Gunny2862

Austin_wb, So where is this Scout shop that had a picture to show you? and why do we have threads discussing the exact same thing?

GW, I totally believe that. But I like it anyway...

Knot head, I'm not at the point of doing it yet, but I think it will run into monthly separate trips for the Venture Patrol and the regular Troop outing, with quarterly all-in-one trips. (So the younger Scouts can benefit from the older Scouts being around.)(And so the older Scouts can "lead" more with the younger Scouts.) It is my hope that the Venture patrol will continue to meet at the same time as the Troop and do their business while showing the younger Scouts how it's done. Does any one have a word picture of this actually working?

Unless you have other requirements you can qualitatively point to and say he didn't meet, it sounds like you are stuck with "Scout Spirit" or a lack thereof to keep you from recommending him to a EBOR. If he has been in the POR for the required time you can't deny him credit for the position now, regardless of how poorly he did it. If a Scout isn't doing the job you have to pull him off of the job before he completes his time in order to deny the credit for the POR. If you feel he isn't an Eagle Scout candidate, then do the right thing and stand up and take the heat - because it will come. And as has been stated before you will most likely be overturned on appeal. And of course you can always pass him on to the EBOR and hope they see what you see and don't pass him - but if you really don't feel like he is an Eagle candidate then what example are you sending by not standing up? This is a tough one but you are the last individual gatekeeper before the EBOR and just as it was your responsibility to give him every opportunity to proceed and succeed in the program, I think it is occasionally your responsibility to say no. But in that no should be an explicit truth telling of what he can do to rectify the situation with clear metrics the Scout can do. And if it is too late then recount all of the opportunities you gave him to fix it earlier. If there isn't time to fix the problems and let him proceed this may best be done in writing if you expect your decision to have any chance of holding up on review. Even in the denial of your signature on moving to the next step should be a lesson on the responsibility he has/had towards others and himself in doing what ever you are saying he lacks. Of course you can't in reality deny him the SM conference because your meeting with him to discuss this will BE a SM conf. And then he goes to the EBOR... Good luck, I hope I don't wind up in your shoes. (knocking on wooden head)(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

I've only been in Scouting for just over a year and am already seeing and disliking this issue. My current crop is: (1) 17 year old Eagle Jr. Asst. Scoutmaster who shows up and helps when his School activities and work don't interfere. (1) 17 year old Eagle candidate - project in progress, awaiting his post "work" paperwork completion. (1) 17 year old who doesn't have the ability to complete due to a lack of time left. (1) 17 year old who might still be able to complete but who is actively avoiding contact. (1)16 year old "I got my Eagle and call me if you do a HA trip" who never shows for anything else. His 18 year old Eagle brother who did the same thing. A gap that drops to the next Leadership group where the current SPL, etc. come from, the 13 and 14 year olds, 2nd Class and Star Scouts, who are already asking about Venturing and Venture Patrols. It is my intent to start that patrol as soon as we have the required minimum of eligible Scouts. I would like for that Patrol to stay around and be available to provide some framework of what "active" older Scouts should look like. I know that rules about this will most likely not work - but if we can make it provide better trips, and not focus so much on repeating the T-2-1 skills the way it unfortunately is now maybe they will be more likely to "want" to come back and help the younger Scouts get to where they are even if they are only there for the troop meetings and the occasional camp out. I understand why the previous crowd did what they did but hope the current Scouts will take ownership of the program and let me provide the tools they need - we are keeping this as a topic of conversation with the boys in question.

No one but a Yankee ever ate "a" grit. Hot Sauce on eggs is a great idea if your eggs are a little long in the tooth. Mine never last that long. They go to good with grits, and a a little sausage, I like my sausage with sage.

I keep forgetting, is it lightbulbs(darksuckers) or bicycles that are irreducibly complex? Look, science is in fact a belief system. In a truly non-empirical sense none of us KNOW that we are experiencing the same reality as everyone else, if we are sensing reality at all. Science seems to be giving us a great sense of repeatability and correlation of results for similar experiments. But, we can only look at the results and BELIEVE that their similarity implies certain observations about the universe. Some overzealous folks turn those most repeatable observations into "truths" or "facts" but any Scientist who tells you that they aren't winding up with more questions than answers is most likely doing bad science. And any good scientist will leave open the possibility that the observations MAY be founded on an incomplete understanding of what is really happening and that an alternate theory may one day lead to a better explanation. So this idea that Science has all of the answers doesn't wash anyway - Scientific method MAY be the best empirical way to investigate what can be known but to ascribe "truth" to Science is also implying Science as a Worldview thus making it a "religion". I like my Religion and my Science to agree wherever possible. When it clearly isn't happening, I usually figure I don't fully understand something on one side or the other. Probably more common a problem than I might like to admit...

dScouter15 said, " Like giving a tylenol, if you distribute it to youth, you might never have a problem 99.9% of the time. But, it is that 0.1% of the time that we focus on in the emergency medicine." And this is part of my point, I also don't believe in routinely giving any meds for "I don't feel so good." I will increase my monitoring of them and determine whether I think I should call a parent if necessary(assuming they're reachable), to get their view and or reaffirm any permissions for any OTC's or meds the Scout might have forgotten they brought and were supposed to be taking that hadn't been brought to my attention. And I can't think of very many times that tylenol is going to be an emergency med other than for patient management. Would you care to expand on this one? But for the Scout/Scouter in extremis I still hold that I don't think that anything I feel capable of doing/administering is something that I would withhold if it might prevent their death, especially if it actually falls into something I either am currently trained/certified in or a little less so if the cert. has lapsed but the knowledge is still onboard. I also thought it was weird when I got my first, second and third epi kit (for MY protection/use) that there was no training - "just read the instructions". I bounced and talked to a couple of different doctors/allergists about that rx.

WHoa, Whoa, Whoa!!!! Don't denigrate safety by controls!!! Safety by control is always better than rectifying the failure to put a limit on an activity and then dealing with the aftermath with our medical training no matter how expert or lay trained! Do you not ensure you have properly placed anchors when rappelling/rock climbing? Do you not ensure you have an "expert" to place those anchors? Do you not plan our route, water, food when hiking - leave word with someone not on the trip about your itinerary and your - "come find us - we're overdue timeline". We use controls all of the time and they are always better than "fixing" a problem caused by a lack of planning - another control.

Absolutely, In the best of all possible worlds the Scoutmaster is also an emergency room doctor and carries a full trauma bag and additional diagnostic equipment in addition to his camping gear. Has a Satellite phone and contacts with all of the applicable air evac services. That is not the scenario any of us have any realistic likelihood to deal with. On the other hand, what will YOU do IF that Scout or Scouter on your trip does lose the lottery and IS in extremis... and YOU lose the lottery and have to make the hard decisions. Thinking about it now is unarguably the best start. If someone has known allergies it should be their responsibility to 1) notify the leadership of the trip and 2) carry the required meds with appropriate instructions for their condition in a KNOWN and group standardized location in their personal kit. If they run across unknown allergies - then you can only do what you are willing and have the capability to do. Having Benadryl on hand in the group first aid kit seems like a reasonable and fairly safe start. If the victim is gone so far that I don't reasonably see how I can cause any harm then it kind of opens the door a little wider on what I might try. So asking questions and seeking training NOW seems like a good idea. That said, not everyone is, can be, should be or will be trained to EMT standards. (My certifications end at Combat Lifesaver which has NO civilian application in liability standards, I would be treated as a lay person in court.)(But if the Scout/Scouter is dying, I think I have an ethical responsibility to do everything I can for them if other(better) help is not available to them.) But some rationality comes into play and to shift it for some clarity - If a Scout has a three inch pulsing bleeder gash on their leg I'm not going to amputate. It just would be so far out of the realm of things that could help that it really doesn't fall into consideration. In the same way an anaphlytic reaction would have to get a little further along before I would skip other steps like finding out if it is a first time reaction, have they had bad or only moderate reactions before, do they have medications prescribed& if so - with them, calming them, attempting to start an evac, get some benadryl on-board, trying to clear the allergen if practicable/known. I share others concerns with the idea of some that might think - they're having an allergic reaction - shoot them up! There is simply more to most interventions than a process that is that simple. And again the final question becomes would you be MORE willing to tell that family that "I did everything I could for your son?" or "I didn't do some other things that I knew how to do but am not currently (or never have been) certified to do which might have saved him because I was afraid you'd sue me."

Any and all humor has a dark underbelly from which it arose - ask any professional comedian, locally Yakov Smirnov occasionally teaches classes on humor in the Psychology department at the University. Snipe hunting is not any worse and a lot less harmful than many "practical jokes" I've seen performed. My Scouts haven't found anyone gullible enough to try it on yet. Yea! When I feel inclined check to see if any of the new Scouts are gullible enough to fall for some of the older Scouts repertoire of jokes I just break out a couple of Cornish hens and roast them over a fire at the adult site - if asked and they accept the Snipe story then I know I may have to watch out that there isn't any inappropriate activity in that direction - If I get the "You're so weird" look (but I get that a lot)then I know they know the deal and don't have to worry about them. But more importantly - and with ANY "practical joke" reading the jokee's(victims, targets) reaction and responding appropriately is the key to keeping it fun versus creating a cultural distrust as described by the illustrious OGE. If the fellows had brought him in when they were supposed to and made it clear that some of them had fallen for the same joke and made him part of the crowd with it he probably wouldn't have felt the same way he does now. - However this kinder approach could very easily still fall into the popular hazing definition. As to the OA situation, part of the key to whether or not something is hazing or not(FOR ME) is whether or not there is spoken or unspoken pressure to continue in an activity in which one is made to feel uncomfortable. Not the uncomfortableness of a missed meal, or a cool night but more of perceived danger to self by being afraid to speak up if you wind up approaching hypothermia from bad equipment+bad weather, etc. If the Ordeal staff are evaluating conditions and have backup plans for dangerous weather situations, are providing appropriate scant food, plenty of water opportunities and monitoring their charges for any undue stress(medically) then I don't see what I was exposed to as hazing. And the "friend" is there, if it is being run correctly to allow the prospect to raise just those kind of concerns. Most activities that I am aware of that are thought of as hazing run along the same lines - there's good clean fun and then over time it's not enough and keeps going one step further - it usually doesn't take too many steps for this to cross the line into hazing or truly dangerous activities. Since most boys and some men lack the ability to evaluate the position of this "hazing line" and some cultural populations seem inclined to always push the limits - the no hazing prohibition makes a lot of sense. But, I may be culturally damaged on the issue; In my old school Marine world my view would include that having your new stripes "tapped" on after a promotion with a single blow to the bicep or deltoid wasn't hazing - lining you up and having two dudes who out weigh you by a combined 150 lbs doing it at the same time - that might be hazing, having the same guy put you against a wall and do it - hazing. Get promoted to Corporal and have someone who was glad you got it do a kind of knee kick in to your quadricep - no just a recognition and congratulations; some sadist who waits for these things so he can abuse people doing the same thing but trying to make you feel it for a week - hazing. I guess for me hazing is the result of the instant the cruel underbelly of the experience is exposed - and/or when no effort is made to ameliorate even the kinder gentler version for the jokee. I don't think the OA experience of Ordeal needs to be modified or done away with yet, it didn't seem anywhere near the line yet and there were safeguards in place. I think that Scouting jokes can and should continue. I think that hazing needs to be quashed.

As a survivor of a rather severe case of anaphylactic shock, to a stimuli I had never had problems with before that incident. I can tell you that in my case I would not have made it to the hospital without a properly placed Walgreens and a clear headed spouse. A little benadryl, timely administered can buy a lot more time than you might think. Your patient may still be in extremis but has a much better chance of surviving if you can get them out. And with the Benadryl you can give multiple doses over time - the epi-pen solution can often preclude other medication or re-administration. I went on to do the allergen therapy and still try to avoid that stimulus but am not supposed to be subject to as severe a reaction - I'm not planning on testing it however.

Or when they sign off on making a Scout eligible to be elected to the OA, when the Scout is clearly and constantly rude, unconcerned with authority of any kind, and appears to be unable to follow rules. Even, OMG AT a Scouting event. How did this Scout get past the Scout Spirit requirement? It's a mystery to me...

Concur with all above... follow the flag code as referenced above - plenty of links already. Some of us Vets get cranky and think things ought to be the way we want them to be...and that people care about the sacrifices we and our brothers made; if you print out the reference and show them that you have researched the answer and are trying to do the CORRECT thing AND that you CARE about doing so, those two factors together should get them to go away thinking well of you AND your business. Better than ONLY showing them that you were right - because they may still not be convinced(we tend to be a hard-headed lot at times) - without the caring part may send them away badmouthing you even though you are correct. Wrong but it's the way it often works.

Remember MY elephant? One meal is/will be training for adults. Currently the SM and CC and a number of Committee members who were prior SM's (here or elsewhere) are Trained. All others, percentages run short of 10%. As a whole at or just short of 25% Trained. Continuing to eat... one bite at at a time...

I am of two minds on the OTC drugs in the First aid kit. 1) For Adult Scouters and WildernessStudents purposes these folks should provide their own supplies of OTC medications carrying what they know they are accustomed to taking - i.e. for me (Loratadine(in season), Ibuprofen(always) and Immodium &/or Pepto-Bismol tabs(if necessary-boy I hope not ) so as not to require the Troop to provide for them. 2) As allergies to various substances can develop quickly and with no notice in mild to severe levels I do think that antihistamines are an appropriate inclusion in a Troop/Patrol First aid kit. Aspirin is problematic for youth, but good to have if an adult is having symptoms of a heart attack - and can provide more time to get them to advanced help. The limited number of OTC's in these kits are to manage the patient who is in PAIN or TRAUMA not because you have a headache or are sore from yesterdays exertions - and with that in mind I tend to keep much of the OTC's in First aid kits. First aid kits like the Weekender previously proposed are great kits BUT - You should look at them with an eye to what activities you are likely to be involved in and add to them those items that may not be included for riskier or further in the backwoods activities i.e. Sam splints, one or two Trauma pads, perhaps even a QuickClot package. But again the training to use these things properly is and should be ongoing. And not just for one or two people on the trip.(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

Remember that although you may want inexpensive - not cheap - climbing gear, EVERY time you are on a rope more than 15-20 feet above ground you really have "Life Support" equipment not just cheap climbing gear. Buy accordingly.

Ours mostly follows the book, a general framework to get the process started, growing more detailed as it goes on to each step - so a lot of work isn't wasted developing a plan that isn't going to make it. My current issue with our Council/Districts process is the District Advancement Chair (the last step in our Councils approval process) is making himself unavailable for varying lengths of time (under the table)to "see how persistent the boys are in chasing him down" (up to six weeks worth of the Advancement chairs delay)- which might be okay to hold off a 15 or 16 year old or a 17 year old with plenty of time yet but I've got a candidate who has five weeks left before 18 and seven days before his project timeline is unrecoverable(in conjunction with a non-reschedulable community event), he's been trying to get in touch with the DAC (having gotten all of the rest of the signatures)for four weeks already. You have to have all of the signatures before you can start the "WORK" portion. I don't think it's right to ramp up the pressure on the Scout that way - especially since there's no guarantee he'll approve it - then what? This Scout has four weeks to invent a new project and get all of the signatures again?

We have the Eureka Timberline Outfitter 4's and love them. Over half of them are more than five years old and you can't tell them from the 2 three year old ones. The only issue we have run into at all is two of the tents have NO shockcording("before my time" a couple of scouts didn't understand the sections were "tied" together and cut some cords to untangle them - a training program was immediately reinstated), it has been virtually impossible to replace the shockcording even with the kits. We now train prospect Webelos and other prospects before they even join the troop. No wetness issues, no leakage, no holes, no stuck zippers BUT they do take a little bit longer to dry the fly in the morning form the dew than the thinner regular Timberline tents.

WildernessStudent, And there it is, (agreeing with Gern) you aren't taking WFA for yourself. YOU are taking it for the people you go into the wild with. Or the person you (much more likely)help after an auto accident. But are your friends as worried about being able to take care of you? Now as has been said before there may be some small character development with it, but you are helping your friends be safer by having the skills. I've had Red Cross First Aid and CPR all ages with AED certification(since it's been availible) since 1984(or their equivalent through various agencies), Combat Lifesaver Certified(3 years)currently lapsed - can't legally use the certification in the Civilian world. It is the skill set and the confidence that you can stay calm and THINK in the crisis that you should actually be after. So you don't have a Fully stocked 5 pound emergency kit with IV bag, ventilator bag, SAM splint - the question is what do you have and what can you do with it that will help your patient? What can you do to avoid joining them as a casualty? How can you get them out? Ideally you want to have the skills and NEVER EVER use them! I think there may be some luck involved as well as the small sample size but it could also be a testament to the dedication of the leaders here that they don't have a horror story to relate to you.

I think I may owe every one who is a regular poster on this forum an apology. For all intents and purposes I walked up to your campfire, started listening, enjoyed some good conversation and then decided that I somehow was responsible for monitoring(correcting) how some people spoke with myself and others. If I had a problem with someones "tone" (which as we all know is harder to interpret online than it is in person) I could simply have shut up and lurked, or walked away from the campfire and chosen not to engage(and or ignore) any offending party, listened in and reentered the circle when I was ready. Better equipped to know who was a smart alec and who might choose to provide information in a way I might accept while carrying on their normal conversations with others - just like in real life. I apologize for interjecting and attempting to bend the conversations(which while some were contentious were still generally very good) to my style of relating to others. Carry on. YiS, the Gunny

Well since my CC was there and I think I could reasonably assume (and that is what it is) that at least one of the OA key three would have to have been there that is was either a chapter or council key three member who took care of us for our election/recommendation on the adult side.. Thanks for the input!

Well since my CC was there and I think I could reasonably assume (and that is what it is) that at least one of the OA key three would have to have been there that is was either a district or council key three who took care of us. Thanks for the input!

Wow! Our budget this year is less than 3,000.00 What is your fee structure? Or does Popcorn fund it all? Or maybe we're just economically depressed more than I thought.

SHOULD a boy hold two PORs? Probably not, but I can think of situations where I wouldn't prohibit it. and that may be why the BSA doesn't either... maybe. I.E. a Troop - Patrol APL who is also a Pack - Den Chief because A) he wants to B) he's DCing his little brothers den so he's squared away when he hits the Troop C) his dad is the Cubmaster and asked him to DC because he was (for family purposes) going to be there physically anyway whether he helped or not. Reasons given were in order of importance given by the Scout when asked. Does a Troop of five need more than just a PL? Well, you could take that in more than one way... two are: In one way you could say we are going to grow and one way to make that happen well is to get all of this cadre "trained" in to the requirements of one position each - even to the extent of having a "mock" PLC unless you were actually going to have two patrols of two boys each which even I think is carrying it too far. But having: a SPL, no ASPL but a PL, a QM, a Chaplains aide, and a Historian could provide a foundation on which to build a strong growing troop...? In another way you might just want to get this one patrol to function strongly as a patrol and build the rest of the infrastructure as needed, I don't think either approach is wrong but either may be more correct depending on your pool of non-scouting youth to pull from. In a smaller more rural area with a very sparse population and enough Troops to serve its spread population I might lean towards the latter. In a metro-plex with waning or few youth opportunities I might lean towards the first scenario.