fred8033

What level of defacing? Using a knife to cut words into it? Permanent marker? Ketchup? Other?

Second Class wrote: "While it may be perfunctory, it is not useless. ...." That's exactly as I learned it. It's not about scout readiness. (scout can work on any merit badge at any time) It's making sure the scoutmaster's included in the process, can coach the scout and guide the process. And, BSA doesn't even require scoutmaster approval all the time. For example, certain merit badge fairs, summer camps and special events such as Jamboree's don't require scoutmaster approval at all. I had to read http://usscouts.org/factfiction/meritbadges.asp to realize it's the next paragraph the explains the approval. GTA section 7.0.0.2 says "A unit leader should consider making more of the process than just providing an OK. The opportunity exists, then and there, to share in a young man's life. Preliminary merit badge discussions can lead to conversations about talents and interests, goal setting, and the concept of "challenge by choice." The benefits can be much like those of a well-done Scoutmaster conference." I've never seen a scout not receive scoutmaster approval.

BadenP wrote: "AHG is a religious propaganda group preaching prejudicial and misinformation to its girls." Really? I guess it's all a matter of perspective. This is a reflection of why I'm not surprised the church is questioning GSUSA. Not that GSUSA is that bad. But there is a big attitude difference (i.e. a strong secular emphasis) and goals. With today's hyper-sensitive society, I'm surprised to see churches support GSUSA. Years ago people would ignore the differences and focus on the big issues (i.e. a youth program for girls). Now, people use these minor issues to drive wedges between groups and use these youth groups as battle fields. I'm not sure if AHG is or is not an alternative. But it's more aligned with the beliefs of most Christian churches. I do wish AHG was more than Christian churches. (i.e. more like BSA) But that's me.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Ya know. I'm actually surprised this did not come earlier. Politics of change long ago started using youth groups as fields of battle. Minor issues are now used to drive wedges between groups. Anyway ... I'm not surprised because over the years I've talked with several girl scout professionals, essentially parrallel to a district exec. During those conversations when discussing the difference between BSA and GSUSA, the girl scout leaders emphasized the differences. Quickly pointing out the openness for accepting all leaders. I don't remember the acceptance of male leaders. And several other topics. What I remember distinctly was the tone of the conversation and that GSUSA as much more forward thinking than BSA. The tone just didn't seem like a Catholic sponsored youth group.

Scoutfish wrote: "But realize at this point, the SM can disapprove a MB card if the scout shows that he's not ready or dedicated enough to work on or complete the badge as it would be a waste of the MBC's time." This is one that's not 100% clear. All the analysis I've read says no. Scoutmasters are not to use the approval process that way. That's not what the approval is for. Everything I've read about that approval refers the approval to be used for knowing what's going on, recommending merit badge counselors and essentially mini-SMCs. Not a point to judge whether a scout is ready to work on a badge. BSA does clearly state any registered scout can work on any merit badge at any time.

I hate getting into discussions like this. It's a no-win situation. Torn on one side to be kind and loving to others. Torn on the other side to be true to my faith and to teach my faith to my family. I think the only answer is as Beavah said. Get government out of marriage. I can easily accept two other people having the sample legal rights as my wife and I. I can accept teaching my children that others have the same legal rights and we treat everyone with love and respect. But I can't accept teaching my children it's the same as marriage. I can't teach them it's right. It's not according to my faith and not according to most of the faiths in this world. Heck, simply as an engineer and someone who's also done plumbing and electrical work, it's just not how the parts work. Sure, you can jury rig things and sort of make it look okay. But I'd rather assemble the parts as they naturally work together. Requires less duct tape. Anyway, I always regret getting into these debates. .... I was thinking how this debate affects the terms mother and father. We have a scout who says he has two mothers and two fathers. Divorce yes, but the two moms are together and the two dads are together. It's weird. But it's not a discussion topic in the troop and just doesn't come up. Most of the younger scouts don't realize the situation. Most of the older scouts and adults just ignore the situation. BUT ... the government birth certificate lists MOTHER and FATHER. One of each. I knew adoption can change things. But what I didn't realize is other states have already changed the original birth certificates to reflect mother/parent and father/parent? Interesting. It's like the state is giving up tracking the biological parents. IMHO, that's interesting and not smart. It's important to know who the biologicial parents are as it is useful in future genetic screening, tracking and analysis. Plus, what happens in the situation we have? Do you basically have an add-on form for parent 1, parent 2, parent 3 and parent 4? And a random odds generator to figure out who the biological parents are? .... I can only think back to the many years of the Maury Povich show. "You are the father!" Now, what do you mean by father? Maybe in the future we'll have Maury Povich show saying "You are the mother!" Ummm... what do you mean by mother? Ummm... what do you mean by marriage? Big M or little m? .... Good luck with the debate everyone. It is an interesting time. I think I'll get back to focusing on scouting topics.

IMHO, these are boundary cases. Though the MBC is not completely unreasonable, the MBC is definitely adding requirements. The MBC is the interpretter of the requirements. But the scout has the right to judge if the MBC is being fair ... and ... the scout has the right to find another MBC. .... First Aid MB - When flooded with too many scouts wanting a merit badge, summer camps establish priority rules for who can get in. But that's different than requiring a scout to be of that rank. If the scout thinks the counselor is unfair, the scout can find another MBC. There are usually a good number of first aid MBC around. Most don't add the first class requirement. The key is that it's the scouts option. What's funny is that many troops encourage scouts to earn the First Aid MB as soon as possible as it overlaps with T21 requirements. AND, first aid is an important skill to develop as soon as possible. Personally, unless I was flooded with scouts, I don't know why you'd ever tell a scout to wait to earn a first aid MB. .... Personal Fitness MB - Requirements 7, 8 & 9 say to record the results; compare; analyze; and, discuss. *** IMHO ***, nothing says the MBC has to be there during any of the testing (pre, during or post). Though not entirely unreasonable, I generally don't like it when requirements are read to make it more difficult for the scout. "Whoops, you missed week four testing with me. Yeah, you did the testing at home last week and recorded the results as stated in the MB handbook, but that's not what I expect. You need to start over." I'd hope they'd just require re-testing at week four and face a one week delay. But the original post did say they "would not be able to finish the badge". And even then, it's the counselor not recognizing the scout for doing the requirement as written. .... Sometimes it's a judgement call. A good MBC will help the scout learn and grow. A good scout will be flexible and see past small legalities. Though I cringe at the two examples, hopefully the scout can find common ground with the MBC and have a good experience. If not, find a different MBC.

qwazse - 13 year old girls can be venturers now. But your points are well taken. Did like the suggestion that SM and Crew advisors be present during cub recruitment. Great idea. Can't see it happening with current structure. But still a great idea. If nothing else, a one-unit concept would help eliminate the attitude void between cub scout leaders and boy scout leaders.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Everyone - Thanks. I must admit from what others have written and what Beavah wrote, I'd prefer moving toward a one-unit concept. If nothing else than for the simple fact that wolves, bears and webelos often drop out because they get bored and don't have much visibility into troops and crews. They perceive scouting from the cub scout view. If they could see more about what's coming, I think they would get more excited. Having a "one unit" view would reveal that. Plus the "transition" between cubs to troops and from troops to crews is an unnatural step that also puts the choice in place to just drop. I think it would also help the continual problem with Cub Scouts, leader turn over. Most cub leaders get up to speed around the time their cubs move on. It does not promote a strong impressive program.

Crew21_Adv wrote in another thread about the UK's one unit concept for scouts ages 5 to 25. What do people think about this? It's intriguing to me as it eliminates the dreaded Webelos transition. Other comments? Does this resemble 4H or other groups too much? Personally, this sounds like a great idea to me. All my sons could be in the same unit at the same time. Different activities. Different skill levels. But the same unit. Thoughts?

February at Blue and Gold is sort of a nation wide standard and BSA teaches it. Some units do it differently.

We do four COH per year and they are high points for the year. One at summer camp. One each in Nov, Feb and May. The Feb one has less advancement as it's only been a few months, but the May one is huge with a slide show set to music showing the last year. We do every COH as pot-luck meals. In May, the troop grills the main dish. The program is more relaxed and friendly. The scouts really enjoy it. I've been to formal sit for 90 minute COH. Those are painful.

Back to ZZZZZZzzzzz.....

Ah that makes sense. Thus discrimination. Of course we can't show movies like that to the scouts.

I thought invidious discrimination was discrimination against those speaking Latin. Could be my Catholic background though.

"You say discrimination as though it is a bad thing..." ... now that's funny

Here we go again ... good time for a nap. ZZZZZzzzzz.....

If you have concerns, you have a duty to pursue them. Especially as your the scoutmaster. It doesn't have to be a witch hunt. It can be just a friendly conversation about how to treat others and a subtle discussion about hazing. Remember those new scouts can be very worried their first night. Scare them enough and they won't come back.

"I'm feeling Fred's pain. We're just getting one or two boys because our CO's pack is feeding another troop. " ... I think that's very common. It's tough being a new cub leader. They feel overwhelmved and develop an attitude that the troop doesn't support them enough. Only later to find out the troop they go into doesn't support their aligned pack either. "But none of our boys are members of the CO, so maybe they are feeling a little pain too." - very common.

"What matters is where the most popular kid in the den is going or where the CM wants the kids to go. " - So so true. .... Never seeing SM of associated troop until recruitment ... seen that too. That's one reason why I think pack and troop committees should work together. One committee to oversee a scouting program for the charter org. Just an opinion on this one.

Here's a great analogy. ... WHAT IF ... Boy scout recruitment is mimic'ed in cub recruitment. Tiger cubs get fliers from three or four packs. Visit multiple packs and choose the one that best fits them and their family. Somehow it's a good idea for Boy Scouts. Why not Cub Scouts? ... REALITY ... A very quick way to get cub leaders upset is for another pack to flier their associated elementary school. It's assumed that students an elementary school will go into a certain pack. They are of course welcome into any pack and are welcome to switch at any time. ... BUT ... it is assumed they go into that pack. Why do people get upset? Because it creates confusion AND leaders feel cheated after investing so much time in the relationship. My main pack (CC for that one pack, COR for two packs) has worked hard with the school. Volunteering in many ways. Great relationship with the principal. We have 30% to 35% of the boys in the school in the pack. In two grades, we have 50% of the boys. We have invested in the relationship. We are grateful that it's assumed kids at the school will join our pack. If other packs randomly started flyering our school, it would frustrate us .. big time. It would create confusion and create a feeling that it's not fair to just jump in after all the time has been invested. Maybe the youth would have a better experience with the other unit. Maybe not. But I doubt most parents would be able to predict it in advance. And there's something to be said for building and respecting relationships. .... If we don't do it at the cub level, why the boy scout level? ... REALITY ... More packs I know have problems then troops. Getting into the right pack is important.

"Instead, the usual thing is to ignore packs until its time for a crossover ceremony." That's sort of what set me off this morning. The other troop offered a den chief to the the Webelos den at the end of the webelos 1st year. Effectively six months left. I know the scout family and he doesn't need the leadership for rank. It's a recruitment effort. The cubmaster suggested the den chief help the bear den that's about to become Webelos. If the scout wants to do it, we didn't want to say no. We just did not feel it's right to step in nearing the end of the Webelos experience. Plus the current Webelos den already has a den chief. If the other troop was at all involved with the pack, they would have known that. Though we hope he helps den, I doubt it. We'll have to see. So guess what wil be discussed at our next troop PLC / committee meeting? Den chiefs. We've had them in the past when scouts are interested and act. Now we need to proactively encouarge scouts to be den chiefs to build that connection too.

"... SPL came up to the boys UNPROMPTED, introduced himself ... " - Love when that happens. I've seen many SPLs over the last nine years as they change on average every nine months, minimum six months, sometimes 12, 18, 24 or more months. Every SPL is different. Some very impressive. Some not so. It's not a long-term attribute of the troop. ... If a troop is dysfunctional or not healthy, sure go ahead and switch. If ya don't get along with the leaders, go ahead and switch. Fine. But why not change earlier? In a continual scouting experience, change when ya realize you don't like the situation. Why wait for the magical Webelos transition? It's a transition that should be eliminated. What's funny is that we have cub members who transferred into our pack from the same pack number as the troop number I have difficulty with. (different charter org as the troop was asked to find a new home five to ten years ago). Thus never recruiting from their current charter org pack. If cubs transfer when they don't like the situation, why not same with others. Transfer when the situation is not a good fit. BUT ... it should be one continuous scouting experience. Then leaders (both troop and webelos leader) can focus on a good program. Not on marketing and a big decision. I suspect it would work very well for most. In our city, I'd say all but one of the troops are very good. And the one that has trouble lost their original charter and doesn't get anyone from their current charter. Guess why. IMHO, the current model creates a "big choice" that's gets blown way out of proportion, wastes alot of time and does more damage than good.

Troop shopping.... Most Webelos dens I've seen stay together unless there's an inside issue the den. IMHO, most troop shopping serves one person and the others just follow. So I just don't buy the matching a scout to a troop. Plus, I really don't think people know what to look for other than to avoid dysfunctional troops. Plus, I'd almost ask why wait for webelos to boy scouts transition. Find a good match as soon as you can. If your aligned unit isn't a good match, switch when you know. I'd almost rather see Webelos be a skills training time for Boy Scouts. Closer aligned to boy scouts. Heck, let the boy scouts help in the training. From my experience, Webelos have more in common with their future Boy Scouts then they have in common with tiger/wolf/bear scouts.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Sorry for rehashing a past discussion. I'm just venting right now because of something that happened this morning. BSA needs to redesign Webelos transition. It should be fun and enjoyable for all. But, I just dread it. This year we got 15 (12 active so far) new scouts from two different packs. Next year looks like another strong year. *** But *** I've lost a lot of respect for scouters because of recruitment and what happens. Lack of support for their own packs. Heavy handed recruitment. Slamming other units. Plus the stress involved is just frustrating. At one point, I fully agreed with BSAs approach of shopping for the right troop. Promotes better troops right? Well, I just dont think it works that way. I dont think parents know what to look for. Instead, they join based on one or two experiences and then also on the smoozing factor. I wish BSA would create a stronger alignment between packs and troops. A continuous scouting experience. Eliminate shopping for troops. Of course if a scout and his family are having a bad experience, let them switch. But I think the program would be stronger if it emphasized a continual scouting experience. At least then, youth and their parents know something about the charter org thru their years of experience in the pack. They should know the facility, the time and probably many of the leaders. Heck, why have such a major transition point that throws everything up into the air? Its already close to the needed result. Webelos arent Cub Scouts and they arent BoyScouts. Theyre Webelos scouts. Theres also something to be said for loyalty. Ideally speaking, the charter org created a youth program (scouting units) to do something nice for youth and the community. So if you are in their pack, why wouldnt you show your gratitude and support by joining their troop. If you plan to join another charter orgs troop, why not switch to that charter orgs pack. .... Our city has eight packs and seven troops. BUT ... two troops don't have associated packs because their packs have failed in the last two years. Another huge troop has a pack that's about to fail. Our troop has worked hard building a relationship with our pack and supporting our pack. But another local troop that hasn't recruited a single scout ever from their aligned pack at their own charter org. Instead, they recruit heavily from our associated pack and a few others. They don't support our pack in activities, facilities or equipment. But they call the pack under our charter org one of their feeder packs. This year we got five from our aligned pack. Next year, I'm not sure. It will be interesting though. And one of the pack leaders is going to inject things to support us as the aligned unit. The trouble is that of all the great local troops I would not recommend their troop. There have been too many ugly situations. Issues happen in every troop, but incidents seem to happen three fold in their troop. I guess I would not mind their recruiting from other packs as much if they tried to recruit from their own aligned pack. But they dont. They have never recruited a single scout from the pack thats under their same roof same charter org. .... Another troop recruits heavy handed. During visits, parents are told "We only take ten scouts every year. If you want to join, you should fill out an application now to reserve a spot." Their associated pack failed a few years ago. The pack members were welcomed into another pack under different charter org (church) that had been working hard to grow their new troop. It was to be their 1st year of a large cross over. Well the other troop leader had strong ties to youth in the failed pack. So they then recruited heavily from the very welcoming charter org pack. So by welcoming those cubs that no longer had a pack and thus doing a good deed, they lost out and helped defeat their own objectives. They would have been smarter to not accept an en-masse transfer of cubs. .... My favorite is another troop that never really talked with other leaders. This year they smoozed (word???) a few leaders that we assumed would be joining us. Well, it's okay as we got others. But we were just looking forward to those leaders and their sons joining us as we enjoy their company. It was just creepy in how they went from zero interaction to a very hign smoozing level. .... This ramble started because this morning something happened that appeared nice. But when you reflect on why, its 100% Webelos recruitment related. AND it requires us to gear up to yet a higher level to succeed with our recruitment. Its a Webelos recruitment nuclear arms race. And it gets tiring, embarrassing and very unscoutlike. .... I hope BSA recognizes and fixes the situation some time.