Issue 610 – August 6, 2019

Hi Andy,

If a Scout has already earned a specific merit badge, like Rifle Shooting for instance, at summer camp this year, can that same Scout earn it a second time at summer camp next year? I’m asking because there’s a very limited number of shooting positions available at our camp’s range and, while many Scouts really enjoys this, their presence for a repeat merit badge might cause another Scout, who wants to earn this merit badge for the first time, to get “bumped.” Is there any BSA policy addressing the issue of earning the same merit badge twice and, if so, could you direct me to the source of this policy? Thanks! (Ron Krawczyk)

Darned good question! First, there’s absolutely nothing in the “rules” that would keep a Scout from earning the same merit badge a second or more times. Nonetheless, I do understand—for the specific instance you mentioned: the camp shooting range—that Scout summer camps do have physical limitation that could certainly create precisely the kind of situation you described. To sort of split the difference here, maybe it should be a “wait-list” situation, where the Scout says to the range officer, “I’d like to fill any ‘open’ slot that’s available,” and take a pass if all other Scouts are first-timers.

This does make me wonder about the camp facilities and time schedules. Are there no “free shooting” time slots during camp days? Maybe it’s the camp that needs to expand facilities, and maybe a council-wide fund-raiser specifically for the range could be initiated? This might be a great OA lodge service project!

But, to take this one step further, Rifle Shooting—the “umbrella” merit badge—happily has three distinct options: Rifle Shooting (modern cartridge [typically .22 caliber at Scout camps]), Air Rifle Shooting (BB or pellet), and Muzzleloading Rifle Shooting. Plus, camps also might offer Shotgun Shooting merit badge, which also has two distinct options. This means that, if any of these alternatives are available, Scouts can return to the range in subsequent years and actually expand their knowledge of sporting firearms without having to do a dead-on repeat! Of all possibilities, this is the one I’d shoot for (pun intended).
==========
Hi Andy,

If my daughter, a Tiger Cub right now, comes to her brother’s Scouts BSA troop meeting, must the troop provide an adult female leader? (I’ve read the policies about females and troop activities but can’t see how that would apply if my daughter isn’t actually participating in the activity.) (Name & Council Withheld)

You’re spot-on. Scouting units aren’t responsible for visitors—children or adults—who are non-participating visitors. If a child is the visitor, then the parent or guardian attending with him or her is the responsible party. So if, as you’re suggesting, your daughter is simply present (whether she’s a BSA member or not) while your son’s troop is holding a meeting, and she’s with (and under the supervision of) either you or her mother, that’s just fine.
==========
Hello again, Andy,

On the issue of advancement via self-motivation first and foremost, as Scoutmaster I agree with you that nobody can force Scouts to advance and, if a Scout wants to remain at the rank of Scout, that’s okay. I’ve explained the same thing to Scouts and parents alike: a Scout will get out of the program what they put into it. And, as a father, I do realize that most Scouts do have a pretty busy life outside of the troop, and sometimes that “other” life can get in the way, and that’s okay, too. If a Scout is gung ho and wants to fly to Eagle while participating in everything the troop offers, that’s great! But it’s by no way mandatory. I just care that Scouts get something out of the program to make them better adults (and have fun along the way, too).

However, I sometimes have a dilemma regarding the rank requirement where a Scout needs to be “active” in the troop for a specific number of months. How does one define that? It seems to be subjective. I know that some grey area exists and I do make a lot of latitude for life outside of Scouting, including seasonal sports, religious classes, driver’s ed, school functions, and so on. I also know there are ways outside of troop meetings that a Scout can be active, such as troop weekend day-outings, service projects, campouts, etc. And I also know that some troop positions of responsibility can even be done without attending every single troop meeting (Historian, for instance).

Where I seem to get hung up are with those Scouts who were definitely active till they get to around Life rank and get involved in high school’s upper grades and activities. At this stage, some seem to just disappear off the face of the earth…until they want their Eagle paperwork signed off, that is! I’ve tried to encourage Scouts in this situation to come to our meetings, campouts, and outings, and I also ask them what they want to do that would make it more interesting to come to the meetings and so on, but often there’s just no response. Unfortunately, at the same time their participation wanes is the same time the troop needs these Scouts the most—for their experience and leadership.

Offering them additional “older Scouts only” activity opportunities doesn’t seem to work either, because it all boils down to the same thing: time. And there just doesn’t seem to be enough of it to go around!

So there’s the crux: How do we assess the “active” component to advancement without being either too lenient or too rigid? (Joe Sefcik, Connecticut Rivers Council)

Your concerns are absolutely real, and you’re to be complimented for being “Scout-minded” instead of “rule-minded”! Fortunately, the BSA GUIDE TO ADVANCEMENT does give us some excellent guidelines without the onus of unbendable “rules,” and this is how it should be. In short, each troop is charged with creating reasonable expectations overall and simultaneously taking into consideration all individual Scouts’ personal situations.

Having personally had literally hundreds of conversations with First Class, Star, and Life rank Scouts, I’ve learned that each Scout is unique in most every way possible. There’s the “into everything” Scout who juggles so many “balls” at once that I sometimes think I must have slept through high school myself! There are others who aren’t into so much but have a family member who needs care and this is rotated among all family members. There’s the autistic Scout who refuses to take an alternative pathway (which the BSA does offer, by the way). Then there was one Scout who rarely went on campouts, but, when he did, he did the whole weekend in his wheelchair, with all his personal gear stacked on his lap. And the list is infinite…

Advancement—the only place where there are specific requirements for “active”—is solely based on personal motivation.

So consider this: A Life Scout may well have been active in their troop for the first six months following the Life rank board of review, including holding an Eagle-qualifying position of responsibility and then “gone missing” for a while, while extracurricular school and other activities gobbled up their time, but that six months—even if it happened a year or more ago—still counts (there’s nothing that says the Life Scout must be active for six months immediately preceding Eagle). Moreover, after Life rank there are some ten more merit badges to earn, and this sure says that that Scout has been active while earning these; it just might not be directly with the troop (meetings, hikes, campouts, and so forth)!

But, so long as Scouts and their unit leader (i.e., Scoutmaster in your case) stay in touch about expectations, everything should work out just fine.

Besides, let’s for a moment imagine that the Methods of Scouting were changed to seven instead of eight and “advancement” is eliminated. Now think: Would there be any conversations about “active”? Probably not. At least until their Patrol Leaders got tired of habitual no-shows!

So let’s acknowledge that advancement is just one of the items offered up on Scouting’s “smorgasbord,” and—like the buffets at Golden Corral and such—we don’t necessarily chomp into everything that’s offered; we pick and choose, and if we really like something yummy we go back for more… and more!

Isn’t that the sum and substance of it? I think it just might be!
==========
Hi Andy,

I presented on The Patrol Method today at a University of Scouting. One of my participants asked me what to do about the BSA’s inconsistent statements on the patrol being self-selected and then the “safety bubble” three-year age span rule for tenting. Any thoughts on this apparent see-saw? (Tom Linton)

The “three-year age span rule” is not only incorrect, it also is more likely a semi-fictional “mountain” created in the tradition of almost impossible “What if…?” scenarios, instead of the “molehill” it’s more likely to be.

To be clear, there’s no “three-year” stipulation for Scouts; it’s officially and specifically that no two Scouts tenting together may be more than 2 years apart in age.

Now that we have that straight, let’s look at the actual practicality of a tenting-by-buddies situation. There are three possible scenarios: (1) New Scouts entering the troop from a pack, (2) a singleton (new or transfer from another troop), and (3) an SPL-ASPL combination.

For the first, we already know that some 80%+ of all Scouts come from graduating Cub Scout dens. This will make their most likely age-range somewhere around six months. So, hoping that no one’s messed around with patrol composition, a patrol of new Scouts will ideally and practically continue through the Scouts BSA program as an intact group for the next seven years. This process alone reduces the probability of a non-authorized age gap to virtually zero.

In the second case—that of a singleton joining a troop—it’s the responsibility of the troop to assure that he or she is offered the opportunity to join a similarly aged patrol, thereby making an unauthorized age gap moot, so long as this is absolutely agreed to by not only the joining new member but the receiving patrol members as well.

The third situation is that of the Senior Patrol Leader (“SPL”) and his or her assistant (“ASPL”) as a “buddy pair.” This situation is likewise equally soluble when the SPL is given guidance by the Scoutmaster to select an ASPL who is no more than two years away in age. Result: No age-gap problem.

Now I’m sure some genius will come up with at least one other scenario of the “What if…?” kind. When this happens, before getting tangled up in your own knickers, ask how often the proposed scenario is likely to actually arise in the average troop. This should save a lot of time, mind-twisting, and hot air.

Happy Scouting!

Andy

Have a question? Facing a dilemma? Wondering where to find a BSA policy or guideline? Write to askandybsa@yahoo.com. Please include your name and council. (If you’d prefer to be anonymous, if published, let me know and that’s what we’ll do.)

[No. 610 – 8/6/2019 – Copyright © Andy McCommish 2019]