Sentinel947

Haha. My first philmont crew ended up allowing the slowest hiker to be the sweep. It didn't work. My first Philmont trek could be be a book How not to Backpack: What you shouldn't do on a hiking expedition. At least we were able to follow bear protocol properly, no small feat for that crew... lol

Hehe you better believe it. I hike in the back of the group. I know at the ripe age of 22 I'm probably one of the faster hikers (thanks ROTC!!!). Besides, the back of the group is solitude. Being towards the kids is where you have to listen to all the boys yammering.

I'm pretty sure that is how it is in my local district as well.

Agreed. 100%

Sorry Beavah, we're going to have to agree to disagree again. I don't think pointing out where people are violating policy counts as being the "Police." Certainly we can't apply that logic to everything, like Youth Protection. Only where we are inconvenienced maybe? Again you talk about inconveniencing the professionals, but in this case, it's their job. I literally posted the procedure a few posts up. You can discount it as lawyering if you'd like. The Council can talk to both sides in a way we cannot, and mediate a solution, which we cannot. They can impose a solution if they'd like, which we cannot. "Can yeh explain to me why the lad shouldn't just go on a few campouts and share his Eagle Scout talents and abilities with younger scouts, like those boys who did the same for him way back when? Seems like a fun, easy, happy "out" for everybody. The boy gets his award, with da full support of his unit. He gets to have some fun out campin'. He gets to give back to his troop and help others. The younger lads see that Eagle scouts are cool and caring and it's great to have 'em around. The younger lads are more enthusiastic about comin' to an ECOH and bein' Eagle themselves someday... way more than if they didn't really know the lad since he hasn't been participatin' since he did his six months some years ago. " YES. Sure, a great answer. He should be ENCOURAGED to do those things. He should have been when he became a Life Scout. Maybe the SM did and the scout ignored it. We have no idea. But to withhold his Eagle based made up requirements is not fair. Waiting till his BOR to ambush him is not fair. I will not agree with you that the Troop can make up their own requirements. Again, we must respectfully agree to disagree. I have no idea where your comment of traditional patrols and rogue comes from. If you've been reading the forum (I understand you took some time away from the forum), that myself and other folks who disagree with you are advocating for troops to "traditional" patrols. However you define the word. Sentinel947

My first post was a bit rushed. Ideally, you have multiple crews/patrols that have scouts who are of similar interest and ability (this is easier with BSA HA trips.) If your troop is using the patrol method, the boys need to set a pace that is acceptable to the group. As other's have said, the slowest hiker sets the pace. When I was a youth, I would frequently try to take gear off the slowest hiker and give it to the rest of the crew so the slow hiker could hike faster. Beyond physical conditioning, this is the only way to make a slower hiker hike faster. For Philmont, they do have a rank/age cutoff. For troop backpacking trips we(the adult advisers for the trip) sit down with any Scout and their parents who we have concerns about, and we talk it over. When on the fence we let them go. This has created quite a few headaches, but part of the process is the youth making decisions, and how to overcome a weak link on a team is a great life lesson to learn. My bigger concern isn't slow hikers, it's hikers who do not actually want to be there. I love backpacking, but if you're heart is not into it, it's terrible. Combine that with a unmotivated scout who is tired and physically chewed up by any meaningful hiking, and they are going to make that trip a not so fun trip for anybody involved. Philmont is the worst for that, as it's 11 days of hiking... This is definitely one of those areas where we as troop leaders have to use our best judgment, there aren't any blanket rules, but rather a few rules of thumb. @@Stosh, the idea of two people trailing the rest of the group scares me greatly. I saw something similar to that at Philmont. Going up Baldy Mountain, a crew passed us on a rest break up the mountain. Almost 15 minutes later, two of their adult advisers passed us. If one of them went down with an injury, the rest of their crew was 15-20 minutes up the mountain, and who knows when they would realize their advisers behind them were stuck and go back for them. (the top of the mountain?) Regardless of whether its a Scouting backpacking trip, or a trip with my college buddies, I refuse to split up the group for that reason. Better for the group to be taking it easy behind the slow hiker, rather than add additional risk by splitting up the group.

I agree. Appropriate activities are key. The fast group may be capable of 10 miles a day backpacking. The younger, less physically strong scouts may only be good for 5. But it depends, how many boys are going? Do you have enough scouts and adults for multiple crews? If not you unfortunately have to go for the level the slowest scout can make.

Very valid point. But any patrol as it forms or adds new members is going to have a lack of cohesion. Think the stages of team development. Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing. Ultimately, NSP's are one way to structure patrols for new scouts, not the only way. You gotta do what works for your Scouts. Also, look back at post 177. You've got a lot of cheerleaders here (including myself) that think your troop is moving in an awesome direction. Enjoy the peaks, use them to sustain when in the discouraging moments. It's a long process. Sentinel947

I've been a volunteer for 4 years now. I recognize that isn't as long as you and plenty of folks here, but I'd respectfully ask you don't trivialize my experience, just as I don't trivialize anybody else. Furthermore, being able to justify why you are doing something is not a punishment. Having your actions questioned is not a punishment. A good leader can justify why they make decisions. I love it when parents question things. It's a great to chance to teach about why we do what we do! When we do things the right way, by the procedures, it disarms the helicopters. It becomes their whims vs the program, rather than their whims vs our opinions. Again, we must agree to disagree. As for the spin off function, I'm unsure, I'll poke around and let you know. I believe I can spin the topic off if you make a post in this thread that is clearly labeled as the OP to your new thread, I can spin it. I'm not sure what's a user function vs a moderator function.

I don't have the documents memorized, but I am wicked good at typing "Guide to Advancement." into google. I don't think following BSA procedure as written is "Zero Tolerance." is defined as: A “zero tolerance policy†is a school or district policy that mandates predetermined consequences or punishments for specific offenses that are intended to be applied regardless of the seriousness of the behavior, mitigating circumstances, or institutional context. " I'm not advocating punishments for this SM or CC that are making up their own rules. Insisting that people follow the rules about running a program that they volunteered to uphold is NOT being a zero tolerance book thumper. In the case in the OP the Council should correct their mistake and let the adults responsible know they are off the reservation. We have plenty of chances to teach the proper lessons to our scouts over the journey through scouting. Springing a ambush about their "activity" when they've already met the tenure for the requirement, and making up extra requirements at the end of their Scouting career is wrong. I cannot justify it. Sorry. I believe in flexibility for leaders on how they run their Troops. But there are boundaries and rules to how we do things. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Are you trying to create an argument with that? I'm not sure what it contributes to the discussion at hand. This forum is not a court of law. I don't think we need to be using a legal standard of admit able evidence. We are not a judge, nor jury. It's an opinion forum. Regardless of what the OP has said, regardless of what the Scout, or the SM or the Committee has or has not done there is one INDISPUTABLE fact in all of this. The BSA has a process for "Eagle in disputed circumstances." It should be followed in this case. It should be used whenever there is disagreement between a Life Scout, and his SM/Committee that cannot be reconciled by said volunteers meeting with the youth and his parents. That is the only thing related to the OP that is completely factual. If a troop is following procedures, then they have nothing to fear. 8.0.3.2 Initiating Eagle Scout Board of Review Under Disputed Circumstances. Pg 59. http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf There are times where a Troop Leader or Committee is off the reservation, making up their own rules and requirements. I've seen it in my own unit in the past. I will never condone that behavior. I don't think it's a zero tolerance mindset. I think it's a following the Oath and Law mindset. What good comes from Scoutmasters ignoring the GTA? If you can make a case for why those rules should be disregarded, I'm all ears. When faced with situations like the OP, most youth and their parents don't know about 8.0.3.2. No scouts, and most parents read those documents, they generally trust that the Volunteers running the unit are doing the right thing. I think that's a good thing, but it does make it ripe to be abused. That being said, Beaver you are correct. We should take OP's like this with a grain of salt. Anybody who's been volunteering for any reasonable amount of time has met helicopter parents and emperor who have no clothes volunteers who make up their own rules. We all know both types of people exist. I think for the most part we encourage and empower folks to do the right thing. Sometimes the issues folks come asking for advice on are reconcilable differences. There have definitely been posts where a parents comes to complain and most of the forum members go "Nah, sounds like the Troop is doing it right." Sometimes, a SM/ASM/CC is abusing their authority, being a bully, and arming folks with knowledge of how the system works in order to resist that is the right thing to do. It's always important to remember, This is not an official BSA publication. Everybody is just putting their opinions out there. Cavat Emptor.

That's a pretty powerful stab..

Welcome to the forums. I just last summer was the Rifle Range Director at Camp Friedlander in Loveland Ohio. I don't know if I'd call it the highlight, but it is definitely a highlight of my time in Scouting. I'm not a huge fan of the article. It's kinda hard to quantify so simplistically what makes working at camp so awesome. Also, welcome to the forums. John.

Care to share where you've discovered that revelation from? Baden Powell talked quite a bit about Scouting utilizing the power of a gang of friends.

I hope so, we have before.... lol

Wow. I'm confused. So can Boy Scouts go Go karting in an authorized facility or is that only venturers?

What makes the 25th anniversary any different than the 24th? I'm not sure why you bring this topic up again. A simple forum search would get you the answer to your question. Most folks here have already put their opinions on the subject out there. At the end of the day, we're all trying to do what works best for our Scouts. We do us, you do you. Sentinel947

Hypothetically I might take action and suspend a Scout if they get in trouble with for some kind of violent behavior in or outside of Scouts. As for camping outside of the troop, I can't see how that's an issue at all.

That is good news! *Moderators note* Don't turn this to a debate on the same old issues for the BSA, or it will end up in Issues and Politics.

That's fine, you do you. When somebody pitches an idea that engages and involves those 16-17 year olds who have kinda done everything, it perks my interest. Yea. I've always looked at it from a consistent set of responsibilities, but I'm thinking you are correct that it's better to build the position to each individual scout and the situations at the time.

Thanks. So it's really on the SPL, PLs, SM, ASM's to identify needs. Perhaps even those JASM's can identify needs as well. Just have to ask them.

@Krampus What are some of the meeting to meeting roles your JASM plays? What is the positions working relation to the SPL and the SM? The BSA's description is painfully vague. Functions as an assistant Scoutmaster. Performs duties as assigned by the Scoutmaster. Sets a good example. What ASM functions does your JASM's perform? What kind of duties? Sentinel947

@@Eagledad I'd love to chat sometime about what role JASM's in your Troop play. It's a sorely underused aspect of our troop. We've really struggled to identify roles and responsibilities for that position.

Our Troop doesn't have a formalized policy on attendance. We haven't been burned by a slacker hard enough yet to feel the need to make one. The process you described is textbook like. Good job. Often when I chat with some of my troop's oldest scouts (17 year olds mostly) they get kinda sheepish about their involvement or sometimes lack of with the troop. I enjoy that conversation because it's a chance to reinforce that this program has a point. By 17 they should be taking their leadership skills and life skills sharing that with jobs and other activities. Isn't that the point of "prepared for life?" Scouts that are 14-16 and are starting to disengage from the program get a bit different conversation about their involvement. Normally this is more in the form of a challenge. It's talked a lot about on the forum that responsibility and leadership is what keeps older Scouts engaged with the program. In the nearly 4 years I've been an ASM, the single thing I am most proud of was sitting down for an informal chat with one of my scouts who was 14-15 at the time. He was stalled out in his rank advancement and wasn't coming to as many troop events. I'd been his Troop Guide when he crossed over, and shortly before I aged out. We talked about a whole variety of things, and then I kinda casually mentioned the Troop had nobody running for ASPL in the election the following week. He was hesitant about it, and said he'd talk with his dad about it. (Jokes on him, I'd already got his dad on board.) He went on to take the ASPL POR. Followed that up with NYLT (he won the honor camper award there, a first for our Troop) and a term as SPL. Our Troop took some massive steps forward with implementing the Patrol method during his SPL term. I'm not advocating for no attendance standards, and I expect soon my Troop will establish some, but those standards cannot replace the kind of chats @@Krampus described.