TAHAWK

We started out in this thread with "field uniform" being used in the Guide to Awards and Insignia, an "official publication." So that is a given. It is also regularly used in Scouting [magazine]. It also seems to be the case that "field uniform" is not currently used in any other "official" publication," including those most in use, the handbooks, and the publications exclusively dedicated to the uniform, BSA's uniform website and the uniform inspection sheets. http://bsauniforms.org/ I am at a point where I would like help in discovering when "field uniform" was first used, if it was ever "official," and, if official, when it ceased to be official. I am aware that some questions are never answered. Handbooks Thus far, I cannot find "field uniform" in a handbook, for boys or Scoutmasters. Boys' Life I have found the label "field uniform" used in Boys' Life in February, 1978, as a caption to pictures of the new uniform for female Scouters": "the Khaki Field Uniform for today's active ladies involved in the Scout program." In January, 1973, "Pedro" referred answered a question with a reference to: "the right sleeve of the green field uniform." Every other reference I can find in Boys' Life is to "the Uniform," "the Official Uniform," or "the Scout Uniform." Scouting Scouting, an official organ of the National Council, presents the inconsistent picture I, at least, have come to expect from our professionals. For example, it both states that the Patrol method is essential to Scouting AND publishes a story that clearly portrays the Patrol method as an option to be used or discarded at the adults' choice depending on how happy the adults are with the results. So, while continuing to use "field uniform," Scouting has said: Scouting, January, 2006 and May, 2006 [emphasis added] In contrast, in 1995. Scouting said: First of all, the BSA does not define uniforms by the terms Class A or Class B, which are from the military. The official (or field) Scout uniform is worn to formal Scouting activities and public events such as courts of honor, recognition dinners, and parades. The activity uniform, for use when a high level of physical activity is involved, consists of official pants (long or short), appropriate official activity shirt (red for all Scouts and Scouters), maroon or tan for Venture crew members , or custom Scout shirt (camp, unit, special event, etc.) and official olive socks.["Field uniform" is military in origin.] Scouting, October, 1995. Interestingly, this language rather clearly portrays the "field uniform" as a "dress," or "Class A," uniform at a time when BSA sold designated "Activity Uniform" garments, clothing the military would call "Class B" or "field." The designated "activity Shirt" went away years ago. It's last version was an ugly gray with a back vent. So too, did any reference to an "Activity Uniform" on BSA's uniform website (sixteen different combinations, but no "Activity Uniform") . But (of course?) Scouting continues to refer to the vanished "Activity Uniform." If you can add facts, please do. That is what I was hoping for. We will all decide for ourselves what this all means. No need to get edgy. (Careful using "pants" with UK Scouters. On that side of the Big Pond, "pants" are worn under "trousers" - at best.)

Certainly. I never suggested that slang has been "repealed." Especially if never "enacted," it cannot be "repealed." Nor have I even suggested that there is anything "wrong" with "Class A," for example, beyond newbies have to be told what in the world "A" is vs "B." Hardly worth getting all fired up over. Call it anything you like. Call it a "pickle." Anyone have an answer to my original question or my follow-up in post 32?

W h at to do? Find that statement from National that it's "field uniform."

Indeed, repeatedly used by Scouting. But your list is not all "is used." Many are "were used. And if you click on the first link drawn by your search, it's the BSA uniform site that nowhere mentions a "field uniform." And in the Boy Scout Handbook or Handbook for Scoutmasters? And on official inspection sheets? Don't forget Hanlon's Razor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor (And none of this is significant compared to Scouter running an article supporting the notion that the patrol Method is optional or a mere aspiration.)

"The {f,st,n,perf}orming sequence has more to do with personalities than arrows on a chalk board." Small wonder. BSA's rewrite of the syllabus reveals a lack of understanding of Tuckman's work and conclusions. He was interested in stages more than sequence since where a group "was" provided direction to what the leader needed to do to help the group progress.

There is no bluffing in The Game of Life - unless the staff took it upon themselves to abandon the syllabus. Read more about The Prisoner's Dilemma. Think about what "winning" means.

Google "the prisoners' dilemma" The game used by BSA was originally modified for BSA by Blanchard and Associates. You can google them too. The leading management consulting firm in the U.S. if not really all that Communist - nor run by Hitler. AT&T used the game to weed out people who abandon integrity to win a meaningless game. BSA uses it to illustrate how easy it can be to abandon integrity. If we lie to win a game that has no real benefit, what do we say to kids whose "friends" tempt them with drugs? I have been fortunate enough to see the WB version four times, once as a participant and each after I attended Blanchard's Situational Leadership course, and no one ended the exercise angry. It is very dependent on good staff. I have heard a variety of horror stories that all sound like poor staff. The money collected is planned to pay for the course. In one of the four courses I mentioned, there were storms that destroyed gear, and the Council took a bath. The others generated "profits" under $100.00.

Asking about camping gear is like asking about cars or the "best" football team.. Lots of opinions. You are looking for value, not cheap. CLOTHING Appropriate clothing is the first requirement and always up to the Scouts and their families in my experience. Still, you can organize fund-raisers to help. "A Scout is thrifty. he pays his own way." The most common problems are footwear for challenging conditions. Ponchos do for wet weather. Coated nylon, not plastic. TENTS Every tent I have seen from Walmart (not perhaps all they have but what was purchased) was junk with bare-minimal coating (1000mm; below that it's illegal to call it "waterproof") that soon leaked, fiberglass poles that broke, zippers that failed, and almost no high-to-low ventilation (= severe condensation inside tent.). All our K-marts around here closed. They are closing all over the country. ePrey is full of junk tents. The Internet is full of user reviews. If you buy tents, buy plastic to go outside AND inside. The tents will last much longer and stay drier. (Wash with water only. Put away totally dry Use two hands to open and close zippers.) PACKS Packs are again usually a personal gear item Whoever pays, if you think a pack will work, buy one(1) and try it out. Room for the sleeping bag, tent, share of patrol gear and food? It should have a frame (internal or external), padded shoulder straps, and padded waist belt. [Just because I had to suffer with a haversack (e.g. ALICE or Yucca Pack) is no excuse for bending kid's back into a pretzel. It is supposed to be fun, not SEAL training.] COOKING/KP GEAR I have purchased hundreds of pots and dozens of green Coleman stoves over the years at house, garage, and estate sales, including almost complete BSA Trail Chef Cook Kits. Since the pots are typically distributed to be carried on backpackers, they do not have to perfectly nest, just work. Churches that used to have troops often has a room in the basement with cooking (and other) gear. Your service center probably has ladies who can help you search for orphaned gear. Dollar stores have all the utensils you need that you cannot find at house, garage, and estate sales. Dish washing needs a pot to heat water, some plastic tubs, and something to scrub with (Split infinitives make great scrubbers due to their sharp edges.). The Midnight Curb Store has supplied all the draining racks I could ever use in the form of racks from dish-washers being scrapped. They sit nicely on discarded "lawn chairs." Imaging planning in advance?

Maybe you local supplier didn't offer all the choices. I was in SoCal.

My first Scout shirt was purchased in July, 1954, and it had no collar. That's what everyone else in the Panther Patrol was wearing, and you know how that goes. "Official Shirt Sanforized. Still has the 1955 Camporee patch on the pocket.

When I was a Scout and Scouter in the 1950's and 1960,'s, collarless shirts were an option.

Makes me appreciate Banana Republic generals.

What about attaching the out? Again, BSA sells the ribbons already. There is room on the BSA leather name tag's flab for 4-5 pins.

There is no rule that even discusses decoration of name tags. BSA sells a leather name tag that it suggests might be decorated. I say, "Go for it." (I mean, BSA hires lawyers.)

Like:

A ribbon. Really?

Read Eagle 94-A1's post. I gave the source of the reference to a "field uniform." It says what it says. What meaning do you assign to a single reference that conflicts with all other official literature and the official uniform website? (Thanks for the correction. I kant tipe a lic.)

So far as I can tell, BSA was the only group to call a shade of green "khaki." "Khaki," as many here know, was a Hindustani word for dirt-colored. Khaki replaced red in the UK military uniform when they noticed what a grand target red was for Boers with 7mm Mauser rifles. Perhaps the same thought process that resulted in calling 2010 the "Centennial of scouting." ( It wasn't even the centennial in the U.S.)

Yes, a "Scouter named Kirk" thinks there is still a field uniform. He is hardy alone. Many still think that is the terminology, but when newer Scouters or parents try to find what that is, it is not defined, or even used, in current B.S.A. literature, but for a single example in the Guide to Awards and Insignia (if they find it) relating to wearing the OA sash. So I get repeatedly asked what this "field uniform" is. Is it, I am asked, different from the plain "dress uniform." [AKA "Boy Scoutâ„¢ Uniform (Youth)] It's not that using obsolete and unofficial terminology is a sin, but it does interfere with communication. I'm just trying to track down when the "field uniform" came and went. qwazse, on 30 Sept 2015 - 3:05 PM, said: Is what was so 'colorful" the khaki background, as opposed to OD, or the appearance of all the colorful patches? Those started appearing below what I know to call "ODL." When BSA went to 'subdued" patches, it got less colorful although on the same khaki background. No?

"ODL"? Olive Drab ? Class A, Class B, and Field Uniform are U.S. Military terms. "Field uniforms Utility and organizational uniforms, excluding the hospital duty and food service uniforms, that are worn in field, training, or combat environments." "The class 'A' ASU [Army Service Unform] includes the army blue coat and trousers/skirt/slacks, a short or long sleeve white shirt and four-in-hand necktie (male)/neck tab (female) (for accessories and other items authorized for wear on the class 'A'." "The class 'B' ASU includes the army blue trousers/skirt/slacks, a short or long sleeve white shirt. Soldiers will wear the four-in-hand necktie with the long sleeve white shirt when it is worn without the class 'A' coat."

In 1929, it was the "Scout Uniform" or "Official Uniform" in the Handbook for Patrol Leaders. It consisted, in major part, of the "Regulation shirt" and "Regulation breeches" (or shorts). In 1936-1941, it was the "Official Uniform" in the Handbook for Scoutmasters. When I joined Scouting, it was the "Uniform" or the "Scout Uniform. Handbook for Boys, 5th Ed. (1955) and remained so when the 6th Edition came out to celebrate B.S.A.'s fiftieth birthday. When I became a Scoutmaster, the Scoutmaster's Handbook referred only to the "official Boy Scout uniform." 5th Ed. (1959). My first SM had given me his old Handbook for Scoutmaster's (4th Ed. (1952), and it said the same. There was no change when I next became a Scoutmaster in 1981 (Scoutmaster Handbook, 7th Ed.) The current literature refers to the "official uniform" or simply the "Uniform." 12th Boy Scout Handbook, 12th Ed. at p. 33 See also http://www.scoutstuff.org/boy-scout-uniform-youth.html#.Vgv7gvlVhBc("Uniform," [to be precise: "Boy Scoutâ„¢ Uniform (Youth)"] A single reference to a "field uniform" appears at p. 57 of the Guide to Awards and Insignia (omitted from the index). Otherwise, it's the "uniform" over and over again. Then we have the world of blogs, official and otherwise, and unofficial websites, where the "field uniform" lives on. When did B.S.A. start using "field uniform" and when did B.S.A. stop using it?

Ran across this language in my first SMHB: Scoutmaster's Handbook (1959) at p. 145. I wonder when the just-removed prohibition of wearing the neckerchief over civies originated.

Stosh, if the boys have been misinformed, as you hypothicate, why are they showing arrogance by doing what they have been (incorrectly) trained to do? Ins't it on whoever gave them the wrong information? Answered above. The uniform, or lack, is irrelevant. The presence of Scouts (or Cubs or Venturers or Explorers) is determinative.

Thank you. I can but try, (Pun fully avoided. )

And did it help when BSA sold Cub Scout denim trousers? Stosh, the fact that some do not understand the alcohol policy does not change that policy. Wearing or not wearing the uniform is unrelated to the alcohol policy. It applies to non-uniformed adults as well as Scouters.