Beavah

Yah, Kahuna, and Gephardt was wrong then, eh? I'm with Lisabob, eh? I just don't get da "You did it first! No, you did it first!" childishness. A bit like when a young scout comes across a piece of garbage in a campsite, and says "Well, I didn't leave it there." And then he leaves it there. Or worse, throws down his own piece of garbage and says "Well, somebody else did it first!" Just not good citizenship or ethics in my book. When you're an American, yeh clean up da mud that your neighbor slung around, because it makes the neighborhood better for everybody. Yeh don't sling more mud and say "Well, he did it first!". If all of us demanded better behavior from those of our own political persuasion/party, maybe we'd be hikin' through less mud, eh? Beavah

Yah, da one thing I dislike about da two party system is the primary system. Seems like da primary system in recent years has strongly tended to select from da extreme views crowd. So yeh either get a fellow like McCain who has to tack way to the right in order to win a primary (guaranteeing in the process that he can't win the general election), or yeh select someone who really is out on da edge like a John Kerry (guaranteeing in the process that he can't win da general election against someone who should have been voted out). Or, worst of all, yeh get a "dynasty" where an elder family member has enough party clout and connections to put his family out front (like GWB or Hillary). There's another effect I dislike, and that has to do with government handouts. Da two-party system seems to perpetuate da practice. Republicans guarantee farm subsidies (welfare for agrobusiness) to satisfy their rural constituents; Democrats guarantee da urban dole in a similar way. I think our bicameral, non-parliamentary system is enough to prevent da sort of gridlock and silliness that multiparty control generates in parliamentary democracies like Italy or Israel. I'd love to see a suburban moderates party, eh? Somethin' that could team up with da Democrats to defeat welfare farming, and team up with da Republicans to defeat wasteful urban handouts. Somethin' that would give Republicans an alternative when their party is gettin' daffy (like me), and Democrats an alternative when their party is runnin' amok... without having to completely hold their nose, eh? I think that would change da political landscape in nothin' but a good way. Beavah

Yah, I liked da president's speech. Say what yeh want about the man, he does give a good speech. If even one out of a thousand young people who heard it take da message to heart, it was a good day for the country. That havin' been said, government education always has that annoyin' twitch at the back of my brain, eh? Deliberately or inadvertently, there is a risk that it can bias its approach in ways that encourage youth to support da government in power. Especially if the government has been in power for a while, and had a hand in establishin' the curriculum and selectin' new hires. And we really do see some pretty odd behavior sometimes in public school leaders, eh? Right now, it's all fairly minor because so many states have local-control laws, with local school boards. But da trend toward more statewide control and nationwide testing/curriculum is a concern. What liberal folks out there are really comfortable with da statewide mandated curriculum in Texas, given some of the odd secessionist leanings of some of da Texas political establishment? I don't like to see political or cultural issues fought out in school curriculum. Just not da place for it. Yah, but there is a risk with government schools that they won't be a safe haven for different viewpoints, eh? I reckon dat's the underlyin' fear that the ridiculous folks on the right are tappin' into. So if we want to stop da ridiculousness, we should be cognizant of that risk and fear. Sayin' "take your kid to private school" is OK for da upper middle class and wealthy, eh? But with taxes supportin' something like $8K per pupil per year for government schooling, that's a lot for other families to try to provide for each child on top of their taxes and other expenses. Beavah

Yah, hmmm... I think it's right and proper for da President of the United States to address the nation's school children. Any president. Every president. I thought it was very telling how P.O.'d Rev. Jesse Jackson got over President Obama's lecturing to African American families about parental responsibility and personal responsibility. I believe Jackson said "I'd like to kick his a**". In many of his talks on that topic, President BHO sounds an awful lot like a traditional conservative. I think his message is a good one. Problem is da "right" and to a large extent the Republican Party has abandoned traditional conservative values, eh? Leastways, when they aren't waivin' em to raise money. I honestly don't recognize 'em anymore. Won't give 'em a dime. They've become the party of ugly anti-intellectualism. They'd rather see America fail than give up their narrow parochialism. As a long-time Republican supporter, I'm completely disgusted. I reckon President Obama is in a unique position to speak to urban minority kids, eh? That can be a powerful message to a group who really needs it. Seems like if yeh want to reduce da burdens of the welfare state, a president who talks personal effort and responsibility to those who are receivin' state support is the sort of thing any conservative should support. And so I support it. As for da medical stuff, it's true that Emergency Departments and ambulances get mis-used by the poor and mentally incompetent. And, quite frankly, by a lot of parents who bring kids in with sniffles. I don't think we ever want an ER to be turnin' someone away because of no proof of insurance, eh? That could be us, comin' in from a campout injury. And I know right now that a lot of scouts in our district and council are uninsured. Seems like da proper thing to do is fix the broken system so that we're providin' that basic care in clinics rather than emergency departments. Since we're payin' for it anyways, we might as well be more efficient about it. And, too, I reckon there's somethin' fundamentally wrong about a hard-workin' fellow being laid off, finding another job, and being denied insurance because of a pre-existing condition. Or a doc havin' to order lots of unnecessary tests to up his receivables and guard against run-away liability. Yah, there's a lot that could be better. Seems like we should work on that, together. Beavah

Yah, hmmmm.... Crossramwedge, are yeh by chance da parent of the SPL? There are a few troops out there that run things so da SPL is the leader and in charge of everything and all that. IMO they're usually not very successful. Good way to burn an SPL out and not let anyone else have a chance to learn and lead. So I think in some ways yeh are misunderstanding da role of an SPL. It's more of a coordination role than a be-king-and-run-things role, eh? In most active troops that use patrol method well, da patrol leaders are the real locus of practical authority, and the other PORs like Scribe are coordinated by the ASPL, not da SPL, and have considerable autonomy to boot. It's a team not a kingdom, eh? An SPL who expects to personally clear all decisions of his subordinates needs to have a SM do a real job of re-training and coachin'. That havin' been said, IMO a PL / Troop Guide for a New Scout Patrol has taken on one of the most important jobs in da troop, eh? If the young man is goin' to leave his post at a critical time like this (first campouts after summer camp), then I reckon it's his duty at least to make sure it's covered in his absence, or to resign the post and let the SPL assign a replacement TG. The lad can then continue his "Scoutmaster approved leadership project" without lettin' anyone else down. All this is just backroom jawin', though. Da SPL needs to ask for a SM Conference and share his feelings with his SM, so they can work 'em out together. Beavah

Yah, Sowell's an interestin' fellow, but he's also a strongly partisan fellow, eh? He's writin' a partisan think-tank piece here. An apologetic, if yeh will. Always good to read that stuff, eh? Learn the intellectual underpinning of one side of da conversation. Never good to read that stuff uncritically, or to only read that stuff. The crisis may have had a part of its origin in low income loans, eh? But yeh can't ignore da multiplying effect of the deregulation and insane leverage. Difference between ordinary foolishness and complete inanity and disaster. Nothing at all conservative about da stuff that Gramm and the neo-conservatives pushed as fiscal policy. Beavah

Troop has never gone there before but it is commonly known that many council Boy Scout troops have taken this trip. It is 100 miles from the meeting hall. The next step is what and who takes it? Yah, this is da sort of practical question I like. Of course the real answer depends on the experience of the lads in that troop, eh? In some cases the answer is "the PLC assigns a kid to it, he does the research, makes the reservations, and sets up the meetin' nights to get ready for it." But Mafaking has already said he has some younger, inexperienced fellows. My answer would be that he encourages the PLC to appoint a small workin' group of 2-3 boys for each outing. Then the SM or ASM make a date with those boys to drive out and check it out. Can be a fun day trip. Go look at what campsites are available, go talk to the outfitters. Coach 'em a bit with what questions to ask before they talk to the outfitters, but let 'em forget about stuff and have to drive back after goin' a few miles to ask some more questions. Take a look at da river, and distances, all that kind of stuff. Kids do so much better with planning when they can see, touch, feel, and smell an area, eh? That way it ain't so abstract. Another thing to do is to call up another troop yeh know who runs that outin', and have the lads workin' on the trip visit with their youth leaders who have done the trip, eh? Have 'em say what's cool, how far they went, how hard it is, what to bring, what to watch out for. All that. Buy ice cream and let 'em go at it. Check in advance to make sure the other troop brings paper plans and maps and such that they've made copies of so that the boys have somethin' to look at and write on and take home with 'em. Then when they've got da beta (the info from the other troop and the outfitters), and they've gotten da feel, sit with 'em and coach 'em on setting up a plan. A budget. A safety plan. Workin' logistics like car shuttles and whatnot. Where they don't know how to proceed and are just stuck, give 'em some structure to help or do it with (not for) them. Where they can fumble through on their own, let 'em fumble. Then have 'em present their plan for approval at the next PLC, so da other PLs can check it over and catch any possible problems or better ideas (and so da other PL's can see what a plan looks like and how to present one, eh? ). See what you've done? Their activity, their plan, their presentation. And it's fun - they got to visit and pal around with another troop, they got to go on their own private day trip. Da small ways the adults coached 'em they'll forget about, and what they'll remember is that they can do it, and how to go about it, and the other boys will have seen their example. Next time, you'll need to do less, and they'll be handlin' more on their own. Ain't this Scoutin' stuff just like magic? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, what Crew21 said, eh? If a lad from another troop wants to come visit, it isn't spying, it's an invitation. I encourage troops to invite other scouters, other boys, share information about good campouts, high adventure trips, resources, whatever. One of da least productive, stupidest adult things in Scoutin' is this notion of competition with other troops that leads to secrecy. Bah! It's 6-year-old stuff. IMO adults that immature shouldn't be in the program. We're in a community of folks dedicated to helpin' boys, and we should have open doors and share anything we can with each other. It's great for everybody if da troop down the road gets stronger. So let your lad go. Call da other troop and ask if yeh can send an ASM and the SPL to learn stuff, too. Invite their SPL and Troop Scribe and an ASM to come visit your troop as an exchange. Go visit their committee meeting with a friend, and invite their CC and treasurer to come visit yours. Learn about their high adventure program and how to develop strong funding, let them learn about your youth leadership style. That way everyone gets better at helpin' kids. A Scout is Helpful and Friendly, eh? Beavah

Yah, Smithgall. Such things happen. Some leaders exaggerate and engage in puffery to make themselves important in the eyes of boys and parents. Some parent leaders pencil-whip badges. Sorry to hear it's happenin' in your program. Generally speakin', I discourage units from usin' husband/wife teams as unit leader and CC, eh? All kinds of possibilities for ill will or at least poor perceptions by others. SM/Treasurer and CC/Treasurer combinations are also ones to avoid. In Scouting, though, the units are owned and operated by the Chartered Partner. The Chartered Organization is responsible for the leadership, not the BSA. Yeh can think of the BSA as a materials provider, like a textbook publisher. They provide trainin', and materials, and support services. But the school provides the teachers. Same with the CO. BSA only takes membership action against individual leaders for criminal activities or very serious things that affect da BSA's reputation or risk exposure. Otherwise it's up to the CO. There are important reasons for that, includin' protecting the BSA from liability for unit activities, and the terms of da congressional charter. So yeh need to voice your objections to the head of the chartered organization. And then vote with your feet. Beavah

Near freezin'? Why, that's shorts and T-shirt weather! B

Backin' up a bit here... Elections seem to be mostly about who wants to do the job, not necessarily the best person for the job.Lately the youngest patrol member gets PL. I'm willing to allow most any change they would like to try. Yah, that happens sometimes, eh? When it does, it's a sign that da PL position doesn't carry any prestige in your program in a way that satisfies older boys, but that being a PL does involve a lot of work. So you're usin' da PLs well for da chores of runnin' events, but not givin' 'em what they need in terms of respect and fun. Consider mixin' some age-appropriate fun into PLC meetings. Planning, dinner, & a movie. Havin' a PLC only outing that's challengin'. Takin' some PLC members out on a challengin' mountain bike ride just because it's a nice Sunday. Most important, though, is da personal attention and respect yeh show them as an adult. In the thick of the work it's easy to focus on the tasks and chores, eh? Yeh have to force yourself to find the time to look at and talk with the young man as a friend and peer. It's that leaven of Adult Association that lads crave... "I'm a co-leader with Mr. Eagle". That's what makes 'em want to do the work of plannin' and being a leader alongside you. Otherwise being a PL is just doin' chores. And yeh always try to get your younger brother to do your chores, eh? Beavah

Ask an adult to grab a campout date. A newbie adult will let a week or two pass then come back and say that weekend was taken. "Ok did you grab the next one?" "No, I wanted to check with you first" Yah, dat's sooo true, eh? And it illustrates an important point. Da kids are no different than us adults. It's not that they're young, it's that they're inexperienced as Lisabob describes. Only way to make 'em experienced is to give 'em that shot, and build experience a bit at a time, eh? So if yeh want your Venture Patrol Leader to be able to plan a week-long high adventure trip on his own at age 16, yeh have to work backwards from there, eh? What's he need at age 15, and 14? (Eagledad's notion of havin' adult goals). And if a PL is just startin' out, yeh have to provide all the basic support that Lisabob describes. How to make a phone call. Sit with the lad, have him think through and write out all his questions, consider what da different options might be, practice it out loud to you, then make da call together on a speaker phone. That's your startin' point. If he's really nervous, you make the call and have him listen so he gets to see an example of a good one (when has a boy ever really "seen" how to make a phone call to a stranger to get information and make a reservation? Between your startin' point of how to make a phone call as a 12-year-old and you're ending point of havin' a 16-year-old be able to plan and lead a high adventure trip, figure out the learning steps, and think about how to make your TLT program provide that coachin', and your program to provide those opportunities. Younger PLs might just handle day trips and local reservations, eh? Older PLs might get canoe weekends with multiple reservations, shuttles to arrange, tour permits to fill out and budgets to deal with. Wherever possible, have lads in charge of an event they've been on in the past as a participant, so they have some experience and a sense for the timing and issues. It's worth rememberin' that Eagledad's unit used mixed-age patrols, so his PLs were older and had that kind of experience. Write it down so yeh don't forget and start assigning a 12-year-old to plan a high adventure trip he's never seen, and think he's lazy for not doin' it. Look at your plan and your goals often, so yeh don't start handling a lot of stuff for your 15 year olds and never reach your goal. As an aside, that's a great way sometimes to have conversations with parents about youth leadership, eh? They want their kid to be fully independent and self motivated at age 18 goin' off to college. So what does that mean he needs to be doin' at 16? At 14? At 12? Havin' the goal in mind forces yeh to think about those things, and loosen da apron strings at the appropriate times. Beavah

Yah, lots of good thoughts here. Another thing that yeh might try is teachin' the lads some version of Rules of Order for a meetin'. Motions, discussion where each person is limited in da number of times he can speak, votes. Plus da ability to call for the orders of the day (demand a return to the agenda) . Takes 'em a bit of time to learn the system, and yeh have to select a lad as chair who behaves like a good impartial chair, but it provides a mechanism for resolving differences in vision or other disputes in a rational, fair way. Consensus is great, eh? It just doesn't always happen in democracies . For da rest, we have procedures for resolution. Beavah

Yah, in da parent thread, eghlie mentioned a lad in his unit where both parents lost jobs and consequently their house. I expect others are seein' this around the country, especially in our auto manufacturing towns. What are we doin' as units and councils to help such kids and families in need? Any great examples out there? Any new ideas? National's initiative to work with Bill Gates helpin' da cause of eliminating malaria overseas is just fine and all, eh? But it seems like we've got our kids and families to take care of right here where it goes to da very heart and soul of our mission. Beavah

Of course, why wouldn't the troop wear uniforms? All sorts of reasons, good and bad. I always like to see troops travel in uniform. Well, almost always. Occasionally I'll cringe at da behavior of some lads who leave a bad taste in folks' mouths. When troops don't travel in uniform, I'll sometimes dare 'em to try it. Almost all the time, they discover that far from treatin' them like pansies, lots of folks greet them and talk to them and tell them their own scoutin' stories. That's sometimes an eye-opener. Wearin' uniforms are also good ways of avoidin' problems when crossing borders or flyin' or getting caught in a traffic stop or whatnot. That having been said, when a unit is goin' on a campout where they're goin' to hit the ground running, the uniform doesn't always work. Leastways not in the snowy north, eh? Yeh want da kids to hop out of the car in the dark, grab their packs or gear and trudge through the snow to make camp. So they've got to be clothed and equipped to do that, not tryin' to change their shirts and pants when it's 0 degrees out. Da uniform was made to serve the program, not vice versa. So to answer da second question, there is of course no rule that yeh have to travel in uniform, and in fact no rule that a boy has to own a uniform. Just like there's no rule that a boy has to advance. Da uniform is a program element that we use, not a requirement. One of these days maybe we'll get away from da legacy of Oscar and have a simple, outdoorsy uniform that the lads think is cool and not embarrassing to wear, and that can be worn in the field. We keep tryin' to head that way, but da tradition of dingles and doodads and well-pressed parades that adults love so much is like tryin' to swim with an anchor tied to both legs. Beavah

Yah, da merit badge application cards (aka "blue cards") are an optional>/B> record-keepin' tool that troops and/or councils can use. Similarly, da merit badge award cards (aka "white cards") are an optional thing troops can use to present/document the award of a badge. Only thing that gets checked as part of da Eagle Application process is the boy's advancement and merit badge records on the BSA ScoutNet system. That's done by da council registrar (a paid staff position, not a volunteer). Sometimes, if a troop hasn't been good about submittin' Advancement Report Forms the way they should, a boy's records won't be up to date. In that case, the registrar will usually call the unit leader and say "What's up?" and the unit will have to fill out the Advancement Report Forms they missed (or show their copy of the one they submitted that the council or ScoutNet lost ). Happens all the time, no big deal. If da unit didn't keep good records and had some turnover, or if the scout moved to a new troop/council and his old unit didn't submit things, it may fall back to the scout to provide documentation because the adults messed up. In that case, any form of documentation that satisfies whoever fills out and files forms is OK, eh? Blue Cards, White Cards, summer camp paper records, a letter from his unit advancement chair, whatever. So it's worth holdin' on to 'em. Of course, Scoutin' being Scoutin', councils and districts and units are goin' to come up with different ways of doin' things, and a few more retentive individuals are goin' to be into da paperwork in some cases. Some districts, usually smaller ones in small councils that have time on their hands, will try to verify Application signatures against MBC lists before approving an advancement report form. A few districts do try to demand a folder full of blue cards durin' the Eagle Application process. What any of 'em do about out-of-district or out-of-council counselors or camps or units that don't use blue cards or units that do internet advancement is anyone's guess. Those folks aside, it's a good habit to teach lads to keep some appropriate form of documentation of important things in a safe place, eh? Merit badge records are just practice for automobile titles and deeds and such . So encourage 'em to keep such records, but don't let such stuff ever get in a kid's way. Beavah

Yah, I reckon there also might be some regional-type differences, eh? If yeh live in da southern states, yeh can take a crossover in January or February and the new lads will be introduced to camping in reasonably nice weather. That's important - first experiences in the troop are tough enough dealin' with the new expectations and social stuff without also fightin' weather. In the great white north yeh aren't goin' to be takin' new lads out on the -20 February polar bear or da cold sleet & mud March hike . Summer camp times are different, too, with more July campers in da north compared to Junes in the south. John-in-KC's point is right... da maturity of the young lads varies quite a bit. Thing is, most dens cross as a group, eh? And if you're runnin' a NSP-style program it helps to get the NSP set up and runnin' as a group, rather than plugging kids into over the course of 4-5 months. So I tend to like later crossovers, since it makes it more likely that most of the lads will have grown up a bit more and be ready when they come as a group. But I'm a northerner, eh? Practically speakin', though, da troops and packs in every council I know are all over the place on this. Better packs tend to plan a year program that the boys want to continue in and be "big dog" leaders in. They hold 'em longer, eh? But dat's only a trend, not a rule. Beavah

Sorry for the negativism but my youth leadership is just not stepping up. They can't or won't organize an outing. Meetings are play dates. Yah, Mafeking made this comment on a recent thread, eh? It seemed to reflect what some others were sayin' in several current discussions. So from anybody who has managed to overcome this sorta thing, do we have advice to share? I'd suggest specifics rather than general stuff like "use da patrol method". In my experience, every unit thinks they're tryin' to use da patrol method, but it's small, specific things in their style or approach that either work or don't work. Let's share some of those. Beavah

Yah, what Eagledad said, eh? I actually can't tell from what you've posted whether you're gettin' there or not, eh? What yeh posted are da superficial trappings of boy led. Elections can be somethin' really serious for important roles, or they can be popularity contests for make-believe roles. PLC annual plannin' can be somethin' where they really determine goals and focus and direction of their troop, or it can be an activity-slottin'-into-calendar session. PLC making meeting plans can mean the boys have real ownership and can change da way adults think about meetings, or it can mean adults handing 'em Woods Wisdom / Program Helps and having 'em pick a page. Real boy led means the boys can set da goals, and change the way the adults think about and interact with the program. They set the "policy" for da operations side, includin' the best way to add variety, and who takes the lead on which troop meetings, and whether there's a game that night, and whether or not COH's should be quarterly, and how they handle safety and first aid. They tell da parents what they need help with and when to butt out. Yah, I like Eagledad's way of thinkin' about this, eh? What vision do yeh have of an 18-year-old Eagle Scout headin' off to college or the Navy or a job? What should that young adult be able to do on his own as an adult? Then to get there, that's what your 14, 15, 16, and 17 year-olds have to be allowed to do (and struggle with, and fail or succeed at) in order to get there. Beavah

Yah, you're never goin' to get a lad to not see the world in terms of right and wrong, eh? I think da lad doth protest too much. The BSA membership rule has to do with whether you have something as "God" to whom/which you owe a duty. On my honor and all that. Agnostics by the strict definition, or at least the one the BSA means, aren't still searching, eh? They've come to a conclusion. There's nothing knowable about God, and nothing to which they owe any duty. That's why there's a difference between undecided/searchin' and being a convinced agnostic. All yeh did for the boy was explain that where he's at doesn't fit the definition, so he's usin' the word improperly. Nuthin' wrong with that. Beavah

Yah, I think how yeh counsel the scout depends a bit on your perspective and that of your CO, eh? For me, I reckon doubt is as much a part of a life of religious faith as emptiness in prayer. We all experience it from time to time. Just as we all experience consolation or meaning in prayer at other times. A fellow I respect once cried out in utter desolation, "My God, My God, Why have you abandoned me?" For the adult leaders, I'd tell 'em not to get hung up over words, but to treat the lad like a young person they love and care about. Yeh don't raise membership issues with a kid who is searching and questing and looking for his way. It's just not in keepin' with da oath and law and ordinary common sense. So I think the only error here was tellin' him not to use the "a" word. That's an adult hangup. We adults should get over our hangups and just care for da kids, eh? Beavah

If there was a nationally ordained syllabus, the naysayers would complain about how weak and watered down and risk aversive it is and how it doesn't really cover what they think should be in it. Yah, that's da risk of standardized stuff, eh? It tends to target the least common denominator. In fact if it doesn't, there'll be pressure from lots of disgruntled folks until it is dumbed down to the LCD. Add to that the challenge other folks mention of difference in environment across the country, and some differences in trainin'/experience/interpretation, and it's hard to come up with good basics courses. I'm more in favor of OGE's notion. Da BSA gets very insular at times. We're part of a bigger country, where some other groups have already done substantial work on this problem that we can use. What's more, when it comes to standards of care, that's who we're goin' to be judged against, eh? Those other groups set the "industry norms", at least when it comes to adult outdoor leader training. Added bonus is that NOLS and other such groups actually conduct individual evaluations of participants on their skills and judgment. To my mind seat-time training ain't worth much without real evaluation and feedback. Beavah

I enticed the older boys to go by asking them if they wanted to be the guides - now they were hooked. Bravo, Brent! That's exactly what I was talkin' about. It's not so much that da older guys mind bein' with the younger guys, it's that they get annoyed by da assigned chore of dealin' with them. But if they have real leadership opportunities where they are responsible for younger guys, it's great. So that's one option for yeh, OneHour, but it's a long-term fix that requires a pretty big rethink/restructure of how the troop runs, eh? And to be honest, it's hard to do in a troop as large as yours. Another option is the Venture Patrols option, but here again yeh have to Think Different . High adventure is not an adult-initiated crew going to Philmont in the summer. That's an activity, not a program. A Venture Patrol is a group of guys that decide that they want to work on SCUBA and sailin' all fall, and yeh quietly advise them about how THEY can make that happen. And another patrol that decides water is wet and they'd rather learn how to lead climb, so they spend their fall trainin' at the rock gym and climbing weekends at da local bluff, doing all their own rigging and planning and safety. Then next spring they run a week-long climbin' trip or sailin'/SCUBA trip over Easter. And when either gets good, they might be guides for a younger patrol or two in their chosen activity. And then after that, they might move on to a new activity like whitewater or canyoneering. That way your Venture Patrols are a program instead of a summer activity, eh? They're buildin' skills to offer your troop program, and bein' given lots of opportunities for leadership and distinction, rather than just doin' the chore of required meetings and prep for the summer HA activity. Often in Scoutin', it's not da activities we do that count, eh? It's how we envision those activities. If we go into things thinkin' "I want these guys to be able to sail and SCUBA on their own, leading younger guys" that's a very different thing than "I want to provide these guys a great high adventure sailing experience." The former is good Scoutin'. The latter is just an eco-vacation. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, OK, I'm not a Wood-Basher (bein' a happy and proud ol' Beavah ). But I reckon Gern, who seems to be channelin' the spirit of Kudu, has a point, eh? In what I do I have contact with a whole bunch of leaders in a fairly wide variety of life pursuits. I'm pretty convinced there's no generic form of leadership. What works for leadership in fightin' fires is just plain different from what works for leadership in a Fortune 500 company, which is different again in leadership in a school, which is different than leadership in a NFP. Now, what does seem to be pretty universal is that good leaders know their business really well, eh? And they learned da leadership they needed from workin' their business. If our business is outdoor education, then I reckon da only way to develop good leaders is by helpin' 'em learn our business really well. That means startin' with developing proficient and confident outdoorsmen and women, and proficient and competent youth educators/mentors. The leadership comes only after that, eh? Otherwise we're just buildin' the house on sand. So it might not be that da problem is with WB21C other than that it gives the perception of Highest Level of Training to folks who aren't really ready to lead. Da problem is there's nuthin' in what we do training-wise that develops proficient and confident outdoorsmen. An IOLS weekend doesn't cut it, eh? Leastways not if you're startin' from family campin' in a camper. And there's nuthin' in what we do training-wise that develops proficient and confident youth educators/mentors/coaches. That's a failing, eh? In both cases, we pretty much have relied on people comin' in with those skills, like Jet526. But it's not a guarantee. Folks come with outdated skills sometimes, and some programs like LDS have a different way of selectin' leaders where prior skill might not be present. I don't think any of us would ever consider runnin' a leadership seminar for a new lad who hadn't yet worked through da basics of T-2-1 outdoor skills and workin' with other guys in his patrol. So perhaps da problem isn't WB21C, it's the prerequisites for it? The youth and outdoor skill pieces that are missin'? Beavah

Was 32 new scouts an unusual or an ordinary year for your program, OneHour? Some of da options depend on what yeh see the size of your troop bein', and what attrition you get / accept. After my guys got back, they really didn't want to work with the "little kids" anymore on mundane stuff. Yah, that's da downside of the age-stratified system, eh? Older boys need to lead and feel responsible. They need to feel like adults, eh? There's a really profound difference in a lad's mind between being assigned to be a Troop Guide or Instructor (babysitting little kids) and reachin' the point where you can be a Patrol Leader in a mixed age patrol (I've become the awesome cool older guy I used to look up to, and I'm responsible and trusted). Just tend to be different mindsets and troop dynamics, eh? The being recognized/in charge/responsible thing matters a lot to lads... a lot more than high adventure. One of the challenges of really big & stratified troops is also on the youth leadership side. Big programs have so much logistics overhead that while there are a lot of jobs, there's often not enough real leadership opportunity for a big group of older boys. Da structure of the troop tends to be pretty well set fast and adult managed. Jobs to do are just chores, eh? It's when yeh get to decide what happens that it's fun, and there's just less chance for that in big troops. I've found most large troops like OneHour's solve da problem by goin' the Venture Patrol or shuffle-off-to-Venturing route. Move 'em up and out into doin' their own thing, essentially. That can work well, but only if that added program level/activity set provides more opportunities for youth leadership and growth. With 20 boys in the group, you'd need two patrols doin' different adventure things. And yeh need da right sort of adults to advise 'em. As Gern mentions, the downside is that yeh are makin' a choice to move 'em up and out of the more mundane troop operations, and reinforcing that that expectation in your program goin' forward. Another thing to consider, if things are feelin' a bit "big" is whether it's time to split or spin off a new troop, eh? That instantly doubles the real opportunities for older boys while halving the young-kids-to-babysit group. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)