Stosh

There are some forums out there that actually keep score and place wagers on how long before a thread has to be stopped by the moderators. So far this forum hasn't gotten that far, but there are some standard dynamics going on that seem to be evident in most forums. Keep it in mind that when this many people have access to a public forum, one will lure in both those that add value and those that don't. Those that have the better moderators do last longer than those that don't. Stosh

One of the reasons forums have problems is 1) moderators that do not moderate fairly and evenly and 2) forum members who find it necessary to push the limits on just about everything. Even this thread seems to be in-line with these types of problems. Anonymity allows personalities on the forum to express ideas in 1) a way totally devoid of body language, voice inflection or tone and 2) unless they get banned, no probability of impunity. That makes for a whole world of misinterpretations, hurt feelings and upset members. Of course this doesn't even begin to address the issue of those who find it quite amusing to always assume a perspective of Devil's Advocate on everything posted. They either think this amusing or they genuinely believe this moves the discussion along. Then there is the dynamic that unless everything follows as one has posted, anything contrary means the poster was wrong, didn't know what he was talking about or was a few sandwiches short of a picnic. Different perspectives will always produce differing ideas on the same subject, many times both correct under different circumstances. Of course there are those whose fuse is so short that forum-rage is second only to road-rage for these people and everything is personal and must be won at all cost. With that being said, being a moderator is a delicate tight-rope walk that will basically damn them no matter what they do or decide. I have been a moderator on forums for over 10 years now and when it become more work than fun, it's time to move on to better forums. There are a lot of forums that simply implode on themselves because they cannot find moderators that understand the dynamics of this new medium and then there will always be those members that haven't figured it out either. Just my views, your mileage may vary. Stosh

The only gimmick that works for me is to take the Law and Oath put it on one's night stand. READ through it 3 times before going to sleep every night for 4 weeks. Don't try to memorize it. But if just read that many times one will retain it. Stosh

I wonder how many SM's who believe they run a boy-led, patrol-method, troop would actually allow a patrol of boys go off for a weekend without the two-deep leadership? I know for a fact that even our scout camp wouldn't allow them to come for the weekend and camp without the 2 deep-leadership. I wonder if I would be going too far out on a limb to think that maybe the functional leadership of the boys of the BSA program isn't sufficient to allow for this possibility even though the lip-service is given to it? For those who would allow it in certain circumstances, what limitations would be placed on these boys or would they be allowed to actually lead themselves and make their own decisions for the weekend? Stosh

In my WB patrol there was a gentleman with 65+ years in scouting who did mention that there were often scout troops without any adult leadership. He said at one point his troop went two years without any adults. He said the troop ran just fine until the council got them a new SM.

I guess this may not qualify for Blue Sky anything but this is what my crew is doing at the present time. We are drawing kids from 4 different coucils at the present time. We have approached our local council to see if there is something that can be done so that it is a little more "official" than just signing up boys all over the place. If we get approval, we will have the possibility of having the first nationwide crew, at least on paper anyway. If not we will at least encompass up to 6-7 councils in the geographic area we will draw from. By the way, our council has never refused to accept a boy's application even when the address shows him to be well out of council, and even well out of state. Stosh

If he is supposed to be POR for 6 months and he showed up only half the time does he get full credit for fulfilling his responsibility? Stosh

As Ed indicated, the boys saw no need for an SPL. The two highest ranking officers are the two patrol leaders. Anything they need to coordinate between themselves they'll just talk to each other. They did decide that because the patrols were made up of all new scouts that it would be good to have a TG to help them with advancement issues. They felt it would leave them more free time to run the patrols if the TG was available to help. That means the only troop support level person is the TG. If there is a need to have an SPL (i.e. the person to go to the SPL meeting at a camporee) the decided they could alternate doing that job. (Good training experience for the two boys who would someday be considered for that position once the troop takes on a few more patrols.) Stosh

"If the Scouts enjoyed a campout learning Morse Code using Myer Flags (the precursor to semaphore) who is to say that any harm was done? Granted they will find little use of flag messaging in real life but what harm is there in appreciating the history of communications?" If one actually ponders the depth of the suggestion rather than taking it at face value, one will quickly realize that it is the catalyst for generating other ideas in the boys. Some of which are good and others not so good. Does one realize that having "enjoyed" learning Morse Code, they did and do make quite some use of the system in real life. I have been informed that sitting in a boring study hall one can visit with their buddy who is all the way over on the other side without passing any notes. A pencil and patience is all you need. The little exercise produced a few of the boys that have begun looking into American Sign Language. Who knows how far their imagination may take them. "So you found a better supplier then the BSA for staves, I know of no breeech of BSA program or policies for that." Again, the point being made was not on acquiring walking sticks. Campcraft skills, using one's imiagination, realizing the importance of something as simple as a stick and how it applies to the skills one is developing in scouting. "Tug of war a fine sport (its a good idea to provide work gloves for safety though)." But their imagination took that rope and they began using it differently than what it was intended. This builds creative problem solving skills what does apply to many of the methods and goals of scouting. "None of these have anything to do with following the BSA "program" which is the BSA Methods, Policies and Procedures," Here is where we will agree to disagree. Much of what we do is done on a deeper level than what most people see as superficial and irrelevant. When the high school kids run around with their 5# bag os sugar to teach them responsibility, showing up at a flag ceremony with full uniform and staff seems to reflect many of the same responsibility dynamics. Proper use of the staff with no fighting with it also shows that the boys understand it's importance and respects it's usage. "Is a small troop any less able to follow rules than a large troop? Can a troop of 60 not follow the patrol method as well as a troop of 13." And I have no idea what is meant by that statement. "The use of staves and Morse code is hardly grounds for being considered outside of the BSA program, and I have not seen any posts that suggests it is." With what I have done in my new troop, I have found that the boys, even those who have taken the NYLT program in it's entirety have repeatedly come to me requesting leadership training because the BSA program doesn't cover it in a way they understand like when I teach. It is also obvious that many people don't accept the concept of patrol-method I use either and claim it's outside the realm of BSA, and I don't buy into the limited size troops that BSA suggests. I have a program that is attracting boys, they seem interested, they are asking for leadership training, they are showing responsibility and the future looks bleak because BSA police are going to come in and put a halt to the whole thingy!" :^( "The faulty premise that began this thread seems to be getting people worked up over nothing." I didn't see any faulty premise. I think that if one takes the time to stop and think about it in a variety of different perspectives, it is quite interesting. Those who don't learn from the past are destined to relive the mistakes. "Some men see things as they are and say why? I dream things that never were and say "Why not?" -- Robert Francis Kennedy To me the BSA is the stepping off point for some great things for these boys. It's not the be all to end all. Stosh

I have dug out some old MB books and the boys have played around with them. Signalling is a popular one. They have patrol flags they can use for signal flags, there are some nice Morse Code programs on the computer that can generate messages for the boys to "read" and I bought the double signal-key set that seems to go well on outings. I would suggest if one does allow this, they know code so they know what's going on with the boys. :^) We use the reprint of the 1911 Handbook for Boys and dig out ideas for tentage, walking sticks, etc. The boys thought it might be a fun thing to go camping 1920's style. I don't know exactly what that means, but I'm sure they'll tell me when they get it organized. The old handbooks offer a slice of life from prior years of scouting and seem to draw some interest. Boys that wish to really camp cook are given the option. Knot tying requirements have backed off over the years. Being able to tie the Turk's Head is a lot of fun. Whenever a boy loses his slide, it's no big deal, he just ties another. Stosh

I have found that with most programs, whether they are BSA or not, are not linear in growth, but cyclical. There's an ebb and flow, i.e. bib overalls were "popular" during the depression, in the 1970's and will some day come back again. For all those who jump to the conclusion that when it's not stylish it's wrong might be over assuming the situation. If it's not stylish, it's just not-stylish. Wrong is if one shows up with two different colored shoes. I don't think that has ever been in-style. I have found that by applying some of the older elements with the current program it offers a lot of diversity that holds the interest of the boys. I used Meyer's flags for neckerchiefs in my honor patrol in my previous troop and they of course played around with some Mores Code at one of the campouts. Is this wrong? Yep, because the Meyer's flag system didn't use Mores Code, it used a code of it's own. But I don't care if it was or not, the boys had a fun time. People generally don't jump rope anymore, especially not boys. But I have seen boys with an old tug-of-war rope jump for hours at a time. Too many times I have observed that people become quite rigid in the program that any slight variance or deviation is considered a mortal sin. Well, it just isn't so. Not all BS Troops will fit into the same mold. Some are big and some are small. The smaller ones can get away with a more relaxed, personal program, while due to the logistics of a larger troop they are a bit more structured. Anything wrong with using the military style of camping used at jamorees at a district camporee? Is there something wrong about a troop that doesn't show some organization and structure? Why do things have to be wrong when the boys seem to like it and have fun with it? I use the 6' walking sticks as recommended by the 1911 handbook. The boys use them for the first-aid stretcher carry, patrol flag staffs, measuring height and distance, and there are even some boys who use them as walking sticks. Our council scout office sells 5' thinner staves. That must mean our staves are wrong? I like to look at the possibilities for the boys to offer and suggest "something different". This may mean we do something by the book, something no one else has ever done, and maybe even something that was once done and discarded as no longer relevant. So what, it's new to them and it can spark some fun. Go for it and quit worrying about whether it's right or wrong. Stosh

Our troop prefers a private ceremony. We select a place that has an appropriate flagpole for the event. Many times this is done at camp at an outing other than summer camp. We all dress in full uniform. Silently "march" down to the flagpole, unfurl the flag for the last time no matter how tattered it may be. We salute, pledge, and retire the color and return to the campsite where the flag is placed placed folded in the fire. It is again saluted until it can no longer be recognized as a flag. If we know who's flag it was, we wire the grommets together before burning. If this flag had been a flag on a veteran's casket, the grommets are dug out of the fire at the end of the weekend and returned to the family. The "ceremony" is marked with silence for each scout to reflect on the meaning of what's happening. All presentation commands are given softly. Stosh

I was kind of surprised by the moderation on the forum. I try very hard to keep my posts in the third party when I refer to controversial issues or if personally challenged by other forum members. But I find that some of my posts have disappeared even when serious efforts were made to insure no personal attacks. I have noticed that certain topics and viewpoints have been removed from the forum. That is rather unfortunate. For many years I moderated a number of forums and we made sure the members knew why moderation was applied. I spent many hours "discussing" inappropriate posts to members off-forum. I find the moderation on this forum takes a different tack from what would be considered normal for forums in general. Stosh

I think the answer lies in: who's leading the boys? If they are, it's their decision. If you are, it's yours. I strive for as much boy-led opportunities as possible and so I would not be involved in the process whatsoever. I might ask the boys if they are planning on trying for it again this year, but drop out of the discussion as soon as I got the answer. If the boys have enjoyed getting this award in the past and want to try for it again, it's up to them to get their act together. If not, just remind the parents that it's the boy's troop after all. You have covered your rear in the fact that you brought the subject up and the boys made their decision. On the other hand if the SM pushes and the boys "win" is it the Troop Award of Excellence or the SM Award of Excellence? I would think wanting to win would carry more weight than having to win. Just my 2-cents worth. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

I try to keep scouting as simple as possible. Just 3 rules: 1) Safety first. 2) LOOK AND ACT LIKE A SCOUT. 3) Have fun. I find that wearing the uniform does in fact meet the requirements of rule #2. :^) With that being said, at every scout activity, the boy is epected to wear up-to-date shirt, pants, belt and neckerchief w/slide. What I can't figure out on this forum is why so much discussion centers around NOT wearing a scout uniform. I would think that was a given assumption to the scouting program. And for those who argue costs, I outfitted a boy in full uniform and the most expensive part was the patches. Last night I made a purchase on E-Bay for 5 uniform pants of various sizes and 1 uniform shorts. The total bill including shipping was a little over $16. Stosh

I think it was answered multiple times each one with the various premises of how the troop is set up. If it's adult-led, the SPL's in charge of whatever the adults tell/let him. If it's boy-led troop method, the SPL's in charge of everything. If it's boy-led patrol method, the SPL's in charge of supporting the patrols. Depending on a number of different variables, anyone of these styles could be used appropriately. At the present time, for example, I have only 15 boys in 2 patrols, so I have no need for a SPL. Stosh

Hmmm, just for discussion sake, what would happen in the dual troop-crew setup if the boys of the troop elected one set of youth leadership and the crew another. Would that mean that the SPL of the troop wouldn't necessarily have a POR in the crew and the Crew president might not have anything to do with the troop, especially if she's a she. :^) Sounds like a possibility of a real can of worms to me. If the elected SPL of the troop automatically became the president of the crew, that would mean the crew could never elect it's president and if the crew elected a gal, it would mean then the president couldn't also serve as SPL of the troop. Looks like a lot of adult-led dynamics needed to coordinate these two units. Stosh

I for one have never really understand the need for 2 years of Webelos scouting. I like the possibility of Tiger, Wolf, Bear, Lion and Webelos as the 5 years of Cubbing. If all the requirements for AOL can be done in a year, why are they allowing for two? Unfortunately with the cycle of Scoutnight and Crossover, somewhere along the way there's a loss of 1/2 a year. I found that when I taught Webelos, it took a full year to fulfill the requirements. That means I picked up the boys in September when the full year and then basically wasted time until BlueGold the second Webelos year. We repeated some of the more fun things, but it was pretty much spinning the wheels. The parents then didn't want to cross over the Webelos 2's because they had been in the program for only 6 months at the second Blue Gold. They wanted to have their boys finished out the school year from Feb to June and so there was even more wheel spinning. They got in the spring Derby and that was pretty much the only effective activity of that time period. Crossing over was "done" at Blue Gold and yet they didn't really cross over until after school was out. The boys left Webelos with no fanfare and straight to summer camp. The only other alternative is to take the full two years, and then wait from September until Blue Gold and cross them over in the middle of the third year. My solution to the problem was: I took the Webelos I for a full year, Sept - Sept, I held them in Webelos II for half a year, crossed them over at BlueGold in Feb and told the parents the boys could join up anytime they wanted but the Webelos II program would not introduce anything new except for any boy that wanted to continue working on pins, or make up past requirements they may have missed. (One boy did earn his AOL after the Blue Gold because he filled the requirements.) The boys filtered in one at a time into the troop as their parents made the decision. Some boys moved over right away and missed out on the spring Derby, another bunch came in after Derby and the rest straggled in after school was out. However, during that Blue Gold until end of school year, I took the next batch of Webelos (those that had fulfilled a half year from Sept to Feb Blue Gold) and started them on the 1 year progam. These boys where then ready for their AOL at the next Blue Gold. That in effect makes Webelos I's only a half year program. Stosh

It would be interesting to actually know the BSA policy on dual registered youth and the 18-21 age period of the crew. On a troop level 19 year olds cannot tent with under 18 year olds. But they can with a crew. But if they're dual registered are there some issues that haven't been identified? It would also be interesting to know how these crew deal with an ASM of the troop being a dual registered member of the crew? It really brings to mind a real problem with GTSS issues. Stosh

I like the idea that the SM is an "honorary" member of every patrol, a "buddy" to every lonely scout, a mentor to every PL, a guide for every ASM, a calming effect on every PLC, a rock of stability for every committee meeting, and a pain in the neck for every DE. If the adults find it necessary to patrol up, the SM should remain separate just like he would for any other patrol. Stosh

Beavah, you do point out a lot of room for discussion and to assure those I'm not ducking a question, I'll address them. * Few places to camp. Large groups are not LNT-compatible. While this is true, it opens the door for some creative thinking on the part of the troop. With the huge variety of opportunities facing youth today, why does taking 60-100 boys all to the same place at the same time make sense in the first place? Scout camp for example: younger boys do the traditional stay in camp, do the FC training, get their feet wet, do a couple of MB's and have fun. The VP's will hook up with the high adventure opportunities, or maybe even have worked out Philmont so 2-3 patrols are off doing their thing in NM. 5 other patrols couldn't make it that week, so they have picked a different week to go to camp. The question I'm left with is: "How does every patrol doing their own thing, meeting the needs of their members of different skills, ages and interests have anymore negative affect on the troop than all the different dens doing their own thing have a negative affect on the pack?" If, for example, one DOES want everyone in the same place at the same time for a mega event, it would be at a camporee type activity where arrangements are made to handle a large number of boys in a single place anyway. This shouldn't be any different than say a Cub Day Camp experience that runs for a couple of days. There might be some equipment shortages on those occasional activities, but it might offer a good training opportunity for leadership problem-solving for the patrols. * As you've suggested, very large troops split into program sub-groups, by patrol or (what happens more commonly) by New Scouts/Gr 7-8 Scouts/Venture aged scouts. This is something that small troops cannot do. The smaller the troop the more it relies on one-size fits-all. We ALL do this or that and we do it together because we need the numbers. The larger troops can offer a wider variety of opportunities for a wider variety of ages, interests and skills. As I mentioned before patrol 1 does the map & compass thingy, while patrol 2 is out doing their 5-10 mile hike-bike, and the VP are off doing geocacheing activity. * This requires a lot of adults, to support the many patrol outings and the different program levels. Two deep leadership. 1 trained ASM and one chaperone per young patrol. No adults required for VP doing their geocacheing thingy. It may require a lot of adults, but if it's boy-led, it may not need as many as some people might think. * It is very difficult to find that many adults who share both your vision and the necessary skills. And it takes hands-on time to really train 'em. Depends on who is the SM and CC. If they are on the same page, the other leadership can be trained to understand how the dynamics play out in the troop and once the program is in place, the personalities of the players becomes irrelevent. You are correct in assuming a heavy responsibility on the part of adults to really train leadership in the boys... but then isn't that the reason we're adults in the program in the first place? * The age-stratified program division leaves the lower two groups without a lot of youth leadership skill, or contact with the best youth leaders (the older boys). I would never think to assume that the younger boys would be totally separated from the older boys. Assume for a moment that the NSP was doing the TF Requirement #1 on packing your gear for an outing. Which group would the boys prefer to learn from. An adult who's read the book and brings in their pack and demonstrates the right way to do it, or the VP that has just gotten back from Philmont and will do the same thing but also let the NSP know about all the fun they had in NM? When one has a patrol-method troop it does not mean the patrols are isolated, just independent. Through the PLC the VP PL makes his resources available to any of the other 20 patrols, the skills, interesting things they are doing. Maybe a VP patrol will take a mid-range patrol out on their first expedition to the BWCA. Or maybe a mid-ange patrol will help a NSP with their knots and lashings. These older patrols are the resources that help make the NSP realize that in just a couple of years they will be where these boys are. * The venture patrols tend to attract adults who are more comfortable with youth leadership, leaving the younger guys who have weaker leadership skills with adults who want to impose more structure. The SM needs to do more with leadership training of his ADULTS as well as his boys. It is critical for the NSP's to become independent and confident in their skills as quickly as possible. The best leaders need to be put with the younger boys. Once they have the ball rolling for these patrols, then the adults who have lesser skills can monitor the boys without having to do as much actual training. * For coordination, you need a host of ASPLs and support adults to serve in "middle-manager" type roles. Correct. This is the first level of support for the patrols. When I asked a boy to consider being a TG for our growing troop, I worded it such that he realized he would be taking a step DOWN from PL to be TG. I told him I needed a TG that would work to support, assist, and meet the needs of the 2-3 NSP's that we anticipate this winter. He wouldn't be top-dog anymore. He accepted in a heart-beat. Because no one should lead more than 7-8 other people, each ASPL can have as many as 8 PL's he monitors for assistance. 20 patrols of 8 boys (160 boys) would need at least 3 ASPL's. Couple that with QM, TG, Instructor, Chaplain Aid and two more POR boys, that's about all the SPL can handle. His PLC would have about 30 boys, but only 8 which would work directly with the SPL, each ASPL would have 6-8 PL's working with him. The DC's back in the feeder packs would also be loosely associated with the SPL relaying information on the prospects and future needs of the troop when they bring their dens into the troop. * Because the SM feels a bit "remote", even a great Patrol Method/youth leadership advocate starts to "push" from top down through the middle-managers. It depends a lot on the personality of the SM. if he/she is confident in the leaders he/she has trained, trusts them to stay on task and function as they should, he/she will actually have more freedom to move amongst the patrols, getting to know the boys, doing SM conf's and actually enjoying the boys company. * To run a troop this size also requires a huge, well-coordinated adult support staff, lots of fundraising, etc. :^) It's tempting to keep throwing in all these adults. There's nothing in the BSA program that says the QM, working in conjunction with the Committee Treasurer can't have a working "staff" of his own. Suppose the QM has 3-5 boys who are "in training" for the QM position that help coordinate equipment, identify equipment needs, and plan and organize fundraisers to pay for them. Other than the Treasurer, who does one really need? If the QM has need of advice, he has his SPL and SM. If that's not enough the SM might assign an ASM to support the QM. We're not talking a boatload of people necessary to do assistance work. * If yeh have a large adult support staff, yeh sorta need a fairly homogeneous and agreeable community. Otherwise, you'll get all kinds of adult conflicts to manage. Only if people quit doing what they're supposed to do and start muddling in someone else's concerns. If all I have to do is help the TG and the NSP work on leadership development and I start messing with whether or not we have enough Dutch ovens for the boy's to do their advancement, will I bump into a place I don't need to be. If we need Dutch ovens for the NSP, the PL relays his needs to the QM at the next PLC who will work on a solution to the patrol's problem. No adult need get in and mess with the system. * 90% of the SM's time moves to dealing with other adults, with a small sliver for working with the SPL and giving SM minutes. Yeh gotta want that kind of role. Most SM's for smaller units want more kid-contact time. If the SM is spending 90% of his time working with the adults, he's probably wasting and about 90% of his time on things the committee is responsible for. The SM should be working on boy-led leadership, boy-led training, and boy-led opportunities. If he's with the adults he hasn't time for that. If Adult A is recommended by the committee and approved by the SM to be ASM-Advancment, and Adult A starts telling the QM how to do his job, then the COMMITTEE needs to address the issue, not the SM. His job is to work with the kids NOT the adults. With a large troop, you typically end up with a very "school curriculum" FCFY program, If the SM teaches the boys that there is only one "correct" way to do the program, yes, one may end up with this type of FCFY program. Maybe the SM should be taking the individual's style of leadership into consideration and not just "stamping" out the same size fits all leaders. If that's a problem, teach alternative approaches to the program, let the boys have the freedom to find their own groove of leadership. Not every patrol has to do it exactly the same way and boys should be encouraged to make the best use of the resources for their particular boys. That's a PL call. and a very "directed" leadership style for the grade 7-8-9 guys. This should be a time, after the training to allow the boys to try out their "wings". This time is critical for mentoring, and supporting the boys. If the process is directed leadership, the boys will have the knowledge for leadership but never an opportunity to do any real hands-on leadership. One must be particulary careful at this point to trust the boys' opportunity to lead. If this is not happening, it's not the boy's fault, but the adult's fault and the committee needs to address it. These are the years that if no real opportunity for leadership is allowed, the boys will become frustrated and leave. Very much like what BW describes, eh, because that's what works. But that's not what you were shootin' for. Alternately, at some point yeh don't take a necessary step, like yeh don't start creatin' middle managers or the SM keeps tryin' to stay more involved with kid contact. In that case, your growth plateaus and you start losin' kids who become disconnected or "fall through the cracks" because the troop is too big to be within the span of control of a single SM / youth leadership team. So you might be accepting a lot of kids, but you're not doin' right by 'em. If the SM/youth leadership team has done their "job" correctly there should be an over-abundance of qualified youth leaders to handle that many more boys. Let's just say out of 150 boys, the troop has anyone of 75 older boys that can easily take on a PL job and function as well as any adult in leading a patrol. With 20 patrols, that means 20 boys are currently functioning as PL's and another APL's are waiting in the wings learning. That's 40 right there. Add to that any number of boys that had been PL's at one time or another. Or maybe 10 of them that could easily do the QM job. Or maybe 10 candidates with 3-4 years experience as a successful PL that would do well in the SPL position? Or the TG after 3-4 years decides to go back into the Pack and do a knockout job as DC? As far as falling through the cracks. The PL has 7 boys to worry about. In 5 minutes a week he can may contact with the boys to make sure he's ready for the troop/patrol meeting. If a boy becomes disinterested in scouting, the PL should be the first to know and if the PL and APL can't handle the problem, it's time to call in the ASPL to help out. If every group of 7 boys is watched like that, falling through the cracks is not an option. Just my observations. Not tryin' to rain on your parade, by all means, go for it! But yeh now have a whole mess of folks warnin' you about the same pitfalls, so you're goin' into it with eyes wide open. Yeah, I just approached my DE this afternoon asking him what the ramifications would be if I took my Venturing Crew nation-wide. I'll settle for the 4 state area, but I'm hoping for the moon at this point. I have heard tell of way too many young people getting turned away and our committee has come up with some new ways to look at the problem that may indeed work out. We just need National's approval because we have already gone beyond our district, council and even regional boundaries with our membership. My DE seemed very please with the proposal and has promised to get back to me this week. One doesn't have to be crazy to do this job, but it does help. Stosh

Hmmm... my 2-cent's worth: with 16 new boys, and 4 recruited older boys, I would take the route of: 1 TG to work with an adult ASM for advancment. Focus on each boy's advancement progress and needs. 1 Instructor to work with adult for training, both rank and leadership. Focus on both patrol and individual leadership training. 1 QM to work with adult committee treasurer to begin the process of developing equipment needs for the new troop. Focus on prioritizing equipment needs and coordinating fundraisers to acquire funds for their purchase. 1 SPL to work with the SM who's concern would be to develop the specific leadership of the 4 patrol leaders of the troop. He would be available to the patrols to offer advice and insight at the 6 month time period if the patrols decide to elect new PL's and/or APL's. This "SPL" would be to just be there for the PL's and all the concerns they will have during this first year of new development. He would have secondary responsibilities of working with the TG, Instructor and QM to make sure the proper support is being given these older boys as well. Extra adults? Support the 4 leaders assigned to the boys. Maybe one adult research summer camp and give to PL's for their consideration, etc. 4 adults assigned to the youth? ASM - Advancement, assist the TG to be sure the boys' information is properly recorded and maintained in a central location maintained by the TG. Give support to the TG in his work. ASM - Training, assist the Instructor to be sure the boy's have ample opportunity for rank advancement and leadership training and feed this information to the Instructor. Treasurer, Assist the QM to be sure that equipment needs are identified and properly researched. Assist QM with fundraising ideas to assist in the purchase of this equipment. Assist the QM in acquiring proper storage facilities for this equipment. SM - Assist the SPL in all of the support logistics of patrol needs, especially in assisting with any disciplinary, problem solving ideas, and advancement needs the boys identify along the way. Until the unit gets 1-2 years under their belt, any formal structure of the troop is not as important as the actual functional support structure of the older boys. The PL's and patrols need time to gain knowledge, experience and confidence before they can be considered for a more structured organization. Stosh

While it is not very practical to go back in time and start running the scout program as it was 100 years ago, there is a lot one can learn from knowing the past. First of all, in order to develop the youth in terms of character and leadership, BP has some pretty good ideas. Well, good enough for the program to maintain itself for 100 years. What he had to say seems to make sense. However, on the other hand, everything evolves, changes, adapts to the changing world in which it exists. That's a good thing too. But one must always be making the same decision each day...do the changes improve the situation?, are they adapting to the needs of the youth?, are they still relevant to the boys?, does the assistance being offered our young boys exist in a vacuum? Scouting has, in some way changed some of it's basic core beliefs and attitudes just enough to cause some to be concerned. Has one made changes to meet the needs of the boys, or have these changes been to be expedient to the world around him? That's always a legitimate question that every generation needs to address. Would going back rekindle some of the original intents, goals, aims that we may have dropped along the way be apropriate? Again, every generation has to address that issue. There will always be those will speak out against such questions who will insist it is only the future is important and the past has nothing to offer. My only premise is: that past is what made the present what it is, and if it's ignored, there is no future. There are those on the forum that seem to draw from previous resources which are often discounted by others. Yet when I look, they make perfect sense because after 19 year, I have seen them work over and over again. It's hard to argue with success. BP had an awful lot to offer this world with his basics for life, it would truly be ashame to ignore them just because we have moved on to the bigger and better of today. I'm not all that sure we are bigger and better than yesterday. The jury's still out. I make opportunities for my boys, it's up to them whether or not they want to be tomorrow's leaders. No matter how much milk get's spilt over the years the cream will always rise to the top. Not everyone will be a leader, and only the individual knows which way they will go. Stosh

Jeff, Expect the unexpected, and take the road less traveled. For the most part one starts with great expectations, great goals, great vision and hope for this super scout troop. This is good thing. But along the way, once one mixes boys in, everything changes. :^) Stick with a few basic ideals concerning the BSA standards such as character, education, self-confidence and leadership. Training is important for all the members of the troop both adult and boy. Don't rush anything, give things time to develop, never panic (easier said than done), and take the time to truly like the boys. I moved from an established troop to a troop going defunct and it really doesn't take very long to instill a sense of mission in the boys. The boys that I thought were going to be good have not stepped up to the plate and the biggest troublemaker has become my most reliable and steady scout. I have an exciting future, the past doesn't do anything except offer lessons on what not to do, and have fun. Like I said expect the unexpected. Always allow for the possibility for boys to lead you to and even better place than you first imagined... and take the road less traveled, follow them they know what they need. Boy led also means that not just the troop is led, but the adults too. :^) Stosh

Not to worry Bob, we have two lawyers in the group and we play the game according to Hoyle. The Venturing Crew is a BSA organization and has a tax exempt status. The CO owns nothing and the crew owns nothing and all the money taken in by both the CO and Crew is given away to philenthropic efforts. Gifts given to the CO group cannot be taken off their taxes, but gifts to the Crew can. Stosh