DuctTape

This is exactly why zero tolerance has fallen out of favor (it was enacted as a knee-jerk reaction without real forethought). Restorative discipline (or restorative justice) is more meaningful and significantly more effective as it deals with causes.

Some of us do work in education and while computerization is in use, when it takes the place of human decision making instead of providing data to help with decision making things have gone awry. No computer system used in a school is competent enough for us to abdicate to it the decision making authority. It isn't old school vs new, it is making sound professional decisions using technology, not having technology make the decisions.

While students may not be allowed to do the actual cleanup of an area they made hazardous, they could spend equivalent time doing beautification projects and speaking with younger students about acceptable behaviors, etc...

Often the boys will be more strict in evaluating than adults.

Learning to do things for themselves in the out of doors is kind of the purpose. It matters not whether they use matches in their normal everyday life. They probably don't set up tents on a regular basis at home either. Nor use an axe or paddle a canoe. We provide the opportunity for all of these things and more. At least we should. They begin as tenderfoots (not the rank, but as one with limited skill) and through scouting we help develop their skills and understandings that they did not previously have. Sure civilization has changed, but even when match lit stoves were common in homes it didn't mean the boys ever lit them. Sometimes in scouting is the first time they swung an axe even though there is one in their garage.

I just got home and looked. I have a 1952 and 1955 Fieldbooks. Both brown covers. The "chapters" were called "pow wows".

I would think summer camp, a backpacking trip, and a canoeing trip would be fantastic adventures to be using the basic scout skills everyday.

Digging a hole is not necessarily a LNT violation. It depends on the environment in which one is in. A dakota fire hole is awesome when one needs to block wind and maximize efficiency of fuel. Think about snow conditions. Dig a hole in the snow, then the air hole. Line the fire hole with stout logs. Build the small cook fire on the ground in the hole... That is just one possible use. Using a tripod to suspend a cookpot into the hole makes it even better. Imagine the boys telling everyone how they cooked their food over a fire in a hole dug into the snow.

I believe it was the brown cover. I have some at home. I will look. IIRC, the organization of the different "chapters" (I do not recall what they were called) act as a great template for a patrol to use as an adventure guide. It proceeds from the simple to more adventurous in small steps. Could you imagine if a patrol followed it in order; wow. What a great sequence of adventures... real scouting.

Size of the troop does not necessarily mean one needs a larger trailer. With a larger troop, different patrols can go to different locations. This is better accomplished with 2 smaller trailers. Many locations also limit group size, which lends itself to patrol based camping. Plus lnt teaches to decrease group size to minimize impact. Key idea: think patrol camping not troop camping as the default design.

Thank you Stosh. I too hesitated with my post, because it really wasn't meant for you. I think I know you as well as I can from your posts to understand your intent. My reply was for others who might read it and not truly understand. I hope someday that we can share a cup of coffee by the fire. But if that day never comes, I will have to be content with this virtual campfire.

I believe it is different in different States as to whether certain personnel have a legal obligation to act. As stated for some it may fall under general citizens, but for others it is specific to employ regardless of being "on the clock". Different states, different laws.

I agree with all that you said, except for the quip about teachers. I am a professional educator and take great offense to the sentiment espoused in the line. The arrogance of the individual is not a result of his profession, anymore than othe scouters who exhibit the same. To haphazardly make a statement qualifying the ability of teachers as less than others is patently false and is degrading to the entirety of the profession. We can "do" what we teach, and we have the expertise and knowledge to also teach it to others in a multitude of ways. I am sure you did not intend to demean myself, or my entire profession, but the statement in quotes has that result. I am smiling as I write this, because I respect you enough to know my tone is not meant to be negative, condescending, or anything of the sort. Thank you all for understanding.

I am not a fan of lanterns, especially large ones. When out of doors, the purpose is not to recreate the indoors. When one allows their eyes to adjust to the dark, the forest can be seen in a "new light". The shadows dancing by the campfire light are fun to watch, as are the stars overhead. I do use headlamps, like most flashlights users need to learn not to direct them at someone elses face. Turn them on only when when needed for the short period of use, and then back off. If on in a group, angle the beam down. Almost all have a hinge to angle the beam down. I also recommend the less luminous lights. Again, the purpose is not to light up the entire forest. Makes going to bed easier too, people tend to stay up later when there is more light.

Yeah. Tinder is usually not a problem, neither is ignition. A lot of folks seem to focus on these aspects as it is kind of fun to try different ignition systems. But ignition isn't the goal. As was stated, the problem is often moving from ignition and tinder to a sustainable and controlled fire. IMO, too much focus is placed on different ignition and tinder methods and not enough on the next stages. Use matches until they are proficient with building, sustaining, and using the fire. Then, move to different ignition and tinder. One method is to use a single pole, 12 feet in length with a 4 inch diamter. Scouts use axe, saw and knife to prepare tinder, kindling and fuel to boil water for cocoa all from that one pole, and using a single match.

A cot? I have never carried a cot into the woods; a hammock yes. Anyway, the main purpose of my building that chair was for the boys to see the utility of a littele extra rope and knowing some pioneering skills. To that end it worked perfectly.

True. But the back rest was way comfortable.

Stosh, I have had a camp chair. I pulled out a few hanks of rope, cut a few poles and lashed together a quick seat. Within 10 minutes boys were using their skills (or quickly learning them) and improvising their own seats. Four boys actually worked together to make a 4-man bench.

Two troops I was involved with had dedicated storage rooms at the CO. One other, the SM had a barn which stored everything. The one with a trailer used it for storage, but not transport. The trailer was parked behind the SM garage. A trailer for storage is different than a trailer for transport. I do not see any reasonable scouting purpose to transport the entirety of the storage room regardless if it is on wheels.

Class B is the name of a company. That doesn't mean it exists within the BSA construct. Using your description of what a myth is, that would exclude anything as long as people undertood what was meant. IMO, class B is a myth not because nobody uses the phrase, but because it is not the official bsa term for any uniform.

Good luck to you. Change is difficult, especially for a group. Having only one person as a change agent is almost impossible, a second person increases the success rate immensely. I cannot recall the exact statistic, but it was something like 60%.

This is exactly what we try to avoid. Having everything there just in case promotes lack of planning. Experiences which involve not having something due to error in planning is a learning experience. Boys learn to plan better and/or improvise. Adults should be far away from the boys for meals imho.

If a wood fire is allowed, why would we encourage the use of chemical fuel stoves? As was stated, with practice a wood fire can cook up great food. Plus it is fun. A stove can be used at home. Adventuring in the out of doors is not about trying to make outside into inside any more than is necessary. Sure there are times when a stove is appropriate, but I see many troops always using them (even when fire is allowed and more appropriate). This goes along with the trailer thread. Everything gets hauled to the roadside, and that ends up being the only camping the boys ever really experience.

I am fortunate to be in an area where wood fire cooking is available. IMHO, cooking on the fire while camping is better than any chemical fuels. Even in winter.

I agree. The only time I see a trailer as necessary is if the troop/patrol does not have a building to store gear. I view the trailer as a storage unit, not for transport. Otherwise little planning takes place for gear needs, and the troop devolves into solely plop camping.