Stosh

We've fought this battle for the entire 15 years I have been with the Troop as ASM. We call them "Mothers". We go over and take equipment out of their hands and hand it to the nearest scout. We bring chairs for them to sit in and then gently insist they sit in them, and recently we have been training our youth to use the phrase, "With all due respect Mr./Mrs. _________, I believe this is my job, may I have the opportunity to do it?" The real test of this is when the SPL says that to the SM. EVERY adult that comes into our troop as a leader or chaperone for the weekend get's a heads-up on this. It isn't easy, especially after 15 years I still catch myself and have to back off. We have adopted the policy that the best place for adult scouters to lead from is around the fire talking to each other. Stosh

If the boys are preferring the broad brimmed hats, why not go with the BSA brimmed hats like the Expedition ($30+), Stetson ($50+) Rover ($40+) or Campaign ($80+) styles? They can be kinda pricy, but the Campaign style can be gotten in knock-off for less than $30 if you hunt around. Put the BSA band on it and you're good to go. As long as the headgear is similar, it is uniform. If BSA will accept a baseball style with Troop design on it, they surely can't complain about a Campaign hat knock off at $30 for the boys. Put the 1" First Class medallion on it and you're all set to go with a hat that fits in with what your boys are willing to wear. As far as wear an tear on these hats, I've got an Expedition style hat that has been rained on, snowed on, Philmont branded, sun-faded, crammed in a pack, hat that I wear all the time. It looks nice and vintage, but there's no holes rips or tears, and is just as functional as the day I first bought it 9 years ago. Sentimentality has kept me from taking anyone up on the offer to purchase it. If a boy purchases one at age 11 and wears it until he's 18, that's seven years or about $5/year investment in good quality headwear. Put this up against the $12+ baseball style hat the boys are only wearing for a year. These hats are also condusive to feathers, pins, bands, etc. to make them unique between patrols within the troop.

My troop has no official headgear. I do have one patrol that has chosen to have it's own headgear. It is a combination of both official and non-scouting items to make it unique. The option is pricy ($50.00), but not as pricy as the BSA campaign hat. We started out with the basic expedition wool felt hat. To that we added the shiny brass Boy Scout First Class 1" medallion for the members of the patrol. This is not the normal pewter circle medallion that normally is ordered for the hat. The PL is also the SPL of the troop and instead of the First Class 1" medallion, he has the old enamel SPL pin from the 1940's. The APL is also the ASPL and his hat has the ASPL enamel pin from the 1940's. Those are the official scout parts of the hat. From that start we add hat cords similar to those used by Civil War reenactors. A red hat cord (Artillery) for the SPL/PL and yellow hat cord (Cavalry) for the ASPL/APL. The other members of the patrol have the green/tan cord (Hospital Steward). The last piece are the brass numerals used by Civil War reenactors, the troop number just below the 1" medallion. They are unique among the boys of the council and even if another scout has the expedition hat, the "extras" make them unique enough to identfy them from a distance. The only other thing unique about the hat is how they are acquired. The boy must pay for the hat on his own. He is not allowed to borrow or abtain money from their parents, they have to earn it on their own.

There is a requirement for each rank that involves Scout Spirit. There are boys who simply don't advance because of this. I do think there are a lot of SM's out there that really don't take this requirement at it's face value and is basically a gimmie. As far as SM kicking a boy out? When one has to unarm one boy to reduce the threat to another, it's time to say good-bye. The SM might be seen as "kicking him out", but in fact, for the safety of the Troop, the SM is only protecting the others. The boy wielding the weapon kicked himself out. It's all part of the un-Politically Correct, avoid a law suit at all cost thinking that keeps leaders from teaching respect, leadership and ethical/moral decisions. Stosh

Since when is it the fault of the SM? When does the boy mature and take responsibility for himself? I've always believed that that is part of what scouting used to be. We've kicked kids out for theft, threatening other scouts with weapons, and lying. They know the rules from the beginning and pledge an oath on their honor to uphold it. We take seriously those words and those promises. Not everyone does and the decision to expell a youth isn't taken lightly. But it does happen. I have demoted youth in our venturing crew and the boy stepped up to the plate and earned back the respect of his peers. Stosh

Build a good program and the numbers will take care of themselves. Sometimes a crew that spends all of it's time recruiting will never have time left over to do their program. If you have 8 boys/girls that are interested, let them concentrate on the program and forget the recruiting. Once the program gets off the ground, others will find out about it an join up. There is nothing in the world more boring than sitting around thinking up ways to get other people interested in your boring recruiting program.

FYI "HANDBOOK FOR BOYS", copyright 1911, reprinted 1976 page 15, "The following laws which relate to the Boy Scouts of America, are the latest and most up to date. These laws a boy promises to obey when he takes his scout oath. 1. A scout is trustworthy. A scout's honor is to be trusted. If he were to violate his honor by telling a lie, or by cheating, or by not doing exactly a given task, when trusted on his honor, he may be directed to hand over his scout badge." It may no longer be part of the scouting program today, but it once was back when the Scout Law was a serious charge of honor, not just memorized words. Stosh

Ever notice how most of the discussion on Venturing revolves around numbers of units, memberships, quotas, and very little about quality of programming? Is a paper unit of 50 people more important or more significant that a solid well run unit of 8-10? Stosh

Ok, try this one on for size. I have been operational for 9 years. During that time no venturing commissioner (didn't know they existed) ever made contact with me. I've never met the DE in person, but have talked on the phone. My rechartering packet has always been available to be picked up at the scout office at my convenience. My SE and DE has been invited numerous times to come to one of our activities and have never showed up. Does this sound like a council that really takes Venturing serious? 30 years ago I was asked to work part time (work-study program) to form Explorer posts. I formed 43 of them over a 2 year period, carried the council 2 years in a row with their quotas and within 3 years after I left, all but 12 had fallen by the wayside. It doesn't take much, but it does take something. Stosh

And this dovetails into the point I was making... Cubbing may be an extension for Boy Scouting, BUT Venturing is not an extension of Boy Scouting. If all a venturing crew is going to do is the same old stuff the boys were leaving scouting for, it's going to fail! If the older boys won't stick around for scouting, why would they stick around for same old thing venturing? Don't people over 21 see this logic? Council wide venturing events are nothing more than glorified camporees. Maybe they're at the YMCA pool with pizza instead of a campground, but the same old, same old stuff is still there. I do believe the the Madison Scouts Drum and Bugle Corps is a venturing type unit that has been in existance since the mid 1960's. Like a Drum and Bugle Corps, my crew has only vague referencing with scouting type activities. We do camp outdoors. A few high adventure type venturing crews might be able to survive in a council, but not many. However, that seems to be the tried and true style most crews adopt and fail with. Stosh

You make the most important point in your post that answers all your questions. You identify all those things a venturing crew is not supposed to be but people try anyway and fail. The scouting program never defines what a crew could be, only what it should be. It's proposed as a one-size, fits-all unit that answers the needs only those those certain crews that seem to be failing right and left. The crews that seem to succeed are those that have a clear vision of what they want to do and then avoid all those distractions that seek to keep them from their vision. What happens if those distractions are the rules of Venturing? I've been chastized for "breaking the rules" and often times, justly so. We have paper officers and go through the motions for training, but what we do, we do well and retain our membership rather well. We have just rechartered the start of our 10th year. For a crew, that's a lot of track record. We have adult leaders that were once charter crew members. That speaks well of our ability to retain members. We have "venturing" members that are too young for our crew, so they are registered boy scouts so they can hang with the high school and college aged youth of the crew. When we accept as normal - early high school youth that won't hang around later high school youth, why has it seems to have it work differently for us? Sometimes it pays not to make up too many rules, it may stifle that which will work in some other cases. And expecially don't make up a bunch of adult expectations that the youth don't want! I'm not saying we have the end all to be all. What I'm saying is: keep trying different things until you hit on the right combination for your youth in your place. Be flexible and listen carefully to the youth. They'll tell you what you need to hear. Don't offer suggestions for them just because the BSA said that's the way you have to do it. It's like an all venturing council activity. When they ask why my youth never participate I tell them my youth have no interest in anything other than what their crew does. Does that bode well for council activities relative to our crew? Nope. Does it bode well for our crew to focus on that which the crew enjoys? Yep. I'm not suggesting at any point you compromise any of the scouting principles, ideals or objectives. But within the scope of the scouting program, you ought to be able to think outside the box well enough to answer the needs of the youth in your area. We thought so far outside the box when we first formed, our council was contacting national every other week to make sure what we were doing would be ok with the powers at the top. So often we as adults worry about numbers, advancement, accolades and recognition that often times the kids don't need or even want. Maybe all they want is an adult that will spend time with them and listen to their hopes and dreams. Stosh

How about an iPod Crew? How about an XBox Crew? How about a cell phone Crew? How about a gamer Crew? Know your audience and remember not everyone is ever going to be a candidate for a legitimate scout group, whether it be cubbing, boy or venturing. Help the few that you could possibly help and don't worry about the rest. Stosh

I had an interesting experience last night. Normally I attend roundtable in the district where I am an assistant scoutmaster. For a change up, I went to another district roundtable for the first time where I'm a venturing advisor. They wanted me to sign in but only had signup sheets for cubbing and scouting. When I said I was venturing, they continued to ask me whether that was under the cubbing program or the boy scouting program. I said it was under a program of it's own. They had no idea what I was talking about. We've come a long way baby!

As I said before the key to this program, just like any other, is finding the right combinations for the people at hand. If everyone is just going to lock-step into an established program and make all the members conform to it's principles and expectations, you are going to lose members when they figure out it's going nowhere. On the other hand, when the program becomes a catalyst for opportunities, is flexible enough to accomodate new ideas and challenges, then maybe you've hit upon something worthwhile and the kids will stick around. If, like a scout troop, you wish your venturing crew to be youth led, and they don't want to bother with officers, and you insist they have them and they function at every meeting as such, who in their right mind is going to want to do a good job? You can't force a "program" down someone's throat. So, you go through the motions, smile nicely when asked, and then do what the youth decide as long as it's getting the job done properly. We have a different person "running the show" at each meeting. This way all learn the skills of the hobby and develop leadership along the way. What if our boys are not interested in being rangers? Do I insist they go through the motions of trying? What if they are not interested in doing council activities with other crews. Do I insist they go? Since 1998 when he formed, I have never had a disciplinary problem of any sort and I have had youth involved that were on the verge of flunking school, ADD/ADHD and getting in trouble with the courts. The challenge is not to do what I do, but to figure out what to do with the youth you have in your area. If that means turning a deaf ear to BSA program expectations to insure youth ownership in a quality unit that the youth are excited about. Then go for it. If it is not going to harm anyone, if it upholds the integrity of the scouting principles, if it develops leadership amongst the youth, then who on the council level is ever going to stop you? When the parents stop thanking me for what I do, when the kids no longer come to the events, or when the council get's tired of riding my butt about keeping going, then I'll hang it up. Stosh

Like most paper units out there, we cover the bases. Having officers to make quality unit only involves a vote. That takes up about 5 minutes once a year. Having trained officers only means one shows up for the training. Those that get the training are those who were voted into positions because they could get the time off for the training. Functioning on the other hand is a totally different animal. As far as membership is concerned, our numbers remain small because normally our people age out and new boys come in on a pretty equal basis. I have 3 leaders that are charter member boys. Whereas most people have trouble retaining boys when they turn 16, we have them hanging around after they turn 21. As far as lying is concerned, feel free to have me removed from the scouting roster. It's a rather serious charge to wield against a fellow scouter. I would suggest a better approach next time. You don't have to quote the Quality Unit application form to me, the quality unit awards were suggested and encouraged by the council. Every year our DE does the paperwork and turns it in for us. I'll be sure to pass along your concern for his integrity. It is not something the crew seeks on it's own. I don't believe anyone even knows where the quality unit ribbons even are anymore. As far as longevity is concerned. As long as our approach is working, we'll keep with it, especially when we are the longest running Crew in the council and I'm the only Venturer Advisor who ever shows up for any council or district events. And I do believe that I'm one one of a few crews that span not only district boundaries, but also council and state boundaries. How many of your boys/girls can say they are willing to drive up to 100 miles to come to one of your meetings? As far as bragging is concerned, take my comments as only suggestions. I offered them as something for crews to consider, especially if their current program wasn't working. If my comments are not welcomed, then so be it and figure it out on your own. There are crews folding up all around, why should your crew be any different and when all is said and done, we'll be going strong.

LOL! My crew does about 95% drill and love it. My trooop did a little "drill" at summer camp and found the process very efficient for my leaders. When boys stand in patrols and with buddies in an organized manner, "roll" can be taken visually in a split second without having to count moving heads, and if someone is missing, their buddy should know where he is. Standing in a uniform position at flag ceremonies is also a little more efficient than single file, saluting the back of the head of the guy ahead of you. The efficiency of such things really makes life a lot easier if done right.

First of all I am an advisor for a Venturing Crew with a 8 year, quality unit every one, program. We have had NO officers, NO BSA program, NO rangers or rank advancement of any kind. We have $1,000+ in our treasury and our numbers remain low. The secret is to do what the crew was designed to do and let the youth run it. It's not an older boy scout program with ranks and offices unless that's what the youth want. Do what you do best and leave the rest alone.

We have found the following to be factors in our numbers: 1) Don't try and compete with other activities, you'll lose. 2) Don't try to accumulate numbers for the sake of numbers. 3) Focus on what you do best and forget the rest. 4) If you build a better mousetrap, they'll flock to your doors. 5) Keep expectations high, both for you and your scouts. 6) Recruiting should not be the main goal of your organization. 7) If the scouts are not having fun/learning/being challenged, talk with them, don't pull ideas out of the air.

I've been in your shoes and it's ain't pretty. First of all, it sounds as if you are not going to get any support from the parents. That is unfortunate. My first step in dealing with the problem was to address the issue to the parent and if they wished their child to continue in the den they would have to attend with them and assist in controling their behavior from disrupting the other scouts. With only speculation on my part, it would seem that the parents in your case are only using a respite opportunity to dump their kid onto someone else for a while. Not a good sign. If the parents won't assist, then the boy will need to find other avenues of socializing. One cannot ruin the program for 10 others just to do a parenting job on an individual. Unless you have a second adult in your den who will step up and watch this scout like a parent, then there's really not much one can do. If that sounds rather callous, then that's too bad because as I speak from experience, it will only get worse. As a scout leader who has had up to 6 boys at a time with ADD/ADHD, I can assure you I have tried just about everything and will as a last resort ask the boy to leave. I have worked side-by-side with parents to insure a good experience for all, but with no parental support, you are beating a dead horse. Stosh

I have seen a lot of crews come and go over the years. I don't know if what I do is anything special, but we're starting our 8th year this year. We have never been a large crew, 15 at the largest and 5 at the smallest. We often times have more adults that kids at events, and we have a like-minded CO. The crew is somewhat of an auxillary of the CO. The key? The program is the key, not the people. We have very few kids interested in our program because it is extremely specialized, but those we get are 110% dedicated to the group. Some of our charter members have aged out and are now staying on as adult leaders. Our turn-over is rather quick. If the person is not interested, they will drop out rather quickly, but if they get hooked, they are in it for the long run. The hobby is very regimented and we do not follow well the directives of the BSA Venturing program. We have by-laws, etc. but we don't have officers per se. Our senior most boy is a corporal. This style we have adopted won't work for everybody and I'm not promoting it as such. But what each crew has to do is find it's forte and go with it. If it has no core goal, it will flounder around for a while and then die off. People will drop out when their satisfaction isn't sustained. There's always something out there that will compete with the crew and unless the crew has more to offer than the alternatives. People will always vote with their feet. If you can't figure out what that core goal is for your group, or never had one to begin with, the only thing holding it together is the sheer will power of one or two adults. It just isn't going to sustain itself.

I have always wondered why everyone goes to such great lengths to make sure the brim on the campaign hat is flat. All historical evidence shows differently. I wear the campaign hat with curves and the expedition hat and love them both.

With the new youth leadership training routine, is there any way the youth can get "trained" without having to pay $200+ and take a week of camp to work through the curriculum? As a troop we used to take a weekend and go through the JLT material with our kids, but now it seems so expensive and complicated that none of our kids are interested in getting the training.

Do what you do best. My boy hasn't been in scouts for 10 years, but I'm still doing my scout thingy. If you feel the most comfortable on the Cub level, go back and enjoy yourself. Do not allow the Peter Principle to take over. If you work best and enjoy most Cubbing, then that's for you. I did my ticket on the Webelos transition. I worked the Webelos II program and worked with the SM of the Troop to help these boys make the transition. During my tenure of that time I had all AOL boys that all crossed over and about half went on to Eagle. Do what you do best and quit worrying about having to do something you really don't enjoy. Stosh C9W93

If national BSA were to see what my boys wear, they'd have a fit. As Civil War reenactors, if the military assault rifle-musket with blackpowder rolled in paper doesn't bring a gasp to the crowd, the 18" bayonet will. Then there's the variety of Bowie knives that are used for the rebel impression. We won't even go into the officer swords and sabers and side-arms that are worn by the kids.

This has become an interesting thread. Yet when it all boils down to the basic core of the discussion as to whether or not a sheath knife is too big, if a locking buck is too small, whether the axe should be worn on the belt, etc. etc. it is all irrelevant. If a boy is taught to respect a big/small/light/heavy knife and to use it correctly, what's the problem? If a boy is taught to respect a hand/three quarter/full axe and to use it correctly, what's the problem? What the tool is is a mere extension of what works for the person. How they use it determines it's importance. If I wish to carry a sheath knife with belt axe, I have to worry about the weight, not someone else. If I carry a small jackknife as well, then so be it. If I use any of them incorrectly I am a bad example to the boys and need to try a different avocation. On the other hand, does it make any difference what tool I use to teach responsibility and maturity when using sharp bladed tools of any sort? Stosh