Bob White

You will likely not get a response based on your list. It has too many errors for a unit to try and operate within. First, 14 months is not fudging. Remember this is not a First Class, First Year plan. It is the First Class Emphasis plan and it is based on a 12-14 month period (always has been). 1) the plan is not based on any specific amount of participation it is based on a plan to teach and apply skills. Nor is it based on 100% of new scouts achieving 1st Class. It is based on teaching and applying all the skills of Tenderfoot to First Class. 2)There is no limit to the number of outings a unit can have each month nor does the program limit when a scout can learn or apply a skill. Part of good teaching is to get the student to appreciate that learning and applying knowledge is not limited to a specific time or place. 3)Assumes living in an area with weather? I have no idea what that means. Are you aware of an area that has no weather? 4) Sign off levels? News to me, never heard of it, never used. Been teaching skills for a lot of years. The best way to test the scout is to put him in a situation where the skill can be applied, When he applies it correctly he completes the requirement. Often time a scout can complete multiple requirements in a single task or activity. The amount of practice will vary with each person depending on existing skills, and learning ability. As an example I have seen scouts who have already taken Red Cross training and needed no practice for most of the First Aid requirements. I have had competetive swimmers who needed no practice for their swim tests. 5)If only half your participants "got it" then shame on you for stopping the teaching. If the learner hasn't learned then the teacher hasn't taught. 6) if advancemnt is just 1/8 of the methods and so we can only work on advancement 12-15 minutes of the meeting...and uniforming is 1/8 of the methods ...does that mean we can only be in uniform for 12-15 minutes as well??? We both know that is not how you implement the methods of Scouting. It is a layered application. Often times multiple methods are being used at one time. 7)You cannot do First Class emphasis and not use the multi-tier program of which the New Scout Patrol is key. The Scouting program model is to have patrols made of scouts of similar ages and interests. 8) 8 New Scouts would be in either a single New Scout Patrol, or Two New Scout Patrols. I would probably use two NSPs because I would expect a couple or three other new scouts to join in the next few months and they could be added. 9)I wish only one was unreasonable but as you now see they are all false premises for a well planned 1st year program. To detail an entire 1st year on a forum is more typing than I would do, and more than most would want. Instead if I could recommend the use of the Troop Program Features volumes 1,2, and 3, as sort of a primer to learning program planning. Each skill is outlined in a monthly theme with three program features each directed at one of the three patrol tiers. Also The New Leader Essentials Training has an excellent excercise that would help demonstrate how multiple methods are used to address multiple Aims, and complete multiple requirements at a single activity. I would recomment revisiting that excercise. Then, let's start a new thread on how to have games and activities that allow scouts to practice and apply skills, rather than say "here do this requirement for me", or waste time playing dodge ball when there are no requirements T-1C related to dodge ball. Hope this helps! BW

"The actual data is that Boy Scouting membership has declined substantially since First Class Emphasis was put into effect." Untrue. The membership decline did not begin until 2000, First Class Emphasis plan was introduceed in the late 1980's. There is no way to explain that a plan to help scouts develop basic scout skills caused a reduction in membership more than 10 years after it was introduced. How can you say that a minority of the units used it yet it caused the membership nationally to drop? How can both conditions logically be related? To say that to teach scouts the skills for advancement hurts the program makes no sense. Learning the skills of scouting IS the program. I would welcome any evidence that actually linked having a planned program to teach the Tenderfoot to First Class Skills in 12 to 14 months has caused membership loss in a council let alone nationally. While we wait for that example to arrive let's give a shout out to a unit who has it absolutely spot on. I did a google search for units using First Class Emphasis and while I found some doing it wrong, I found some doing it as it was designed. Here is a shining example of a unit that not only "gets it" but does it. Kudos to Troop 175 in Peachtree , GA. HEE HAAAW! http://www.ptctroop175.org/firstclass.htm

In order to give a specific answer as to you what you can do we would need to understand your role in the unit. Are you a Scout, a parent, an assistant scoutmaster, a committee member? Each has a differne tavanue to take.

"Still, I don't think FCFY is required. Motivation to create the FCFY program was to increase scout numbers in the troop," Actually not. FCFY was a certificate you could present to a scout who achieved that personal goal. First Class Emphasis is a program plan for teaching and applying the basic scout skills. In field testing it showed to retain a significant higher number of 1st year scouts in units that used it compared to units where scouts were not exposed to the skills of Tenderfoot to First Class in the First year. "I heard not too long ago that the scout numbers today are not all that different from the scout numbers just before the FCFY program." Rumors are not a good basis for making program decisions. What is the actual data? "That suggest that we missed understood the problem and the solution." About the same time that First Class Emphasis was begun so was the two-year Webelos program, Drugs-the Deadly Game, The BSA's first youth protection video was released, not to mention a number of elements that have been added or deleted in the last 20 years. How exactly has it been determined that from all of these changes it was the First Class Emphasis program that negatively affected the membership totals? I don't see how anyone can make that correlation. In fact, based on how few leaders seem to understand and use the First Class Emphasis program (which is now actually encapsulated in the New Scout Patrol program) it would seem that a much stronger argument could be made that the membership drop is in part due to the LACK of use of the First Class Emphasis program. Perhaps rather than scrap the program at a time when troops are again failing to retain membership, now would be a good time for troop leaders to learn it again?

If we get rid of every element of the program that a few adults did not understand, or did not like, then there would be very little left of Scouting in the U.S.A

Close Eagledad, here is what I was thinking. The BSA program is developed around the notion that the attention of boys this age can be captured through outdoor adventure. The BSA program says that knowing this we can use the allure of the outdoors to teach specific skills that will develop the scouts in 3 specific areas of growth; Character, Citizenship, and Fitness. And that we can track what they have learned and accomplished, and give them positive reinforcement to learn more, through the advancement recognition program. Adventures are ways that we can give scouts opportunity to practice and use the skills and lessons of scouting. Troop meetings are where they learn the skills they need to enjoy the adventure safely and skillfully. So by taking part in the learning during troop meetings, and applying what was learned on the adventure, Scouts complete the requirements as they have fun. As the Scouts become more proficient in their skills the adventures get bigger. First Class Emphasis teaches a Scout the basics of Scouting, and the basics of being comfortable outdoors(Tenderfoot to First Class skills), so that he can begin experiencing bigger and more challenging adventures his second year. If scouting was only about kids having fun we would not need trained leaders or a program, all we would need are video games. Scouting is fun with a purpose, and to effectively fulfill a pupose you need a plan. First Class Emphasis is the first phase of a troop program plan in Boy Scouting. Wearing a scout uniform is not what makes it scouting. Following the scouting program is what makes it Scouting. If advancement is not taking place then neither is a scouting program. There is nothing so difficult about the requirements of Tenderfoot through First Class that they could not be taught, practiced, and applied in a 12 to 14 month period. It just requires the adult leadership to make the decision to have a plan.

Thanks John, Lisabob, based on your position, and as a Mate on a Sea Scout Ship, here are ways I would like to see a district membership chair suppport us. 1. There are membership flyers available through the Scout office. I would be impressed if some arrived with a recommendation on places in the community that we would find youth who would be potential members. 2. I would be impressed if we got a phone call asking what our membership plan was and offering us resources for publicizing it through council and district communication avenues. 3. I think a lot of units would benefit from a quarterly e-mail blast telling what other crews (even if they were in other councils) did to result in significant membership growth. 4. Be an advocate for the crews with the council/district advancement committee to see that there is an effort on their part to develop programs for Venturing. The retention rate for Venturing is the worst in the BSA. Membership will not improve until unit programs improve and I think they are going to need the Council/district to start modeling what a good Venturing activity looks like. I don't think most Crew members see a difference between Venturing and Boy Scouting other than the fact that the uniform is differnent and there are no young scouts around.

I agree, the all in one cub training is a real problem. One of the reasons for developing the job specific training was to solve a problem caused by the old Cub Scout Leader Training where you went once at the beginning of being a cub leader and then never had to go back no matter how you position changed. So the BSA broke up the the training to be job specific. Roling all of the job specifics into one course is just sliding backwards into the old problem. Now there is no reason for a person who takes the training as a Tiger leader to go back and learn how to be a Webelos Leader. To expect that will will retain information that they do not need or use for three years until they need it is illogical. As it has been mentioned before you both conscientious trainers and participants for good learning to take place. I accept that the professional service need to have measurable results, but councils and districts need training chairs with enough knowledge and confidence to help the pros get the measurements they need without sacrificing the goals of the training. Even if a council achieves 100% of their leaders having attended traing, if the training was not done well then the numbers will suffer in the years to come. When units are poorly lead then there will be a resulting drop in membership, in FOS pledges, in # of units, even product sales are effected by poor training and poor leader selection. Mandated training alone is not a path to good scouting. All it does it create a meaningless number, no matter how high that number is.

One plan to consider Catmechanic would be ... Year 1 Have the scouts function as a New Scout Patrol with you acting as the Troop Guide rotate the 6 scouts through the Patrol Leader Position so that you can focus on one scout at a time with your leadership coaching. Use the First Class Emphasis program planning approach, where you have a 12 month program that would expose the scouts to the advacnement elements for Tenderfoot to First Class by the end of their first year. While you are doing the leadership coaching have your assistant look for opportunities to catch scouts doing things right and approve the appropriate advancement requirement. Work with your committee chair to have the committee take care of recruiting for each year's New Scout Patrol. Then with two patrols you can elect an SPL from your First Class Scouts as well as a patrol leader for your regular patrol. Year 2 The Assistant Scoutmaster can now lead the New Scouts through you First Class Emphasis plan, while you work with the regular Patrol. Year 3 By year three you could have two Regular Patrols and another New Scout Patrol, and enough depth for the SPL to select an assistant to help him, and a Troop Guide to help the ASM with the New Scouts. All the while you focus on leadership development. Year 4 By year four you could have 4 patrols; 1 Venture Patrol, 2 Regular Patrols, and a New Scout Patrol, each with their own unique program. The New Scouts learning the basc skills, the two Regular Patrols putting those skills to use on various moderate adventures to increase their proficiencey and begin learning advanced skills, and the Venture Patrol, putting the advanced skills into practice on higher level adventures. By this time you will want 3 to 4 Asssitants, each responsible for overseeing a program level, leaving you available for coaching and mentoring the junior leaders. Have a great time with the new troop. BW

Lisabob writes "From a membership perspective - what suggestions do you have for how I can best aid these new crews in getting off the ground?" What exactly is your scouting position? BW

Mandating training is not a bad thing, the unit I serve requires training from the CR on through the entire adult leadership. My primary point was only that mandated training only has a measurable affect on attendance. If a unit selcts the wrong person to be a leader then you will end up with a poor leader with a trained strip. Understanding and using the scouting program is what makes a person a trained leader. That will depend more on the character of person selected as a leader. The more careful charter organizations are in choosing and recruiting volunteers the more effective the training will be. Charter reps need to be involved in overseeing the quality of their Scouting programs. They need to see that the training recieved is being used, or that the leader revisits the training, or is replaced.

We get funds from the CO a well as from other sources. We also provide a lot of service back to the CO. That sort of relationship is possible in any unit.

I agree that FCFY is a fabrication, but it was not a program fabricating by the BSA. It was fabricated by unit leaders who misunderstood the First Class Emphasis program. We agree that the Handbook is one of the many resources that support the scoutihng program. But it starts with goals and promises that the BSA program, when followed by the volunteers, delivers on. But it does not support every individuals version of what they think the scouting program should be. No book can do that. It supports what the BSA program is currently designed to be and how it is meant to operate in order to meet the Aims and Mission. Sure scouting should be fun and educational. When used correctly the advancement program measures what a scout has learned to do. It gives the scout milestones to chart his accomplishements in scouting. If a scout in not advancing then he is not accomplishing the goals of scouting, and isn't that what the program is for. Through Scouting the Scout learns and accomplishes specific skills and activities in order to achieve a specific mission? To say that 'the scout isn't advancing but that's Ok because he is having fun' is a little odd. If he isn't accomplishing the goals of scouting why does he need to be a scout, or even more bewilderingis why does he need a Scoutmaster? There are lots of ways kids can have fun without scouting. There are lots of things kids can do without achieving the goals of scouting. The whole purpose to be a scout is to learn and do things in the scouting program. Scouting is more than just keeping a group of kids happy. Scouts who are not advancing are not learning and practicing the skills and values of scouting, or if they are someone is evidently forgetting to recognize them for their efforts. What would keep a Troop from having a planned program that gave a Scout the opportunity to learn practice and apply the handful of skills from Tenderfoot to First Class in 12 to 14 months? (besides simply choosing not to do it?)

Thanks, And congrats for handling things the way you did. Class act way to do it! BW

Thanks I will grab the update. I don't believe the information related to this question has changed has it?

Hi John, The BSA has already said that the troop committee is responsible for seeing that quality adult leaders are selected recruited and trained. (see the Troop Committee Guide) Some units do, some units don't. As far as the councils that are mandating training we return to 'what the volunteers don't do the professions must'. If units did a better job of selecting leaders who would atttend training and get then there then professionals would not feel the need to intercede. But that does not alter the fact that mandated training onle insures better attendance, not better trainers or better participants.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

No matter how gung-ho the scout might be, without a planned program in place that allowed him to learn practice and apply the skill he is not going to actually advance according to the scouting program, and is less likely to stay in the troop. Lots of Scouts start out gung-ho only to be let down by a poor unit program. You will find them leaving units in about a year. These units are easy to identify. When you ask why so many scouts have left they wil tell you things like; poor parental support, left for sports, peer pressure, competing activities, etc. Units with poor programs quickly become masters of excuses. Then again, it would seem logical that a well planned first year of Scouting that gave a a Scout the opportunity to learn and apply the skills leading him to First Class has a far better chance of building his enthusiasm for Scouting (as well as his skills) than would a troop that did not have such a program. A lot of how much a boy is invested in scouting will be effected by how much is invested in him, having a planned program that supports the advacnement program of scouting seems a reasonable thing for the scout (and the Scouting program) to expect from a Scout leader. The Handbook tells the scout that he should be able to reach First Class in about a year. Shouldn't the unit have a program plan to support the Scout Handbook? (This message has been edited by Bob White)

The documentation you are looking for to support your belief is in the Advancement Committee Guide/Policies and Procedures, BSA publication #33088E. BW

Mandatory training can hope to do one thing and one thing only, it can effect an increases in attendance at training courses. Mandating training has no effect on the quality of the trainers, or on the quality of the learners. When you really think about it, attending training does not guarantee you are trained, it means you attended training. Unfortunately there is no way to show that you actually learned or use any of the information once you leave, and that is the difference between those who were there and those who were trained. Unlike rank advancement where you do not get the badge until you prove that you can do the requirements, the BSA gives the adult the "trained" recognition simply for being present, not for actually learning or using the aims and methods of the program. They trust in the individual integrity of the learner to follow the BSA program. As we all know integrity comes in variable amounts. Real learning requires effort on the parts of both teacher and student. If you want to effect the quality of scouting in your community then two groups must perform their jobs thoughtfully, and I am not referring to the trainers and the Scout leaders. I refer to the District Committee and the Charter Organization. Unless they select and recruit quality people to lead their programs then very few good teachers will meet even fewer good students. Good trainers will not have to be told to follow the syllabus, good trainers feel an obligation to teach the syllabus materials. Good leaders do not have to be made to go to training. Good Leaders would want to learn their job and how to deliver a scouting program, and they make the time to get trained...and they would use what they learned If training is to be mandated then let the unit make it mandatory since the unit volunteer belongs to the charter organization. Charter organization representatives should only choose leaders who feel an obligation to follow the program from the comittee chair and committee members through the Scoutmaster and assistants. When a adult is being recruited the unit chairman should make it clear that attending training and following the BSA program is a unit standard and not an individual option. District Chairs should only select sub-committee chairs who are dedicated to learning and executing their obligations to the charter organizations in their community. The solution to better unit scouting is solved when good people are selected.

I agree with Lisabob's post through the line about "somebody had to". I would disagree that it is "our program" collectively. It is "our responsibility and obligation" to deliver the "BSA program", at least that is what we agreed to do when we became adult leaders. Collectively the Scoutmaster, assistant Scoutmasters and troop committee, and charter organization of a single unit are responsible for the quality of Scouting program that their specific unit recieves. But the Scouting program itself has survived generations of volunteers and professionals good and bad. It is not dependent on any individual or collective. It is not like a football someone owns where they can take it home to end the game. The program in TAHAWK's council as an example, will suffer for a while because of lack of leadership on the training committee. But nature abhors a vaacuum, and in time, someone will accept the responsibility to get things back on track. How soon that happens depends on how long the scouters of that council are willing to accept the current conditions, and how badly they want to have good scouting. But I am confident that at some point it time they will rebound. Professionals were not developed to be paperpushers for scouting even in the kindest terms. There are day to day serves and business functions that must be attended to to keep a corporation the size of a council or national program operating. It must work as we are the 2nd largest in the world in scouting membership and the most financially sound of any scouting program. We own and operate the most camps, and send people and resources around the world to help start and sustain scouting in foriegn programs. All of this is primarily due to the professional structure of scouting that was initially designed and instituted by James West about 90 years ago. The pros did not dream up stepping in to fill program gaps. They have little choice. The Council has a contract with the locl Charter organizations to provide specifci services through the Council committee. When the council committee (a volunteer committee who accepted their responsibilities of their own free will) does not live up to their obligations then someone has to. If those committee members have not the ability or time, and do not intend to give the input or effort to do their job, then you are not being "stuck" with the pro. The pro is the one stuck, he or she now has to find volunteers who will perfom their responsibilities with greater dependablity. There are responsibilities that belong to professionals, delivering the local program is not one of them. BW (This message has been edited by Bob White)

I am afraid you have misunderstood, my apologies for not being more clear. You are correct it is doubtful that a one day program will meet the training goals of the BSA's syllabus. No the professionals should not have to be doing this course. Evidently the local volunteers are not fulfilling their responsibilities as a district Training committee and so the professionals are doing the best they can to get some training done. This is a local problaem specific to the decisions of the local professions based on the lack of training being done by the local training committee. Yes, you are correct. In the local community the quality of scouting rises or falls based on the skills and abilities of the local volunteers. Program is not the job of the professional. Local program is lead and delivered by local volunteers. The professional staff is no more responsible for your Camporee program then they are for your next troop meeting.

I can only repeat that training is the responsibility of the volunteers in your district and council. I can only guess that your professionals are doing it because your local volunteers have dropped the ball. While I would personally rather see them not do the training then to do it incorrectly, I do not live in your community and so only your local scouters can correct this problem. It is not a reflection on the BSA, or the course, or even your local professionals. If your local training committee was properly lead and staffed this situation would not exist. It is unfortunate that the local volunteer Council/District training committee have allowed this situation to develop, but it can only be solved by the volunteers in your Council/District. There is an old saying I am told among Scouting professionals that goes something like this, "Ashes to ashes, dust to dust, when a volunteer doesn't a professional must." Professionals are not trained to do the training, they are charged however with filling the gaps left by volunteers not getting the job done. This is a local volunteer problem that requires local volunteer solutions. Talk to your local professional, they may have ideas on ways you can help. Good luck, BW

Introduction to Outdoor Leadership Skills is just what it says it is, an introduction, nothing more. To understand what it is supposed to be and how it is supposed to be done, one would need to read the actual course syllabus or have a training team that actually followed it. The purpose of the course is to familiarize Scoutmasters and Assistant Scoutmasters (as part of their BASIC training) with the outdoor skill requirements for Tenderfoot to First Class ranks, no more and no less. It begins with a skills assessment and ends with a re-assessment to see if leaders improved their knowledge in areas where they were weakest. The course is intended to consist of hands-on training and to model teaching methods that the Scout leaders can mimic back in the troops. Here is the problem. There are over three hundred Councils and over a thousand Districts, each with their own locally selected volunteer trainers. The quality of the course you attend is directly related to the skills and abilities of the local volunteer training team, and the leadership of the Training Committee Chair. As you can well imagine unless every single council and district chooses to follow the syllabus (and they dont) there will be (and is) a wide range in the quality of training throughout the country. But you cannot expect the BSA to be able to control that. Training is in the hands of local volunteers, some of whom take part in this forum. If the local volunteer trainer does not follow the syllabus, or does not stay current with the training information then cannot blame the BSA (or the course), for the problem is in the skills and abilities of your LOCAL training staff. So if this is an introductory course how do you and other leaders improve your skills and knowledge? The same way the scouts do, PRACTICE, READ, SEEK out individuals or groups with greater knowledge to teach you more information. The BSA provides for many supplementary training opportunities where intermediate and advanced skills should be taught and practiced. Troop meetings, Outings, Camporees, Show and Do, University of Scouting, Roundtables, are all teaching/learning opportunities for advanced skills, and are all the responsibility of LOCAL scouting volunteers. If you are not getting the training you desire then you need to look at your local scouting community for the solution. It is not the BSAs job to run your local activities. A poster asked If ya don't know how to camp, how are you going to be able to teach it to someone else??" Easily, by understanding that they are not the only source of knowledge in the troop, and that they have a community full of resources to tap into that will share their knowledge with the scouts (this is covered in several BSA resources including the New Leader Essentials training, the first part of Basic Training for any scouter). Bring in local people with greater skills then you have and learn along with the scouts. It would be silly to think that if you were not proficient in every outdoor skill that you could not be an effective scoutmaster. Rather than complain on the Internet (which will have no effect on your next training event), consider having a friendly, courteous, and helpful conversation with the scouting volunteers who are responsible for your LOCAL community Scouting program. Talking to the people who are actually responsible for the change you want is the best way to make a difference. BW(This message has been edited by Bob White)

The scout Methods are a theory? Only a theory? Where is that taught? The Scout Methods, as a refresher, are the transition between the Aims of Scouting and the Mission of scouting. The Aims are "What we do", the MEthods are "How we do it", The Mission is "Why we do it". How do you take "how we do it" and make it merely a theory? The Methods are specific actions. Could a trained Scouter tell if you weren't using the personal growth method. Well...it may take 3 or 4 minutes but.. YES. It's not that hard. I ask you a few questions about how you do Scoutmaster conferences and boards of review and if you give me thoughtful honest answers I can not only tell you IF you use it or not, but if you use it well or not. Hillcourts Scouting went something like this, It is the scoutmaster's responsibility to train junior leaderS and to put on "the best show in town". Hillcourt told us at a commissioner college and again at a Wood Badge reunion to stop blaming parents, peers, school, sports and other things for boys quitting the troop. If you want to see the reason look in the mirror. If you are scoutmaster then YOU are responsible." Does that sound familiar to you Kudu? That's what Eamonn and I and a few others have been saying here for years. PL training isn't something you need to stop and do. It is a constant use of leadership styles that allow you to counsel and mentor rather than tell and yell. If you feel that the only way to develop good young men is only through male association you need to go work that out with your mother. I am sure she probably feels that she had some relevant and valuable input in your growth. I would rather my son had a female scoutmaster than one who treated the scouting methods as a theory to use or ignore at his whim. I would love to see more scout leaders follow Hillcourts example. Where I get to feeling explosive is when so many good scouts are chased off by leaders who do not know, or do not use, the scouting program but just enjoy dressing up in tan and bossing other people's children around. I grew up on Hilcourts teachings as a Scout, and even had the opportunity to sit down with him on three occassions and talk about scouting. I'm not sure you grasp the methods or philosphy of Hillcourt based on your posts and what he taught us. Hillcourt was a strict patrol method guy, and the job of the SM was to train and develop his craft and leadership skills so he could teach it to his patrol. You didn't tell the scout what to do, you asked him what he was going to do. Much of what Hillcourt believed is still taught today. It just isn't used much by many of the posters on this forum. But don't think there aren't plenty of scouters who use it. Hillcourt was the one who really brought home the importance of not mixing and dividing patrols. If your brother gets sick you don't borrow someone elses brother to fill-in in your family. It's a shame that the only way you know who are the scouts in your cabin is when they take their coat off. We can tell long before that because we know who our scouts are. The uniform is not so we can tell who they are. If you are wearing a scout uniform on a winter camp-out, then someone did a poor job of teaching you how to dress for cold weather. So kudu, you don't wear a scout uniform and you don't use the methods of scouting. If you didn't have a membership card how would you know you were even a scouter? The uniform method and the outdoor method aren't even related other than they are both methods. A patch doesn't reinforce a method. Actions reinforce methods. So what if 8 boys wear the same medallion? If they do not function as an independent unit under their own leadership, within the community of the troop, then no patch will make a difference. Any Scout related shirt IS an Activity Uniform shirt. Why would you go through the expense of sewing a patch on top of another one? Why not just design a shirt? The design simply needs to include a fleur-d'lies, the words "Boy Scouts of America" or the initials "BSA". By the way, a new uniform is expected to be released for the 100th Anniversary. Even if it pleases 90% of all memebers you can still be one of the 350,000 that will complain about it. Before you decide that the Methods of Scouting are only a theory perhaps you should try learning and using them. The scouting that Eamonn, Fscouter, OGE, CNY, myself and a few others talk about is much closer to the scouting of Baden-Powell and Hillcourt then what you have recommended.

Since you are a commissioner and trainer Ed I believe it would be far more beneficial to anyone with your responsibilities to be familiar with the entire content of the G2SS. To that end I will once again post the BSA web site location of the current Guide to Safe Scouting and recommend that you familiarize yourself with the entire document rather that have me inform you of just one paragraph.