Armymutt

We don't get more repetitive training than the oath and law. This is a kid who has been in the troop three months. He came to us from another troop. During his BOR, it came out that he wasn't aware he earned Fingerprinting MB at summer camp and doesn't recall the classes. I can recall the exact setting, location, and principles in attendance at my Fingerprinting MB in 1991. How this kid can't recall his from Aug 2025 is beyond me.

One of the questions that comes to mind is, does a Scout have to know the Law and Oath after achieving the rank of Scout? It's no longer a requirement for advancement. We all take it for granted that a Scout would know the two things we say at the beginning of every meeting, but is it a requirement? I suspect they are not doing BORS correctly. My wife is a committee member, soon to be the Advancement Chair. She said they don't have a discussion with the Scout not present. Another problem is, they try to cram all the BORs into one hour. Last night we had 4 for Tenderfoot and 1 for Second Class.

They are handled at the district level. I don't think anyone from the troop sits on them.

I volunteered to be the SM. I'm getting weird vibes. The SM stated that he is not going to be the SM after the first of the year. Of all the ASMs, I'm kind of the front runner - proactive, understand the program, grew up in it, advocating for the patrol method circa nineth edition of the handbook. When I mentioned it to the SM, he said, "well, maybe I'll stay on a little longer." Having the CC and the SM from the same family is generally considered bad, unless you have no other options. I'm trying to get us to have 3/4 of the month be patrol meetings so that the patrols can develop the skills and the leadership. I feel like I'm fighting an uphill battle.

I mentioned previously the 15 y/o Scout whose mom wants him to make Eagle by summer. Nice enough kid, but incompetent as hell. Tonight was his Second Class BOR. He still doesn't know the Scout Law and Scout Oath. The SM acts like this kid is the second coming of Green Bar Bill. The CC, his wife, doesn't seem to have an issue with it. The SM has previously complained, at length, about incompetent Scouts. I can't figure this one out. They are essentially paving a path for him. The SM and his SPL son set up the new patrols so that it was all but assured that the Scout would be the PL. Where in the rank progression path is a speed bump for slowing things down until competence is gained? Is this Scout going to be awarded Eagle without knowing the basics of Scouting? We have an 11 y/o who could stomp this kid into the ground when it comes to Scouting knowledge.

It's definitely something that confuses me. Why would you sign up with an organization that has ideas you disagree with and then change them? Why not create your own organization?

Our SM asked me for my opinion on appointing an Outdoor Ethics Guide. Looking into the job description, it seems kind of a low threshold of responsibility position. It's not clear what the job does. I don't foresee any changes to our program based on LNT inputs. We already do that pretty well. Has anyone utilized this position?

I showed him the Black Pearl Patrol Patch. The guys all liked it.

That's kind of what we did. We covered 12 Second Class requirements on that hike. First aid discussions while walking. Demonstrations during rest stops. I'm offering orienteering next month. A large portion of the troop is off on Monday the 10th while their parents have to work. Trying to get a contingent together to hit our council camp to give the young ones something to do. Signing off a First Class requirement helps.

Well, we reorganized the troop this month. The SPL created three patrols from four, spreading the various ages across each patrol. The old patrol identities were disposed of. Our situation did make some things a foregone conclusion. Each patrol only had one really viable candidate for PL. We just have too many young Scouts and too many older ones who either hit 18 by January or who are leaving the program at the end of the year (ES who proudly states that he doesn't know any knots). They have created new identities - patrol names, flags, yells, and cheers. Our first campout is next weekend. My son, an 11 y/o G.I. Joe fan, was really upset that his patrol chose Buccaneers over Vipers. He's autistic, so he takes every disappointment rather roughly. I pointed out to him that they can do a whole lot more with the pirate theme and that most of his patrol mates have dads in their 20s to early 40s and have no exposure to an 80's toy line, despite it having a rather large role in our house. I think he's on board (no pun intended) with the idea. Told them they can name their dining fly after a pirate ship, adopt pirate code names, make a sign for their campsite with a pirate theme, etc. I've been hyping up the idea of patrol activities - hikes, campouts, etc. I keep trying to get our new 18 y/os to register as adults for that purpose. The 16 y/os keep forgetting that they can also go on a campout as a provisional patrol, as long as they have someone over 21 and another adult. At the same time, the new PLs can set up a patrol outing to work on advancement. To get that idea moving, I set up a 5-mile hike for those needing Second Class. We had three Scouts attend, and a new recruit. Still trying to figure out how to get more attendance at these "side quests".

When we dissolved the Pack, the funds were dispersed to the units the Scouts moved to. If that unit did not establish a fund for the Scout, the funds were retained by the committee and the Pack paid dues to the new unit for the Scout until those funds ran out. Imperfect system, but the most fair thing we could come up with. The CO retained the equipment. Ok, realistically, we abandoned the equipment in the CO's big shed. There's a troop there. They can have the sleeping bags, sleep mats, and tent. Can't give away a PWD track around here, so it's there if someone restarts the pack. Our CO wasn't really involved with us and treated us little different than an outside organization using their facilities. There was no way they were getting any funds, most of which were dues paid by parents.

I've never heard anyone say "I pledge of allegiance", however there is traditionally a natural rhythm to the pledge that provides a pause between "nation" and "under". Just as there is between "allegiance" and "to", "flag" and "of", "America" and "and", and "Republic" and "for".

I've known our CC for a few years now, well before we even entered the troop. She is looking more and more exhausted these days. We got a couple of new families in and there have been complaints from them constantly. Apparently, there are complaints from other parents too. When did this become a thing? When I was a kid, parents had minimal contact with the troop, unless they were registered. She does a great job and I don't want her to quit. Personally, I'm of the mindset that the CC doesn't have the responsibility to investigate any complaints. It's not in the job description. When I was the pack CC, and when my wife was before me, our policy was that complaints are only accepted from registered adults who actively participate. Anything else was peripheral noise from people who don't really care about the program. She had a parent who had been in the troop for all of 4 days screaming at her because of the cellphone thing. She's too nice to tell the lady to pound sand and find a different unit. I'd like to help her out. Husband is the acting SM and we had a few discussions this weekend. The kids are ok - we caught two of them in a pretty significant lie. Another parent came with a complaint that her 12 y/o son saw an 11 y/o boy naked. When I asked the 11 y/o, he reported that the 12 y/o peeked in the window of his tent while he was changing. I was inclined to chalk it all up to little boys being little boys, but the mom of the 11 y/o, who was also willing to ignore it, is now cocked and ready to launch an attack on the 12 y/o's family. I'm realizing that Scouting, like veterinary medicine, is fun until the parents get involved.

That looks really cool!

That's what I'm encouraging. We're rather limited on trees with appropriate spacing here in NC. They are either 5 feet apart or 100. I know at Philmont, we ditched half the poles and just used some that were about 6' tall. The fly went to the ground. Helped out in some massive rain storms. I've tried to get them to make stakes and get blank stares. The handbook doesn't show how and Scout's Life is a paltry version of its prior form. Most of our Scouts don't carry their own hatchet and the troop's hatchet isn't the best for hammering. Also, it's less desirable for use as a lever to extract the nails when stuck and I'd rather Scout not use it as a digging implement.

We decided to add dining flies to our camping gear, partially as a team building exercise, partially as a Scout skill exercise, but mostly to help build patrol identities and provide shelter. I used the instructions found here: https://troop279.us/patrol-dining-fly/ My wife and son helped hold the poles while I tied the knots for the adult fly so I could do a test set up. Poles need straightened and we need to get hammers for the troop, but otherwise, it looks like it will work.

I had a discussion with the Scout last night when he wanted to test for Second Class and couldn't tell me when it is appropriate to use a fire for cooking or other purposes. I pointed out that there are people with the Eagle badge and people with the Eagle badge who actually know the stuff, and asked what type he wanted to be. He said he wanted to be the latter. I pointed out that he couldn't list the Leave No Trace Principles, let alone tell me how to apply them, for example, when it came to fires. I signed off some other stuff, but he will need to return to studying the material.

The SM and I talked yesterday about our philosophy with the program. We agree that it's not Cub Scouts and mastery is the standard. Let's face it, we aren't talking about things that are all that difficult, and the expectation is that if you are going to be in the club, then you need to actually fulfill your obligations to the club. I won't sign off on my own son's stuff without him having a level of mastery that I feel is acceptable. Some things are pretty simple - put the flag up once and I'm satisfied that you know how to do it. When it comes to first aid or safety items, I want to make sure the Scout is confident and competent at the tasks required for his/her rank level.

New kid showed up last week. Went camping with us this past weekend. Can't seem to figure out the patrol method - kept coming to the adults for everything. Mom thinks he can earn Eagle by Christmas. Has him submitting videos for all sorts of requirements. In one, he is obviously reading off a cue card. In another, he ties a square knot instead of a sheet bend. I told the acting SM that I'm not comfortable accepting these as an appropriate level of skill to sign off the requirement. He agrees that it is strange. Has anyone encountered this sort of thing? It's an amazing hyper focus on rank advancement over actually being a Scout. I push my son to learn the material so he can advance, but this is something else.

For us, it's mitigation of an unnecessary liability. An ideal Scout is trustworthy, but reality is often different. I've had a Scout close the curtain to his cabin in my face when it's time to clean the shower house and latrine, knowing full well that I can't go into that space and get him out. We had a parent insist that her son passed the Swimmer test at camp but they didn't record it. I watched the same kid start drowning after swimming 15 yards on Saturday. We have an 11 y/o refuse to head back to camp at 10 PM because he couldn't find his $1000 phone. I don't need parents suing me because Timmy's phone got damaged or lost. Even if they lose, I'd still have to pay a lawyer for the defense. I'm unwilling to put myself in the position of being accused of allowing cyber bullying or worse. One method the Scoutmaster is considering is setting a rule of phones only being allowed for Scouting purposes. Using it for something else is demonstrating that the Scout is not Trustworthy. That prevents the Scout from advancing in rank because they aren't living by the Scout law. I think maybe setting a position requirement is better. PLs, SPL, and Troop Guides can have phones for access to instructional material and time keeping. I still think it's a liability. As far as adults, I also expect them to use their phones only for Scouting needs. For example, entering requirements in SB because the Scouts keep forgetting to bring their handbooks. I have no problem with putting my phone away for the weekend and wouldn't mind just leaving it at home. The other thing I forgot to mention is that phones present another opportunity for conspicuous displays of wealth that run counter to the values of Scouting. Scouting is supposed to be open to all kids. It's hard to feel welcome in an environment where some kids have wealthy enough parents to be a 10 y/o with a smartphone and another with parents who can barely afford to buy a Scout uniform and camping gear.

How do you ensure it isn't being used to stay up all night? How do you ensure it isn't being used to bully? We actually had conversations going on vs the total silence we had during summer camp where everyone was glued to their screens. We have a bunch of "barracks lawyers" who complain that we didn't specify this or that wasn't permitted. It's far easier to simply put them away safely. I don't need an 11 y/o freaking out again and yelling at us that he's not going back to camp because he set his $1000 phone down somewhere.

We're trying to correct what I, and the acting SM, perceive as failures of previous adult and youth leaders in our troop, and the troops from which we have received Scouts. We have a number of Scouts in the Star, Life, and Eagle ranks who can't do basic Scoutcraft. I'm of the mindset that a Scout should be competent at the skills of the previous rank, and an expert at the skills of the ranks below that. For example, I expect a First Class Scout to have no problem tying a square knot, two half hitches, or a taught line hitch. The Guide to Advancement says this: It is important to remember that in the end, badges recognize that Scouts have gone through experiences of learning things they did not previously know. Through increased confidence, Scouts discover or realize they are able to learn a variety of skills and disciplines. Advancement is thus about what Scouts are now able to learn and to do, and how they have grown. Retention of skills and knowledge is then developed later by using what has been learned through the natural course of unit programming; for example, instructing others and using skills in games and on outings. When the requirement says, "Show first aid for the following:", does it mean using the book or from memory? I lean more toward memory with prompting from the examiner. That's what we did this weekend. I have a feeling other leaders have taken a more Cub Scout view of things and if the Scout did it in the class while mimicking the instructor, that was good enough. Consequently, unless the unit actually follows the last sentence of the relevant portion of the guide, the Scout never develops the skill.

Don't know. Depends on whether or not their Scout told them. This isn't Cub Scouts. I expect the Scout to tell their parents about the rule changes their PL puts out.

I'm waiting for that. The solution is for them to become leaders and monitor the cellphone usage by their Scout, away from all the other Scouts. The cellphone must be secured by an adult unless the adult is present while it is in use. The only exception to this rule is when a Scout is using the phone as a means to provide training. After that, the cellphone goes away. We also have parents who complain because their Scout is tasked with providing training on Tenderfoot through First Class skills. "They already did that!" is apparently the phrase. As if Scouting is a one and done type of program.

The public schools across the country have banned cellphones unless medically necessary, like a glucose monitor.