fred johnson

Wonderful post and as scouting should be.

Well said ... and I like the phrase ... "bitter old goats" ...

IMHO, long policies are reactionary and rarely needed. Worse yet troop unique policies are ... - not read because it's just too much - not remembered because people come and go - not enforced because when you are dealing with an issue ... you're dealing with the issue - not consistent across troops or with other policies - not balanced because now you have some long policies and other topics are ignored IMHO, focus on coaching and less on creating the perfect set of rules. Also, forms are rarely needed. We have two. A parent permission form (always used). The other is a meal planning / shopping form (used by new scouts). SUGGESTION - How parent handbook comments that is with the equipment list ... example ... Scouts are hard on things and need to take responsibility for their own equipment and for troop equipment. We suggest your scout doesn't bring anything that you value significantly. In addition, scouts must recognize their responsibility to care for troop equipment.

Yeah, it's the strong attitudes like these that push my opinion to be flexible within the limits of BSA published guidance and then teach leadership by having the scouts do fun things. Leaders, scouts and situations turn over so much that all methods need to adjust to handle the current mix.

I'm really confused. Though I often differ from your posts, your post seems out in left field. How do you not have an SPL? Who directs your patrol leaders? The only time you don't need an SPL is when you have one patrol. i.e. that patrol leader is effectively also the SPL. We've had times where we've had four or five patrols at camp. Who tells the patrol leaders to get their groups organized? Who works out with the patrol leaders who cleans which area? Who assigns service and program to the patrols? I'm assuming it's not an adult. I'm not as militant as most, but my rule of thumb is remove the adults whenever possible ... and it's usually possible.

FYI ... I don't think it's lazyness or training. Some of that yes, but I see two other big factors. #1 Non-critical positions. #2 Structured to fail. ============================== NON-CRITICAL #1 - Without most of the positions, the troop runs fine. The only absolutely critical position is the senior patrol leader who needs to get all the scouts marching in the same direction. Without a scout as SPL, almost nothing would happen in our troop. But historian? Quartermaster? Scribe? ASPL? Troops easily adjust to missing positions to the point almost no one notices the person is gone. Even when patrol leaders are gone, a scout usually steps forward to represent the patrol. NON-CRITICAL #2 - The absolute non-critical position is the librarian. Is there really much to that job at all? How much more non-critical can we get? Heck, most scouts get their info online now from meritbadge.com or elsewhere. How can we expect scouts to take the positions seriously when the jobs themselves are pretty make work? How can we keep their respect when we promote just how serious the job is when the jobs are often just don't matter, either because of the job or because some adult is doing the job anyway. ============================== STRUCTURED TO FAIL - #1 Why is the scribe and historian expected to be in patrol lines? How does the scribe take attendance or updates notes if he's standing in a patrol line. How does historian document troop meetings if he's in-line too. STRUCTURED TO FAIL - #2 How can the scribe take his job seriously when adult leaders send emails to parents describing everything that is going on? How can scouts take their job seriously when adult leaders take notes and share them at committee meetings? IMHO, if the troop is going to use email to communicate, let the scout at the troop meeting be on his laptop and sending the information out or updating the web site. I've seen good and bad SPLs, but I've never seen an SPL who didn't expend significant energy doing his job and making sure things happened. I've also seen many librarians and even those that did their best barely did anything worthwhile. IMHO, if we want the scout to perform the POR, the POR needs to be important and not done anyway by an adult. The trouble is it's really hard to get adults to stop taking notes. Heck, I've seen troops that send adults around at summer camp to take attendance at merit badge sessions! IMHO, that's the ultimate statement of lack of trust and defeating the responsibility of scouts. ============================== If you want to develop leadership, don't ignore the training, but focus more on doing things. Go on a canoe trip, a bike trip or .... By doing things, the scouts naturally have to get things done and have to work together. It also gives us opportunities to coach in situations that matter and not seem like we are just nagging them. AND thus scouts learn leadership. Have the scribe work with the SPL to create the duty roster and get it posted. Be on a canoe trip and have to divide the work to get things done. ============================== Annedotal side comment ... In our troop, SPL is a year position starting in the fall. The idea is the SPL can gear up all year to run summer camp. IMHO, I'd like to reverse that. I'd like SPL to take charge in April or May. IMHO, SPLs are much better SPLs after having run the troop summer camp. There is nothing better to teach an SPL his job than getting the troop moving at summer camp, attending camp leader meetings, using their patrol leaders and representing the troop and even simple things like making sure the final patrol lines are cleaning before we leave summer camp. Then for the rest of their year, they are comfortable taking charge, knowing their role ... AND ALSO ... the other scouts know to look to the SPL for leadership and coordination. I think it would make the rest of the year go better.

If you can get your book easy to find and easy to buy, I'm sure parents google'ing the topic will buy it. But, I must admit as a unit leader I would strongly avoid my scouting units from having any involvement in the book. The scout starts the BSA Boy Scout Handbook, period. He needs to open it and page through it. That BSA handbook has rank advancement pages that we initial and date as requirements are complete. Those are enough guide for him. I would NOT want to present a ten or eleven year old with yet another document to try to consume. As for parents, we want them to open their son's scout handbook too if they have questions. And our scouting units have parent handbooks. Any "guide" is better done with a one or two page quick reference sheet. More than that is a distraction.

Start Saturday 1pm. Friday night closing campfire. Saturday morning pack and leave.

​Just to confirm .... by "AS A TEAM" ... you mean that your swap out who have a set of ASMs who support the SM by doing SMCs. ... BUT ... they are still a one-on-one experience (with youth protection still addressed). Just wondering if you meant as multiple people in the SMC because SMC is meant to be a simple conversation. -------------- SMC topics ... I know it's not supposed to be formal conversation, but the first scoutmaster I worked with had a plan to his approach that I still like. It was still a simple conversation that occur anywhere and whenever the scout wanted. But the SM would work in specific topics for each rank as each rank meant something different in the advancement program. For example, the joining SMC is about his cub experience and what he can expect and to practices law, oath, etc. Tenderfoot is about learning the skills path. First class is about the transition to being a fullly skilled scout and starting with leadership roles.

I don't have time for a detailed response. I agree troops need to focus on a good program. But with so many troops competing for so many fewer cubs, it just compounds a badly designed unneeded transition. If I had time, I could respond in detail yet again. but I don't. Troop shopping is a bad idea. Switch when you want or need. But troop shopping is a bad BSA concept.

jblake47 ... I didn't meant to hijack the thread away from scouts not wanting to recruit. Probably best for another branch ... and it has already been discussed into painful detail. Agreed that big premiere troops are not always best. And yours is the standard defense given for troop shopping. I just don't buy it. Troops competing against each other is destructive for everyone. Heck, just the simple fact that leaders that join other units often subvert their own CO's efforts later is just not healthy. CO wants an healthy running troop, but the CO's own leaders end up recruiting / marketing for the other troop. It's a bad model. Scout's can always switch units at any rank if it is a bad match. I just think there are WAY WAY WAY more negatives to the current troop shopping design than there are any positives. Period. Plus in recruiting ... it's not about one troop being better than another troop. It is very much looking better than the other troop to the scouts ... and very very much so to their parents too. IMHO, it is appearance over substance. Even worse, it's often about temporary features such as the current SPL or how well one specific event went. KDD ... original post ... Every group of scouts is different. Some really care about recruiting. Some don't. Some want to work with cubs. Some don't. IMHO, if you care about the long term viability of your troop, the SM needs to continually coach and the troop leaders (all together ... committee, SM, ASMs) need to feed back into the planning process through the SM coaching. For example, the adult leaders need to approve the calendar. IMHO, the troop leaders should not approve a calendar that conflicts with school days. Similar, the troop leaders should not approval a calendar that does not support the long term health of the troop ... lacking recruitment. Sure it's boy led and boy run, but it is not anarchy.

Everyone's points are good. But it also makes me cringe because it's another broken part of BSA's program ... having charter orgs re-recruit the same kids yet again and compete against each other for scouts. Why wouldn't it be in a scout's interest to go to the "premiere big troop" in the area? More opportunities. Better support. Obviously a better program because they are bigger and look better ... right? Why should parents ever stay with a struggling troop. It is not in the scout. Scouts should go to the best troop they can find and let the other troops die quickly so that new troops can be formed ... right? It's BSA Darwinism.

Hmmmm.... Sad to hear. I've was hoping it was better handled than that. I know councils often push units to solve their own problems. I was thinking this was more though as it's a significant Guide to Safe Scouting violation. In any event, the scoutmaster needs to move on from his role as scoutmaster.

A few comments ... #1 Avoid where two core leaders of a unit are husband and wife. It is just asking for trouble. Even if everything goes well, you have problems such as them having long discussions and making decisions without any of the other leaders involved. On the other end, you have situations like this where you effectively lose the leader or the leader's effectiveness because she is his wife. #2 Call the scout exec or the district exec. Let them be the bad guy. They can probably keep you anonymous and just say there have been reports of the scoutmaster drinking in camp and his being intoxicated enough to tell all the scouts he was quitting.

Qwazse is right. dfscott ... Call your scout exec. NOW. THIS MOMENT. And yes, time to move away from this forum. The question you need to answer for yourself is "mandatory reporting". Page one of Guide to Safe Scouting. Do you have a good faith suspicion of abuse? Or are these guys just willing to destroy everything to win. In either case, this is beyond you to resolve. You need to pass it up the chain. My question would be do you need to call local authorities too. Abuse does happen. Take it seriously. http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34416.pdf I wish you the best and hope that somehow this all gets resolved. The ironic part is the only person that might do okay in all this is the SPL. He's moving. That's probably the best thing that can happen for him as he'll be able to get away from this situation and these people. The sad thing is that this whole situation can poison scouting for many many people and potentially kill a troop. Good luck.

Dfscott ... at this point ... asking the father to switch troops is not unreasonable. But use it to reflect. CalicoPenn and ScoutNut have excellent points. Trailer access ... you do need to support scouts having the resources to do the job. QUESTION - Could you have made the trailer more available ... AND ... do you think he would have done anything with it? SPL asking to remove a scout ... I've never seen an SPL ask for a scout to be removed. It is interesting. I've rarely seen a scout leader want to remove a scout from a position. It does make me wonder what is going on. POR attendance ... 75% is high, but I understand if you want to make the position work. It is not necessarily and by-itself unreasonable, but it is high. Our troop focuses on "are you helping in your position". Are you doing something with it? No attendance percentages. ASPL & summer camp ... We've never asked a scout to step down from a POR because of staffing summer camp. You do want to congratulate your scouts that work as staff. They don't earn anywhere near minimum wage to do it. It's a great experience and brings great scout spirit back to your troop. QUESTION - Does your troop have weekly meetings during the summer? Was the stepped-down ASPL at summer camp with you? Would the ASPL not being there really affected the troop during the summer. ---------------------------------------- IMHO, I don't like percentages on positions at all or attendance requirements. I am okay with making sure the scout did something with his position, but you need to address it early and not after-the-fact. The other comment is scoutmaster can be difficult to balance all the competing attitudes. Just remember to stay on the scout's side and avoid getting too caught up in creating the perfect troop or executing the rules perfectly. I like to know the rules inside-and-out if possible, but then see what I can do to support the scout and create a great positive experience for our scouts.

Been using SOAR ... reasonable cost and a nice set of features. http://www.mypack.us/ Best part is you don't need to invest a lot of time to have a really good site, mailing list, e-blast, roster, etc etc. Easily worth the $99 per year.

One final comment. You can "chain" positions of responsibility and time in position counts. It does seem reasonable though to explain with the next position of responsibility that he needs to demonstrate doing something with the position. Communicate and set expectations EARLY and BEFORE he starts in the next position.

You will get a million answers all over the board on this. -------------------------------------- Do what you think is best, guided by the Guide To Advancement (Section 4.2.3.4) and a soft heart. ..... Guide to Advancement ..... Section 4.2.3.4 Position of Responsibility ..... http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf -------------------------------------- You do need to trust your SPL. Otherwise, you will be subverting his role and he won't take it seriously. -------------------------------------- Offering scribe? "Officially", scribe is SPL appointed. The way to avoid scouts using grace periods to complete rank is that if they do poorly on one (such as SPL asking to remove him) then the SPL won't be appointing him to another position. -------------------------------------- Deal with the scout, not the parent. Inform the parent if he asks, but deal with the scout. -------------------------------------- As with his purchasing the food example, you have an opportunity to talk and share with the scout how he affected his fellow scouts. Have him find another scout to purchase the food. He accepted responsibility. If you step in to save the day for him, then he won't understand the impact. -------------------------------------- You can't force scouts to attend and outside activities (sports, etc) are a valid excuse for lower participation rates. -------------------------------------- QUESTION - You asked him to step down. Did he step down? Or does he still have the POR?

​Two years ??? These situations need to be dealt with early and quick. An oppositional, defiant scout or even a scout who doesn't want to follow the program can poison a troop. Gives the troop a bad name. Ruins experiences. Drives away existing scouts. Hurts future recruitment. We as scouters have kind hearts and we want to work with the scouts. So these situations drag on and on. Until we are all too worn out to handle it anymore. IMHO, we need to handle these early in the scouting experience. The pattern was probably seen in the first few meetings or first camp out. Right away the scout needs to have a scoutmaster conference to see what the scout is thinking .. AND ... to clearly communicate expectations. I've tried to practice that conversation so I'm ready in advance. Pretty much it includes: ------- what scouts is about ------- what scouts value ------- what is expected ------- if you can work within those boundaries, we're excited to have you ------- if not, you should look elsewhere to spend your time ------- if you decide in the future you want to function as a scout, we'll be glad to have you back. ................ IMHO, for this scout, he needs to move on. You are a volunteer and your not paid to deal with this. Nor do you have the training or authority (dragging sleeping bag) to handle these types of issues. You need to talk with his parents to let them know. Then, you should let him know too.

Age isn't the issue. It's confidence, drive and ability. No strict requirements. Just by coincidence, our JASMs have been Eagle scouts looking to do something for the troop. Usually, they have been 16 or 17, but that was not a requirement.

Christineka ... I'm a rules person too ... in that, it is very important to know the rules so that you can better understand purpose, expectations and flexibility. I very much try to support the scout at every opportunity and let the rules and requirements be the bad guy. I agree that the MB "process" is as important as the "MB". But even I confess to prompting my own sons to hand in their blue cards or ask for one or to make progress.

I agree with everyone so far with a slight twist. Agreement part ... Bad form, but permissible. IMHO, the trouble is linking advancement and service. We do service because we are scouts and because it is the right thing to do. As such, if a scout wants to use Ordeal for advancement, it is none of my business and I really don't care for his specific advancement. Like OA and servic with a smile, I really hope that every time a scout discusses service he's performed, I greet it with a smile and a nice comment like that's a great thing to do or that made a difference. I'd hope I'd ask questions about how it went and if there is anything that could be done better next time, but always keeping a positive that's great attitude. But ... IMHO, I'd very much care about what it says about the troop. Why don't we have enough service such that it's not needed? Hour of service every camp out. Scouting for food. Eagle projects. Charter org service projects. Other ... there should be plenty of hours.