Bob White

Mark, Who ever said it was a secret? I said, like the rest of you, "I don't know"! I never asked because it was never relevant (and in my opinion still isn't). The patrols are told that they can go to a private campground that is approved by the parents and scoutmaster. If a scout were to ask "can we go to the scout camp" (and I do not recall one ever asking) I'd say, "no you need to find your own place on private property". It's the same answer I would give if they asked to go to a state park. Who knows the reason? I suspect it has to do with insurance carriers who couldn't care less about the patrol method. It could have to do with only having one ranger and the possibility of one on one contact. It could be proximity of troops with adults and patrols without adults and the YP problems that could arise. Whatever the reason it has nothing to do with a patrol saying "we have an invitation for my patrol to camp at my Uncle Ben's farm." Would you say "No, I'm sorry you can't do that because the council does not allow patrol camping at the scout camp"? Where they can go is the only thing that matters. They can go anywhere where the owner of the property, the parents, and the SM, say yes. Forget "why can't we" and focus on "how will we". The units that do patrol activities don't worry about not going to scout camps, why in the world are units that don't use it worried about it? Bob White (This message has been edited by Bob White)

I hardly think "sanction " is an apropriate word. The BSA does not sanction any scout method. They created the American program. It is what it is. The BSA program teaches how to use white gas but it is prohibited in almost every council camp. Why would a leader that doesn't use Patrol activities be concerned about where it can't go to not do it? How about getting patrol skills developed to the point the patrol can do some simple day activities, hikes, bowling, cycling, x-country skiiing, sledding, swimming at the Y, etc.. Then when they are ready to camp they will find a place. It is not the troops responsibility. It is for the patrol to choose to do, make a plan and get the SM okay. Bob White

Mark, Why would knowing why you cannot go to property X, have any bearing as to why you would not let scouts go to private property A, B C, D, E, F, G, H, I, etc. etc.. It seems to me that leaders are using this a a self imposed crutch. You should be celebrating this program revelation not looking for reasons to squash it. For decades patrols have camped without letting this bother them. Why now is it such a big deal? I already told you haow to handle it with adults in a nearby but separate site. Plus there are lots of other places to go. Not to mention starting off eith day activities. Fishing, hiking, x-country skiing, bowling, swimming at a public pool. Etc. Bob

So many things to cover... Tour permits are for Troops, Packs, Webelos Dens and Crews, not Patrols. Patrols are unique because they are the only scout unit that is not adult lead. Their plan needs to be approved by the parents and the Scoutmaster ONLY. I never said that none of the leaders here used patrol activities, I said "many". Patrol overnighters are the sandlot baseball of scouting. It is designed for the boys to do all the arrangements. Let them find private property they can stay on. A short time ago many of you would not even consider letting patrols camp, now you still don't have anyone going and your complaining about not getting to use a facility for something you have never done. I wouldn't want a patrol in a scout camp in proximity with adults who do not know or use the scouting program. I want to see the patrol on private property "on their own" were they can develop as a patrol without interference from outside influences. So even if a Scout camp alllowed it I would discourage its use. Can you imagine the hassle a patrol would have to combat if they ran into some leaders who didn't know patrols could camp. They would spend their entire weekend having to defend their right to the activity. Focus on the training and let the boys them find private property were they can be "on their own". OGE I'm sorry I cannot give you an answer that I do not have. Nor am I interested in either the question or the answer. Not using council property has never hindered our Patrol Activities and I do not anticipate that it ever will. Kids who have never been scouts find places to camp with thier buddies all the time. I have nor reason or experience that leads be to believe that scouts could not do so as well. This is a lot of waving of hands and gnashing of teeth over nothing. Bob White

Saltheart, have you ever asked a State Park why you need an adult in the campsite? Or why is Quiet Time at 10PM and not 9:45 or 10:15? Why in my state can you only have two tents in a site? I have never asked, I never cared, It never stopped me from camping. Every place has rules to follow. What I find funny is that the ability for Patrol Activities, without adult supervision, has been in every BSA Scout Handbook since 1910, it's mentioned in YP training, Adult leader training, the SM handbook and the G2SS. Yet the vast majority on this board never knew it until just recently, despite years of experience as a Scoutleaders. Why is that? How could something that publicized have gone unnoticed leaders for so long? Now that you know, all you can talk about is "why can't we go to scout camps". Why do you even care, a short time ago you never even considered letting patrols do the activities that their handbook said thay could do. Now all you want to do is gripe about not being able to go to a specific place. Don't let the curmudgeons of the forum sidetrack you from the real issue. Has the troop program in the unit you serve prepared patrols for independent activities? Forget about the rules of camp, have you done your job? That is the only issue that should concern you. My guess would be that insurance companies do not concern themselves with the patrol method when they set premiums for scout councils. By the way does your camp have the resources to have rangers always traveling in pairs to avoid situations that could viloate YP regs. They are scouters too you know. What if your council did not have a scout camp? Would you quit going outdoors? As I said before, why not use the scout camps for patrol activity but have a couple adults camp a couple sites over. Nothing says they have to interact with the scouts. We are scout leaders, we are supposed to be positive role models not whiners. Bob White (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Patrol activities have existed in and out of scouting for almost a hundred years without the use of scout camps. Why the sudden need for them? Do you really believe that the boys cannot find anywhere to go? Why do you want to create hurdles? Anybody can find excuses not to do something. Shouldn't we be setting the example to scouts on how to make things happen? State and national parks have campgrounds, but the state and federal employees cannot send kids to camp there without adults. So do you think they never camp on private property? Please do not dwell on where you can't go, and focus on developing the patrols to be independent. Believe me they will find places to go.

Sorry but I'm not familiar with that old saying. Is it from the same person who said "Personally, I agree with not letting patrols go on campouts without the Troop. ....If a patrol starts camping on their own, then why even belong to a troop?" Evmori 3/2002 Is it really legitimate to discourage others from experiencing an element of the scouting program that you haven't even tried? Bob White

In class it's full field uniform. Out of class it's your choice. most wear scout type clothes, camp shirts etc. Family can wear whatever. Your 12 yearold may want uniform for his group photo.

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

"How about they are just too apathetic to do them?" That is the pessimism of unhappy adults not the nature of children who are scout age. Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

OGE First the patrol method and patrol activities existed years before scout camps existed. Second, Council scout camps have been around for decades and patrols haven't needed to go camping there. It just one location OGE, don't let this be a sticking point. I have never met a patrol that didn't go on patrol activities because they had nowhere to go. They didn't do them because either the scoutmaster said they couldn't or never told them it was possible. The hurdle for us to focus on is preparing the scouts to be able to act independently, the patrols will figure out places to go, just wait and see. As a scout we had 8 patrols and we all went on patrol outings, the SM never had to find a place for us and we never even asked about scout camp. Bob White

I would doubt that the OA is a qualified Chartering Organization. It is possible for an approvewd organization to charter a crew and limit membership to OA members. But the BSA's congressional charter restricts the BSA from chartering units itself. So a troop cannot charter a pack and an OA Chapter, I am pretty sure, cannot charter a crew. One way I have seen Venturing and befor that Explorring used in conjuction with OA was that a unit was formed for the dance team and ceremony members of the OA. This allowed them control of a separate bank account that was used exclusively to fund costiming and props needed for OA ceremonies. Bob White

How did the scout drown? As the SM did you know that the land had a body of water. Were the scouts trained in the Safe Swim Defense Plan, which requires adult supervision for all water activities? Was the patrol mature enough to be allowed to camp near water? Did the scout leader and the land owner inform the scouts of any restrictions for using the property such as "stay out of the water"? If, as the Scoutmaster, you feel the property is inappropriate for the activity you can have the patrols find a new location or require that two adults camp nearby as a safety device. Rather than not use the full program for fear of what could happen, why not plan ahead and be prepared to control or remove the hazards that you see as a problem? Scout Camps like other council and district functions are designed to sertve Packs, Troops and crews. All of which are lead by adults. But why not have two adults camp in a nearby site? Not having BSA camps available to patrols without adults is not a big deal. There are far more potenial camping opportunities on privatre land than there are scout camps in a council, plus in many councils the camps are several hours away. Let's not be "the glass is half empty" kind of leaders, we have enough of those already. Don't worry about where the scouts can go. That's their job to arrange. Our task is to get them skilled enough to be capable of patrol activities when the opportunity and the interest arises. Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Here in the US, apparently most WB beads are made by staffers of the WB courses." I'm not sure what your souce is for that statement Owl62. That may be the case in your area, but I think you will find that nationally most WB beads come from BSA national supply division. Bob White

OGE, Why would you assume you are sunk, did you contribute in some way to the scout's accident? Did you violate some safety policy of the BSA. Were you negligent in some way as either the property owner or the scout leader? As the Scout leader you did the right thing, you followed the program and it's rules. The BSA cannot keep anyone from sueing you, but they will provide your legal defense at no charge and should you you be found liable in any way the BSA will pay all court cost and fines against you. So you have no reason to think you are sunk. Patrols have gone camping without adults for almost 100 years. Somehow I do not see them altering the program just because one of your scouts has an accident. Do not be swayed from utilizing the entire program by leaders who never have. If you want to get complete results you have to give scouts complete responsibility Lord Robert Stephenson Baden-Powell Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

DRINK LOTS OF WATER. The most important part of staying healthy at Philmont either on trek od at PTC is hydration. PTC sits at anelevation just over 6,000 ft and mudity is often around 7%. It actually sucks moisture from you each time you exhale. You should be drinking at least a gollon of water each day, even if you are just sitting in class. Take lots of picture. This is a gorgeous place lots of incredible views and wildlife. Your living quarters are spacious wall tents with a closet, electricity and metal cots with comfortable mattress. But the doors are still just canvas flapes and the deer and skunk can smell food from a mile away. NO FOOD OF ANY KIND IN THE TENT, unless you want company. One night is western night, BBQ, barn dance, western games, branding. The branding lines can be long so get in line early. Dress the part of cowboy life it adds to the fun. Be open to change. Be willing to participate. The classes are more conferences than lecture. Everyone has solutions and successes to share. Expect to come back to PTC again and again. Once you go you will get Philmont Fever. It's a place the entire family will fall in love with. Happy Scouting, Bob White(This message has been edited by Bob White)

He is incorrect. As proof direct him to the newly published Patrol Leaders Handbook. Bob White

BSA properties, State, and National parks all require that youth be under the supervision of adults. Private land is really your only choice for overnight stays. Patrol day activities on the the other hand are far more flexible. Bob White

Hi Yarrow, Yes the scouts can only be registere in one troop at a time. But no matter which troop they are registere with they are still members of the BSA and have all the priviledges of membership. If they are currently registered with another troop they can still participate with yours as guests, the only thing you must be careful of is that you cannot submit any advancement for them through your unit and council. Advancement reports for them must come through their current registered troop. Bob White

Again fine entertainment. But you showed them uniforms that they don't even wear. If you expect a child to translate seeing a uniform that is a different design, different color, has awards they don't have and badges they don't have, into understanding what they should wear and how they should wear it, then you have a real up-hill battle on your hands. Kids just do not think that way. They laughed, that's great. They got to cheer and moan at the adults, always a fun thing. But did they learn, and did the learning result in significant measurable changes? The chances are small. Bob White

Tis is really not a safety based rule. If it were then rifle, shotgun, archery, Rock Climbimg and a myriad of other activities would have been banned long before laser-tag. Bottom line is that scouting is an edicational system designed to teach values. Learning to point a weapon at another person is not one of the values we are trying to teach. Some have brought up squirt gun fights as a comparison. I was taught over twenty years ago in scouting that water fights are fine but squirt guns are not appropriate in a scouting event. So you cannot blame todays "PC" society. Here is an alternative...We have always used squeeze bottles (empty dish soap bottles mostly) they spray a lot further and dispense more water. Plus, they are cheap, readily available and paractically indestructable. Another great thing to use are large sponges. But we have never done "gun fights" and no scout or parent has ever complained that it wasn't fun or wasn't appropriate. Again this is not about saety it is about values. I would agrre that there are times when having to shoot someone is required (in the military or in law enforcement for instance), but those situations have their own specific training and do not require that they be learned or used by scout aged boys. I like paint ball and laser tag too. But that does not mean that they further the goals of scouting. Bob White

"The bad example is only part of that process." That could very well be twocubdad, but it was also the only part of the skit that you explained in your post. Do not blame me for my comments, if you do not share the entire presentation. Bob White

Ed, A college instructor teaches much differently then your second grade teacher did. If you look back at your Wood Badge notes, you will find that adults learn differently than children. Children are far more visual in their learning than adults. In addition, a childs limited experience does not allow him the same filtering that an adult has developed over the years. As an instructor it is necessary to deliver the lesson in a way that your audience can receive and process it. Showing the wrong method and expecting a child to be able through experience or deduction to extract the correct method is not compatible to their abilities or thought process at that age. Bob White

Again twocubdad, This is a different problem. I do not see your skit as harmful to a scout, I do see it as very funny. If the purpose of the skit is to entertain I would thing it was very effective. I would even bet if you asked a scout what your exaggerated uniform looked like that many would be able to recall it in great detail because of the visual impression it made. But, if the goal was to train or educate its results were probably less successful than you might think. At this age children learn a lot from what they see and experience. What they saw was a funny uniform in a funny skit. What they learned was if you dress funny you can make people laugh and have a good time (not that there is anything wrong with that). But showing the wrong thing is not as effective a teaching tool as demonstrating the right way. Would you teach a child how to tie a shoe by showing him ways to not tie it? Do you teach someone how to dress by dressing funny? Or do you teach him how to dress funny by dressing funny? I am sure you entertained and thats fine, but was that your goal? Bob White (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Twocubdad, You told a terrific story, unfortunately it wasn't what I posted the thread about. It was not relevant to the situation or the questions posed as the topic of the thread. I was asking about mimicking a specific scout in front of the others. I cringe at the thought that an adult leader would want to "put an exclamation point on how foolish this boy looks" I personally do not find that in keeping with the values of the program that we are there to teach. Although I am not a big fan of using demonstration of incorrect behavior as a training technique for children of this age, I do not see your skit as being personally harmful to a scout. Bob White