own, apart from differing units and their goals, they will either struggle or die or both. It basically sounds as if this crew was initially set up to fail with the structure designed by the organizers. Stosh

We'll be doing a pizza restaurant COH this winter and we'll be inviting all the potential Webelos boys to join us. Stosh

Welcome to Scouting 101. This "stuff" happens all the time and eventually either 1) one becomes immune to it, 2) one quits, or 3) one does something about it. What about starting a troop of boys that are assisted by adults who care about doing it right? I would think that are more than one family that is dissatisfied. Either 1) take over the leadership of the troop, 2) take over the leadership of a close by unit that is struggling but has potential for growth, or 3) start another troop. It took me almost 3 years to make up my mind, but I didn't have boys in the unit so it didn't make any difference. However, I would have been far happier had I not procrastinated. Stosh

The only problem with modern buglers is that no one at the camporees will know what the bugle calls mean and thus the functionality will be limited to ceremonial reveille and taps. Maybe if every unit had a bugler that didn't have a bugle, at least he could teach the boys what the general calls meant when they hear them. Unfortunately any boy that wants to learn bugling will need a week or two to do so. The old BSA bugle manual assumed the boy could not play but could learn in a very short period of time (5-Minutes). Our modern ceremonial expectations make it almost impossible for any boy to want to play the bugle because it has become something that most professionals would need to practice up on to be able to do. A poorly played bugle is still better than none, but that standard isn't adhered to much in our modern society. By the way, "Taps" is played on a bugle, taps after "Lights Out" is played on a drum, thus the name taps. Prior to the late 1800's, "Lights Out" was the final bugle call of the day but the first communications and last were on the drums. If a few more BSA members could actually play the bugle maybe the WWII veterans would get something better than recorded music at their funerals. I have often heard the comment that a bugle poorly played is still better than a recording. Like any other POR, the position is as important as the unit makes it. Any bugler in my unit will have it on a sling over his shoulder as part of his uniform in like manner to the patrol flags of the PL's. If I'm going to be camping my patrols 100' apart, I'm going to need a functional bugler to communicate with them. Stosh

I'm thinking either the piper is the guy who plays the bag-pipes, or they really mean fifer, the guy who plays a fife. And for those who know the effectiveness of communication prior to walkie-talkies, the fife was better at long range communication than was the bugle. On the opening day of Gettysburg, Gen. Buford was tenuously holding a cavalry skirmish line against massing Confederate infantry. The Iron Brigade at the head of the relief column was coming to their assistance crossing over Seminary Ridge and the commander, knowing drums and bugle sound would not carry the distance and be drowned out by the din of battle, ordered the fifers to play "The Campbells are Coming" and Buford hearing it knew relief was on it's way. For those who commented about my suggestion on standing next to an adult, if that's the way they are teaching it, then that's the way the boys will learn it. The bugler is a position of responsibility which means he's responsible for communication and communications is a two-way street. If he is not teaching what the bugle calls mean, he is wasting his time and not fulfilling his responsibility. I have had experience with this process over the past 10 years. My venturing crew boys understand bugle calls for more than just reveille and taps. As a matter of fact they know the drum calls, they know the difference between cavalry, artillery and infantry calls and when the bugle call is meant for them and not someone else. They march by the bugle, fight by the bugle and skirmish by the bugle, and they didn't have some adult standing around telling them what the call meant they learned it so the command structure could communicate with them. This bugler stuff is meant as a military form of communication. If your bugler is standing on the other end of camp, can he communicate with your unit, especially those who aren't standing next to an adult? If not, just have the adults tell the boys what they need to do like they're doing anyway and forget the bugle. Like any other POR it should be functional, not ceremonial as is the case with most buglers I have heard. Stosh

4 pages of objectivity on a subjective topic. Gotta love it. 1) There's a ton of untrained leaders out there doing a somewhat passable job with the program. Tradition goes a long way of passing on (rightly or wrongly) some of the basics. 2) Every leader that wishes to take it up a knotch gets the basic training, and can operate for a time with quite a bit more quality in their program. 3) Add on Roundtables, University of Scouting and WoodBadge, and things begin to change and mature in the units over time. 4) Sit and read every bit of BSA literature, study it so that every iota of law can be fully critiqued? Nope, not in my lifetime. I understand the program, but when all is said and done, the BSA does allow and often times encourages the leadership to actually do what's best for their unit! If I were to actually adhere to the letter of the law, 1) I would not have my Venturing Crew, nor would it have continued successfully now for 10 years (it is amazing how many "laws" had to be re-written by national to make room for such crews), 2) the council would not be going out of their way to invite me to lead jamboree contingents (post-2000 WB leaders only), nor 3) address University of Scouting and various roundtables to teach my version of "boy-led, patrol-method" because of the success of such an approach. If one has the gist of things and remains within the confinement of reasonable, mature and legal, they shouldn't have too many problems. If they do, they have the administration of BSA to help guide them. If I'm facing a particular problem, and I approach a group of people for help and all they give me are legal quotes where I have not followed the rules and have erred along the way, then I'm going to find another group to ask, and I'll keep asking groups until I get the help that is needed. I have found that most people do have a pretty good idea of WHY they are in a sticky situation and don't need anyone telling them that, they have already crossed that bridge, what they need now is HOW to get out of it. So, when all is said and done... yes, if in my opinion, I think it's in the best interest of the boy not to sign his SM conf requirement, I'll do just that with a complete explanation as to why. On the other hand, I do so many SM conferences with the boy prior to his advancement, he's usually got a pretty good idea where he stands and 99% of all SM conferences are merely a formality where I can be the first to congratulate the boy on his accomplishments before the obligatory signature and the advancement BOR. Stosh

Ok, a little Devil's Advocate here: The boy IS the QM, but did he DO the QM job? This is the first question that needs to be addressed. Just because the QM didn't go on the outing, did he check all the gear prior to the event to make sure everything was there that was needed by each patrol? Did he clean out the trailer and pack it with just what was needed and the boys didn't have to dig through the entire troop inventory to get to a backpack stove they needed? When the activity was over, did the QM check in all the equipment to make sure it was properly cleaned, stored and reinventoried back into the troop? Were tents wet and checked out to patrols to dry? Was the trailer back in complete order as it had been before the activity? Showing up at an activity with a QM patch on and unlocking the trailer doesn't constitute DOING the QM job. When the QM was given the responsibility to DO the QM responsibilities, was he properly trained on all the expectations so he could do his job. It shouldn't make one iota bit of difference whether the QM is actually present at an activity, but it makes a world of difference whether he prepared the equipment prior to the event and gathered, cleaned and stored it afterwards. If that be the case, the QM can at his own pace/schedule fulfill his QM responsibilities regardless of his other family, school, and church responsibilities. To me it sounds a little bit like an excuse to not having to fulfill his QM responsibilities if he misses an activity. I'm thinking that the QM of all the POR's doesn't have to actually be 100% present to fulfill his responsibilities. The Bugler has to at least show up and make noise, the QM doesn't if everything is properly prepared in advance. Stosh

"That's why you tell them! You say, "guys when you hear this . . . you come a runnin and when you hear this . . . it's time for lunch and when you hear this .. . the PLC needs to get together." Pretty simple idea, no?" No, that's how they learn to listen to the adults rather than the bugle. When the bugle sounds, go stand by an adult, they'll tell you what it means. Stosh

A metal canister with metal lid will snuff charcoal and briquettes without water, they do not fall apart and can be reused. Briquettes are handy because they measure easily, start quicker and expire at the same rate, meaning if one needs to replenish charcoal on the dutch oven, some charcoal is spent and some is still going strong, briquettes all die at the same pace if they are lit together. If one is guessing measurements, it would definitely be easier and thriftier to just use wood and replenish more often. Briquettes are also uniform in size so they can be transported easier in plastic bags in areas where wood is at a premium. Variable lengths of charcoal often times makes it more difficult to use precise amounts for a meal and is often a bit more wasteful. Stosh

Except for taps and reveille, 99% of the scouts out there don't know what the bugler is trying to tell them. A bugler is only as good as those listening. Whereas most people recognize the call, but haven't the foggiest idea what the call means. Stosh

How about setting up the "John Smith Foundation" that takes the $$'s one would give "John" as a token of appreciation and put into a special fund that would give $$ assistance to scouts that otherwise couldn't afford stuff, outings, etc. The system would be an enduring remembrance of "John's" generosity. Foundation could be set up under the umbrella of "...because of all you have done for the Pack!" This would then be a fund that would available for anyone else so inclined to contribute to. Stosh

Our unit was almost defunct and I was asked to take over. I had 4 thrusty older scouts and nothing more. We took on 18 new Webelos using the method described above. This year the older boys are hanging together and we are basically supplementing and adding a new NSP with a last year scout as PL. We took many of the last year Webelos and moved them to troop officer positions and refilled their ranks with new Webelos boys with an experienced PL and maybe one or two other boys to assist them. No one is really more than 12 years old for the most part in my unit except for the 3 older originals. We have the possibility of taking on 15-30 new Webelos depending on how the recruiting goes with competition from the other troop in town. Forgot to mention that we broke our original 18 new scouts into 3 patrols with one PL each. That was maximum amount of boys the experienced PL's could handle along with reorganizing the unit. We will not add more than 6 new scouts to any patrol at one time. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

In our unit, the PL is responsible for instructing/advancement in the NSP. He should be aware of each of his boy's progress and make arrangments to accommodate the variance of advancement speeds. Of course the PL can request assistance from the troop Instructors and/or TG as necessary. We find little or no need for the PLC to be involved in the advancement process which confines itself to inter-patrol activity planning. Those things which involve leadership/focus within the patrol is the responsibility of the PL. The patrols do not realign at the end of the first year and so any incomplete advancement continues on in the patrol. If the patrol wishes they can take on new Webelos boys coming into the program and start the process all over. The patrol then becomes the medium by which the new boys and catch-up boys are taught together. Extra new boys who are not picked up by existing patrols, will be assigned an experienced scout (FC+) as a PL and start the whole process once again from scratch. Stosh

In our unit, the PL arranges the BOR with the CC for his boys when it's needed. Our BOR's are available every other week and it's scheduled one week and that gives the CC two weeks to get it organized for the boy. At the BOR the boy is introduced by the PL who can then stay if the boy wishes or leaves the process with the CC and adults. When the CC turns in the signed BOR report to the advancement chair, it is recorded in TM software. Stosh (This message has been edited by jblake47)

Take a tuck or two here and there, but get him in a uniform that looks like the rest of the boys. If his short sleeved short looks long sleeved, so be it. He'll grow. If he doesn't he'll always look the same and everyone will get used to it. Make sure he has a place to put his awards, buttons to hang things and if one has to tuck all the arrow point into his pants, no bid deal, he'll know they're there. Cinch him up and send him off and don't make a big deal about it so that he becomes self-conscious about it. If the other boys make fun of him, maybe it's time for the DL to have a little talk about what scouting's all about with them. Stosh

"What do yeh do when two boys are both interested in a position. Or, more properly, what do the boys do?" This is exactly what I thought just a couple of weeks back. It's six months out from Blue/Golds and it's time to consider the lead time to establish the troop leadership we'll finally need because of our growth. My best PL was of course the best candidate for SPL which we haven't had (only three patrols), but the TG is a more experienced boy (did double duty as SPL as needed), but would do a lot better as ASPL training and supporting the different troop POR boys. I asked them what should be done and the older more experienced boy took the two patches and said, "This is an easy decision." He then handed the SPL to his buddy and took the ASPL himself. I got a good lesson in trusting the boys to do what was best for the troop and not just themselves. "Have an election six months early?" Scouts serve as long as they wish and are productive in the position. Each boy immediately begins to groom new scouts to fill his position so he can move on to something else if he wishes. "Work it out by consensus?" This time the maturity and decision making skills of the boys worked out a very selfless decision that surprised me as well as the new SPL. "Play rock, paper, scissors?" No random luck goes into the POR positions in the troop. Evaluation of the boys' need and evaluation of the troop's need are always considered first before decisions are made by the boys. This is why the boy decided that sometimes the election process was too random and not enough thought in it to guarantee efficient and trained leaders taking over. "SM's favorite gets the quiet nod?" One can be 100% guaranteed that this will never happen. I have drilled boy-led, patrol-method to these boys that although my input is welcomed, I'm never going to get my cronies into the system unless they prove themselves to their buddies first. "Might not come up much given your troop culture, but I bet that and the occasional lad who isn't doin' the job will come up at some point." If a boy isn't fulfilling his responsibilities, he can be replaced in a heartbeat. Remember the boys are constantly training replacements, but they still retain their previous skills to go back and step in an area that has fallen short by a scout not doing his job. This might be only a temporary setback and a boy goes out for a sport for a couple of months, and a previous POR holder will step back into the role while the boy does his school thing and then turn it back over to him when he returns. The boys have accepted functionality as the #1 expectation of the leadership. If scouts are not or can not function in the position they are taken out, trained and given another chance later. Leadership is functionality. I have stressed servant-leadership style to the point where I have very few ego problems to contend with (I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but it usually gets corrected by the boys themselves). I have heard boys ask when they could be a PL or something simply because they would like to try out their wings/learning, but not necessarily to just wear a patch and look cool. By the way, when the SPL received his patch, the other scout asked him who then would be taking over his patrol. He said he had a boy that he thought he could get up to speed as PL while he himself was getting up to speed as SPL. He, of course, selected his best scout out of his patrol for this training. (But of course who would know the best who would be able to take over for him and do a good job?) I know he will pick the best because he had a lot of pride invested in his boys and wouldn't pick someone who couldn't take over and do a good job. But by being SPL, he'll be there to help the new PL even after the initial learning curve has been comleted. Stosh

Of course there are those who try and emulate the civic/vote model of things and hold elections at certain times of the year and make major changes in leadership in one big swoop. This is to be expected for those who find it works best for their troop. However, our boys do it more of the business model, where one learns the job and then takes it on. Our boys are singled out at this time of the year (early school year) in preparation for leadership change 6 months from now (SM and youth leaders work this out as to what's best for the boys and the troop). At that time there will be a major reorientation with the influx of new Webelos boys coming into the troop. Therefore, while the boy are still not IN the position they are going to be spending time learning the position they have been singled out to perform. The SPL is a PL now and will be leading his patrol while at the same time develop the skills to be a SPL next Feb. The PL that will replace him is learning how to be a PL while still a member of his patrol. The ASPL position will be learned by the TG who will be responsible for training the troop officers who are still in their respective patrols. This "dual" responsibility allows the boys the opportunity to remain where they are comfortable while anticipating and preparing for a future change/challenge. When that time comes to make the moves, the learning curve has been finished and the boys are ready to go fully on their own. They will hold these positions until new boys can be trained to fulfill their shoes, and they can learn the next step up the ladder of leadership themselves. 6 months of learning before taking the position seems to be more effective according to the boys than taking the job and trying to do the job and learn it at the same time. The boys holding the positions all have the choice to whether they wish to stay on a PL or move on to another challenge. This also means a boy has the choice to step down from a position and let another aspiring boy have a chance. What happens there is that person trains his replacement. The boys have commented that they like this approach because they feel comfortable in taking on the challenges when they have had the opportunity to get prepared for it. Does this cause confusion as to whether or not the boys is fulfilling a POR position while in training for it? The boys have never said anything about it and appreciate the opportunity to learn before taking the reins themselves. Stosh