oldsm

Both of my sons are going as staff members -- part of TOAP (The Outdoor Adventure Place), demonstrating cooking. I'm told that they're all staying in dorms. Cushy camping!

Time for an update. It's a long story, but I'll give you the Reader's Digest version. We did let the boys go on their own. They whittled down 50 miles on the AT to 30 miles. They planned a detailed itinerary, purchased dehydrated food, had water purification equipment, an emergency plan, thorough maps, etc. They had chosen some of the most difficult terrain on the AT (the Mahoosic Range in ME/NH - they wanted to do Mahossic Notch, which is about 1 mile of bouldering). They started out in great spirits in the rain(!), immediately having to ford a swollen stream, then head uphill to where I could no longer see them. They found that the section of trail they'd chosen was more difficult than they had anticipated. One boy started with "treated" blisters that had developed during an athletic camp the week before. Two others were totally exhausted by the time they reached their first shelter (4 miles of up and down with about 2000' of vertical gain that took almost 6 hours -- and that was to be a short day!). They wisely determined that they had bitten off more than they could chew and decided to shorten the trek (there was no way they were going to make it to the planned pickup point by the appointed day). Since there was cell phone coverage, they called with their revised plan. They spent 2 nights at that shelter, and on the 3rd day hiked another, easier 6 miles to the next crossroad where I picked them up (in the rain, again!). Total distance: 10 miles. This was not a failure! The boys learned more on this shortened trek than they would have from listening to adults. To wit: 1. They met with some other AT hikders (both thru- and section-hikers) and learned some valuable tips. Such as not taking Backpacker Pantry meals (the hikers they met exist mostly on ramen noodles, foil-packed tuna or chicken, peanut butter snack crackers, etc.) - saves weight and money. Ditch the tent on the AT: take a tarp for emergency shelter and use the lean-tos. Just for starters. 2. Be sure to do conditioning hikes close to the big hike. I'd tried to get them to do a couple before going, but they were sure that they were ready - after all, they'd done AT sections before (easier ones). Conditioning doesn't last over several months - you have to keep at it. 3. Really examine the topgraphy on the maps, read the trail guides, and check out blogs and other online resources when planning the trek. I think they overestimated their abilities and underestimated the difficulty of the section they chose. 4. Lighten, lighten, lighten. They knew this, but didn't pay enough attention to their own knowledge and experience. 5. Backpacking MB doesn't require the 30-mile hike to be difficult - just 30 miles. In spite of not achieving their original goal, the boys are not discouraged. They're planning to do some conditioning hikes this summer and try again (on an easier route) over Labor Day weekend. Mahoosic Notch will wait for another time; it's now a distant objective. I'm certain that all the parents are behind them. The boys impressed the other AT hikers at the shelter by showing them how to start a good fire (in an established fire ring) when everything was soaking wet ("Now there's some real *#&$* Boy Scouts"). Our guys came out of this happy, wiser, and aware of what they need to do in order to make the next attempt successful. No one was hurt, no untoward incidents with strangers or animals (they did see some moose). The cost besides the food that they ate (some is left for future treks) was two 600-mile round-trip drives to Maine for me. Even at $3.00 a gallon and a very tired butt (mine), it was a small price to pay to give these boys the experience they had and the knowledge that they gained. For 4 boys: Cost of food: $200 (including meals en route) Cost of transportation: $225 (plus the tired butt) Cost of the experience: PRICELESS Incidentally, regarding the G2SS issues, I've been reminded by people wiser than I that the operative word is GUIDE. If an activity isn't expressly prohibited ("may not"), or a requirement isn't stated as a "must", then the G2SS is advisory ("should"). Good advice, to be sure, but not the final dictum. In this case, the G2SS was considered for guidance, and no hard-and-fast rules were violated -- which I think is the way the G2SS should be used. I just wanted to share the results of the trek to provide closure to this thread and thank everyone who posted previously. It's a good thing I don't write novels!

Not sure about the elitism part, but I've had a couple of WBers counsel me NOT to go to WB. The reason? "It's just a rehash of the same stuff you've gotten in all the corporate leadership training seminars you've been to. Save your $200." Not sure if this was the "old" or the "new" course. But the comments and $$$ and time out of a busy schedule (1.6 jobs, scouts local and district, and family) make me wonder why I should. If BSA thinks that WB is so vitally important, why not make it free of charge?

I think most of us have run into problems with Council records, and you're correct that dates don't matter until a boy comes up for Eagle. I've gotten into the habit of requesting ScoutNet printouts for each of my boys once they reach Star. I compare the printouts against our troop records (Troopmaster and boys books) and our copies of advancement reports. I've found some real doozies - one can only imagine where Council got some of their dates. Once I provide supporting documentation (copies of the advancement reports previously submitted), my council has been good about correcting their records without question. Extra work for me, but worth it in the long run.

Nothing would make me happier than to leave the parents out of it. Unfortunately, there will probably be some blow-back. They tend to be a bit over-protective IMO. Mama's always waiting at the end of the meeting to get her boy out of there as quickly as possible.

I am starting to realize that I have a problem with my SPL and I'm not sure how to deal with it. Here goes. SPL, a Life scout, was elected in October for a 1-year term. His dad, an ASM with who we have had some problems (now basically inactive), was certain that his son would make the best SPL the troop had ever had. Dad has a very strong personality, son is quite meek and is certainly not a "take charge" fellow. I have tried to counsel with the SPL via phone and at meetings. SPL tends to provide the answers he thinks adults want to hear. Also does not follow through well on things he commits to do. Recently, he told his ASPL (a very quiet boy) on 1-hour notice that the ASPL had to run the PLC. The ASPL can do well given advance notice, but does not like things sprung on him at the last minute. I helped him through the PLC and thought he did quite well. Last night, my son gave me a message that he'd spoken with the SPL, who told him that he would not be present at the COH tomorrow evening - no explanation. I later called the SPL to get the order of speakers for the printed program. SPL said he didn't have it - that the ASPL and/or one PL did. I expressed surprise that he didn't have it as SPL, then said "see you on Tuesday". He mumbled an OK. He had plenty of opportunity to let me know he wouldn't be there, but gave no indication one way or the other, and I didn't specifically ask. Found out from the PL that the SPL had instructed the boys not to discuss the annual planning conference at the COH. No one knows why. I told the PL to bring it up anyway - it's important for parents to know about and for the boys to be reminded about. The SPL is being pushed by his parents (mostly his mom, I think) to get his Eagle project done. She seems to think it's a slam-dunk process, but the boy hasn't finished his proposal yet - no way it's going to be done next weekend. They've also been rather open about wanting him to "get his Eagle so he doesn't have to be bothered with scouts". SPL is only 15 and has no outside activities other than piano lessons and scouts. Usually makes high honors. No sports, no extracurricular activities, no fumes. Only child. Recently agreed to help with a student-run musical at school, but parents decided he didn't have time. Is a member of the OA in name only. The issues I'm identifying have to do with the SPL's leadership ability and sense of loyalty to his troop members. He will not "take charge" on outings, waiting for an adult to step in at the last minute to tell him what to do. Never shows up early to set a leadership example for the other boys. He has been to troop-based JLT 2x and council-based JLT camp. He never told me until the summer camp sign-up deadline that he wasn't going to camp with us this summer - and wasn't going to tell me until I asked where his paperwork was. Seems he decided to go to a sailing camp instead (I know he could have done that any number of other weeks - every summer his parents, who both work, are looking for relatives and camps to keep him occupied and not home alone). He had kind of a sheepish grin on his face when he finally told me. Should I be concerned about his leadership or lack thereof and how it affects the troop? Hold "early" elections? What about Scout Spirit and eventual recommendation for an Eagle BOR? It will be interesting to see what happens at the COH tomorrow if he doesn't show - I'm pretty certain he has not alerted his ASPL. SPL is basically a good kid - never gets into trouble, one my son's best friends, but I find his attitude wanting. I know this is long, but I'm seeing a persistent pattern. Comments and suggestions?

Good point about B-flat vs C. As far as I know, BSA does not print bugle calls in B-flat. This should not be (B?) a show-stopper. Most listeners will have no idea what key a call is played in unless they have perfect pitch (most people don't). One alternative is to transpose the calls. Maybe the MB Counselor could do this as a service to the scout. Or maybe a scout would like to try his hand at transposing (no, don't add it as a requirement!). The easiest way is just to let him play the calls at whatever "natural" pitch his instrument has. We're only talking a 1/2 step difference. The important thing is that he play them "open keyed" (without pressing any valves), letting the embouchure and natural overtones do the work. Of course, the MB book does not say whether the (approved) trumpet has to be a C trumpet or they typical B-flat trumpet. Tune 'em up!

As I stated in an earlier post, "whether or not a flugelhorn is too mellow is largely a subjective matter." In my opinion a flugelhorn is at the edge of "acceptable". I would draw the line here, though, and NOT accept lower brass instruments. You say poTAYto, I say poTAHto...

The "trumpet" button on an organ? Thanks for the chuckle. No one has asked to do that yet, and I pity the first one who does (HA!). Actually, that wouldn't qualify for Requirement 1 "...demonstrate how the bugle makes sound..." or Requirement 6 "Serve as bugler in your troop for three months". Good luck backpacking your organ! Yeah, we can debate this forever: the letter of the law versus the spirit of the law. If we don't have room for the spirit part, then we don't need counselors with expertise - just exam proctors. Toot on.

Actually, a flugelhorn sounds more like a cornet than it does a trumpet. Even though the bugle has a brighter, "nice sharp" sound, a cornet is specifically acceptable for this MB. Whether or not a flugelhorn is too mellow is largely a subjective matter. The practical side of tone quality is that a brighter one will carry farther at a given volume than will a mellower tone. Since the flugelhorn is so closely related to the "approved" instruments, I feel that this is really a minor matter of interpretation. My job as a MB counselor is not to be a purist about bugling, but rather to help the boy gain an understanding of the instrument, technique, and possibly a desire to pursue it farther - at which point he may very well decide to invest in a real bugle. A Scout is Thrifty. That means, in part, that he doesn't run out and spend a bunch of money ($100 and up) for an instrument just so he can do a merit badge. By way of comparison, Requirement 1 of Music MB states: "Sing or play a simple song or hymn chosen by your counselor using good technique, phrasing, tone, rhythm, and dynamics. Read all the signs and terms of the score." Requirement 3d (a choice) refers to being part of a school band. Music MB badge does not state what instrument to use. I am a strong proponent of keyboard instruments (piano and organ), although I also play other instruments (winds and low brass). In my opinion Music MB is best done using a keyboard instrument; however, not every scout has a piano at home; therefore, I must adapt to whatever instrument the student has and can play, within reason (operative word). Maybe it's a saxophone, or a cello, or a bassoon. No, a drum set or slide whistle won't do. Bugling is one MB where I believe the counselor needs to apply his or her best judgment in allowing some variation in the instrument used. And I don't think that this is "changing" the requirements - the scout still has to do all of the requirements. Note, too, that the instrument list is shown as an explanatory "note" - an afterthought - not one of the base requirements; therefore, I see it more as an advisory element than a requirement. Let the batons fly!

The requirements for Bugling MB states that "A bugle, trumpet, or cornet may be used to meet these requirements." I think it is more likely that a scout will have a trumpet or (less likely) a cornet rather than a bugle. Bugles just aren't used in school bands, so they're not so readily available. I think the intent is to be able to use "modern" instruments that are similar in tone and pitch range to a bugle. Certainly either the trumpet or cornet can play the bugle calls without having to use any of the valves, which in my opinion, makes them valid stand-ins for the bugle. How many people have even heard of a flugelhorn? For those who haven't, here's one description: "Instrument scholar Anthony Baines describes it as a valve bugle which is related to both the key bugle (a precursor of the bass saxophone, which was replaced by the tuba in orchestras) and the signal horn (a bugle used as a signal in battle)." In case anyone is interested, here's a link for those who want to learn more: http://www.music.vt.edu/musicdictionary/textf/Flugelhorn.html The basic difference is that a flugelhorn has a mellower tone than the other instruments. Playing technique is similar. I would have no problem accepting a flugelhorn as a valid instrument. (Aside: I wonder if a rather "esoteric" instrument was even considered when the requirements were last written?) Perhaps an enterprising young musician could borrow one of the "official three" instruments for counseling purposes? If a scout played a lower brass instrument (horn, tuba, trombone, etc.), I don't think that would be appropriate. Others may disagree with me.

So... If we don't ask about a boy believing in God (or however we want to cage "religious beliefs"), what happens when he goes to fill out an Eagle Scout Rank Application and doesn't have a Religious reference to list?

Lisa'bob, I'm sorry you have so many adults going. To my way of thinking, that's WAY too many adults for only 34 scouts. I'd be curious to know how you will keep the adults from getting in the way of the scouts a) having a good time and b) letting their summer camp be as boy-run as possible. I know we can't keep parents away, but summer camp is supposed to be for the boys - not the adults - and I would make that patently clear to all parents. I'll probably be excoriated for my position, but in a council camp setting, I don't believe you need any more than 3 adults for this number of boys (unless you have a special-needs scout or some other specific requirement). Just my $.02.

In my troop the scout holds on to all funds. Developing the means of managing funds and accounting for them is part of the process of demonstrating the leadership required by an Eagle Scout Leadership Service Project. How he manages the funds is just one aspect of the project report. In my opinion, if a troop serves as the repository, it is depriving the scout of a significant portion of the opportunity to demonstrate leadership in his project, which is after all the primary purpose of the project. If a troop starts to handle the money, I can see where it could start to exert unwarranted influence on various aspects of a project. Hopefully, a candidate will have completed Personal Management merit badge before undertaking his Eagle project - the project is a great place to put into practice what he learns in the MB. If Eagle is supposed to represent the "cream of the crop" of scouts, then having the scout be totally responsible for his project heightens the value of Eagle.

My troop usually has only 2 adults at our council summer camp. Usually the SM (me) and an assistant SM. One year we had another assistant, but that was the exception. We usually have 15-22 boys. The camp runs such a good program that we find adults have very little to do! The boys enjoy independence (subject to the buddy rule), get to police themselves, assign their duties, keep on schedule, etc. I find that this affords great opportunities to do SM conferences, mediate the occasional disagreement that goes beyond what the boys can handle, get to know the boys' strengths, weaknesses, and personalities differently from what I could on a weekend trip -- and I get some R&R, too! Our council permits 2 adults to attend "free" for up to 20 scouts, with another "free" for each additional 10 scouts. Anything over this involves a nominal payment to cover food. One year we had to switch the "2nd adult" midweek due to work requirements. We don't run out for "forgotten" things. We are supposed to Be Prepared. If we weren't, shame on us - we'll find a way to "make do". If the camp runs a good program and your boys have bought into the boy-run concept, I don't think you need to have a whole lot of adults hanging around or (worse) getting in the way of the boys having a great summer camp experience.

In my opinion, I believe that a scout needs to complete some combination of sub-requirements a, b, c, and d: a + b a + c a + d b + c b + d c + d Pick one combination. Each of the sub-requirements (a, b, c, d) must be fulfilled on its own merits. Visiting two state capitols does not satisfy the requirement. For one things, 2B says "visit YOUR state capitol" (emphasis mine). No one (I think) has dual state citizenship, so visiting two state capitols (trying to do requirment 2b twice) does not satisfy the requirement of doing TWO. Similarly, if you live in Maryland and want to visit both the state capitol in Annapolis and the nearby US capitol in Washington DC, you can do so, but that does not "count double" for the requirement, although there's nothing wrong with a scout going beyond the requirement if he wants to. In the same vein, requirement 2d says to research a (single) monument. Doing it twice does not satisfy the main requirement of 2. Likewise for 2c. If the state capitol happens to be on the National Register of Historic Places, I would count the visit for EITHER 2a OR 2b, but not both. I believe that the intent of the entire main requirement 2 is to help boys learn more about the breadth of meaning behind this thing we call US citizenship. Trying to repeat sub-requirements seems to me a bit like cheating on the requirement, which too many people are becoming adept at doing in life (adults as well as youth). I would not accept the scenario you describe toward the CIN merit badge. I do tend to spell it out when I first begin this badge with a boy and his buddy. It all falls into the spirit of the merit badge as well as personal honor in knowing that you have fully met the challenges of the merit badge.

Wow! What a fantastic idea. I've often been of the opinion that the 12th point of the Scout Law gets short shrift. And unfortunately I think that a great many of today's scouts' families are too often only peripherally involved in religion. While the article is necessarily superficial, I'm sure that many participants got a whole lot more out of it than what the writer conveyed. It certainly goes beyond the typical "Scouts Own" and saying grace before meals. I would really like to know how the heritage tour was put together. Details like logistics of identifying historic religious organizations, coordinating with the various venues, coordinating with the local BSA council, publicizing the event, working out transportation, etc. I'd love to see a blueprint for replicating this in locales all over the US. Kudos to those who had the foresight to initiate this event.

My council does a war dance (figuratively speaking) if we don't have a tour permit turned in 2 weeks ahead of time. So we require permission slips at least 2 weeks ahead so that we have accurate numbers for the tour permit. In reality, there are always last-minute changes. We have to recognize that we're competing with school activities, organized sports, family birthdays, illnesses, emergencies real and imagined, and shifting priorities. There will always be a couple of last-minute "cans" and an occasional "can't". We generally try to accommodate everyone to the best of our ability. Most of the time the boys don't do food shopping until the night before, so that's not a problem. Still, it is easy to let too much happen at the last minute. It's difficult to get boys AND PARENTS used to committing in advance (even though the dates are on our annual calendar that everyone has). It has a lot to do with family priorities. I do like the approach in eaglebeader's troop.

I think that every boy is going to learn from multiple approaches. The coin cup has its place. I'd bet that there are other "incentives" in place to encourage proper decisions. Maybe the boy wants to save his quarter; what's wrong with that? If he "saves" enough quarters, he just might get out of the habit of cursing. A lot of ethical choices are not conscious ones. Over time, we have all assimilated "correct" behavior into our psyches so that we automatically make correct choices without even thinking about it. I also suspect that most of us as adults really have no clear knowledge of exactly how WE learned what we know. We may have ideas about it, but most people don't remember all of the mundane actions and incidents of our childhoods that surely influenced our characters. So, the coin cup has its place. As do other approaches. Who knows, if a boy is funding his summer camp through the coin cup, that should prompt a whole bunch of "other" opportunities to help him make good choices. Eventually, he might get to the point of making the cognitive choice "I want to keep a clean mouth and not offend others". As I stated before, there is no single correct method of teaching values. If the coin cup works for you, fine. If you don't like it, use some other method. But let's not question the motives or techniques people use just because we disagree with them (the obvious exceptions being matters of safety or BSA policy, of course.) Your mileage may vary.

I sense that we're almost choosing up sides on how to deal with issues of discipline in a troop, whether "boy run", "adult run", or "adult guided". Please, let's not forget the GUIDE part. I'm nodding at some of the suggestions, and shaking my head at others. I believe that there is no single correct way to deal with matters of cursing, losing things, misusing tools, respecting others, and just about every value that we are trying to instill in our scouts. While some people might consider singing a silly song to be demeaning, my troop has found that a little embarrassment works. Hazing? I don't think it is. In fact, when a scout starts to feel uneasy by being expected to sing, another scout will almost always spontaneously jump into the circle and say "Come on, I'll do it with you." That's scout spirit in my book. Cutting a corner off a card? It works for us (only had to cut off 2 corners in several years)! Every one of us is human, and we all have our own experiences and set of values. We have all made some of the same mistakes. Some of us have yet to actually experience some situations, so we don't really know how we will respond, theories aside. Every boy is different. So is every troop. So is every SPL. Maybe a strong SPL can handle discipline, but a weaker SPL is going to need more support from his adult leaders. A case in point: last night, the troop was gathered for instruction by one of the senior boys when another older boy started acting up, soon encouraging a number of younger scouts to follow suit. The SPL was doing nothing to remedy the situation; the instructor tried, but was ineffective. Finally another older scout (a former SPL) stood up and quite eloquently addressed the problem, leaning on respect, ability to learn, loyalty to the troop, etc. It worked for everyone except the instigator, who started back-talking and making a scene. At that point, I calmly removed the boy and had a next-room conference with him and another adult. The boy spent the rest of the meeting listening from the other end of the room without further incident. The former SPL's message to the boys was so well done that I deferred my prepared SM Minute, pointing out that they'd already heard a "minute" from their former SPL, and encouraged them to reflect on that message and the evening. Every situation that arises is different. There may be similarities to other situations, but there will always be minor differences that, in conjunction with our own moods, experiences, and foibles as adults, and the changing dynamics of our troops, will cause us to make different judgements. Not only is this a part of human nature, but I believe it is the only fair way to set a model for boys to follow. Absolute consistency is a myth. Integrity is key. What works for me might not work for you. Maybe I've tried what you're suggesting and found that it didn't work in my situation. I guess what I would like to read is more examples of what has worked, rather than what can appear to be second-guessing of another person's approach. But then, maybe I'm just in a bad mood. I hope no one takes offense, because none is intended. Let the dialogue continue.

My council gives free badges of rank for 1 year based on a total unit FOS formula. It's the total dollars contributed in each unit equivalent to about 70% (I think) of families giving the "suggested" donation that they would ordinarily make to acquire a special FOS council strip. Some families contribute the recommended amount, some less, quite a few significantly more. In my unit, this simple incentive made a sizeable increase in FOS contributions. It think it's good for the Council and it's good for the unit. There's no limit to the number of rank advancements. This does not apply to merit badges, CS activity badges (just wolf, bear, webelos, AOL). My council hasn't attached popcorn, rechartering, etc., onto it - I think that would discourage FOS participation from the parents.

Thanks, LongHaul. What you write makes sense, but does not address one of the central issues: the counselors involved are already registered. One through a local unit, one through the local council (this one is also dual-registered with a local unit). The non-registered counselors aren't a big issue - I guess I was just trying to present that perspective, too. As far as what is the "most effective" way to re-register counselors, I like the way ljnrsu's council handles it. It's easier for counselors, fewer 5-page application forms that BSA has to pay for, less waste (a scout is thrifty), and I would bet less work for all concerned. Now, where is the National policy?

ljnrsu, that sounds reasonable. Do I understand correctly that your MB counselors do not have to fill out another Adult Application every year - just respond to the letter? What forms of response are accepted? Phone call? Email? IM? Written (snail-mail) response? I'm really curious how this entire process can be simplified for everyone while maintaining safety for the scouts. Does anyone know if National has a policy on this?

I think most of the objection comes from people who are already registered scouters. I can understand the thinking that, since they're already registered with the council, they shouldn't have to register separately with the district in order to be a MB counselor. After all, it's the same program, and the "higher" (council) entity already has all their information and permits them to re-register every year without a new app. So why can't the district accept council's records as far as being a "safe" person to counsel?

IMO, having the SPL and/or the PLC address the issue with the other boys could go a long way toward resolving an issue, with a couple of "ifs". IF the PLC/SPL is willing to seriously consider the matter and discuss it with adults, this could be more powerful than having the SM address it with the troop. However, the adult leadership must have frank discussion with the PLC/SPL to convey what the norms of acceptable language for the unit. It also goes nicely with the "boy run - adult guided" philosophy. ALSO IF the PLC/SPL is willing to do more than give "lip service" to dealing with the matter. It's one thing to make an announcement/prounouncement that "language such as [insert curse words here] isn't acceptable". It is quite another thing to be vigilant about enforcement, especially if the chief enforcer is also one of the chief violators. It could, though, be an opportunity for personal growth... Just my $.02.