TAHAWK

David, the idea, I thought, is that Scouters learn outdoor skills so they can pass them on to Scouts, preferably through other Scouts. I too would not favor using Scouting resources only to make Scouters more skilled for themselves. And teaching, promoting, and requiring the Patrol Method should have higher priority as it is a more important method (or at least B.S.A. has said so for generations).

If every "maybe" is the worst option one can imagine, it would not be so good.

Were the courses required and were they useless. But advanced outdoor skills is not even available and it seems to some that better outdoor skills could lead to better outdoor program.

Given the time limit, I give priority to highlights not covered in the Handbook (and topics are not easy to find given the lack of a true index), such as features of boots for backpacking, avoiding cotton socks, SOTP, the concept of "Home Base" and what information needs to be there, and the myth of "waterproof breathable" garments.

The current IOLS syllabus devotes 1.25 hrs to backpacking and hiking. I have delivered that session in May, June and July of this year for two different councils, and only 60 minutes was allocated in each case.

I suspect you are right about the motivation.

OK. Waiver. Any knowledge of where that is authorized? I know more than one council expressly states that "Because of the advanced nature of the training, these requirements may not be waived." I also know of one patrol that had four members with no training of any kind - zero, nadda, zip. They had a tad over six years in Scouting as adults - combined. The other two patrol members were wonderful about sharing their experience and training.

It seems to be the case that a troop Scouter must have completed SM/ASM Position Specific and IOLS before taking Wood Badge. http://www.scouting.org/filestore/training/pdf/Trained_Leader_Positions.pdf This requirement is not being uniformly honored. Are there any consequences when councils allow untrained - some totally untrained - Scouters to take Wood Badge? Any contact info for someone at National Council who should know? (Yes, the basic training courses are not always wonderful, but they seem hardly likely to be improved if deemphasized.)

I was told by an American Legion member and Scouter today that any flag flown at a veteran's grave must be thereafter removed and burned."according to the flag code." He was very sincere, Apparnetly, they collect all the small flags placed on graves on Memorial Day and burn them.

Council websites get this wrong, which is fairly amazing since the rule has been unchanged for a long, long time: "If wearing all or part of the uniform is impractical for whatever reason, the candidate should be clean and neat in his appearance and dressed appropriately, according to his means, for the milestone marked by the occasion. Regardless of unit, district, or council expectations or rules, boards of review shall not reject candidates solely for reasons related to uniforming or attire, as long as they are dressed to the above description." A Board of Review might discover that the candidate has not met the requirements for the rank. I know for a fact that it has happened, including an Eagle candidate who, upon extermination, had earned twenty Merit Badges.

The ceremony needs to be dignified and respectful. If you regard cutting the Flag into pieces as disrespectful, you should not do it. Many years have passed since I watched the First Marine Division retire a U.S. flag. They separated the "Field of Valor" from the strips before burning. I was told by a Sgt Major that they flag was cut so it was no longer the U.S. Ensign.

I supposed everyone has his or her own homesickness story. A stayed at the Health Lodge while doing SM/ASM training this week, and a boy (12) came to see the nurse at least twice each day. He was on his "device" repeatedly to Mom begging her to come get him, although it appears she was telling him to tough it out, The SM said the Scout was OK when busy in a MB session or other activity, but began to get weepy with any spare time and would progress to hyperventilation. The SM was doing his best to keep him busy, but could not devote 100% of his time to one of 23 Scouts and had as his only adult support a brand-new dad who was "uncomfortable with a crying kid.".

The people who put this plan together mean well, but listen to Stosh and Beav. It's not school. It's the anti-school. It's not regimented. It's individual - driven by the Scout's interest, not adults. The goal is the Scout learning for himself as much as possible. Further, according to B.S.A. for 85 years and in 2016, Scout skills are to be primarily learned by doing in the patrol through the effort of the Scouts in that patrol.. "The patrol, not the troop, is] the place where boys learn skills together and operate a mini democracy" "Patrols will sometimes join with other patrols to learn skills and complete advancement requirements. [emphasis added] . . . At other times they will compete against those same patrols in Scout skills and athletic competitions." To the extent that the troop is more, the patrol - the fundamental unit and site of Scouting - is less. NOT good.

Bandages vs, red hot iron? Water filter vs. prayer? Cloth vs. hides? Boots vs, calluses? Steel vs. stone? Aluminum vs. birch bark? I'm with da' Beav . "Too much?" seems like a question of whether a particular technology is fitting the methods and helping meet the goals or taking the Scouts away from Scouting.

Does the training have o b renewed periodically?

scoutldr, your observation about wenches seems to be zipping right over some Scouterly noggins.

I recall the third "new" program for youth 14 and older - in 1959.

And another example of troop, troop, troop.

Yes. you can. My old troop did that every other year - well, twelve times in twenty-five years. Council camps were for experiences we could not supply - like motor-boating. We did the "Scoutcraft" part better than a council camp because we had far better staff overall. Much more room so every patrol was in its own "troop site." Food was what they wanted and that they cooked. Iron Chef patrol competition every Thursday. Much lower cost. Arrive Friday. Leave nine days later. Compare that to the five days of a "week" at council camp. The new President means well, just like Council Presidents, most of whom also know little about Scouting. He talks as he does because that is the language of the world he knows best. Does he understand that Scouting has two very different classes of "customer" - boys and parents? Does he know that B.S.A., on its part, behaves as if its "customers" are donors? Indeed, B.S.A. needs to act differently. B.S.A. has misplaced the Patrol Method (Many of its employees don't even know what it is, describing it on Scouter.org as a aspect of the boy-led troop [ ].), reduced the effort to train adult and youth leaders (less time to train new SMs; elimination of district-level youth leadership training), deemphasized the outdoor program (JTE calls a lock-in playing video games a "weekend campout") and lost track of its true "core constituency" by focusing on sources of donations to meet payroll rather than parents with Scouting-aged boys. It's as if AT&T had confused communication with copper wire. WE NEED MORE SCOUTS AND MORE AND BETTER-TRAINED VOLUNTEER LEADERS. If this is not effectively addressed, nothing else will matter. YMMV

Pardon me if this is repetitive, but the troop I was with for 25 years had only one way to 'sign up" for Summer Camp. The name went on the list only when the paperwork and check were received. Until then, you were not regarded as going to camp. This was announced in a letter about Summer Camp that went out in late January, and in the monthly newsletter thereafter. It was also announced with increasing frequency at troop meetings until the deadline passed. "Sorry, we didn't know you wanted Johnny to go so no place was made for him. Maybe if someone drops out . . . ." Sadly, the troop I am with now allows you to "sign up" and then someone chases after the papers and money. They also cannot seem to get gear back that is checked out. I suppose that one can keep using the same practices and expect to get different results.

To acknowledge the more positive aspects of life, the other parents seem perfectly happy to see their sons serve the community.

I distinguish between what a CO is entitled to do and what it can do. Given the B.S.A's language in the Guide to Advancement and the statement of the spokesperson for the B.S.A. advancement team quoted above, it does not appear that B.S.A . agrees with David's CO about what it is entitled to do, although, as a practical matter, units very rarely have their charters pulled.

Fred, my "for example" question addresses one consequence of excluding boys. If you exclude them you can hardly expect to influence them towards any values, yes? King, as to "backdoor," I don't know exactly what Mr. Coppock meant, although I can speculate. As I suspect you know, different churches, indeed different congregations within those churches and their IHs, have widely different behaviors as far as seeing Scouting as a pathway for evangelism goes. One troop I had at a large Methodist church in the 1980s was almost totally ignored by the church. They even told us to take Scouts wanting to work on religious awards to the Episcopal church near us . They had no time to work with the Scouts. The Methodist church that sponsored my boyhood troop was very careful to respect all of the many religions of its Scouts, facilitating any Scout's interest in religious awards of their faith . (Dr. Bob played golf with the local Monsignor and the local Conservative Rabbi. I can't recall the joke Dr. Bob told us, but it was something about rocks in a water hazard.)

I want to discuss. in the context of Scouting, whether it's a good idea to exclude youth on the basis that they are not adherents to a particular faith. You think it's wrong to even discuss the topic. I don't. If you believe that the values of Scouting a worth spreading, the topic bears on how best to spread those values. Discussing a topic may make us think about how well we are working to spread the values of Scouting - or not. Since the topic is a subset of the topic of religion, I think it is interesting what religious leaders think about the topic. “Fifty percent of the youth who meet in our churches through Boy Scout troops, Cub Scout packs and Venturing crews come from unchurched families,†he said. “Scouting represents a ‘back door’ ministry for bringing youth to Christ.†Larry Coppock, director of Scouting ministries for United Methodist Men And I am not arguing with 'em. The fact that you believe this issue should not be discussed does not mean we cannot discuss this issue, it just means we apparently cannot discuss it with you.

Please read the OP. It was not my intention to discuss anything more than raised in the OP: excluding youth from membership in a Boy Scout troop on the grounds that they do not belong to a 'religion." David's unit is only an example. I know from personal experience of other troops that adopted a policy of excluding the unchurched. I have asked members to stick to that issue, but this is the Internet. Topic drift seems to be inherent. You are a mod.