Gunny2862

Didn't think the thread should continue where it was as there may be lot of Leaders over their twenties with Tattoos who might not look at the thread this was spun off of.... Of course, there is always the odd man out as far as judging people with tattoo's as having a character defect. One of the pastors at a local semi-mega church has "Ambassador of Christ" tattooed in Aramaic on the inside of his right forearm as a reminder of who he is representing each time he shakes someones hand, it's in Aramaic and rather small so it's a reminder to him, not to advertise it to anyone else who sees it. I've always thought about getting one but haven't felt a compulsion to spend any cash doing it. Would definitely have to be the right thing and meet some need to do it - not getting ink just to have it.

1st, do you in fact know the swim qualifications of your Cubs? If not you need to treat them all(or at least those you haven't had tested) as non-swimmers until they have tested. 2nd, It's hard to comment on backyard pools without seeing the one you are talking about. For some backyard pools you can't fit 10 Scouts in the pool at the same time. Some I've seen in this area would require a full out 3 swim areas by ability, a guard for each area regardless of 1:10 load - the first guard then takes care of the first ten in each area, then you may need an additional guard for the next swimmer numbers 11-20,etc., in each area. Judge your needs by the size and depths of the pool plus the anticipated swimmer load. If you are hiring out a private or public pool - you may just have them provide the lifeguards also - but realize that they may not utilize BSA standards for the ratio of guard to swimmers that we utilize and they probably won't worry about ability groups or buddy groups. But it will cover your situation under G2SS. 3rdly, You'll need to make a judgment call on this whole thing or you might ask a BSAL to come over and advise you on what they would do with the pool in question. BSAL's will probably work a two or three hour party for a meal(or a meal and $10 or Troop donation)(and a smart Scoutmaster who has some BSAL's will see it as a recruiting tool to get those BSAL's to work for you with minimal compensation) - but they will probably also try to get you to do things the way they were trained - If not, they aren't following their own training - which includes not working for a leader who isn't following the rules of SSD as it shifts culpability for an incident partly to them. Yes, the lookout can be one of the lifeguards(capable swimmers in your case) but remember that one lifeguard (most often the lookout) should always be able to look out for the other guard/s. According to the reference given by NealOnWheels and your second post on this thread it looks like you would be okay with the way you appear to be stating you would do it. Pack212Scouter has a good additional list - I'm not sure about the Item (b) on his list but that is probably a Cub Scout item for general supervision. You are doing a tour permit, yes?

IMVHO, Advancing groups of Eagles is a sign of : an excellent program, or a program with very real problems. Check to see if you are are happy with the development of all of your Eagles and that they are setting their own pace then - it may be that your boys are spontaneously forming groups to help each other - if you don't "know" this is happening it may be a very good thing. I'm sure that this grouping may occur naturally also, in some cases, but if your program puts them out in groups regularly by adult involvement in "planning" how they will get there, you have to wonder if you are an Eagle Mill or not, and whether or not that is your goal. We occasionally see groups, but it's usually when two or three boys have consciously banded together on their own to push/help each other through. We see it as a good thing as long as the adults didn't set it up.

Cheerful - I can find a reason to be grumpy in just about anything - however it's been that way a long time and I've also learned to turn that on it's head quickly MOST of the time. Wife says my family trained me as an Eeyore but I'm naturally a Tigger so I tend to ride things out fairly well and see the bright side on the way out rather than going in. Which works out well when planning things. (See, just did the whole process here )

Haven't tried it, prefer sewing think it's a skill the Scouts should have too.

The best things you can do to help with perception is to be the one who is always ensuring that YPT is covered, the rules are followed, training is taken, and the Scouts are taken care of. Do those, avoid any possible appearance of impropriety and you shouldn't have any problems. Although the above is good advice for any/all of us. Come on back, some lucky Troop is just waiting for you.

I've got one of these coming up myself. Not really my idea of a good Scout, much less the top 5% of all Scouts. He did his Scouting, except for his Eagle project and application before I came on board. In my opinion, I wouldn't point him out as a positive example to very many people. BUT, he's done 99.999% of the work and is doing the Paperwork to close the loop, if he finishes in time and is passed on his EBOR then he will have met the BSA requirements and have EARNED his Eagle. We are supposed to facilitate, not be gatekeepers for, the program. They earn it, or not, on their own. Some will get more out of it character wise than others - that is up to them. We can guide them but it is up to them to grow. It is up to us to offer them the opportunities to advance and grow as Scouts - but it is up to them to attend and take advantage of those opportunities. If they can advance - meeting the BSA requirements without attending as much as we would like, then our only real option is to lobby BSA for a rule change or two.

At our NLE training it is pointed out that it isn't against the rules to do Husband and Wife(H&W) two-deep for YPT at the Troop level, but that it is foolish to do so on both the H&W part for their liability and also for the youth. The previous SM made a practice of enlisting his Wife or his Father, or Aged out Son to do YPT when there was a lack of parental interest. (His Father and his Son were registered as Committee members) I won't be doing that if I can in any way avoid it(To include a lot of griping to my CC about getting some help recruited). Another Parent/Committee member will need to step up. My ethics training (from various sources) often pointed out the appearance test - if it looks like it could be wrong - why would you leave it open to question and do it that way? And in some instances H&W leadership with no or minimal other adult leadership could look hinky very quickly. Now if you've got additional adult/s going with the H&W team, then no problem. So CAN you do it, sure. SHOULD you do it, another question. I might - depending on circumstances but would definitely prefer not to and only after I have tried all other options first.

The only thing I can add to all of the above is to remember that you are coming back on the other side of the aisle. You wouldn't be a Scout but a Scouter - one who is there to facilitate the program FOR the boys. Come on back, your knowledge and experience as a Scout will most likely be an asset to any adult team and thus to the Troop. Maybe the Troop is looking for a Venturing Adviser - something none of the parents want to do because they think they couldn't keep up. Definitely look into it! Let us know where you land.

For my rather non-diverse city we have a fairly diverse Troop, economically as well as racially. Native American, Caucasian, Asian, Hispanic, and a (don't attack me, his own title) Proud Black American. The comments that I've heard made(and was initially inclined to stop) tend to be what you would expect from real mixed brothers and I have never heard them make the same comments to any other Scout or any other person, but among themselves they seem to have taken it as a right of brothers to harass each other a little bit(a reason I am monitoring but haven't stopped it). No one gets upset or complains, they seem to do it "in fun", stop at the first sign that anyone shows annoyance - and do small corrections on the one who crossed the line, and it all goes both ways up and down Scout ranks and both ways across all the "available" divisions. They also never do it when they are really upset at each other about something else. If anyone does get upset or it goes too far in an attack mode instead of some light verbal jousting I will however, try to stop it if the SPL or PL's haven't already, quick and in a hurry. So racial divisions exist(but not necessarily within the Troop), they are aware of them and the limits of expression but no "problems" with racism so far. I'm in a bit of a quandary here because it seems like this is part of the life laboratory where they get to explore a bit and do so because they trust each other and the group as a whole - and so far the trust appears to have been warranted. But, also where some folks will think that it's unthinkable to allow it to continue. As long as no one is taking offense, and there are no hurt feelings about it. I am not inclined to try to stop it as I think that would merely drive it underground where they would just do it in their Patrols at times where I won't hear it. So in a sense, while they are after each other a little bit, they are doing it just like brothers.(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

You know Dan, a lot of people are blessed with the experience of never encountering a child who has a problem like Autism or ADD or any other number of disorders. Until I had one of my own I was certain that the ADD/ADHD thing was simply bad parenting - but even then knew enough to know that Autism was a real problem. Until people are exposed to a situation it is easy for their preconceptions to override any thought or examination of what is really happening. Don't let the jerks get to you.

We had a youth sign up, attain his Scout status all with in ten days prior to departure from camp. We worked Tenderfoot advancement with him at camp and he took three MB classes, he finished one and has two partials +/- 70% complete. He also had a great time doing all the "other" camp stuff. I can't see why someone would make a Scout who wanted to work on badges wait. They should be doing some T-2-1 advancement but if they are doing badges too then that's great, not a problem. Once the card has it's initial signature I don't expect to see it again(as SM) until the counselor has signed off on it being complete. I know he's working on it or started it but unless it takes longer than usual I'm usually not asking them about it and I certainly never hold their cards for them. And if you are doing classes as a Troop for the MB then why hasn't the Blue Card been started by the Scout, signed by the SM, kept by the boy and had the requirements that were met during that session signed off by the Counselor and then returned to the Scout until the next session? I may be wrong and am open to correction but I think that is how it's supposed to work.

Thanks John and BW, While I've been checking counselors and prereqs and reiterating the buddy rule I never knew they were all a part of that signature. Also the starting and not finishing bit, too, good to remember. Thanks.

Hi Northbell, Welcome to the forums. The purpose of it has never been explicitly explained to me but, my understanding is that if there are prerequisites to a certain Merit badge, that the Scoutmaster is certifying to the MB counselor that those prerequisites have been met. My question about this would be IF that is the case then why isn't the advancement chair the one who does this signature? For me, I wouldn't stop a Scout who wanted to work on something individually rather than "wait for camp" or the Troop to do it "as a class". I would think it was unreasonable to quell his initiative in wanting to do it on his own. We should be facilitators not gatekeepers. If the Scout hasn't met the prerequisites then I think it's entirely reasonable not to sign it.

As much as it pains me to say it, the only reason I haven't ignored GW is because when he's on topic and not playing at being an undesirable or ... maybe is just being undesirable, he makes good points. Wisecracks are one thing, and many of us have done so... pie comes to mind... but few of us are mean in our wisecracks, but, some have chosen to be mean spirited, seemingly on purpose. It's the meanness that's tiring and unappreciated, a well crafted pun or funny wisecrack perks things up and we all seem to enjoy them from time to time. Maybe you should stop the mean spirited postings GW, but I am generally opposed to censorship OGE.

You know, I think BobWhite's quote... "from the Scoutmaster Handbook: "A boy who continually disrupts meetings or whose actions endanger himself or others during Scouting activities should be sent home." Seems pretty clear doesn't it. " ...has nailed it. A Scout who had a bad attitude, refused to correct it, and was disruptive, and/or endangered himself or others would probably make my grade for a trip home. But note that this puts him on the wrong end of several of the things I would look at about whether or not he should go home.

Lisabob, I can very easily imagine sending home a Scout for slapping, punching, kicking, etc. BUT, it's all a continuum to me, the reasons, the attitudes of both Scouts, the severity, reciprocity and duration of the altercation would all come into play at to whether either or both went home. And so without a specific and fully disclosed case to discuss I can't say with any certainty what I would do with a hypothetical. I am not into black/white, right/wrong, go/no go distinctions in dealing with most issues with the boys because the rules may trap me and keep me from doing the right thing for the situation. But I do like having rules that expressly allow me to send anyone home at anytime at my discretion - and the COR and CC can fire me the instant they see me for abusing my discretion too. Thanks for the answers about how you handle refunds - or the lack of them.

I like BrentAllen's answer in conjunction with NeilLup's. But if the Scout just wants to go to camp and not do MB work, I would encourage him to just say so up front so everyone is on the same page. Fishing is fine, so is meeting other Scouts and "just hanging out". But the points of those who have pointed out that he may be keeping another Scout out of a class by signing up for one is totally valid especially if it is a space restricted small availability class like Scuba, etc. Would I prefer that he was doing some advancement, emphatically yes, but there are other methods of Scouting and ways of advancement other than MB work that may be in play here... and it depends on the Scout in question. I wouldn't be sending a non-trouble making Scout home for not going to MB sessions.

John-in-KC, I get it about being at BSAL and the time commitment there. I did it this year plus the BSAL Counselor/Instructor section. The Scouts did really well this year, everyone including my ten day Scout, advanced at least one rank or merit badge. Maybe I should get further out of the way more often. But that's a goal too. I was in no way intending to say anything about your situation with the Scout on the range, I wasn't there and don't know the details, plus, I am confident that you handled it well. I was simply saying that for me in regard to the range situation that it would depend on the Scout, his attitude, and what the violation was. I'm not sure that who came down to tell me would make that big a difference to me(but camps handle things differently too, the Scouter who came and told you may have been a message in itself that I am not familiar with, we usually find out things from whomever Staffer is available at the moment to tell us). NJCubScouter, I agree that whoever makes the call to send the Scout home should fill him in on the 5 W's of his new destination but depending on the situation it may then be necessary to "constrain" his activity until the parents arrive. In some cases, this is best done by delaying the talk until the parents have charge of him. Remember we are talking about any and all levels of offense that might be serious enough to send the Scout home. Not necessarily just one example you might be thinking of. I prefer BrentAllens old SM's approach in his post above, if possible, rather than sending a Scout home but that will often depend on the Scout and his attitude.

I haven't had to and hope I won't have to send anyone home. But, if they won't follow reasonable directions from their PL, the ASPL, SPL (or the leader of a camp program area) and wind up facing an ASM or myself and still don't care to play the game then they simply don't need to be there. If there is inside the unit theft and the proof is there then the offended might get to help make the call. If it's theft outside the unit they're probably going home. A safety violation on the range isn't probably enough for me to send them home, to keep them off of the range according to the rangemasters wishes, yes, but not necessarily home. But it's all speculative for me at this point, haven't seen it yet, would want to know the Scout involved and the circumstances of any of the above situations and talk it out with him before this decision was made. Exceptions to my fairly soft line would be any battery, especially if a weapon of any type is involved. Go straight home, do not pass go, do not collect a merit badge or $200. I agree with BobWhite here, I shouldn't have to tell them they are going home, they should know they are going, and that is only reinforced by their parental transportation arriving. On the other hand, I probably would have a sit down with them and inform them of the Who What When Where and Why's of their shortened Scout outing(because if I can't do this then how do I KNOW they KNOW why they are going, and give them the opportunity to learn from it) and would make sure they were either in the immediate presence of myself or another adult until their parent arrived. No 300 foot space for a Scout who is having to be sent home, sorry. Question: If you do send them home, do you refund any portion of their Camp, HA or other fees? Or is that part of their discussion with their parents?

It looks to me like that Life Scout is a lot further away from Eagle than that... but, what standards have been communicated to him that he would have to meet to redeem his past behavior and move on? And will you require him to meet those standards?

No, I don't think we should scrap it. I do think that some overzealous adults are putting up some unnecessary hurdles. But the majority of the problems I'm aware of in the process have to do with 17 year and 9 month old Scouts who come to the realization that they are now on a compressed timeline and have to jump on the project to finish it. The few Scouts I've seen in this predicament(I'm still new) have been "absent" Scouts - the ones who stayed around and involved with the troop didn't fall into this trap. And due to their decision to wait until the very last minute every adult interaction becomes one of "You have to hurry and meet MY timeline because I waited so long - and if you don't it's YOUR fault I didn't make Eagle." I'm not buying it, If they get their Eagle package when they make Life - the way we do it - then there's just not an excuse for waiting that long and expecting the adults to jump thru the hoops FOR them. JMVHO

Powdered Gatorade will save a lot of weight in shipping and help him stay hydrated on the pier. Slip in a couple of the envelope drink mixes in various flavors to help break the boredom. And maybe an empty 20. oz bottle to mix them in so he doesn't goop up his water bottle. A deck of cards, UNO or other game deck cards as alternatives, or even the Scout Card decks with the Scouting games on them. Fresh batteries for whatever light he took along. I've always been happy to see socks in a care package, foot powder, gum. A note re: how proud you are of him...

Neillup raises an interesting point and one I hadn't thought of about individual "ownership" of the funds and the tax ramifications. But it's not surprising, many heads are better than one. So, IF it's allowable for non-members to work the fund raiser, then they just have to understand that if they do not join the Troop, that they are donating their labor and if they choose to join they "may" receive credit(but not ownership of the funds - just like all of the other Scout accounts). Is that better?

Thanks Lisabob!