saltheart

Some campsite improvements will be temporary in nature. Some will be permanent. Our scouts would accomplish many of the examples above each year, and that earned them the necessary points for what was called 'campsite' improvement. Permanent improvements were called 'camp' improvements, even if done in the troopsite. Those ideas wouldn't come to us until we were actually 'in-camp' and able to see what repairs and improvements might be necessary. The camp ranger usually had a list of repairs and permanent improvements that he saw desireable or necessary. And, he also had the tools and materials necessary to do the job. He just lacked the manpower. Permanent improvements usually involved both Scout and leader efforts.

Quality of instruction 'outside' the troop was always a concern we shared. The quality of instruction of adult leaders, volunteer instructors, merit badge counselors, and others that we built over the years was one that the group itself took great pride in, and therefore maintained tight control over. The quality of instruction at summer camp was another thing. Those leaders that attended camp would make the effort to watch classes and volunteer where they could. Swimming was never a class we worried about for the instruction was absolutely top notch. Even the youngest instructors were to be admired for their attention to detail. Some other classes (even riflery at one time) were suspect. Scouts would blow through baskerty and wood carving and handicraft in a couple of days. Easy work, to be sure, but that easy? We got involved while we were there. The point is that while we can take and maintain tight control over those things we actually provide ourselves, unless we can get involved in assistance to others outside the troop, we have to rely on the integrity of those teaching to do the job right. Unfortunately, that isn't always the case. And unless we want to stir the pot a little in an effort to make things right, things may not be as up-to-snuff as we might have them at home. Example; after the summer camp episode where riflery was not the best we had seen, and because of the subject matter, we took control of that badge and with the assistance of a couple of NRA trained and one ex-military instructors, and the use of a local gun club range, we taught those things ourselves. Now, that's my thoughts as a leader. As a parent, my take would be that we still have to depend on the integrity of the instructors until evidence points in another direction. Stepping in as an effort in "keeping him honest" might do your own conscience good, but it wouldn't change the fact that the instruction outside your control wasn't up to what you expected. That is and will be the case in every walk of life your son comes across during his life. During his growing years, if he can carry with him your words and teaching so that he, himself, recognizes this and makes the effort where necessary to go the extra distance not provided in the instruction, he'll be better for it, and you'll sleep easier knowing he sees life through those eyes. I guess I'd say that stepping in to keep him honest might be best served as an effort to reinforce his understanding that mediocrity is neither a path to travel nor a goal to seek. If he understands that, he's likely to follow the steeper but more rewarding path. Stepping in to keep the program honest would require your time and effort, probably as a volunteer wherever necessary. But, that's more often than not, just how we all get involved, thinking that we can lend a hand where we see that things might be a little better. And then another. And then another...... Before you know it, you're a trained adult leader having more fun than you thought you ever could.

Although there are literally thousands of good ideas out there for enhancing ones training abilities and talents, there's only really three that I've kept in the back of my head when serving on staff or as course director. First, regarding computers, I've been an advocate of having a Plan 'B'. If for some reason your computer has a major glitch or the power fails, be ready at moments notice to make your entire presentation the old fashioned way. Second, in any kind of training, be it working with Scouts or adult leaders, and as in business...know your client. Be totally aware of who you're addressing and key your methods and message to that audience. And third, believe in the message you convey. Sell your information, don't just preach it. Your audience needs to know that you have completely and totally bought into what you're presenting, and that you make it a part of your life and Scouting. If you can convey to your audience that you believe utterly in what you're saying, chances are they'll actually believe you. And once they believe you, you're more than halfway there.

Kinda reminds me of Abbot & Costello's ol' "Who's on First?".... Anyway, where required, I've always used my real identity, but those places are few, and mostly far more secure than forums such as this. My 'handle', 'moniker', 'nic', whathaveyou, is one that predates Microsoft, so in many ways, it really is me. A name gained many moons ago by those friends who all resided by the sea, as did I. Even the Mrs. resorts to that tag when the mood hits her. Few in the troop use it when addressing me. But when they do, it's usually 'Mr.' Saltheart.........lol..........

I may never know you. You may never know me. I can only know you by the words and thoughts you present to me here. Likewise, you can only know me by what I post, be that my very best effort, or my worst. Be that the truth, or falsehood. Be that well said, or poorly written. Unless you are my neighbor, my friend, or a personal acquaintance, I cant possibly know you by more than what I read. I either appreciate it, or abhor it. Or perhaps have no opinion at all. I gain my knowledge and opinion of your character by what I read. Likewise, you will only gain a picture of my character and me by what I post. I will try my very best not to mislead you, not to impress you falsely, nor to point fingers or call names, and to stick only to the subject I came here for. My trust is that each who visits here will do the same. Those who I conclude are doing otherwise, I will simply not make the effort to converse with. Why would I bother? I dont visit to make enemies I dont already have. I dont visit to get that headache Ive been missing. I dont visit to have that opportunity to throw verbal stones that I cant do elsewhere. I visit for the purpose of learning and conversing and giving of my own little bit of knowledge about Scouting. I abhor the soapbox venues. I avoid the forums in which opinion is castigated for its very existence. I know when and where I might have something to say. I trust I know when to keep my mouth shut and my fingers off the keyboard. And my heart tells me that most here are just like me. Just your average folk trying to learn and share. So, why not just close this thread, as it now seems aimless and pointless. And that is by no means a judgement on those who have participated here. Its just my very own opinion of the direction here. Lets get back to the Scouting thing. It is not our call or our station in life to agree with everyone we meet, nor even pay attention to them all if conditions warrant. It is only ours to be the best we can be, and practice that setting the example thing we talk about with our Scouts so often.

OK...a few times now I've read reference to some private members mailboxes. Ummm...can someone direct me to where I might find them? (Oooooh...I just hate it when I have to appear my age...)(This message has been edited by saltheart)

FOG, Our docs are very nice, thank you very much. We'll keep them. But a fact of life that many seem to miss, Lord knows how, is that the society in which we live today is, if nothing else, litigious. And doctors, the good and the bad, have to protect themselves in as much as they can. Hence, most need to talk directly to someone who has legal charge over a minor prior to administering many forms of aid. It's a CYA thing. Same with the permission forms, for the most part. If nothing else, the parents signature and medical information provides a level of comfort for volunteer leaders. Again, it's a CYA thing. The original intent of the permission form, at least when I was a child just after dirt was created, was that Mom & Dad basically handed over the reigns while I was away at camp. But back then, no one questioned. Few if any litigated. Perhaps there was a level of trust then that doesn't exist today. Perhaps many things went unspoken that today would be front page news. Who knows? Who cares? Today we live in a society where the first order of business for many when they awake each day is making certain the rear end is covered...just in case. Sad fact of life....

I think we're getting a tad picky here. What I believe Bob meant was that when dealing with a child, doctors will not treat non-life threatening conditions without first speaking to the parents or legal guardian. I know this myself having been to the hospital on numerous occasions over these past many years with Scouts in those very situations. Our troop always used a home-grown permission form for complete medical information purposes as well as parental permission in addition to the BSA standard forms. But both only served to provide immediate information to the doctors, and neither would serve as a 'go-ahead-to-treat'. Each and every doctor I met said the same thing..."I need to speak to the parents or guardian first". With regard to life-threatening injuries, which I fortunately have not been witness to in Scouting, I would assume that the situation is very different. And direct contact with the parent is attempted even as treatment is being performed. That supposition being the case, our own troops forms that requested detailed information was that little bit of insurance...just in case. Our own camps, for years, have had a policy of keeping all meds at the medical station. The station is manned and open 24 hours a day while Scouts are in camp. The staff may be asleep there, but they're there and for timed medications, they know when to be awake and ready. And when to send out the search party for the Scout who over-slept and might have missed his midnight med. I did, at one time, have a little bit of a test of wills with the staff when they determined that rescue meds also would be kept at the medical station. My own son being highly vulnerable to circumstances requiring an epipen, I fought that notion hard. No way would I allow my son to be left at need in emergency without his self-administered aid. It was sheer lunacy. They finally gave in when I put the whole subject in terms of how they, themselves, might be held at fault for the death of a child in need due to their own inability to be at the scene, anywhere in camp, in a timely fashion, with the appropriate aid in hand...for whatever reason...but mostly because they "withheld" immediate aid by reason of confiscation. Subsequent to that little trial on the first day of camp, rescue meds were allowed to be in the possession of the Scout, so long as the adult leaders in camp for that troop knew about it.

I think Bob said it quite succinctly. Now is your time to remove yourself from the process and allow it to move forward without you under the guidance of the committee and the parents. The only commentary that I might add is that in circumstances where consequences for actions (aka: punishment) is the subject of discussion, the 'walking of the knifes edge' part of that discussion is setting an example for the future without mixed signals or even the remotest possibility of more than one interpretation of the final dictate. It's tough. Whatever consequences for actions the committee sets forth in this particular situation, it will be a tough but necessary part that the final dictate say to both Scouts and parents of Scouts that 'This is what will happen should anything like this occassion rise again'. No if's, and's, or but's. No questions, no deviations, no other interpretations. Ever... It is, of course, necessary that each and every incident (hopefully few) be treated individually and with the utmost regard for the situation and the facts. But the example set for consequences for ones actions must be unequivocal. The two are not mutually exclusive. Having been there once (fireworks and explosives, not knives), I sympathize. Good luck. I'm certain the road may be bumpy. But it sounds like you are, and have been, up to the challenge.

I'd agree that the NSP practice is one that should be particular to the needs and size of the troop. It works in some circumstances, in others it might not. The NSP may be, as Bob said, some 14 years old as a BSA standard. But I'd bet there are others out there for whom the practice goes back much further. Our troop started using the idea back in the very early 80's. That would make it over 20 years old with our troop. And, as I said above about it working sometimes and sometimes not, it came and went along the way. Currently, the troop still uses the practice as we set it out way back when. In the early days, when the troop was still made up of mixed age Scouts, the NSP (we didn't call it that back then) was a haven for new scouts to learn all they could about the troop and the other boys in the troop between the time they crossed over and the 'start' of the new school/scout year the following September. At that time, those boys in the NSP were to choose which of the existing and constant 9 patrols in the troop. Their choices would be a culmination of their working with the Scouts older than themselves in the preceding months, finding where they would feel most comfortable. To the extent possible, their choices were honored, excepting when a patrol size exceeded the maximum. Then a second choice would be sought. This worked fine for some time. And the ideas of both the haven (NSP) for new scouts to get comfortable with the troop, and the mixed age patrols where the time honored and tested methods of older and wiser leading and teaching the younger sat very well with both the adult leadership and committee, and the PLC (or Leadership Corps). Then, we began to wonder if allowing the younger (NSP) Scouts to stay together as a patrol, thereby requiring reorganization of the entire troop to single (more or less) single age patrols would be of some benefit to all. Subsequent discussion lead us to doing just that to see if the troop and program would gain in some fashion. What we found was that in the long run, the single age patrols were much harder to maintain as a unit for a variety of reasons. The lack of experienced Scouts within the unit framework made for difficulties when setting examples, leading, and teaching. Replacing the infrequent boy who left the program became difficult when trying to maintain patrol size and strength. And the rotation of scouts into and out of troop leadership positions, bringing their new found talents and experience back to the patrol, upon relinquishing their positions to others at election time, was missing. So, by common agreement between all parties (adult leaders, committee, and PLC, we went back to what became most comfortable and workable for us, the mixed age patrol with the NSP in place as the temporary and welcoming haven for the incoming Scouts. Our experience shows us that the NSP idea is valuable, but how it works depends on the make-up of the troop, mixed or single age patrols. For us, the mixed age patrol is the standard, and unless some future leaders take it upon themselves to reorganize yet again, it will likely stay that way.

As this story has nothing to do with Scouting, I fail to see how it would even belong in the Politics section of this Scouting Forum. It may be an important subject to discuss, but not here.

Can't disagree with the notion that Sewing would likely fall short in the "want-to-have-this-badge" catergory. That being the case, perhaps if it were a required MB? Or, if the badge being required fell short with public opinion in Scouting, the at the very least, some sort of competency with sewing might be made a required part of the program...like a requirement for rank advancement?

Can't resist this Rooster... Does the United States Government embrace values that contradict the BSAs? Probably depends on who's President. The current one does, for sure. The last one...? Well, that would be up for discussion... I think the idea of the BSA being a bit more choosey about where their funding comes for is a fine idea. But, if I were a betting man, I'd bet that with funding being hard to come by at present, changing the way things are done would hurt if philanthropic interests who embrace the standards that the BSA doesn did not appear on the horizon with checkbook in hand. The unfortunate reality is that there aren't enough folks out there with either the deep pockets to write those checks, or the willingness in corporate America to face the BSA's opposition squarely and stand firm. The term 'boycott' comes to mind, and I'd bet few in corporate America want to take the chance.

Many, many years ago...when our youngest son, at his Eagle Ceremony, just prior to the presentation of the award, asked that his older brother (an Eagle), his father, (an Eagle), and his grandfather (an Eagle), join him before the gathered crowd, and had his award presented by his grandfather. Very proud family that day. And one extremely proud grandfather...that he was asked, and remembered...

OGE, ...it's unseemly and un masculine.... LOL...ahem....harumph................ Would it make a difference if males learning to sew used a much bigger needle? Would it be more...manlier...to use a very larger needle? I'm told by some that size matters........ (This message has been edited by saltheart)

SEWING... I've said this for years, and even taught it (as I see it) from time to time.... Plain ol' sewing...like sewing on your own paatches so MOM doesn't have to do it. Or sewing a patch in your tent...or your pants or socks while on a hike in the outback.

Oh, Dave. I'm disappointed that you don't find the tattoo specials interesting...LOL. I find them quite interesting, from time to time. But then again, been there, done that, and not about to get any more at my age. (Although both my Eagle Scout sons, now married, have a number between them.) Does the Mrs. truly find them worthy of her time? LOL... Can't type worth a darn...this is the third edit...(This message has been edited by saltheart)

Gosh, I don't know if I could possibly make such a list. There's few things about Scouting that I list as "not" great...except, perhaps, the 1 hour a week thing... I'll give you a hint on why I think we all enjoy it so, though. We wanna be kids again doing the things the kids do. And sometimes, we adults can be more like kids than kids...ain't it great? Scouting is great for that. I never felt out of place letting the kid in me "out for a while" (on a tether) when outdoors with the troop. The trouble with that whole thing was that I couldn't allow myself to look "too" much like a kid...in front of the kids. A friend of mine used to put it quite succinctly. When looking at Scouting from the adult leader point of view...he always joked that, "This Scouting thing wouldn't be all that bad...if it weren't for all these darned kids!!" God, we loved being out in the woods. We could belch with impunity. Of course, that was after the kids were fast asleep.......

Well, it would appear that my post above was one of my more misdirected and ill-thought-out posts, as I was attempting to read the OP here, and 2 other magazine articles all at the same time. Such as it is, the information flow from eye to brain resulted in one very bad post....sorry for that folks.

Finally, it has happened. The very first of our 50 states to openly condemn the BSA...as an state, not just individuals jousting with the BSA and its position. But an entire state!! That is truly amazing. And it would seem to speak volumes regarding where the millions of residents in that state stand. Yes, I know that's one heck of a lousy generalization. But, fact seems to be that there's no voice being put to the issue by those who would say that this is not representative of the population, only of the elected and appointed officials. (Is there a difference?) How can Scouting survive in an atmosphere so negatively charged against the BSA?

BINGO...!!!!! We have a winnah...!!! packsaddle...!!!

Our troop also never found itself blessed with those of the "actor" personality. At least, not in a planned forum. Hence...no skits. Now, what they did like to do was assist in the creating, editing, planning, and narrating of the (sometimes) audio (more often than not) video presentations that became more than just a slide or video show. They became background to the awards presentations that were going on. It began with a couple of adult leaders who continuously took slide pictures at all Scout events, and turned them into slide shows eventually choreographed with music (and not always Beethoven, either). A few Scouts became interested in helping with the process, and then showed an interest in narration. Of course, said narration was "approved" by the adult leader in charge of such things to be absolutely sure of content and relevancy. (LOL...try to keep a Scout relevant when his motor mouth is full of enthusiasm.) After a while, video cameras entered the mix, and before we knew it, the highlight of many a gathering, formal or not, COH or not, was this "presentation". Each presentation was edited to be as relevant as possible to the "earning" of the rank by this Scout or that. It could ensnare both serious and the not-so-serious moments of a Scouts career, and that of the troop. The events shown ranged from camping trips to fund raisers to regular meetings to summer camp and then some. And...the Scouts, at the prompting of the adults working with them, eventually caught on to the idea of bringing ancient history back into the mix for both troop related things, and Scout specific things...like an Eagle COH...where a sometimes not-so-delicate roast of the new Eagle was presented "after the awarding". It usually brought howls from everyone, including the newly elevated, both at Eagle COH's and regular COH's. This came about over time, but it was, and still is I believe, something over which the entire troop shows a lot of enthusiasm to create, participate in, and watch. No boring COH's in that troop.

I've always been of the mind that there is no better place for a boy to fail than in Scouting. Why? Because there are so many around him ready to pick him up and get him back on the trail, while helping to reinforce the "lesson learned" idea. That's part of the beauty of Scouting. Setting Scouts up to fail is a whole different, and undesirable path. One which we should not be using, even if the intentions are noble.

Gags, I think the key to using the SM minute can be stated in one word...relevancy. When I first learned of and started to use the SM minutes, I rarely made the connection between what was going on in the troops life at that moment. But eventually I began to see that making the SM minute more than just an arbitrary fable, but something that embraced real current events in the troop could be an attention getter. Planned or recent trips? Meeting agendas? Good or bad experiences by a Scout or 2 or 10? Basically taking in the big view of where the troop was, what they were working on, the problems, the initiatives, the goals, and the successes or failures within. And then tailoring the minute as best I could to that subject or experience. It does take some work, especially when first starting to use them. There are a multitude of available choices. But, if one sticks with it, and makes the effort to use the minute as often as one can, eventually the mind begins to remember not only the ones used, but the ones passed by in favor of another at a certain time. And after a while, the effort comes not so much from finding one, but from choosing between the ones stored mentally all pertinent to the moment...which one does the best job. You'll know if you've hit the nail squarely by the looks on the face at the moment you finish, not during the tale. A SM minute that is as relevant to the matter at hand as it can be will be the most provocative in the Scouts mind, setting the stage for a young man to really think...an action we sometimes find in short supply in young men and women. :-) (This message has been edited by saltheart)

A good follow-up question to Ed's would be... OK, now tell me why you think we should approve your application for Eagle... What I always looked for by that question was the level of confidence that the candidate could put forth that his abilities, his energies, his leadership, and his performance were worthy of the Eagle Award. I used to get the biggest kick out of hearing a worthy candidate, in response telling me that..."I deserve it. I've earned it." Indeed!! Hurrah for the boy who you know deserves it....and he knows, too. Confidence without being overly self-assured.