Buffalo Skipper

Stosh, The 6 months to which I was referring was not POR related, but rather the idea of taking that amount of time to "train" the new scouts before assigning them to a permanent patrol. Several posts on this and related threads have talked about this in different ways. Another point I am trying to make, which has received little response is patrol unity. With the NSP (and Venture Patrol) it seems like patrols are constantly being picked apart and put back together to make the boys fit into this "system." If the boys start out together (NSP) and stay together, then when they become 14 (presumably at roughly the same time), their patrol can become a venture patrol, and they maintain thier unity. Otherwise, with a mixed group, the older scouts are constantly being pulled out and reassigned. Somewhow this just doesn't seem right.(This message has been edited by Buffalo Skipper)

Sorry, that came across far too strongly. My apologies. I know as a Cubmaster (and later as a Pack Trainer), I did not "interfere" with den leaders. Each den (via its leaders and members/parents) decided upon a schedule which best suited them. For new dens, I would step in and help with one activity at one meeting, giving the DL and parents the opportunity to meet (without the boys underfoot). At this meeting (20 minutes), they worked out a short term schedule and established the relationships to work through the year. With a pack of 50-60, and 1-2 new dens a year, this worked out well. I saw in another (friend's) pack a similar situation as yours about 3 years ago. The den had not been meeting and in fact had not been coming to the pack meetings and was not participating in pack activities. He (CM) tried to to step in and make suggestions, but the den didn't want any interference from the pack. He only tried to rally the parents, but instead it backfired. The 7 out of 9 quit before the school year ended and the other 2 quit the following October. On the same lines, they had an untrained leader who really didn't "play well with others." As I can see that you are eager and willing to do the best (for the boys!), I only meant to suggest that your CM allow you to do your job of running the den. As your den is not meeting, I really don't see this as a "splitting" of a den, but rather as finding a capeable new and willing leader. In this regard, I agree that you should work closely with your CM to involve your den in the pack activities and functions.(This message has been edited by Buffalo Skipper)

I think the CM should butt out of the den business. If the CC is willing to accept you as the new DLs, then you should register and act like DLs and begin planning meetings and activities. There is no "old" schedule from which you need to switch, there should only be the new schedule. Whoever jumps onboard is on for the ride (and a fun one it is!). Anyone who does not is no better or worse off than before you acted.

Slight asside, but not off topic. Our troop (PLC) is still considering options and will discuss the matter tonight, so I want to give them the best information available. Assuming you do not use the NSP model, but place new scouts with existing patrols, what can be done to separate scouts from say a "misfit" patrol who cause more trouble together than if separate? My example is two friends (PL, APL) who just feed off each other. They are not "bad," just very "disruptive." As SM, I don't want to be micromanaging patrols, but we have had this arrangement for a year and it has gotten worse. The PLC's option is to have a NSP. This results in the "necessity" to combine the 2 exisiting patrols (4 each right now), which leaves only one patrol for the new scouts to combine into. I see plusses and minuses to each option, and I want to encourage the PLC to make a decision which will be the best benefit in the long term. Likewise, with a small but growing troop, how do you implement either system with increasing numbers without reorganizing patrols when membership requires additional patrols?

Bankers and Lawyers. We ban both from our units--no exceptions. --"All I ask of my Banker is a calendar every year, and all I expect of my lawyer is that he is back in his coffin before sunrise."---F. Ross Johnson (James Garner)from the movie, Barbarians at the Gate.

For lashing, I really like manila. It is cheap compared to some advanced synthetics and looks like a lashing should look. American Rope & Tar specializes in a synthetic product to simulate manila; it has a great reputation and is durable and strong, but somewhat pricy for scout use. For lashing, 3/8" is great. Purchase by the spool and insist on the boys whipping all ends before using. Once you get them in the habit, they should be able to whip an end in 60-90 seconds. Here are some good supplies for manila, or look for another--there are many suppliers out there. http://www.ropeinc.com/cat-manila.html https://www.acehardwareoutlet.com/(ufhcfdfkjhw4j045fycebd55)/ProductDetails.aspx?SKU=74343 Consider a spool of 1/2" for other projects; we also keep a spool of 1/4" manila and 3/16 parachute cord for other miscelaneous uses. If you do things like a rope bridge or tug of war, you may want a thicker diameter, but for this you may want to buy a specific length to keep the cost reasonable. Anyway, what troop really needs 600' of 1" manila? Have fun!

Gern, I think you are doing what was intended as this "position" was conceived, and I commend you for that. Everyone does their part and that is how it works. I know one instance of which I heard in my district was several years ago when a Life Scout had completed all his requirements (project, MBs, etc.) but the L2EC would not arrange an EBoR because the only 2 letters of recomendation had been received. At the time, district policy was for the troop--not the scout--to arrange the EBoR upon receipt of 3 letters. He put his foot down and the scout never received an EBoR. But this intstance is not what we are discussing here, and this case is not one I want to go into details on. In a larger troop, I agree that having an ASM or CM assist with these things is a relief to the SM, but as Mr. Blansten said, it is important to keep the SM informed of progress and activity.

I know there was a similar discussion a few months back on this, but what does everyone think of "Eagle Advisors"? My experience has been a mixed blessing. Our advancement coordinator does not feel experienced enough to handle the Eagle process, and a former SM of the troop is our "Life to Eagle Coach." He has started a new family and is not active in the troop at this time, except as the L2EC, but he can be hard to reach. Though it may be nice to have someone else coordinate the "administrative" aspect of this, I would think that mentoring a scout from Life to Eagle would peronally very gratifying. On the other hand I have read of Eagle Advisors acting more like "Keepers of the Gate of Eagle heaven" than as real advisors. Your thoughts and experiences?

...keep in mind that this is "Patrol Leader Training" NOT "Junior Leader Training." I can say that I would not confuse the two. But since you did bring it up this way, do you still use JLT to supplement the Green Bar training? (Stosh, I know your answer to this, but I really wanted to hearKudu's view on it) Most everyone here who has seen the TLT program feels it is kind of light. In spite of this, our troopput together a good program for it last March after Webelos Crossover. We did the 3 sessions in one day with leadership games between the sessions as well as lunch and working on Patrol flags (which won awards at the last council camporee). One aspect we focused on was delivering a program for the new scouts, whose new job position was"patrol member,"for which they did not know what was expected of them.Ideally this can be delivered at a patrol meeting (training) by the PL, but we have not gotten that far in our program yet.

I would not describe this as "commonplace," but I have seen it. There are troops (and packs) out there whose pay for all their adult leader training. This is to relieve the burdon on the volunteers. Generally, however, this is for the basic trainings (SM/ASM essentials, Outdoor Skills, etc) and usually not for advanced or supplemental training (as Wood Badge or Powder Horn). If it is the policy of a troop to reimburse, then that is one thing, but be consistent in what is covered if you do this. A few other considerations are what is the benefit to the unit (is the 200 some odd dollars worth it to the troop?), is there a financial hardship on behalf of the adult leader(s), and prepaps the most important consideration, is can the troop afford it? Lastly, if the committee is intersted, consider covering half the cost. Just my 2.

I've got some of my ducks in a row, and I now have at least enough of a footing to ask a question or two. I am looking at the first meeting of the "training patrol." First, it is this "patrol" which chooses a name, and begins the training as a unit, right? And is this the "same" as the PLC, replacing it for the 6 months of the training period?

Kudu, Thanks. I'm sorry I missed this in my haste last night. I can direct much more of my discussion and questions here. Give me a bit to digest what you posted; I am confident I will have questions as it all sinks in....

Gunny, Was that on the forum here, or from another source? Any other suggestions?

Can anyone offer a good SM Minute for a Webelos visit? We will have about 15-20 Webelos visiting our troop Monday from 3 different packs. The PLCs theme is Cooking and they have chosen not to break from the planned program, but to divide the Webelos to our exisiting patrols who will work to cook samples of breakfast items. Respectfully, at least 2 of the visiting den leaders are personal friends who are active ASMs in 2 other troops, so I don't want anything which will be inflamatory to them, but I would like something which may appeal to the webelos and the parents. Any ideas? We always close with the circle and the SM benediction.

Great discussion, but I feel my earlier question went unanswered, so let me re-spin it, based on what everyone contributed in the last 10 or so posts. I really don't want to muck with patrols and mix and merge. One of the patrols right now is about 3 with a strong PL; the other has 3-4 with poor leadership and skills. With about 8 expected crossovers, we can either form a NSP and merge the other patrols, OR we can have the patrols and new scouts work to divide themselves. Either way, once the decision is made, it becomes an "as is" arrangment until next year. Am I missing any options here? My "fear" is that mixing crossovers in to the "misfit" patrol will spoil that bunch of apples. And don't misinterpret my intents: I want to see a way to make the scouts work this out. And I know sometimes scouts need to make mistakes from which they can learn; I am just unwilling to let the scouts make the kind of decision (mistake) which will result in unwanted attrition. Again, this all got brough up to the PLC (senior scouts) a couple of months ago, and they suggested that we merge the patrol and create "true" NSP for the first time. Last year, we allowed the new scouts to mix with the slightly older scouts and form new patrols. One worked, while the other did not. We (the adult leaders and the senior scouts) want to have better results this time.

Hang on guys and gals, because here I go again, overthinking my troop. We have 2 small patrols composed of 6th and 7th graders. One patrol does ok, but the other really struggles. Left to their own devices, they would do nothing responsible, only play. Combined these patrols have 7 good members (2 are formally inactive). We are expecting about 8 new scouts from crossover this year. I am reluctant to divide and place these new scouts into the patrol of "misfits," as it would be putting the inexperienced with the incompetent. My thought was to have combine the two existing patrols (making one good sized working gang) and forming a NSP with the crossovers. The situation was discussed by the PLC back in November, and they actually suggested this course of action independent of a lack of suggestions on my part. I am inclined to support the PLC on this, yet I have reservations about mucking with the existing patrols. Several of my SM Minutes have been on patrol unity and cohesion. Have I overlooked any options or particulars?

I always thougth that a traditional Viking raven banner would be very cool. This was really neither a flag (as we now think of them), nor was it a standard (as I discussed above), but somewhere inbetween. The Raven was not a universal Viking symbol (like a national flag) but was a banner representing a specific Viking king. See a representation of the traditional Raven banner here: http://flagspot.net/flags/xn_raven.html

Makafing, My understanding was that these scouts formed a new scout patrol, this was their patrol. After a year, they would no longer be called a new scout patrol, but would be a patrol, like any other in the troop. Naturally, this requires a particular amount of recruited scouts (sometimes difficult to get, and impossible to plan). We will have about 8 scouts crossing over this year, and will have a NSP for the first time. It is our intention to keep them as a viable patrol until it dies (ideally, for 6-7 years). This also allows the patrol to become a Venture Patrol all at once without changing the patrol dynamic. In theory, scouts can be in one patrol their entire scouting experience. What is your reasoning for breaking up the NSP after 6 months? Is there some dynamic which is not working?(This message has been edited by Buffalo Skipper)

Lisabob, I could not agree more. We always invite our commissioner, DE and anyone else we like. It keeps us in everyone's good graces. Out of 200, we often have 2 tables (12-15) honored guests. We keep our meal simple but nice, and we have a stellar slide show (no cost) and have a great time. We have "fancy" decorations (table mirrors, and vases wit fake flowers, etc.) which the pack purchased several years ago and continue to reuse. We buy plastic blue and yellow tablecloths which makes clean up easy; at 3.00 a table, clean up is a snap. Dens are, of course, encouraged to make their tables' decorations. It is all done on the cheap. We get away with a total cost of around $800 feeding 200+. Pretty good.

2eagles, Yes I do work with Sea Scouts, but on the council level. When I assumed the council chair position last year, we had no ships in the council. Now we have one scuba ship, 2 traditional ships and we are close to chartering 2 more with another 3 in the talk stage. With 150 miles of linear coastline in our council we have more than 3 independent areas in which to organize ships which will not compete with one another for members. In fact, last night I attended a Bridge of Honor one of our ships was having. They are small, but they had 2 Apprentice presented, 2 small boat handlers, and had 2 new recruits join. They had a beautiful landship, varnished mahogany mast and stanchions and a great binnacle and ship's wheel--really top notch stuff! Sea kayaking is not real big here. We do have lots of good areas to go, but nothing like the Chessapeake or Seattle. Most of our kayakers here use it as a fishing platform. The immediate area here has 3 bays with dozens of bayous, with what I would estimate to be 200+ miles of inland coastline in a 30 mile radius (and that is only one of the 4 areas I referred to above, each of which has it's own bay or two). It amazed me that with this much inner coastal area, there were no active ships. But we are working hard to change the image of Sea Scouting in the area.

2eagles, I am sorry to hear abou the division in your troop. As a new scoutmaster, I too have an agenda--give it all over to the scouts and let them lead. I have been blessed with minimal division in the units with which I have been associated. On the other hand, it sounds to me like these older scouts are screaming at you what they want: a boy led Venturing Crew; and the direction they are heading is clear. I would get right on that. May of the crews here text almost exclusively as a means of communicating. It is interesting to see everyone (youth and leaders) texting everything back and forth. If you can reach them this way, all the better. Do what you have to to save these scouts and get them involved with a crew.

Our pack uses a church facility. Ironically this is not our charter's church facilities. Despite the size of our church (1 full restaurant, 2 campuses, 3 sanctuaries, and 4 full service kitchens), none of our facilities are large enough to accommmodate our pack and families. We are fortunate that we are not charged for our facilities, either at our church or the one we use. We generally get catering (buffet style) from a local restaurant. With payment of the annual dues, we include 3 "tickets" for the B&G. we generally pool these tickets by paid dues per den. So if a den has 8 paid members, the den gets 24 tickets. If 2 cubs and their families do not attend, the remaining 6 tickets can be used by the other 6 families (for siblings, grandparents, etc). Additional tickts are usually $5.00 each. It sound complicated but it is not. We have 50ish in the pack, and ususally have about 200-250 attend the B&G. It is always a great time!

I carry a large rigging knife. It has a straight blade, marlin spike, shackle key, and a can opener. I don't think I could ever switch to another style of knife. The straight blade is excellent for cutting line (rope for you landlubbers), and the locking marlinspike is a uniquely useful tool. More to the point, it is made of 316L grade stainless steel, which is great for corrosion resistance in a saltwater environment, but dulls very quickly, as it is soft. I have to resharpen this blade after every campout. I would prefer to have one with a harder steel, but I have been unable to locate one.

Calico, I did take the time to do some more research on this, most everything concurred with exactly with what you said. I belive my main problem was the stone, which was fairly small and had no good angles for striking. One source I found suggested a 30 degrees, which I could not accomplish, as the rock was very "squared." I took the stone and a coal chisel and got some better shapes. First strikes produced sparks (though not as much as I would like). Another source indicated that the "makeup" of high carbon steel allowed better shaving qualities and more sparks. I do not believe my kit has this kind of striker. By the way, I did buy the kit at a summer camp store, but it is not a BSA product. Though others may be able to find flint in their local area, our local geography is devoid of all natural stone, so I will have to purchase another kit. Can anyone suggest a kit or supplier which has a good reputation? I am intersted in fire by friction (not fire by fiction, as this sometimes appears to be) and fire pistons; if anyone has any information on these techniques, please let me know.

Great little kits. I know the ones you are talking about. If you are really seeking a good looking finish, some quick tips: 1) Sand smooth. Use 120, 150, 180, and 220 grit papers for pine 2) Sand some more. 3) For good measure, do a little more sanding. 4) Coat with a water based "Sanding Sealer." (Paint or home imporvement store). This will seal the grain so it will not show through the paint. 5) Sand the sealer. 6) Apply a good sandable primer. This will all good adhesion and provide a smooth surface for a nice finish. 7) Yup, you guessed it. Sand some more (probably 220 or 320 grit). 8) Several coats of finish paint. 9) If you use a lacquer (not model enamels) after the first 3 coats, give it a good sanding with 320 or 400, before applying the last 2-3 coats. I really like the lacquer, because it provides a smooth, non absorbant layer which resists being stained with graphite. I believe it is "faster" than enamels (by having reduced the friction points of the wheels against the body--this is oninion, not scientifically tested). Make it fun. Let the boys do all the work safely. And again, have fun! I still have memories of making my car with my dad and older brother as a 3rd grader almost 35 years ago!