saltheart

We started using the new scout patrol thing back in the 80's. I'm not sure the BSA even had it as an official policy back then, but we found a lot of advantage to it. Originally, we used the new scout patrol as a temporary haven in which the new scouts could learn about the troop and all the other scouts in it. The SPL would assign another senior scout to be what the Troop Guide position is now...a mentor for the new scout patrol leader...thus having an interface with another scout for introductions to the troop (rather than an adult). Even though the SPL was 'the' guy to see, the assigned senior scout and the new scout patrol leader knew that there was one specific ASM whom they could get assistance and information from when necessary. Just about the time school got out for the year, we'd already have made the new scouts aware of the requirement that they choose one of the standing patrols in the troop to join. That way, we kept the 'mix' of ages in the patrol. The SPL and ASM would work with the boys to make sure that no single patrol became overloaded, and if creating a new patrol was necessary, then it was accomplished. We had a large enough number of active patrols to accomodate most years influx of new scouts. Then, about very late 80's or early 90's, (memory for dates ain't what it used to be) we began to question the notion of mixed ages. The scouts were the ones to first raise the question, so we took it under consideration and discussed it. Long story short...we dumped the 'mixed age' thing and allowed the scouts to reassemble the patrols as they saw fit (one time shot, here), with the assistance of the SM and SPL (for numbers). Once the patrols were reassembled, it became obvious that similar age won over mixed age. So since that time, the new scout patrol has pretty much remained intact from beginning of Scout career to end. We (adults, and sometimes the PLC) still see benefits to both methods, but the scouts had to make a decision they were happy with, so long as they understood that reassembling the patrols would not happen every year. That would have created a record keeping nightmare. (This message has been edited by saltheart)

Interesting visit to the council office yesterday. When the question was posed, the common response seemed to be... "Ummmmm....gee, never been asked that before..." Sooo...I asked what their individual thoughts would be. Pretty much a 50-50 split. Those on the positive side based their opinion on the knowledge that the BSA has, for along time, held patrol camping as a positive learning experience and reinforcement of the values and skills presented by the program. Those on the negative side based their opinion on the lack of adult supervision. And even only about half of that group (the negative side) thought that patrol camping on private property or state property was a good idea. Sort of makes me wonder if they read the book.... Anyway, the gauntlet has been thrown down, and now as they take the matter under further consideration for more 'research', we'll wait and see where this goes. Interestingly, many of us around here had never even thought about the possibilities. But those troops I'm familiar with who have fairly close access to the council camp seem quite interested in the potential. Why we collectively never thought about the idea is beyond us. But the facilities are just what the doctor ordered for many...if the council staff and camp ranger can be loaded on the same boat...

We've been pretty fortunate, I guess. Our troop, through hard work and fund raising, has been able to stock the shelves with tents in sufficient numbers that we have enough 2 man Timberline Outfitter tents for backpacking, 4 man Timberline tents and 6 man LLBean tents for other trips for the entire troop...including adults. That being the case, we do not allow for personal tents on troop trips. There seems to be a little more equality in conditions and such when everyone uses the same equipment.

Eamonn, Do I read your commentary to mean that those who work to establish rules regarding behavior within the troop, such as the carrying of cell phones and other potentially distracting devices, are nothing but "tyrannical rule makers"?

The decisions made by our troop, preemptive as I've described them, were made with past history of electronic distractions,like GameBoy, becoming far too much of a nuisance distraction taking the boys attention away from where it should be in Scouting activities. Experiences of nearby troops with cell phones becoming the same distraction were also considered. The policy was agreed to unanimously in the committee and among adult leaders. It was also fairly well supported by parents. Such as it is, there is room for accomodation on an individual basis, but as I indicated, there are more than sufficient communication options within the troop and at the scouthouse to negate the need for each scout to carry his own. Some may not agree. That's fine. Our policy works well, and support for it is broad based. Even the PLC supported the original concept.

Well, Bob...I think it's probably fair to say that you really don't know why the BSA will not allow patrol camping on BSA property, correct? You've made a statement, and apparently can not support it. And yes, it is indeed a curiosity for adult leaders to learn that the BSA may have that policy. I say 'may have' for your inability to provide more information about the policy and the reasons behind it makes me think you know only that it exists, but not why, like the rest of us. And now that we hear this, we are, at least I am, very curious as to why the BSA says one thing, and apparently practices another. I'd like to know if it's true, and why. It may be a fair guess that insurance concerns for the BSA and YP concerns play a major factor in disallowing patrol camping on BSA property. It may not be. But if they are major players in the rules, then that speaks very uncomfortably to the issue of coverage and liability outside BSA property should an scenario such as OGE portrayed actually happen. Seems to be a tad more than a 'good for the goose, good for the gander' issue. And I'm not letting the " curmudgeons of the forum" sidetrack me from any real issue. The issue is, indeed, the very statement you made right up front, not this overall patrol camping thing you're trying to focus it on. You made a statement that was quite startling for some of us, and I think I'd like to know if that is the BSA policy, and why. Your statement was...well, you can read it above as well as I. Since making that statement, you seem to be trying to shuffle the focus of the conversation elsewhere...like 'forget I said that and focus on this part...' Your statement was a revelation, even for me after a great many years in Scouting. I've never had anyone in the troop attempt patrol camping on BSA land, but it would seem an ideal place. We're just a little too far away for a quick trip like that. Nonetheless, if someone wanted to, why not? State and Federal land issues aside, for they are quite different, BSA rules should, I think, be in keeping with the program they publish and provide. Not allowing patrol camping on BSA lands due to YP concerns, insurance and liability concerns, or any concern, seems diametrically opposed to the published program. I'm uncomfortable with the notion that they might see things that way. Now...I've tried to explain myself as clear as I can. Can you provide back-up for your statement such that we can all learn if the policy is actually what you stated? And can you provide reasoning for that ruling that seems so opposed to what the BSA expounds upon?

With all due respect, I think an answer to the question is in order, and you simply seem to be trying to avoid answering it by telling us not to seek an answer. Your statement was... "BSA properties, State, and National parks all require that youth be under the supervision of adults." Exactly why is that? Why does the BSA expound on the good things about patrol camping, yet not allow it on their own properties? The BSA requires adult supervision on their own properties but tells us all that the Scouts should be allowed to camp on their own without adult supervision? That, if it is BSA policy, is double speak and double standard if I ever heard it, and hardly speaks to the virtues that the BSA expounds upon. Care to give us a clear and concise answer?

Perhaps I'm missing something here. Perhaps others are still scratching their heads, too. But I still don't see a good crystal clear answer to the question 'why the BSA will not allow Patrol camping on their own property' as BW has indicated is their policy, while BSA publications promote that very thing - patrol camping. If that is, indeed, the policy, it would seem to smack of a double speak and double standard.

Cell phones really haven't become an overbearing problem...yet. But as a preemptive measure in answer to a similar question about a year ago, the troop committee established the following guidelines: Meetings: Cell phones are not welcome and should be left at home unless there are extenuating circumstances, and then the SM must be made aware. The Scouthouse has a phone, and the number is available to all members and families. Outings: Again, cell phones are discouraged and those that must have them on a trip must inform the SM or trip leader(s). The trip leader(s) always have at least one cell phone and the number is published for parents of trip participants.

There seems to be a lot of information on the web regarding "Conservative Alert", but only one site that I could find relative to an organization by a similar name..."Conservative Alerts" (conservativealerts .com). And as staunchly conservative as I am, I have a pratice of staying well away from any website asking for money...for any purpose. The only reference on this particular website to the BSA was one to Philadelphia.

I seem to remember that those Marine DI's all had heads specially form fitted to the hat...not the other way around. 'Marine tradition'...I think that's what I was told.

Incredible as you may find this, Bob, children do, in fact, learn in a variety of ways, one of which might be the way you seem to be insisting is the one and only. The scenarios presented by others here, all of which seem to be nearly diametrically opposed to your way of thinking, actually do work, and have worked for years untold, long before you and I were even a thought to those who bore us. Each and every one who has presented a different opinion here likely has positive experience with the methods they've posted. And no one seems to be preaching that their way is the one and only. So, why do you stand so high on the soapbox and preach that others who do not follow your lead and words are going far astray and off the path? Methinks thou protesteth too much.....

What a show that was last night. Clear sky, not too cold, moved the adirondack chairs out into the middle of the yard, and just sat and watched the show. The early results are showing that many in the troop did just the same. The idiot boxes (TV) were turned off, and Mother Nature provided the evening entertainment. Once again, the common opinion among the troop leaders so far is that many times, the best Scouting events are those that are totally and completely unplanned and spur of the moment. There was a lot of talk about space oriented MB's last night. We'll see what the follow-up is. Here's hoping that the good ol' sun will keep throwing his stuff our way so the show continues...at least for a while. In this regard, I envy those of you who live far enough to the north that the northern lights are a common occurence.

My goodness...I'm finally getting to see the Northern Lights...even as we speak!! I've been on the portable phone starting the troop telephone tree to get everyone away from the darn boobtube and out in the yard to see what I'm seeing. It's absolutely fantastic! Reds and whites...moving all across the northern sky...the migrating to the western sky...then slowly disappearing... No, wait...it's back! A little dimmer now, then brighter! Wow...I feel like a kid again watching the July 4th fireworks, but this ain't man-made. It's even better. Never thought I'd ever see this within 30 miles of Boston. I hope you're seeing it, too. Gotta run back outside and join the growing throng of Scouts and Scouters and...whoever goes by....wooohooooooo. (Yeah, I know...act my age...)

Wouldn't the good ol' insignia guide offer and answer to this? Or the uniform police? I and one other fool from our troop, both of whom have been around for a while, took to poking fun at the 'insignia' police many years ago after being told, on numerous occasions, that some of the award patches we donned were out of place with 'official' patchwearing rules. Irked and somewhat humored by the wealth of 'officialness' and lack of humor with which these folks approached the subject, we plotted against them...in secret. And for months, we gathered additional copies of every patch we had ever earned or been awarded...and stole secretly into our caverns of mischievousness, working by night...many times in the dark so as to not be detected. And then, at last, when we were satisfied with the results, upon a grand and glorious morning, sun full in the sky and warm comfortable summer breezes, we donned our 'new' Scout Leader shirts, literally covered from stem to stern with patches and awards, fore and aft, top to bottom, yet all in neat rows and columns...and marched proudly to breakfast in the dining hall. Talk about fruit salad... All conversation came to an immediate halt, and all eyes fell upon our regalia. And then the laughter...and hoots...and howls... ...even from those for whom the 'officialness' of the whole thing was paramount. Some times I think we take ourselves just a little too seriously when we worry about this or that patch. I took this stuff all very seriously once, long ago, when Uncle Sam told me what to wear and when. In Scouting, though I do abide by the Insignia 'Guide' as much as possible, I don't really worry if something is amiss. It's not like I get paid for or demoted for things either being ship-shape or not. Scouting is a game. A game with a purpose. But a game nonetheless. Someone important said that long ago. And I don't think he took these things all that serious, either. But I could be wrong. LOL....

"Are your values different then those of your parents?" No. My values are the same as theirs. And my sons hold true to the same. And all of us base our values on the same thing....common sense. And, of course, common sense is nothing less than.... ....genius....in working clothes. (Aaarrrgh...if only that 'genius' could spell...)(This message has been edited by saltheart)

"The answers you seek are best found in the resources of the BSA than in the opinions of forum posters." That's tantamount to saying that these forums serve no purpose, you should go home, read the books, and not participate here. Begging to differ, the question(s) posted here are exactly to obtain others opinions. Read the books, yes, by all means. But don't point the finger from the Ivory Tower and suggest that opinions here have no value.

One minor point of clarification here. While it is up to the Scout(s) to make the appointments for follow-up and completion of the work not yet completed and signed, there is no requirement that the original counselor be the one to whom they go. If troop level or district level merit badge counselors exist for the subject badge, the wise Scoutmaster, Troop Advancement Chair, and/or Troop Committee would make certain that the list of those counselors is readily available to the Scout(s) so they know where to begin the trail to completion.(This message has been edited by saltheart)

"Just why BSA chose to use this term for the training syllabus, I do not know." eisely, Not everything that the BSA publishes and distributes, and not every name or caption is dead on the mark sometimes, and it leaves us to wonder. I remember years ago the cover on an old Riflery Merit Badge Pamphlet. The character in the picture wore a Scout uniform with a First Class Patch, plain as day, for all to see... ...the character was male...and sported a full beard...looked every bit like he was 35 years old. LOL...still wondering... Powder Horn? Quaint and ringing of yesteryear in the frontier. Self-sufficiency and ruggedness. Good traits to have. But some might feel the name itself a little out of touch and not inkeeping with contemporary times. Myself? I like things that harken back to yesteryear. We lose a little of ourselves as species when we let our past slip away out of concern that the name isn't PC.(This message has been edited by saltheart)

"...the "Oldtimers" will soon be vacating due to old age and death." Hey...I resemble that remark! I still have (most of) my own teeth and can still stand upright. But I do agree with the observation that more and more adult volunteers/leaders in Scouting tend to end their participation upon Juniors departure. That's not all that new. Adults have come and gone with their sons for as long as Scouting has been around. Today it seems more prevalent. The adult leader who comes and stays out of enjoyment and commitment is by far more the exception than the rule. And it never ceases to amaze me when young parents, upon learning how long some of us have been with Scouting as volunteers, let their jaws drop...deer-in-headlights stare...and then off they go with a..."see ya!" In our area it seems that even many of the youth sporting groups suffer a similar situation. Parents come and drop the kids off...and off to the mall or links they go...tah taaahhh... And when Junior ages out of whatever group he's in, most of the participating parents and whatever talent and enthusiasm they had are suddenly hard to find. On the scale of things in our area that require adult volunteer participation, the percentage of available adults who do, in fact, participate seems lowest in Scouting. Team sports seems to have a higher percentage, but not all that much higher. Even Lions, Knights of Columbus, and others find falling numbers. It's come to the point where even the Masons are advertising for members on TV here. One time, one shot volunteer opportunites for fund raising here and there for Cancer, Heart & Lung, Diabetes, Battered Women, and many other good and worthy causes prevail in the participation numbers. It's only one time...no commitment, and very worthy. But one time nonetheless. Then home again, home again...wriggity jig... We used to joke around about BSA standing for Babysitters of America. But current and growing participation problems among the available parent corps in many areas tends to make that seem all too true. (This message has been edited by saltheart)

You've pretty much set it all out for yourself already... Learn what levels of training those registered adults in your troop already have. What positions do they serve in... Learn and keep abreast of any and all training opportunities scheduled by both your District and Council, and any and all training that is published and provided by the BSA. Make those schedules available to all registered adults continuously, but don't try to be the training 'enforcer'... If you're not keeping the records, make sure that things you know about the people you work with, (i.e; who is taking what training), are known by both you and the record keeper... As 'coordinator' make the plans and schedules for those training opportunities that will be presented locally (just for your own folks). For all other training, simply present those folks who need it with the information and encourage them to follow up on it... Don't set yourself up as a local trainer (in-house) unless you want to be saddled with that extra responsibility in an otherwise already busy schedule. Take advantage of the Council and District folks who will come and do it for you... Good luck

Timm, Much too late to edit my post, and attempting to steer discussion back to your OP, I must clarify my response to your query (in reference to the point made about troop vs. patrol outings)...we've never had patrol outings, so if your question stems from that POV, I can't offer anything. All activities our troop involves itself with are troop activities...at least 2 a month, so the offering in the plan set out at the beginning of the year are such that patrols don't have to try things on their own. That's their decision...or should I say 'was their decision' some 20 years ago or more, and subsequent generations in the troop have opted to keep to that plan. It works, so why change it? Thus, when speaking about adult involvement on outings (your original question) I speak from the position of 'troop' outings, not 'patrol' outings. Most often, with so many offerings in the plan, we rarely have 'all' of the patrols on any one outing, but we never have 'only one'. This type of planning requires a lot of work on the part of both the PLC and the adult leadership and the committee, but it seems to be worth it as the number of offerings attend to the varied schedule the Scouts have in their personal lives (they have a life?). Same with the adult leadership. Not all adult leaders attend each and every trip. But there's always adults along for the trip...be it near or far.

Great explanation! Never bothered to look it up myself. Gotta wonder, though...what if those ol' timers had done their business at the General Store across a beer keg instead?

Sounds like we're approaching a recommendation for both Scout Dress Uniform (for which the current designs are best suited) and something approaching Scout BDU's (which, of course, the current designs and fabrics fall far short in satisfaction for anything). No camo, please...... An' ay laddie...the kilt being good'nuff for me fathers long er' gone, t'would be a fair sight bettar than that which is offered up in the catalog of fashion these days....ay....but nay, ner' could we git away with the undergarments of ol' which me father might have found most agreeable....none at all, laddie...fer the kilt was not of just the skirt 'tis become today. Nay, the kilt of old took some intelligence and experience to don...with many a wrap to cover all and keep the best parts warm... Me thinks that the kilt would be tough 'nuff, but not without it's hazards to the inexperienced.

A half mile away? Lord of the Flies, indeed! I think what you've presented are the extremes, but perhaps that's what you're faced with. The policy of our troop has always been that the adults will camp separately, but still within view of the patrol sites. Simplisticly, and not meant to be flip but perhaps it will come across as such, we approach the situation with the 'eyes in the back of our heads that Mom always had when we were kids' ideal. We do not hover over the Scouts, nor do we leave them totally to their own devices. We're not in their face, and we're not on the other side of the mountain. We're within hearing distance, and within view. But we can't be seen around their campfire, thus the Scouts pretty much know they're on their own, but there are eyes in the dark, around corners, in the back of our heads as we attend to our own campfire, and we know all that they do...the impression, at least, has some value. There are problems from time to time, but senior boy leadership either deals with it and resolves the problem, or presents the need for assistance to the SM. If the SM is not available, then the appropriate ASM will be. Untrained volunteer adults and parents who might be in attendance know their place...and that's out of things unless health, safety, or imminent danger are the call. Your reference to bullying, rocks thrown, and knives being inappropriately use to threaten are definitely beyond the scope of boy leadership resolution capabilities, and must be the territory of the SM. The example set by the SM in not attending immediately to these types of situations should be of deep concern to all adults in the troop, if that was the case. If, rather, the case was no immediate attention because of the distant location of adult leadership, that should speak volumes to those of you who have concerns.