fred8033

Been there. Really cool experience. Nothing like tent sleeping where at 2am it's 90 degrees with a 85 degree dew poitn.

Interesting discussion. Only a few comments... #1 SMC - It's not the scoutmaster's job at the SMC to make sure every requirement is done. Scoutmaster can do that if he wants, but it's still the BOR's job. Just saying it because as a BOR I would not use a completed SMC as an indication the requirements are complete. #2 BOR has several key focuses. One is that the BOR is the checkpoint to verify that requirements are completed. IMHO, that means also to verify that paperwork is clean and ready to go. But IMHO I view that as a cooperative co-responsibility of the scout and the troop leaders and not an obstacle for the scout to overcome. Help the scout recreate his records and help the scout find evidence that he completed the requirements. Support the scout. #3 In our troop, we've had few handbooks lost over the years ... very few. I've only known one scoutbook that had to be completely re-created and that was because it was destroyed at school through vandalism. A good velcro cover is important.

"2 signatures won't stop everything, but its still a good procedure." Agreed. For our unit though, it's a moot procedure as multiple leaders see images of the checks thru emailing the PDF bank statements and those statements have images of each check. IMHO, the solution is transparancy.

IMHO, two signatures on every check is never really that great of protection. In our units, the protections are #1 someone other than the treasurer gets the bank statements; #2 we email a PDF of the bank statements to four or more different families and #3 the PDF bank statements include an image over every check written. PDF bank statements with check images is a service by our bank. We love it. Strongly recommend it. I hope everyone reads it. but even if they don't, at least there is transparancy if someone starts questionioning what's going on.

No chit. Have adults guide and coach the youth leaders and the youth. For electronics, teach youth leaders common techniques for dealing with electronics such as waiting until it's put away to continue or asking the person to step away or other. It's our job as leaders to guide the youth and to teach youth how to leader other youth. I've never cared for the "If I see it, you lose it" approach. I wouldn't respect a boss who did it to me and I suspect scouts roll their eyes at such threats. A phone is a tool just like an ax, knife, stove, tent or rain coat. We warn parents that scouts lose and break stuff. Happens all the time. It's their risk, not ours. As a side note, we often say equipment is built for commercial use (flimsy), heavy duty, industrial or scout use. Things just don't take a worse beating. (This message has been edited by fred8033)

basementdweller wrote: "wingnut you have never been a victim of roundtable or camp adult snobbery." LOL. Been there ... way too many times.

Eagle1973 wrote: "This Scout may have to come back and "finish" his SM Conference." That just creeps me out. Taking an appropriate BOR response to an incomplete advancement requirement and applying it at a SMC to hold up the scout. SMCs happen. No pass fail. Once it happened, the scout has had his SMC and the SM is to help the scout get his BOR. There's no re-convene two weeks later after you've refreshed your skills. But it's your troop and you can pretty much do as you want. The only way I've seen scouts held up at SMC is when the SM reserves the "scout spirit" requirement for the SMC. But that's a whole different discussion. And even then, you sign off on the SMC because the scout had his SMC. ... Eagledad wrote: "I do feel that if scouts are intimidated by the SM conference or BOR, then that is not the right style." Great insight. Fully agree. ... Buffalo Skipper wrote: "The SMC is not a retest of skills (as stated by many here). The SMC is not a prep for the Board of Review. The SMC is not a lecture by the SM." So correct.

Beavah wrote: "Yah, I've never understood this claim. Are yeh really saying that by the time a boy comes up for rank advancement, the Scoutmaster doesn't know the scout?" I think you know better. It's one thing to know the scout, but another to have had an extended private conversation about scouting experiences and goals. I'm a CC and I focus on the adult side of the troop; redirecting the scouts to the SPL or SM. But I still know all the scouts, their personalities, likes, dislikes, etc. But I've had few private conversations. And even fewer have I had a heart-to-heart conversation about their life and scouting experience. I'm sure it's the same for our SM. SMC is not pass / fail. It's just a directed conversation. ... Rank advancement worksheets ... Falls right in-line with the ninth method of scouting. 1. Patrols 2. Ideals 3. Outdoor programs 4. Advancement 5. Adult interaction 6. Personal growth 7. Leadership development 8. Uniform 9. Inspirational paperwork

Pack - 80 - Just lost 10 Webelos 2 at the B&G Troop - 45 - Just received 15 Webelos. Had two bad recruitment years.

I'll confess. Over the last ten years, I've handed them over periodically. Not that often. To recharter, you already have to visit with the CO executive. As such, we've already had a recent conversation. Probably the same conversation that happens each year. Starts with the church secretary ... "Who are you?" ... "Why do you need a signature?" Followed by a "Huh?" The charter paper comes a few months later. We've already had the conversation. Time in front of the congregation is pretty limited. The other CO is a PTO and we don't really want to raise visibility too much as it could easily push someone's button causing a much bigger headache. ... Probably the one thing that should change is see if the CO wants to have a frame somewhere to display the charter. We could put the new one in each year.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Beavah wrote: - "I think what evilleramsfan and his fellow scouters are tryin' to say is that the boy in question really hasn't done this, at least in terms of learning and meeting BSA advancement expectations. Fair enough. I read evilleramsfan posts very differently. I saw where evilleramsfan wrote:" "This boy was one of the ones who got a bunch of items signed off because he went to two different summer camps. As a result, most of his First class was signed off and just needed time to happen. He did not earn First Class, but received it anyway." But it really didn't connect with me in where he did not earn First Class. I was reading that the scout had reasonable knowledge on the topics the SM questioned him on and the scout was very involved. I interpretted that others in the troop were grumbling at how fast the scout advanced. Almost like complaining that such a young scout had an unfair advantage by getting two weeks of summer camp and was able to shoot past his similar aged scouts. ... evilleramsfan - This might be moot now. But when you wrote "He did not earn First Class", what did you mean? Did he not pass a swimmers test (or equivalent with doctor's permission etc and BSA waver)? Did he not identify 10 different plants? Did he not help plan a patrol menu? Did he not do the map and compass requirement? How did the scout fail to meet the requirements?

Eagle732 wrote: "I just try to balance the overall numbers of the patrols. I ask the new guys which patrol they want to be in and try to work it out so everyone is as happy as possible. I think it's important to let them have some say in where they go." Cool. Very similar to our troop. We do initially put scouts in new scout patrols. They elect a patrol leader at the 1st meeting. Troop Guide helps them with the 1st meeting, 1st PLC, 1st camp out, etc. The Troop Guide knows to slowly wean the new scouts of needing his advice. But if they want, they can join another patrol. Or switch to another patrol at any time. Usually, functioning patrols want to stay together. That's 100% fine ... in my book. Your experience may vary.

RememberSchiff wrote: "Give the units with an absentee COR the right to select another representative to attend and vote at district and council meetings. " Great answer. When the local councils merged, the COs were given the vote. They had no clue. It was a laugh at the district round table with scouters rolling their eyes. ............ I like the current model of BSA providing the concepts, rules and materials for a program to be owned and run by the CO. BUT changes are needed to address key weaknesses. I'm not sure what solution is, but the problems are recurrant and based on absentee or barely involved COs. In my experience, the vast majority of COs are absentee or just barely involved. I really doubt many church elders or pastors regularly monitor, guide or correct their owned units. Sooo.... ..... #1 Legal or practical ownership? It's a grey situation at best. Who's responsible? Who's liable? Is CO unit ownership just a BSA liability shield? If so, it seems like a weak one. BSA has 99% of the contact by "owning" the camps, the training, and the program materials; and, registering the leaders. BSA (thru the councils and districts) runs all the activities (district derbies, university of scouting, council level youth training, etc.) I bet most COs (pastors, church elders) wouldn't know the name or recognize the cubmaster or scoutmaster when he(she) walks in the door. Most COs just sign the charter every year. That's about it. ... AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ... BUT ... the absentee CO is to approve the unit leader character and knowledge? And to monitor and "own" the unit? If BSA contracts with the CO and BSA knows the COs are usually not doing much on their side, it seems like BSA has a big liability. The problem is that an absentee CO is the normal condition. IMHO (not a legal scholar) when it's accepted knowledge that the majority of COs are not that involved (i.e. not screening volunteers, training or monitoring quality), then it seems BSA doesn't have that strong legal coverage when problems happen. ..... #2 Fixing problem units? With time, leaders change. Especially in Cub Scout packs. When units get off course, get poor leadership or no leadership, who fixes it? District execs can coach, but they have no power. COs are mostly absent and have no concept of what the problems are. The result is that to fix broken units, the units often need to first crash and burn. Or worse ... the units keep going as they are for years not delivering the scouting promise and damaging everyone's perception of what scouting is about. ..... #3 Conflicting youth program concepts? ... Except LDS ... Scouting groups are often viewed as an "outside group" that the church is providing a service too by letting them use church space. It's common that "internal" church youth groups don't even get involved with their church's scouting unit. And vice versa. BUT ... the church youth groups are tightly coupled to the church (monitored, supported, overseen, fixed, guided, ...). The scouting unit is the "outside" group.

shortridge wrote: "By emphasizing advancement and quality control and making that your priority, you're implicitly telling Scouts that they need to focus on checking the boxes and reading the rules. That's a skewed focus. "The emphasis should be on program and outdoor adventure, not advancement policies and procedures. Advancement will happen naturally in a troop that has a good outdoor program, almost accidentally. There's no need to worry about retention of skills, because the Scouts are using them every month. "It is harder to do, especially in a troop with lots of aggressive parents. But it is the way Scouting was intended to be done." 100% agree. Great response. In another thread, it was asserted that some troops are "kid focused" and others are "program focused". I've yet to reach a position on that. Perhaps because it wasn't a strong deliniation in my mind. BUT, this one is. Program focused versus advancement focused? Scouting is program based. It's about doing. Getting outdoors. Learning. Exploring. Building friendships. The scout in question apparently has done this, has been a good member of the troop and has met BSA advancement expectations. Why even talk about testing the lower limits? Why even talk about advancement quality control? To me that's just misfocused and needs an attitude adjustment. IMHO, the real question is how to celebrate this scout's achievement before he moves out of town. ... If you have any quality control question, perhaps the question is how do you make sure it's the scout's scouting experience and not the parents. It's hard to save a scout from his own parents and especially a scout with such a disability. In our troop, we've got two with significant autism, one with muscular dystrophy and several others with more mild conditions. Often, the parents are there just to help out. But we've also had pushy parents. Usually after listening to the parent talk / vent, the answer is a friendly smile and a "have your son come talk to me." Often we don't even discuss advancement with the parents. Explain yes. Discuss no. ... "too fast too soon" is as often an adult leader issue as much as a scout issue.

For the last eight years, we've been pretty consistent Weekend - tent camping - 8 or 9 (Mar - Nov) Weekend - cave camping - 1 (Dec - Feb) Weekend - cabin camping - 2 (Dec - Feb) Weekend - outdoor winter camping - 1 or 2 (Dec - Feb) Week long summer camp - Tents - 1 Extended adventure - Tents - High - 1 or 2 (Jun - Aug) Extended adventure - Tents - Moderate - 1 or 2 (Jun - Aug) If you did every overnight activity with the troop, you'd have around 35 to 38 nights. No one does it all, but a good percent of the troop has 30+ nights yearly.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Beavah ... Mellow out. All the kids know him. He's an active parent in the troop and effectively a committee member. He has helped our events and we've helped his sheriff's department events (forming snow blocks, etc). In the last eight years, we've only had one scout who we've asked to be visit with the troop committee because of behavior. We had talked with the parents before and they understood why and we worked out how to handle the situation. Visiting the troop committee was almost a formality to impress the seriousness of what was happening.

raisinemright wrote: "I had a little incident with a municipal youth group I used to help lead. We caught a kid with some pot, disposed of it and set up a meeting with his parents with the intention of letting them handle the punishment, besides being kicked out of the club. The other leader was a cop but the kid didn't know it. He showed up to the meeting in uniform. Seeing the kid's look of utter fear, I had a hard time keeping s straight face." That's an absolutely great story. We have an active parent who's a deputy sheriff. He helps our troop and our troop helps some of his police community activities. You can sure as bet we'll be doing that too if anything significant ever happened. He doesn't need to say or do anything. Maybe a friendly word of advice. But having him there in full uniform would say plenty.

Beavah wrote: "Yah, but in the end, what did the boys learn from that? Maybe somethin' about the fickleness or fears of adults, but certainly nuthin' about managing safety, exercising judgment themselves and all the rest." We never said no. We just said they should make sure they had adults to go with them and to find a few to commit early. They asked a few but could not find any willing to commit. It's a brutally tough hike with all your gear in good weather. But Feb can be -20F and I'm sure snow can drift above your head on the trail. Controlling a sled would be really hard. Plus, you might think your on the path and .... .... Beavah wrote: "Any way yeh cut it, just dumpin' it on 'em at Eagle isn't really fair. Da Eagle Project process in a troop should be functionally the same as the outing process." dumpin' it on 'em is a loaded mischaracterization. But I don't buy the 2nd part that "eagle project process ina troop should be functioning the same as the outing process." I just don't see that supported in any BSA materials. Doesn't say anything about eagle projects being part of troop meetings, PLC discussion or supported by troop committees. And nothing allowing troops to require eagle candidates to follow established troop policies and procedures. BSA does document that scouts are to be given latitude to strick out on their own and take responsibility for their project. For our troop, our scouts get plenty of experience coordinating, making decisions, taking responsibility, coordinating resources and following thru. Plenty of experience to succeed at their Eagle project. It's a solid program and don't forget the MB experiences too: Personal mgmt, Communications, etc. .... I will say that I'm intrigued by this discussion and the many ideas it has raised. I'm not sure what will happen, but I'm sure multiple points from the discussion will influence our troop.

Just reading more what BSA says about scoutmaster approval. GTA does say scouts can have any number of partials, use multiple MBC per badge, no time limit, etc. BUT with approval ... ???? GTA IS CLEAR AS MUD GTA section 7.0.0.2 ... It tries to be explicit with statements such as "Although it is the Scoutmasters responsibility, for example, to see that a counselor is identified from those approved and made available, the Scout may have one in mind with whom he would like to work. He may also want to take advantage of opportunities at merit badge fairs or midways, or at rock-climbing gyms or whitewater rafting trips that provide merit badge instruction. This is acceptable, but the unit leader should still consider the recommendation and approve it if it is appropriate." "This is acceptable" seems to say the scout is allowed to use any counselor he wants. But then it says "but the unit leader should still consider the recommendation and approve ...." So if it's acceptable, why the "but" and talking about still considering the recommendation. Maybe it's a typo and the scout should still consider the scoutmasters recommendation as the SM did the recommending and the scout the requesting. Or, it's the SM who is to allow the scout's choice if valid. I just have no idea. that paragraph is clear as mud. It's almost like it was written by committee and the committee had no conclusive agreement on the answer. ... BSA does address it in other ways too GTA page 76 Clause 12 Examination in camps ... seems to give leeway to camps to establish other standards "to give an intensive scouting program" ... not 100% unit leader signature but related but seems to open the door. ... GTA page 76 Section 1 Responsibility for Merit Badges, clause 13 ... says the the responsibility lies with the merit badge counselor and DAC. Doesn't really say what the responsibility is, but says it's the MB counselors or DACs. ********************** ********************** GTA 7.0.4.6 "Once a registered and approved counselor has passed a Scout on requirements for a merit badge, it cannot be taken away." - ONLY CLEAR STATEMENT ON THE TOPIC - So if a process was violated but the MBC approved the badge, this seems to say it's a done deal. You can't take it away just because the SM did not sign the card. ********************** **********************

Oak Tree: "I disagree, though, that the Jamboree Scoutmaster is equivalent to the actual unit leader." Unofficially - Agreed - NOT EQUIVALENT because the Jamboree leader doesn't know the multi-year history of the scout. But is that really needed to sign a blue card? Official per BSA - EQUIVALENT. I looked a few years ago and ... if I remember right ... Jamboree scouts are dually registered in his home unit and his Jamboree unit. So while participating in Jamboree related events, the jamboree SM is the real unit leader. Same with some scout camps where staff members get dually registered as "crew" members. Hopefully, unit leaders can work together in those situations. ... Trek leaders and camp staff leaders are not "officially" allowed to approve, but why sweat it? The trek leader is the one responsible for that scout at that time and will be on-hand to deal with flu, broken bones, dehydration ... and emergency blue card signatures. In your case, the camp director / ranger had responsibility for the scout. Yeah it's different in that it's employment. But the youth still is housed and fed there. I do view that as accepting some responsibility for the youth for months at a time. Often they get to know the scout better than the home unit leaders. ... I have seen where the signature is important. 2nd year Webelos were done with the Webelos program and wanted to start working on MBs when visiting the troop. Their future scoutmaster was able to catch it and explain the situation. ... Eagle732 wrote: "Well if a boy is going to be halfway across the country he should know before he leaves what MBs he'll be working on ..." Really? We've camped at state parks and met up with other troops working on MB. If invited, should our scouts turn down a chance to work on a MB just because our scoutmaster isn't there and we can't reach him on the phone? ... Eagle732 wrote: "Seems there's lots of differing opinions. " That's because we're dealing with registered scouters who didn't follow the BSA procedure. Most procedures focus on the planned "GO" path. It's hard to document how to handle every screw up. Though this is a pretty common MB screw up. Strictly speaking, the counselor should have told the scout to first get his SM approval and signature. That's the documented process. Until then, he doesn't know if he's teaching a qualified (registered boy scout) scout. He and the youth could be wasting their time was the youth might not be registered or might be a cub scout or girl scout. BUT ... I've never seen a MB counselor wait for the unit leader signature. At summer camp, scouts routinely sit through MB sessions and the counselor says at the end ... "Don't forget to bring me a blue card tomorrow." or even just gives the scout a new blue card and ignores the signature part. That's pretty common. IMHO the BSA rule to apply is where BSA says that we are not to penalize the scout for leader mistakes and in other places to not be overly legalistic with advancement. (new eagle process GTA documentation for example.) So the camp director said the cards are signed by registered MB counselors. So either the camp director and/or counselors need better training. OR they view this as a legalistic thorn that they don't want to deal with in a summer camp setting and until you can make them "care" your going to deal with a screw up that BSA doesn't address.

water temperature > 32F. Appropriate gear. Some of the best camp outs have been on the river on 45 degree days.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

I read too quickly. Eagle92 raised good point. My comments are removed.(This message has been edited by fred8033)(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Event #1, #2 and #3 and hitting in #4 hitting are all very bad. Tooth paste does not fix sheet rock. #3 is what scares the #### out of me. Several of our camps have river ice and others have lakes with flowages. It can be very dangerous. ... If he's a life scout and 17 years old, there must have been earlier behavior problems. Things rarely get this bad during just one camp out. SO ... what's been done to correct him in the past? Sometimes it's little feedback moments are critical. Sometimes a "come to Jesus" moment is needed. In another words, has the scout ever been explicitly to his face been told the expected behavior. That his behavior is not within those limits. (Specific incidents). If he can work within scouting boundaries, you are glad to have him in the troop. If not, he should look elsewhere to find a place to spend his time. We had a youth who really needed scouting because of the ugliness in his family life. But, he could not work within the scouting boundaries. We tried for too long to make it work and longer than he was willing to invest. It drove scouts away and damaged the troop. We waited too long to make the final "come to Jesus" moment. And then he left the troop. I've seen him for a few years after, I think he learned from being asked to step away until his behavior changed. ............... I would 100% separate his age and Eagle rank progress from the decision. That's his issue and a result of his behavior. ............... IMHO, those scouts affected by his behavior need to know they will be safe and all the scouts need to know the behavior is not acceptable. ............... I hate cabin camping for this reason too. ............... Flip side of all this is that we had an older scout hit a younger scout around seven years ago. Just wacked him. Heard later from the adult leaders that the older scout was just trying to sit quietly by the fire by himself. The younger scout would just not leave him alone. The adults were watching most of the afternoon and the feedback was ... yes it was 100% unacceptable, but they could not blame the older scout. The younger scout later became SPL and an eagle scout. Funny how things can sometimes work out.

qwazse - What do you mean when you wrote "Plus, the boys have a responsibility to tend to 11-13 year olds, whereas in the crew any such obligation is voluntary." ??? I don't see any difference in troop / crew here. If anything, crews have more responsibility for member to member training. ........... This discussion has really opened my eyes to think about changes we could make. Or better ... to have the SM discuss with the SPL and then have the SPL work with the PLC to see what they want to change. I can't see going as far as having scouts reserve camp sites, but there is much we could change.

IM_Kathy wrote: "I think there is a difference between boy-led and boy-done. To me boy-led means they plan: they decide what they want to do at a campout, where they want to camp to be able to do that, how long they want to stay there. It means they lead: they lead the younger scouts in all the "how to's" of scouting... knots, tents, packing, hiking, reading maps. It means they work together: John wants to canoe, Pete wants to bike, Luke wants to just chill... they agree to have a campout for canoeing, a different one for biking, and either make sure their is chill time at these as well or they plan another campout that is just a chill out campout. our last campout was a chill/rank campout. Some of the boys chilled out and played games - some worked on rank advancement but also chilled out." That pretty much reflects our troop. Boys led - planning and leading activities, camp outs, etc. Boy-done - while at meetings / activities and where scouts can easily coordinate. adult-done - off meeting tasks critical to making sure events happen and to support the troop. For example, adults receive permission forms and money directly from the scouts. It doesn't get handed to the PL, then to the SPL and then to the adult camping coordinator. Adults reserve the sites and pay the bills. Scouts deal with attendance lists during meetings and camp outs. Adults deal with them at other times. Same reason given by IM_Kathy. Scouts are busy and it's hard enough to depend on adults to get things done away from troop meetings. Scouts often have sporting, school, church or personal conflicts. ------------- We do have a PLC(SPL) report to the troop committee. It's a great chance for the adults to get to know what the scouts are thinking and will need in the coming events. The troop committee knows to not debate or hassle scouts during the report. We provide any critical feedback through the SM. The only schedule plan we ever had an issue with was a February camp out where the plan was to hike "DOWN" a mile long steep uneven rocky path to that would be covered with ice and snow. Oh... and the path has a sharp drop off (when you can see it ... not a sheer cliff, but still a sharp angle). We don't mind winter camp outs. That's fun. We just mind risking our lives. We were willing to schedule it if the scouts could find registered qualified leaders who would go with them. Oh and to get to the hiking trail, you have to drive on an un-marked, un-plowed raw dirt trail for two miles ... if you can find it. Not so cool. ------------- qwazse: - mentioned that you want to leverage boys talents. I like the term "progressive responsibility" to give scouts opportunity to grow with a good chance to succeed and to get out of their way when they already know what they are doing. ------------- Thanks everyone for your responses. I has given me much to think about. It's always amazing that "boy led" means something so different to everyone who hears the term. I'll have to look for a local troop that has patrol leaders managing attendance lists, budgets and where the scouts reserve sites, etc. It would be very interesting to learn more.