Stosh

Yet I'm curious how a BOR can "fail" a boy when all of his requirements have been marked as approved/accomplished. Let's say Bobby 2nd Class come up for his BOR & the boards asks him when he completed 2D & he states I never did and it was signed off in his book. A requirement for rank wasn't completed so Bobby 2nd Class would "fail" his BOR. Naturally, the board would tell Bobby 2nd Class what he needed to do to complete the requirement & reschedule a BOR for a later date. Ed Mori 1 Peter 4:10 >>>>> The first question I would ask in this situation was how that boy got past his SM conference with that scenerio? Sounds to me like the SM isn't doing his job in the conference very well. If I had a boy come before me in a BOR with that situation, the first person I'd be talking to is the SM, NOT the boy. The question would be clear and simple: "Why is the boy being presented to the BOR when you as SM know he's not completed his requirements?" I go into advancement BOR's with the assumption that the MB counselors, TG, SM, ASM/Advancement, and everyone else has done their job of making sure the requirements are fulfilled and properly recorded. Showing up at a BOR specifically called for advancement and the boy hasn't completed all the requirements, then there's something seriously wrong with the troop's record systems. "However, Stosh, it seems to me the BOR IS the last requirement for advancement otherwise, and I hate to be really simplistic about this, there wouldn't be a box the same size as the one above it (where the SM signs) for the chair of the BOR to sign. That says to me, quite clearly, that the BOR can deny advancement much the same way the Senate can "not approve" an executive appointment. Or maybe I'm just making a complicated thing way too simple (sarcasm here is intended to be gentle). I see it as a checks and balances system and however troops want to implement it within the really general guidelines we're provided is up to them. It's a really good way to see if your program is working but it absolutely should have a "formal" feel to it, IMO." >>>>> The "boxes" you refer to for the BOR Chair and SM are indeed checks and balances, but not as a means to judge the boy. They are checks and balances to insure the integrity of the system supplied by the adults. For example, what's to keep the SM from simply writing off requirements for his son or pet scouts and over loading those who he doesn't like. Or a BOR that has too much ego and feels boys are too whimpy to progress at a level they expect. These two requirements make sure the system works as it should, not as someone's personal opinion suggests. Two deep leadership is for the protection of everyone, not just the boys. If a boy is not getting his requirements fulfilled in an appropriate manner/time frame, a BOR is conviened to inquire why. If a boy's requirements are being signed off and he's not doing the work, a BOR is conviened to inquire why. A BOR is a working fuction of support within the troop. If it's only showing up to pass judgment on boy's advancement, they are simply not doing their job, and that's not the boy's fault. The troop can be a failure to the boys as much as the boy can be a failure to the troop. Stosh

I'm satisfied in doing it differently than suggested in the prior post. Yet I'm curious how a BOR can "fail" a boy when all of his requirements have been marked as approved/accomplished. And better yet, how the boy got to the advancement BOR when the requirements are not yet approved/accomplished. Sounds a little too arbitrary to me to think a BOR can reject priorly approved advancement. And of course there's nothing in scouting literature that states that a BOR is the last requirement for advancement. Our boys have multiple BOR's depending on the need of the boys progress for each rank. Although a BOR is not required for SCOUT rank, we have them so the boys get used to sitting with the adults and help him get a better understanding of what scouting is and how he personally fits into that process. Once BOR's take on a "trial", "court" or judgmental atmosphere, the boys will no longer feel safe opening up and talking about delicate subjects. As an ASM Advancement Chair, I have had boys come and request BOR's because they were having a problem either with the SM or the SM wasn't dealing satisfactorily with the boy's problem. They boys all know fully well a SM can never sit in on a BOR. To whom does the boy turn when the bully of the troop is the SM's son? He has a BOR that can provide a safe venue for his concerns. Board of Review = A group that reviews, and may I add reviews more than advancement progress. Stosh

If a boys has fulfilled his requirements and the SM has conferred with him to make sure he's done that should suffice. Then why even have a BOR? Why is a BOR part of rank advancement? >>>> The rest of the post explained it as: 1) "celebration" of his accomplishments, 2) review of his hopes and expectations, 3) challenges for upcoming advancement requirements and 4) an opportunity to express any comments or concerns he may have about the present troop operations BOR's shouldn't be rubber stamp exercises but they shouldn't be a witch hunt, either! I'm with Ed on this one - younger son's aforementioned troop has absolutely declined to approve scouts at a BOR, almost always at the Star or Life levels. >>>>> A SM conference is part of the advancement process as well. Any time a SM allows a BOR to process a scout when the scout has not completed the requirements successfully, the SM is at fault and is setting the boy up for failure. If the SM approves the boy and the BOR doesn't there is something drastically wrong with the organization/politics of the adult support of that troop! Either the boy has fulfilled the requirements or he hasn't. If he hasn't he has no business in a BOR but if he has fulfilled them, the BOR has no business declining his advancement. It is important for people to understand what a BOR is all about. We have BOR's for boys who are not advancing and should be. We have BOR's for boys who are having trouble with different personalities in the troop. We have BOR's for boys talking about dropping out or are having difficulty of any sort. We have BOR's for boys taking on a new POR. We have BOR's for boys who's leadership style isn't working and they need to try something new. And of course we have BOR's for boys who have fulfilled their requirements for rank and we get to be the first people to congratulate them and celebrate their accomplishments. If a BOR is a judicial system to re-test, question the integrity of the boy , and make ultimate decisions on the scout's success/accomplishments, it's not part of scouting as I know it or have ever experienced it in my 20 years of scouting. If it is a group of adults who can support, challenge, inspire and assist scouts, then I'm thinking it is a worthwhile part of scouting.

If a boys has fulfilled his requirements and the SM has conferred with him to make sure he's done that should suffice. If this process functions as it should and the BOR questions the boy's fulfillment of the requirements, then in fact they are suggesting the boy is not trustworthy. If he has to be processed to make sure of his trustworthiness at the last minute, then 1) there's something drastically wrong with the boy or 2) there's somethign wrong with the SM to set the boy up for a "trial", or 3) there's something drastically wrong with the BOR. Every BOR I've sat in on has been a 1) "celebration" of his accomplishments, 2) review of his hopes and expectations, 3) challenges for upcoming advancement requirements and 4) an opportunity to express any comments or concerns he may have about the present troop operations. If I approach the BOR with the assumption this boy may not have fulfilled his requirements, then I can only question his honor and trustworthiness. After 20 years in scouting, I'm not ready to accept that as a valid part of any BOR. Stosh

No one can starve to death in 3 days. Food is optional. If the boys wish to avoid being hungry, they may consider the suggestions provided in the early rank requirements. If they don't figure this out on their own, then leaders, parents etc. will end up taking over the responsibility of the boys. I hear of parents paying, leaders in attendance when shopping, adult directed menus, etc. which all detract from the ability of the boys to assume leadership responsibilities. I have attended many events where I brought my own food. It's not difficult to shop for oneself and let the boys learn leadership skills along the way. Hunger can be a great motivator. Stosh

All of our boys wear the custom troop neckerchief, ordered through the scout office with our troop # and city embroidered on it. One of our patrols also has a patrol neckerchief they wear when doing patrol activities. This means that some of the boys carry two neckerchiefs at all times. In our troop a full uniform with neckerchief is your meal ticket and travel voucher. Yes, one can travel from Western Wisconsin to Chicago and then to Philmont on the train wearing a uniform and neckerchief without breaking out in a rash. The patrol neckerchief is a square Meyer's flag folded diagonally and worn over the collar. Because it's a folded square, it is bulky, but wears nicely and I haven't had any complaints from any of them.

I guess my perspective is a little different than "official" BSA, but after 25+ years of scouting, they haven't said much lately to cause me concern. I find it rather strange to allow a patrol-method's first line of support be a setup staging area for eventual failure so a lesson can be taught. The troop committee selects effective, supportive adults. It is their responsibility to pick the best they can find and make sure they are trained to the highest standards. These people are supposed to be there to make sure the patrols are supported and have what it takes to have a good, worth-while program. The liason group of support between the adults and the patrols is the PLC. If the leadership here is ineffective, then it's not the patrol's fault, it's the leadership's fault for not providing effective support for the program just like the committee is responsible for the adult level. The patrols should be focused on their programs, not on the support structure of the troop. If I remember correctly the SPL and ASPL are not patrol members. What then is their responsibility? Run the troop or support the patrols? If it's troop-method scouting, then they run the troop. But if it's patrol-method, they support the patrols. Hypothetical - One patrol plan an outing, and invites other patrols through the PLC to join with them. The PLC is ineffective and drops the ball. 1) the combined outing fails or 2) the adults step in and do what the PLC didn't. I don't see it as being any different than if the second level of support for the patrols being the adults being ineffective either. If the adults can't come up with two leaders the patrol can't have its outing.... Oops, wait a minute, yes they can, the adults are only supportive to the patrol-method, boy-led program. If I remember somewhere in the literature, patrols don't need adults to go along on patrol outings. Hmmmm, a little known clause in the BSA literature. Somehow I get the unnerving feeling that some BSA policies are in direct conflict with each other on many of the important issues. I see in some of the other threads where small troops can't go on outings because they have only one patrol and then when just one leader can make the trip they have to cancel the outing. No they don't, just cut back on the outing, find a place they can walk to/have parents drive, and have an adult leaderless patrol outing. Sounds a little intimidating for adult-led troops to even get their minds around such a possibility. If a couple of parents hang around to keep an eye on the boys, is it still a scout outing? I think a little more definitive understanding of what BSA is trying to do would be in order. If BSA policy was chiseled in stone, this forum would become obsolete. So, hypothetically, if the committee apoints good adult leaders, the adults ought to be apointing good scout leaders. Stosh

We don't elect an SPL or ASPL, they are appointed by the adults. While this may sound strange, we have found that in order for the troop to be patrol method, boy-led it has to have a chance with a decent boy at the helm. We don't want to deal with the problem of a poor choice/popularity SPL causing problems. If we feel a boy is read to be given the opportunity to stretch his wings a bit, he's offered the choice of accepting/declining any position that is offered. The only elections we have are for PL and APL in the non-first year patrols. The first year patrol has an assigned PL and APL. All other POR's are assigned. While this may appear strange, the tradition is that if the boys complain about the leadership we appoint we will appoint new and take into consideration any suggestions they may have for the position. The QM wasn't keeping things as the boys wanted and that position was switched out. The old QM will need to fill his POR hours in a different position or sit until next time the POR's are suffled around. This process is not as terrible as it sounds. The positions are discussed amongst the adults, committee and among the boys to see if there's some interest in certain individuals. Each individual is given the choice to accept or reject and after a period of time, evaluations are made and the boys can suggest a change if they feel it's necessary, i.e. the leader isn't doing his job. This flexibility gives us an ability to quickly deal with administrative problems as they happen rather than waiting 6 months of agony before an attempt to fix can be offered. We have had boys come up and said, "I'm taking basketball/baseball/etc. for the next three months and will be stepping down as Scribe." This is not a demotion, it is an honest suggestion on the part of the boy to insure quality for the rest of the troop while he does other things for a while. Obviously at the end of the sport season, this boy's honesty and concern for the troop will weigh heavily in his favor for a position of leadership in the troop. While these dynamics may not be in line with BSA policy, we have a strong "boy-led" group with an increasing emphasis on patrol method and the system is working for us. Your mileage may vary. Stosh

Last summer our SM could not attend summer camp. He drove up to camp with a load of boys and came up at the end of the week for final campfire and drove a group home. I was the only registered leader as ASM and had two parents to assist me and we did just fine for the week. This week we have SM, 2 ASM, and 3 parents going to summer camp. It'll be 1,000 miles to camp and so we needed the extra parents/drivers. I'd say an ASM and 1 parent could do very well at camp for a week without having to have the SM there. I would also emphasize that if none of the ASM's are willing to step up they should shut up. This isn't the Zoo, young Gerald McGrew. Stosh

Multiple levels of administration can be sucessfully handled by one person if they are aware of how each works. Our CC is in attendance at most meeting and outings and functions very well as "ASM" and does a nice job as CC when he's with the adult committee. Our UC is also at most of the meetings and outings and functions very well as "ASM" and doesn't interfere or pull rank. He's WB trained and former CC. Our DC is at many of the meetings and will be a chaperone/"ASM" on our summer camp outing this year. He's also the CM of our feeder pack and parent of one of our boys. I'm an ASM in one unit and an Venturing Advisor in another. I think the SM is the only one with one responsibility in our "group". I think it's a waste of scouting talent to be: Cub Basics trained Webelos Outdoor trained SM Fund trained VAdvisor trained WB trained and then assigned only one responsibility. Of course I wouldn't recommend such things unless the individual was trained in each area and was able to quickly shift gears on the fly as necessary. If the individual has all this multiple training and "lords" it over others, pulls rank, and is basically a nuisance, then it would be better for them to simply stay home. Stosh

My suggestions and $1.00 will get you a cup of coffee in most small town cafes, but here's my take. You seem to have the background and training, along with the position and awareness to make some fundamental changes in your troop. 1) SM and ASM responsibilities do not get reassigned when there's an absence, nor does the SPL and ASPL. This is a problem of communication for both adult and leadership positions. Further training in this area is a must. 2) Responsibilities are not well defined. Committees should not be planning program, etc. as has been mentioned. Again, more training, defining, and everyone doing their own job would be an improvement. 3) You are in a quandry as to whether you wish to be a CC or an ASM. That is good! Keep the middle road because it gives you the appropriate insight to effect the needed changes. You see the whole picture from your current perspective, retain it and work on improving the dydnamics of the troop, i.e. boy-led, patrol focus, support from the PLC and adults for the patrol's program, etc. Use the committee to promote and provide support for boy-led and use your personal contacts with the boys to promote and provide guidance for the boys to do their respective jobs.

And when all else fails, one can give the appropriate salute according to the Flag Code of June 14, 1923. When a male is to salute a flag wearing civilian clothing he is to stand at attention. When a male is to salute a flag wearing civilian clothing and a hat, he is to stand at attention, remove the hat with the right hand and place the hat over their heart. When a male is to salute a flag wearing civilian clothing and a hat during incliment weather he is to stand at attention, lift his hat with his right hand and hold it over his head. When a female is to salute a flag wearing civilian clothing she is to stand at attention and place her right hand over her heart. When either male or female is to salute a flag wearing a military uniform they are to stand at attention and render a proper military salute. A scout uniform is no longer considered a military style uniform since the 1970's and therefore scouts should render the appropriate salute as if they are wearing civilian clothing. Any variations from the Flag Code of June 14, 1923 is purely the invention of personal imaginations and/or commonly held traditions that have nothing to do with the recognized protocol of the Flag Code of June 14, 1923. While it has become popular to "make up rules as you go along", it is rather fruitless to question their validity when they are not adherent to the Flag Code of June 14, 1923. My crew (male) uses military uniforms and render appropriate military salutes in spite of BSA policy/protocol against it. The females of the crew, depending on their particular dress at the moment will normally not render any recognition of the flag at all. When only a partial uniform is worn at any particular time, using a valid US flag, a civilian salute (at attention or hat over the heart) is rendered. Stosh

It's always been my personal opinion that if someone wishes to beat met to the ground and tear off my unauthorized patches, they can do so. So far I haven't met any scouters that feel all that strongly about it, but I have found many opportunities to have some great dialog about patches and uniforms when courteously confronted. Stosh

1) Advancement - Boys can advance without knowing it. If all your programs for the boys involve advancement and are viewed by the boys more as a game than a requirement, you can still mark off the skill accomplishment when fulfilled. When I was working with the Webelos boys a few years back, everything we did was fun and games, yet they all centered themselves around the pins and advancement. The only problem I ever encountered was one pack meeting when they were handing out pins the CM asked the boy what he had done to earn the pin. The boy genuinely didn't know. However, the CM then asked what he had done since the last pack meeting and it became obvious the activities he had done all centered around the pin he was receiving. 2) Age/Responsibility/Respect - Find an ASM duty that for the time being isn't directly involved with the boys, i.e. advancment, summer camp planning, etc. for example This way you will have less contact with the boys and will be able to adjust to your new responsibilities as ASM and have some time to evaluate, learn and develop as an adult leader. Boys understand how these things work and like the new boys and their TG, maybe you need to view yourself as a TG to the youth leadership. They will quickly see that you are "not one of them" but you're there on a different level to help them instead. 3) Hang out with the adults. You shouldn't have to "go to one of the older adults", you are now running with the big dogs, act like one. If the adults are hanging back from the pack, you hang back. The adults hang together, you need to hang with them now. If the boys are throwing stuff at you and you're sitting with the adults, someone else will put an end to it and you won't need to even respond. The adults know what's going on and they will continue to work with you as you develop. It won't take long for the boys to figure out you are no longer "one of them" if you don't act like them. You aren't a peer, you are now a mentor. The quicker you establish that, the happier everyone will be. Stosh(This message has been edited by jblake47)

Some patrol outings may have only 2-3 boys and don't need adults to go along. If you have only 3-4 boys that want to go and can back it up with 2 leaders, go for it. I would think the absolute minimum would be 2 boys and 2 leaders. That's covers the buddy boat and hiking minimums as well as GTSS. The "smallest" trip I ever made was 3 boys and 2 adults to the Boundary Waters, we had a blast. Small numbers don't mean less fun, and at times can make for better focused events. As far as word of mouth advertising is concerned I had a non-Scout youth group "boycot" one of my events (Church group) and a parent called up during the week before I was going to leave and asked if their son could still go. The boy and I went, had a great time, and the following year we had to rent a 66 passenger school bus to get everyone to the event. Our troop used to be 12 - 14 active scouts and that meant that maybe 5-8 would go on an event. I always enjoyed the smaller groups and now that we've grown, we have 25-30 active scouts and it's a lot more work/supervision/education involved and although I still totally enjoy it, it is a lot more "work". Count your blessings, find another adult, and go and have a great outing with the few boys that showed. Stosh

I wear my WB patrol patch on my uniform. My SM wears his WB patrol patch on his uniform My CC wears his WB patrol patch on his uniform Mine is different than the SM and CC. When the boys ask why it's not the same as the other "adults" I tell them the story and why it's important to have a reference point of being part of a group and yet being an individual. Stosh Some of the boys picked up on this. My Raven Patrol (Honor patrol) have a flag with the raven on it, but on their uniforms they all wear a older black/red patrol patch to indicate their individuality. "Moose" is the SPL and "Squirrel" is the ASPL "Beaver" who just was invited in is the Troop Guide for our Beaver Patrol and the boys thought that was appropriate. The boys all wear the blue/tan beaver patrol patch and the TG wears the red/black beaver, but is recognized without a doubt as a Raven While totally inappropriate, the boys are really liking it and when a patch gets given, it is usually sewn on by the next meeting (which is usually faster than rank advancement, POR patches, or merit badges). I'm with Bubbabear, if it isn't really hurting anything and it doesn't threaten the program, why not?

We were informed a Venture uniform can be anything we wish it to be in a crew. Therefore our crew's uniform has nothing related to BSA, but they are all the same. If one is going to implement parts of BSA official uniforms, it should be all or nothing. Stosh

If you wish to print multiple tabs in Excel, when the print screen comes up, check the box to print whole workbook. TroopMaster scouting advancement has a calendar feature that will print your activities you enter in and keep track of. We also use Yahoo Groups for our web-site and that has a nice calendar that can be viewed on-line and/or printed out as needed. Stosh

Weapon", "firearm", "gun"? What's the diff? The purpose of that mechanical device is to kill, either animals or other people. Except when that weapon is used to make dinner, whittle a stick, competition shooting, bi-athelon, etc. As far as killing animals, there are far more animals killed by other means than killed with a weapon, firearm, or gun. Every law enforcement officer will also tell you that a weapon, firearm, or gun he uses is not exclusively used for the purpose of killing, either animals or other people. After all, there are guns and ammunition that are used exclusively for shooting skeet, and military assault rifles that are made today that are used exclusively in reenacting which never fire live ammunition. While the puprose of fishing poles contribute to the capture and death of animals, somehow I just can't wrap my mind around them as being a weapon. Harpoons, maybe... Hmmmm, a military bayonet is a mechanical device use to kill other people, and yet any kid in the country can own one. Somehow, I have a difficult type trying to define absolutes in light of this grey-area discussion. Stosh

Gotta love it. Totin' Chit training is a form of weapons training. To say a knife and/or ax is not a potential weapon isn't fooling anyone. Bow and Arrow are weapons as are walking sticks and medium sized rocks, small rocks in a sling-shot. A well trained martial arts participcant knows his/her body can be used as a weapon. Weapon is not a word to describe a gun, revolver, or any other shooting device, it refers to the use of firearms, projectiles, or hand held blades or clubs. A weapon is used to offend and defend. I can threaten someone with an ax and defend myself with a knife. However, I do not use a weapon to cut up potatoes in the kitchen or to make kindling for the fire. When I target practice or plink I shoot a handgun, but I use a weapon to defend my home. If we are training boys to offend and defend, we can call it a weapon, if we are teaching them to shoot guns and bows, then we call it guns and bows because we are not training them to be used as weapons. Stosh

Last weekend I had a 4 hour drive to the river we were going to canoe on. In the vehicle I drove there were 3 boys and one other adult. The adult sat in the middle row of seats with a boy, another was in the far back and one rode "shotgun". The adult's two sons rode in another vehicle. The boy way in the back drew in his sketch book the entire trip up and back, taking the time to come up and show me his drawings when we made our rest stops. The boy in the middle row read a book. And the scout in the front seat chatted with me all the way up and back. He did at one point ask me if I enjoyed listening to the radio while driving. I told him it's always playing when I'm driving alone. He asked why I didn't have it playing on that trip and I said, "Lead by example." Our policy is no electronic devices. A car radio counts as such. Our conversation continued on without any interruption for the rest of the trip. The other adult spent his time watching the scenery go by, something he didn't get to do very often when he had to drive the family. While it did very little to encourage getting to know each other, everyone seemed satisfied with the lack of electronic stimulus. With a background in counseling and psychology, one must always remember that boredom is not a result of lack of stimulus, but more a factor that the individual cannot entertain themselves. One of my psych professors once told me that if a person can't sit in a dark closet for two hours without being bored, they will in fact be boring to other people as well. We are required to develop not only the physical and moral development of these boys, but also the mental alertness that is often dulled with outside electronic stimulus. Stosh

Adventure is an attitude. If you as an adult are not excited about this "adventure" then this "backpacking hike into the unknown" is just going to be another "walk through the park." My Webelos took major adventure hikes. They were all expected to have canteen and backpack. The pack was filled with first aid kit, rain gear, messkit, etc. etc. They carried a ziplock with hobo dinner fixin's and another with 6-8 charcoal briquets. We took a hike in the local nature preserve, looked for hiking sticks, identified plants and animals, and then (with permission) made a fire, and cooked our hobo dinners in the great outdoors. All this adventure was accomplished within the city limits of our local area and we were never more than a mile from the parking lot of the preserve. One of the boys came back to me many years later and razzed me about how I had conned them into thinking this was a high adventure trip when it really wasn't. He also admitted it wasn't until he went to Philmont that the feeling of excitement he had as a Webelos returned. Stosh

Boys invited into the honor patrol accept membership voluntarily. One does not need to be in that patrol to do any and all things in scouting, yet those who do join are always in full uniform for all occasions except swimming. No adult madantes it, no surprise unform inspections enforces it, it just is expected. The "rule" for the troop is, if you don't have a scout t-shirt, you must wear the Class-A, but can take the neckerchief off. The honor patrol never bring scout t-shirts to an event and they prefer to wear their neckerchief. How did this new "rule" come about? At an event everyone was dumping their class-A's once they reached the camp. The newly formed honor patrol PL came over to me (their advisor) and asked if they should switch to "class-b's". The advisor, (standing there in class-A's and who has worn a scout t-shirt only once at Philmont), answered, "Lead by example." Thus a new "tradition" was established. No one is forcing this new policy except the boys of the honor patrol and then only on their own members. The NBP has now adopted this new policy and the 2nd Year Patrol has become more aware of it and the older boy patrol still has their uniforms off in record time after the salute is dropped after closing flag ceremony. It has taken the honor patrol but a few short months to compete and win against the older scouts in terms of respect and prestige in the troop. Do scouts notice? Sure they do. The ASM who always wears a full Class-A uniform for all activities, all the time, (hat, shirt, neckerchief, belt, pants and socks), rolled his canoe for the first time in 15 years at the annual white-water canoe outing this past weekend. There were a lot of surprised faces when that same person showed up for dinner in a dry full Class-A uniform for supper that night. :^) "Be prepared" and "Lead by example". It's really not all that difficult to live by those principles. Stosh

While the scouts have a bugler in their POR and a bugling merit badge, the notes played by the bugler have to be understood by the listener. The use of the bugle is to communicate a message over a long distance. If one does not understand the message, it surely is useless. Each of the bugle calls expects a certain response, if the scouts in your troop don't know the bugle "calls" (the word is very appropriate) then at least teach them so they know what is expected of them. In my unit we have only functional buglers. If they aren't functional, they don't play. Stosh

Why would you want to play "get-out-of-bed-for-roll-call" bugle call for a flag raising? If one were to be more appropriate, maybe playing "To the Color" just prior to raising it might work.