Gunny2862

John, Still no UC but they were working on recruiting at Roundtable so maybe we'll see some action there. thanks!

You, (envious tone) Dry Clean your uniforms? (Plaintive tone) I want to dry clean my uniforms. Sniffle. No really, they seem to hold up to repeated washings so far...

All true but how much effort am I required to put in to get in touch with him? In the hypothetical, the family screens calls religiously and I left numerous messages. Shouldn't he be responsible to respond to outreaches by myself and/or his PL and other Scouts? If he makes himself unavailable to even return phone calls then... Am I totally responsible for contact as the SM? Do I have to literally "Catch" him wherever he is at and if necessary chase him down if he sees me and goes the other way? I fail to see the Scoutlyness (that's probably not a word) of this approach. By either party. And if I have to physically chase a Scout on a regular basis to maintain the requisite contact because he won't return a phone call then it needs to be a business and I need to get paid. As regards the hypothetical, amazingly this individual may be supposed to have not been elected/assigned to any position.

The Troop has purchased a string of what (without looking, I think )are MSR Whisperlite multi-fuels which are great "Boil it NOW" stoves. The multi-fuel option has saved the day on one of our HA trips. What was supposed to be available at a refueling stop wasn't. For a Troop purchase, compatibility is a great thing, whether you purchase the same model or just have the availability to use a common fuel amongst the Troop. I am partial to my homebuilt alcohol stove due to the incredible weight savings on any trip >3days.(Most of the weight savings are in fuel weight/fuel canister dead-weight considerations.) Although the stove weighs less than a 1/4 of a Whisperlight without the fuel considerations. Drawbacks are that it is MUCH harder to use in the cold, or at altitude - I usually sign out a Whisperlite in those events. You can buy them online for a very reasonable cost too. The GSS does require adult supervision of Scouts, not that they cannot use liquid fuels. Which then requires that an adult intrude on the patrol by proximity when they are cooking by patrol with liquid fuels.

I didn't catch the spin off until just now, thanks for doing it! Given that you have given me the requirements and a new wrinkle. My first answer is that Number 1 still hasn't been met. However, the strength of what you propose as his reason for the lack of involvement might sway me to sign off given that my CC concurs that there isn't a bad precedent being set here. (Getting some additional counsel on things is often a good idea)(Especially when you are a new SM)I would have preferred in your wrinkle that he had kept me informed of why he was SO unavailable - which is also the case in the hypothetical. Also, why didn't he ask the Scouts for assistance in this endeavor?

Required means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. In my case when I hear BSA talking about required,... What I hear is "required to be considered fully trained in their current position".Also, To be able to wear a "Trained " patch. Not "Required or you can't play in our ballpark." I believe in training and am pursuing it, I believe that every Scout deserves a Trained leader. I would love for my Committee to be fully trained for their positions, For my ASM to be trained for his. My CC actually is. But I don't have a stick to use on volunteers and neither does BSA - I wish I could afford to provide a big enough carrot to entice them to do it but I am unable to afford that either.

I currently have one Brother Boy Scout-Sister Girl Scout family. We don't do anything with the GSA not because we don't want to but because some special interest groups around here are perceived to believe that joint BSA GS activities would give them a reason to jump on GS and attempt to punish them for cooperating with a misogynistic (BSA)(in their opinion) organization. And so GS folks tend to try to maintain some separation from us. I, IMHO, think you have a great idea as long as the proprieties were observed for both organizations. We do a lot of work with local CS packs whether they feed us Scouts or not. I'd love to expand that to GS cooperation also, In my uneducated to any potential or historical problems to it anyway. I, IMHO, do not, however believe that a totally combined program might be the best thing to do.

My earlier message to you about about someone not going on the trip knowing your whereabouts and return time applies. Do you intend to wear the life vests? Can everyone swim? Will you match strong swimmers with weak swimmers? No non-swimmers should go(IMHO) but if you as a non-BSA group take them you may want to put them with the very strongest swimmers and ensure that they at least always have their vests on when on the water. Ensure you take the canoe out of the water WELL BEFORE you go up to a low water bridge!!! Do NOT float up to them. The hydrodynamic pressure of the flow under the bridge through the under water pipes can EASILY DROWN you or even FOLD/CRUSH your boat. A rather silly friend of mine lost a boat this way - then he had to pay the costs for the county workers to divert the flow so they could remove the wreckage from the pipes. Remember to secure any thing that might fall out of the boat (coolers; trash after lunch; etc.; and to have a stuff bag where you can keep sunscreen and other things you might want to have handy. If DNR - Department of Natural resources in this area can trace trash or other "left behind" items to you that should have stayed in your canoe you can look at pretty hefty fines pretty quickly. At least around here. Remember to plan a drop off and pick up plan, it's rather nonplussing to arrive at your take out point and realize you are going to have to hike/hitchhike 15+ miles back to the cars.

It doesn't have to be specifically in my wrinkle it was by your definitions part of the original question posited. Which my wrinkle retained all other parts of. Have no boys ever thought someone would be a great friend to have in Scouting and invited him, assuming he was of the same faith and also assuming that membership wasn't going to be a problem? (Not spelled out but not excluded from the original question.(Also probably the most likely way this problem arises). For further clarification I was positing membership in that CO, not just in that faith group.

Bob, that answer makes a whole lot more sense! And I agree with it, not that that is particularly important to the greater BSA. To me, My Troop, My District and Council, perhaps. But with your clarified wording in mind as the SM as Troop Leadership in the above example might he be presupposed to know his CO's membership rules for the troop, is it then your idea that he shouldn't tell "the boy and his parents that they will not accept him because he, the Scout Applicant, is not of their faith.", and then offer some constructive suggestions about Troops he might be able to join. And isn't that what you'd want him to do? My problem isn't that the answers are there in the books and that you know them - it's that to me it looks like you ignore the human in the equation and pedantically beat that human with the answer, instead of just showing them how it should be according to the book. I do agree that if the issue comes to the UC that there is some kind of issue. And that clarification of the CO's policies by the IH would definitely be in order. It might also be that the Troop Leadership does know the CO's policies and that the Prospective Scouts parents need to be guided to a Troop that would be an appropriate fit.

Thanks Evmori, for your response to me and your most recent one.

OGE, I agree with your definition. No really, no argument I do. By hypothetical way of example, if an Eagle Scout wanted a SM conference on his accomplishing the rest of the requirements for his first Palm, but he: 1) had never been seen on any camp out since his Eagle, 2)Came to one Meeting since his Eagle COH (1 meeting in sixteen), 3)Had not been on either of two Eagle work days for either of another Eagle candidates projects 4) Did not show up for any of several service projects 5) had previously stated a desire to help the SM in the transition to a boy-led troop but has only been around as stated above. And had had many messages left by but no conversations with the SM - the family in the hypothetical screens calls with religious fervor. But is a bright, engaging, charming youth with excellent social skills and a good and usable vocabulary should he still "Pass" in his Scout Spirit? The only thing he might be missing otherwise would be in "regular association with the SM". Or does he get held back until he has some measure of Adult association - Or does that get fulfilled in his Merit Badge work. I (hypothetically)never signed any of those blue cards by the way - assume the former SM did that part. No (hypothetically)there is no valid reason why he could not have been more involved. Could one say that some element of Scout spirit was lacking here? Could the Palm be denied? Under what grounds, if so, if any?

WildernesStudent, in response to your most recent question. Nothing. Everything I would take on a regular hike I would take with me off- trailing. The only exception I can think of might be a rope, harness (or another rope to make a harness out of), carabiner, figure eight and an ascender or two and that would be on the off chance that someone "discovered" a hole or ledge you couldn't recover them from any other way. That would be crew gear and split up among the ones going into the woods that trip. And only carried if you are in a part of the country that has those features. Of course if the one with the rope is the one who falls you still have issues... so they should trail the others.

Sadly, yes it does make sense. We've quit demanding NEWS- the 5 W's come to mind(The basics of any news story, Who What When Where and Why) - and we are getting Infotainment(yes it is now a word, spell checker didn't even blink) instead. And what's more entertaining than scandal:( . Try and find any popular news outlet that actually does the 5 W's. BBC and NPR try, but you are still required to unspin them. But spin has been around for a long long time.

Joni, I am well aware of time crunches on people. I'm at Training every weekend this month! Twice for a full day and once for two nights and two amalgamated days. My CC is having to take the boys out on the outing so I can get "Trained" - for the boys. Yeah I'll wear the patch but it's never been about the patch. In my imperfect world we are just stepping into the TLT material. Heck, I've only been a Scouter for less than a year - I'm still trying to get to all of my required Training as SM - (Haven't missed a single in Council opportunity for anything they've offered that I hadn't had yet. Have gone out of District and have gotten in trouble for that, imagine. ) I'm still trying to get myself trained, get experience, borrow virtual experience from others on the forums. Some of whom would rather jump on me rather than teach me... Is she, or anyone, going to stop another Committee or SM or ASM from teaching a TLT, NYLT, JLT curriculum to the Scouts? If so ask them isn't any training better than none? Wouldn't they rather a Scout knew how to splint a broken arm even if he didn't know how to remove a splinter? Is there anyone who would run JLT, TLT or NYLT for you? If so, see if you can make it work would be my suggestion - if she complains then tell her it is of no use to be an unavailable resource - step up or sit down. Probably a little more kindly than I'm doing it.

Lisa, I have had the situation you most recently describe, in a SM Conference(non-advancement in the case mentioned below). Remember that I am relatively new to the Troop and as a SM so it's possible that not everyone is familiar with and comfortable with me yet. I just had to kind of stop the process (it wasn't going anywhere any way) and tell him that I really needed to know what he thought. That I was sorry, there still are wrong answers but I really didn't think he'd be giving them. And that we couldn't fix any issues unless we could communicate about them. When he was really convinced that I was interested in what he thought I found a lot out about HIS view of some Troop dynamics I had never seen. I think you MAY get the same kind of results if you can convince the Scout that you think what they think IS important. On the other hand, if they are non-responsive(or minimally responsive) then in the upper ranks it should be addressed at some point before they go for an EBOR shouldn't it? Of course I could be Waaayyyy out in left field here, too.

Bob, I realize that I look at a lot of things from the SM POV, because I are one. But your post makes absolutely NO sense. I never said a single thing about the SM setting policy in this thread! Never said the SM didn't work for the CO! AS a matter of fact until your post immediately before this one, including your own previous ones in this thread, no one has brought up the SM role in this equation! I feel as though you are trying to be inflammatory! I'm trying to just find out things. I feel like you are enjoying using a rule book not as a guide or a resource but as a hammer. I might want your knowledge, but I don't want your attitude as I grow in Scouting!

I don't think that trying to change his actions is going to get you where you want to go. To get his actions to change you have to give him the VISION of how it can be better for the boys. Better enough that IF numbers fall you won't kill him. Better enough that IF someone doesn't Eagle that would currently be expected to that you won't allow the parents to kill him. Better enough that when others criticize him because his program isn't doing well as an adult led and isn't fully boy led either that you'll defend him for trying to go where you and the BSA want him to. Better enough that you'll understand his missteps as he tries to implement a system he may not fully understand. Better enough to make it worth leaving his comfort zone - after all he's taking a risk leaving something that is producing results.(at whatever level) Do the Committee/ASM's help him enough as it is? If not, why would he open up to the possibility of more work "fixing" problems the boys create when he has his hands full doing it right the first time? I say you don't Beat Down the defeatism, you Raise Up the hope for a better program. From one who is trying to do what you want Your SM to do while dragging a Committee and Legacy of "Adult Led" Scouters. And a Troop who don't trust themselves to change - they've never seen Boy Led modeled anywhere. It a struggle -but I hope and think it will be worth it.

It hurts twice as much when you get kicked for trying to do the right thing, doesn't it? And is compounded when you made yourself part of the problem. We really don't like it when we are the ones kicking ourselves. Yes you've got some issues here. One thing you might consider, is to approach this person or to find someone else to mediate and approach her with the attitude not of assigning any blame; but to find out if you both want to do things for the boys. Maybe she is offended because she hasn't been "asked" to help more. If she is traveling to and going to training at Philmont(and paying the Toll for the training) is it possible that she is more motivated than what you are seeing and is frustrated at being an unused resource? Maybe she didn't correctly or properly express what she really meant to(or get to the right venue?) because of her frustration? Try communication, you may find yourself with a new ally. I certainly hope it works out for you!

But Ed you just said that if the conference takes place it has to be signed off?! "If the SM & the Scout get together for a SM Conference & it takes place, the requirement gets signed. A SM Conference is nothing more than a chat between the Scout & SM." Then you said,"If the Scouts Scout Spirit is lacking the SM can refuse to sign off & give the Scout his reasons & a plan to get the requirement completed. Or the SM can send the Scout to a BOR & advise the BOR the Scout Spirit requirement is not signed off & let them deal with it." How do you reconcile these two opposing views? I'm not getting it.(This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

Wrinkle in the scenario above, the CO does not (to date) require membership in their church and has boys of the same faith as the CO from other churches. All else applies. What then?

Sorry for altering the thread a little Lisa! I still think you did the right thing I just want to find out how to keep my BOR folks from going thru what you are now... Okay, time for me to learn something. Ed or anyone, if the SM Conference isn't a pass fail requirement, then if the Scout has done the rest of the work are you saying I am then required to sign off, that they have had a SM Conference - and can then request a BOR, which (as I understand it)in theory cannot retest(as a pass/fail) the Scout on anything and so really is just another sign off? OR, if Scout spirit is lacking how do I address it w/o a SM Conference after they have completed the rest of the work for the next rank? I'm positing that I have been talking to them about it as we went along. Is Scout Spirit a requirement for advancement, and if so then where does it get checked off if not at the SM Conference or BOR?

Ours is a triangular affair built by one of the boys with a candle hole drilled out for 12 inch taper candles. Ours has a hole for each item in the Scout Oath along the top and a cross bar that has three holes drilled for the Duty to... candles. Simple 2x4 construction. One item to note, ensure you keep an eye on how long your ceremonies run and the quality of the candles you burn. We had one unfortunate incident that lent a lot of excitement to the ceremony and some character to the candelabra. Took a little sanding and re drilling to restore functionality to the piece. It should be easy enough to find either a member who is a woodworker or a local crafts person who could make any thing else you would like to adorn the basic structure with. Our guys like the simplicity of ours.

Who said they weren't. The issue for the SM Conference can become; you are working the attitudinal issues, they finish the rest of the requirements, ask for a SM Conference and you are thrown into the scenario I wrote about above. As it relates to Lisabobs initial post, if I'm (as SM) hearing the right noises and seeing the right looks I may give them benefit of the doubt and throw the ball to her putting her in the position to check my faith that the Scout meant it. Makes the BOR & Scout uncomfortable(if they find his skills or attitude wanting) and casts doubt on my running of the program - not something I want happening often either. (This message has been edited by Gunny2862)

No kidding, I find it really a killer when the kid can make all of the right noises during the SM Conference but wasn't showing it before hand. Then you wind up with three things two of which are the Catch-22 situation: 1) You give him benefit of the doubt and he goes on to the BOR passes and improves - good outcome Catch-22 below... 2) You give him benefit of the doubt and he goes on to the BOR passes and goes back to his grumpy,unscoutly ways - bad outcome 3) You don't give him benefit of the doubt, tell him his scout spirit needs work (best done giving specifics and examples)and some one either calls you a scoundrel for refusing him unearned advancement or people want to know what requirement he hasn't had checked off other than the SM Conference(and why you're being such a stickler about it) -bad outcome. Lisabob, I think you did the right thing, mostly because you were there and I think the Leader on the Ground needs to have peoples support. It is hard, just to tell the boy no. But also to realize that you may be putting the seed of discouragement out there and when they are told, "no" it is really easy for them to fertilize and water that seed instead of attending to all of the rest of the work they've already done and the little bit remaining that would get them through. Make an effort to buck that Scout up the next time you see them.