jmcquillan

Mike,

 

You brought up a subject that just might make a great subject for a section in the Basic Scoutmastership Fundamentals cirriculum..."Acts of God, and How Many Scouts Can Come Up With..."

 

I have heard some real great ones in my years in Scouting. Like the Scout who was running through camp, (as he was told not to), and tripped on t root and fell smack on a two man tent...ripping the fabric and ruining half of the poles. He claimed, of course, that the root was an Act of God. Believe it or not, his parents backed him up on this one and refused to pay for the tent repairs...or should I say replacement.

 

I'm sure that there are stories out there that would fill a book.

 

I couldn't agree more. There's really nothing magic about the 100+ hours that candidates spend on projects in our area. Our experience has shown that a candidate working on all elements of a project usually takes at least this long to gather the information requried, get approvals, plan, perform, and report. Experience also shows that anything substantially less than the 100 or so hours results in a project that does not allow sufficient time for the candidate to show his planning and leadership skills. And THAT is what it's all about, isn't it? The whole purpose of the project is not to do work. That's only a part of the process. The real purpose is to have the candidate challenge himself in such a way that he can actually practice the skills we hope he's learned and provide real evidence to that effect. Of course, we've had candidates come forward with project proposals that looked like they would take 3000 hours to complete. We've never let those go forward. To those candidates, we've offered extensive counselling on the merits of choosing and planning a project that is both achievable and acceptable within the guidelines published. And having a project ACHIEVABLE is key to it's success. It can be very disheartening to a candidate to realize too late that he's bittne of more than he can chew. Thus, we counsel when necessary. The flip side, of course, is the candidate who comes forward with a proposal for a 30-40 hour, all inclusive, project. At that time we counsel with regard to time necessary to prove ability, skills, planning, and leadership.

 

I suppose if you broke it down, there are projects where the actual 'working' part of the project may only take 40-50 hours, for all participants and volunteers. But the approvals, planning, record keeping, and reporting can take quite a while when done correctly. And those parts are just as important in providing evidence of skills, planning, and leadership as the 'working' part.

 

The longest I've ever allowed a Scout to plan for was 300 hours. That project was the construction of a canoe landing on a local major river. It involved meeting with local, state, and federal agencies, public meetings, and document production as well as the 'normal' parts we thin of in a project. The result...? The candidate went on to a full scholarship at MIT, and became a very good Environmental Engineer. Talk about your pride in the product!!! We still can;t stop talking about that fellow.

 

Nowhere, to my knowledge, in Scouting, is the number of hours for an Eagle Project specified. I will tell you, though, that the 30-40 hours you have both indicated is quite low by 'rule of thumb' for troops in our area. The 'average' number of hours around these parts is more like 100 hours for the total project. That includes the time that the candidate spends getting his approvals, getting the project done, and writing his report. It also includes the time spent by any volunteers who help him with his project. In our troop, most projects run 100-150 hours total, but I've been witness to larger efforts.

So...who's troop is it, anyway???

 

Adults should not be in the business of chasing down the Scouts for advancement review or signing off in the books or even reminding them to bring the books. We're trying to instill a little responsibility, right? And who's troop is it???

 

Use you PLC. We do. And it works. Adults hardly ever have to make any reminders of these things. At PLC meetings, the Scoutmaster and the SPL go over these items every meeting. The SPL is given the responsibility of coordinating announcements and reminders like this with his ASPL's and the Patrol Leaders. It's their troop. Let them run with it. The older Scouts need to be good examples for the younger guys, and when the little guys see the older Scouts 'taking care of business' like this, it makes an impression...slowly for sure. But by the time these younger Scouts reach their 'maturity' within the troop structure, they hopefully will be able to remember these little maintenace issues, with counsel from the Scoutmaster. Make your adults available, for sure, for instruction, assistance, review, etc., etc. But let the Scouts do the rest.

 

Having the SPL and/or ASPL's making announcments like, "Our Scoutmaster, Mr. Smith, and our Advancement Chair, Mrs. Jones, will be available at the other end of the hall during tonights meeting for anyone who has a question or is in need of review for rank advancement", is a great thing. It's all part of Scouts learning to LEAD the troop.

I don't believe that you'll find a 'good' two man tent anywhere for under $100. You may find an 'acceptable' tent, but not a 'good' one. I have seven tents myself, two 4 man, three 2 man, and 2 solo tents. Two of these tents were the cheaper models (I won't name brands...but). There is a definite variation in quality based on price. The cheaper models tend to have seams that leak, and the design often lends itself to rain coming in the doors and windows whenever opened. You really get what you pay for. On the other hand, one of my tents is one of the Northface VE series, quite expensive, but for what I do, it's a benefit to have spent the money on the quality. BUT, I would never, ever recommend going that distance for a tent for Scouts. Too much money. When getting into that arena, I would agree that personally owned tents are the way to go. A troop should be able to get very good two man tents for between $100-$175. If the troop can manage it, they should target certain tents to certain uses. (i.e., having one tent type to serve for both camporee / jamboree type events AND backpacking might not be a good idea given the use and abuse that kids will give them). We've been able to set aside a number of tents that are used ONLY for backpacking. It helps to extend the life of the tent.

 

I don't know about REI, EMS, etc., but both LLBean and Eureka will provide repair service for their tents if required. Of course, you have to mail the damaged piece to them and pay a fee. But, if you don't have a local tent repair guy for broken zippers and torn fabric, it's something to remember.

 

Lastly, a really good place to find out about camping gear and how the different brands stand up to use and comfort is Backpacker Magazine. They have a website. Every year, they one issue of the magazine devoted to nothing but gear comparisons and costs. It's quite extensive. It's a good publication for a troop to get.

 

 

As has been stated above, what kind of tent you buy, and convincing the committee to make the purchase has everything to do with what your program will be (or is) and what you intend to do with the tents. In our troop, we started off years ago with the two man canvas Voyager tents. They weighed a ton. Only two poles were required, but they were hardly backpacking tents. In fact, we still have about a dozen of them stored away in the Scouthouse. Subsequent to that, we started making purchases of the two-man Eureka Timberline series self-supporting tents for our backpacking program. We were able to get them at reasonable cost through Hilton's Tent City in Boston. They gave us a discount when we made bulk purchases (6-10 tents at a time). During the years since then, we've realized that the two man tents weren't suited for every application, so we made the decision to investigate additional tents for camporees and jamboree-type events. We settled on the LLBean 6 man dome tents. They're a little pricey, but the quality is great. Our experience with LLBean has been that, although they don't advertise it, they will give discounts to Scout Troops if buying in bulk. We've purchased 15 of the 6 man tents over the past two years.

 

One thing we've found that is valuable to remember is, don't sacrifice quality for price. When you get a group of Scouts out in the woods, it's too late then to realize that your 'great deal' on tent prices supplied you with tents that don't hold up to the conditions you're using them in. That includes cheap fabric that rips, seams that leak, and design that allows wind and water to penetrate or drip inside at windows and doors.

 

Check out the resources at www.macscouter.com for more information regarding the Patrol Star, requirements for earning it, and presentation ceremony suggestions.

This appears to be nothing new with these folks. I placed a couple of orders with them after the magazine first started, and got nothing but the run-around for the longest time. To this day I'm not sure whether I ever got everything I ordered...and PAID for.

 

Good luck with you adventure here...

The Patrol Star is the emblem awarded to the Patrol when they achieve the Baden Powell Patrol Award. It is awarded to the Patrol, not the individual Scout.

If you go to this link, you'll find the words to the song.

 

www.usscouts.org/usscouts/songs/omh.html

Now there's a very interesting point. The responsibility of parents to control what their children are exposed to...

 

It's been quite a few years that I've held the belief that part of the problem with our society these days is the 'abdication of responsibility' on the part of many parents in bringing up Johnny and Jane. There seems to be quite an undercurrent in all that we see and hear on the news that points to a general feeling that many folks would rather have the schools and others (like Scouts...BSA...Babysitters of America) bring up their children.

 

Of course we can't protect our kids today from all that is out there to see and do. Of course we can't control all of that either. But how simple is it for a parent to sit down with a child and TALK about what they've been exposed to. How much of a chore can it possibly be to TALK to ones children about those things and how they relate to the basic values and tenents of their family? You're absolutely correct about the inconsistency of the media circus. And that type of double standard makes those discussions even more of a pressing issue.

 

Long ago, when I was a Scoutmaster, I made it part of my Scoutmaster Conferences to delve into that arena. Not to take the place of Mom & Dad, for sure. But certainly to encourage all of my Scouts to take the time to talk with their parents about issues like that. I even had my own Scoutmasters Newsletter where I could make the same point with parents....TALK TO YOUR KIDS...please.

 

Lord forgive me for pontificating. There are some issues that get the blood boiling, and this is one. Of course, in the back of my mind there's a little voice that questions whether that particular effort made any impact at all. I can only hope.

 

Mike,

 

Having been around Scouting for about 16 years or so, I can't tell you how much shear enjoyment it's been watching boys learn through this process in Scouting. And when they finally earn their Eagle, and look you straight in the eye, and thank you for letting them find their own way in the Scouting world, it's at that moment that you know it was all worth the effort, and the darn program works!!!

 

If only the adults would take the time to understand that the adult leader training offered in Scouting makes all the difference in the world. It's only after the training that one realizes how preconceived notions don't always work. There's a proven program out there that works wonders when it's allowed to...without any preconceived notions.

 

This is a really neat idea. One I haven't heard before, but definitely worth trying. I've passed it on to the current Scoutmaster and Committee.

 

Thanks

 

Bobwhite,

 

Too bad the situation around you has disintegrated. In the end, it may all be for the best.

 

As to the first of the two main concerns you shared in your posting, perhaps I can pass along something that might assist those who are still struggling with the situation.

 

A few years ago, our troop was in need of a new Scoutmaster, and was having a devil of a time getting someone to step in. Having served for many years in that position, I was asked to come out of retirement and take over for a while. Upon getting back into the 'big' chair, I saw two things. First, there was a definite lack of skills proficiency, and understanding of and use of leadership skills by the Scouts, and second, there was a growing appreciation for these facts, and a desire to jump in a 'fix' things on the part of many adults. There was also a real lack of trained adults volunteers, both in and out of uniform.

 

Working with the Troop Committee, I came up with a plan to get things back on track, and use the energies of the concerned adults, but all within the guidelines of the Scouting program. The first phase of the two year program was to have adult volunteers completely take over the teaching process in the troop. This provided us with two things. First, it gave us control over the things being taught, and insured that the information was all correct and within the program. Secondly, it gave the Scouts good role models to follow (which they would be given ample opportunity to do). The second phase of the two year program was to pull the adults out of the process, step by step, allowing the older and more proficient Scouts to first assist, and then take over, in the teaching process. We used the same model for leadership skills, and three JLT's, during that same period. Eventually, the adults were all pulled back to their 'support of the Scoutmaster' roles, watching, and lending assistance where the Scoutmaster felt necessary, or where the PLC asked for it. At the same time, and within this model, many adult volunteers saw the need to get trained, and I encouraged them to do so, whether or not they ever intended to wear the uniform. Within this two year effort, many adults came to realize just what the program entailed, not just what they felt the Scouts should be taught. They also came to understand the responsibilities of all the various Scout (boy) leader positions, and the importance of having Scouts in those positions understand their own roles, their skills, and the value of role models (as they would themselves become role models for the troop).

 

The key to the success of this program was making sure, right up front, that the concerned adults understood the limits of their roles, and the needs of the Troop, Scouting program, and Scouting environment for their services. Everyone was made to understand the goals, and the limits, so they would all be happy with their participation, and the need to step aside when the time came. This all required that I do a little Basic Leader training on my own in the beginning so they would all have level of comfort that I could be happy with at the start. But the effort was worth it.

 

Now, this doesn't mean that we have attained 'Nervana' here. There is still plenty of work to do, and there always will be, for that's the nature of the beast. Which brings me to your second concern, the fear that some adults have that Scouts will fail.

 

Failure is a key ingredient to the success of the Scouting program. Why? Simply put, very few venues in this world allow for a boy to utterly fail at something, and have someone standing right behind him to pick him up and get him right back on trackeither and adult or an older Scoutand help him to understand the failure and learn from it. That's counselling. That's learning. And that's doing it within an environment that provides fun. There's no need to fear a failing grade. There's no need to fear being fired. Scouts learn quite a bit about themselves and life in general from experiences like that within the Scouting world. Not too many other avenues afford boys that kind of opportunity. So a degree of failure for a single Scout, or a group of Scouts, can actually be a good teacher. Adults should not fear that the boys will not succeed at an event, and therefore cancel participation. They learn about their limits by participating in these things. And once those limits are known and understood, they can work to expand those limits. Humans have a limited ability to make each other understand personal limits. By and large, those limits are learned via experience, and experience alone. So let the boys learn.

 

Just be there to pick them backup, and get them back on that trailimmediately.

 

I've rambled enough, but hope this has been of some help. Good luck with your Scouting future.

 

I've taken all the training I think there is to take (except for the latest courses), and my understanding is that in order to participate 'on staff' for Scoutmaster Fundamentals or Woodbadge, one has to have taken Train the Trainer. I've done that, years ago, but even then found that the course had a good deal of irrelavancy with regard to training methods at that time. Unless BSA has updated the cirriculum, it is probably still a little behind the times, but all in all, worth the effort, if the course staff is good and 'up-to-date'.

 

Mike is pretty much right on the money, here. Having the ENTIRE committee attend Basic Leader Training (Scoutmaster Fundamentals) is very important. The entire group should understand the program elements on the same level.

 

If you get to the unfortunate position of having to ask the CC to leave, or forcing him out, there's power in numbers. The CC should understand that it's not just one or two adults who find his direction unacceptable and not as the program should be, but it's ALL the other adults. That may help. And ALL of this should be handled by the Troop Committee. I've seen unfortunate circumstances where the Troop Committee tried to rely upon the Scoutmaster to take the reigns and force the issue(s). That's not his job. The Troop Committee has to handle this.

 

It would be best, of course, if the ENTIRE committee could get together and find training ASAP, as a group, so they all get the same information together. If training is not available in oyour area in the near future, call your Council office and talk with you District Executive. Ask him for help. These folks are paid to help the units in their districts with problems like this. They may even be able to come to your troop and provide you with some basic training concepts just to clear the air and make sure your CC understands what his role really is (and is NOT).

 

Cross-over's to two troops is really not difficult. My first question would be: Have you ever done a cross-over before? My second question would be: What month do you usually cross-over, and what month is your last meeting?

 

If you've ever done a cross-over before, and your ceremony is good, then just stay with the same thing. The only difference is that at the far side of the bridge, there would be representatives from both troops waiting to accept their new scouts. Doing it with the light dimmed and a path the the bridge lined with Cubs and parents holding candles is a nice touch. The Cubmaster (or other Pack representative) just needs to coordinate with the two troops as to how he intends the ceremony to proceed. We used to follow this routine, and the pack still does now, 16 years after I went on to Boy Scouts. An Assistant Cubmaster acts as MC, and reads the name of the Cub about to cross-over. On the Cub side of the bridge, the Cub and his parents shake hands witht he Den Leader and the Cubmaster they are leaving, and proceed over the bridge to the Troop they are joining. (Remember, the troop is counting on the Scout AND his parents joining.) Just before the Cub crosses the bridge, the MC says something about the Cub and the Troop he has decided to join. This signals the Troop Representatives that they should be ready on their side to formally recieve a new family. On the Troop side, the New Scout is presented with his new neckerchief, troop numbers, handbook, and/or anything else that the troop usually presents at cross-over. We've used this method for the two packs and two troops in our town for many years, and it has always worked very well. What really makes the difference, is how organized, formal, and quiet the Pack Leadership can make it.

 

After the cross-over itself, the Pack meeting usually goes on for another 15 minutes or so, renewing itself as a temporarily smaller unit, while the Troop Leaders lead their new charges off to another portion of the building to hold an informal meeting with the new Scouts and their families to give them information about first meeting, parents night, introductions, paperwork, etc., out of sight from the rest of the Pack. If this meeting is the last meeting of the year, the time right after the cross-over is a good time to get the remaining pack members and families focused back on the pack by doing something to give recognition to the Cubs who will become Webelos in the following year, and/or make any presentations of awards and achievement recognition.

 

That, I guess, pertains mostly to question 1. As to question 2, cross-overs in our area are usually held in March. That's far from the last meeting of the year, so the Pack still has a couple of months to go before the summer 'break'. Don't turn off the Cub Scout spigot too early, and don't cross-over too late. The troops will need the months before the summer to get the new Scouts introduced to the Troop, and make them feel comfortable in the troop. they will usually use this time for first campouts and skills instruction to get the new Scouts going ASAP.

 

Hope this helps.

 

That's an interesting point regarding acknowledgement vs. full acceptance. And I suppose that one could make a case that BSA does just that. It probably harkens back to the religious roots of the environment during which Scouting was born. One can only hope that the written statement does not mean one vs. the other.

 

As to 'jamessnow', I stand by my statement. Having served as a Scoutmaster for a good many years in an area of the country where variety of religions is something we deal with all the time, I've had Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddists, Agnositcs, and a few other lesser known religions within the troop, and I can tell you that Scouting is simply not the place to make introductions to God...whatever you believe him/her to be. It's a daunting task to provide opportunity for such a wide variety of faiths to practice their beliefs within the Scouting environment, provide opportunity for everyone to better understand the differences between the faiths, challenge each Scout to accept the differences, and allow life to go on without also being involved in introducing God to the Scouts. That is the realm of Mom & Dad and the family religious leader(s).

 

Now if you come from an area of the country where the troop is chartered to a specific church, and everyone within the troop (Scouts, Leaders, Committee,etc.) are members of that church, then I suppose you're dealing with quite a different situation...one that I am totally unfamiliar with, for it's not that way around here. Our message to the Scouts should be that faith is something that hopefully you practice somwhow with your family, and no matter what that faith is, it is accepted here within Scouting. No Scout should feel that there is any pressure to know a God or faith that isn't his. We should, of course, be providing a safe haven where each Scout can feel comfortable with his own faith, and learn what he can about others, if he so chooses. But we should not pretend to be religious leaders.

It is an unfortunate, but unavoidable, circumstance that we have no way to 'police' parents in scouting. It sounds like you're doing about all that you can by keeping the parents informed of what the boys need to be working on with them and the 'need' for the boy to 'actually' do the work. It's never too early to counsel the boys about that need to really 'do the work' and not just try to slip by with minimum or no effort. Once the boys reach Boy Scouts where Mom & Dad have little to do with advancement, the boys will begin to realize that they need to 'work' to advance. When I was a Cubmaster, I would work with the Den leaders to make sure they understood this, but that in the long run, if Mom & Dad say Johnny did the work, it's really tough to question that. One can only hope that the boys come to understand what the reality is. One thing that I did do was to start each year with a meeting with all 'new' parents to make sure they understood that while Cub Scouts is supposed to be FUN, it's also a learning environment, and learning doesn't happen well if the work is avoided.

 

You're right, there's no stipulation anywhere that an Atheist or Agnostic cna't participate in Scouting. If they say nothing, no one knows, and life goes on.

 

The only place in Scouting where a Scout will get tripped up as an Atheist is the Eagle application process where a written statement from the Scouts religious leader is required (the alternate being a statement from the Scout and/or parents). If the written statement says that the Scout believes in nothing at all, well National will have a problem with that, and likely the Scout will go no further in that process.

 

As to Agnostics, it depends upon what they say in the statement. Most Agnostics believe in 'something', they just can't define it as God. And a belief in 'something', even with questions, shows that there is an underlying faith that something or someone is responsible for creating us all and all that surrounds us. And that is acceptable. In my SM experience, I've been through that twice in 17 years.

 

Absolutely not!!!

 

It is not the obligation of a Scouter, no matter how well intentioned, to introduce a Scout to God. That is the territory for Mom & Dad (or guardian), and Mom& Dad (or guardian) ONLY. Only parents or guardians have that obligation. And it's not really an obligation. If Mom & Dad choose not to make that introduction, so be it. We can not and should not attempt to change that. As Scouters, we have no obligation, right, or permission to introduce a Scout to God. No matter how religious I might or might not be, I know that I would not want a Troop Leader making that introduction for me. That is a very personal issue, and so it should be.

 

What a Scouter can do, is make possible the opportunity to a Scout to explore, understand, and practice his own issues with faith and belief as he so chooses. This can be done simply by Ecumenical services on Sundays at campout or such. This may be simply an opportunity to have a moment of silence at service, or an opportunity to sit on a mountain top and wonder. But introducing a Scout to God? No... Introduce him to the wonder around him. Give him the chance to question why everything around him is as it is. Don't give him the answers, unless you're his Mom or Dad, Minister, Priest, or Rabbi. Direct him as to where the answers can be found, if he asks. But don't try to minister faith or belief to him. That is defintely not our job.

 

The following story was published by NewsMax.com (which is

in West Palm Beach, Florida), on Monday, Dec. 18, 2000:

 

HEADLINE: Exclusive: 2002 Salt Lake Committee Bans Boy Scouts

-------------------------------------------------------------

From Olympics

-------------

By David M. Bresnahan

 

The largest Boy Scout council in the country responded to the

call for volunteers issued by the Salt Lake Olympic Organizing

Committee, but the welcome mat was rolled up and the door slammed

in its face.

 

Olympic spokesmen for the 2002 winter games say the exclusion has

nothing to do with recent protests by gay activists.

 

While the organizing committee for the Olympic event is prominently

displaying a call for local volunteers, they have explicitly let it

be known that the Boy Scouts need not apply.

 

"For us not to be involved is discouraging, considering the Atlanta

games. The Scouting council there was extremely involved," said Kay

Godfrey, professional Scout executive for the Great Salt Lake

Council of Boy Scouts.

 

A number of executives and volunteers from the council have

worked for many months with Salt Lake Olympic officials under

the assumption that the Boy Scouts would participate in Olympic

ceremonies - until recently.

 

Boy Scouts were seen in many of the venues at the 1996 Atlanta

Summer Olympics, and they participated in a number of ceremonies

there.

 

Salt Lake Scouts expected the same opportunity in 2002, particularly

because Utah is so supportive of the BSA program. About 45 percent

of the population of Utah belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ of

Latter-day Saints, the largest sponsor of Scout units in the country.

 

 

At a recent training event for Scout leaders, Marty Latimer, chief

Scout executive for the council, revealed that the Scouts are no

longer welcome.

 

"We dont understand whats wrong. They just dont want us and

wont talk to us," said Latimer.

 

He told NewsMax.com that Mitt Romney, president and CEO of the

Salt Lake Olympic Committee, has not returned phone calls from

a number of Scout officials who have tried to obtain clarification.

 

Latimer and other Scout leaders say they are confused because

Romney is a former Scout and Scout Leader and a prominent member

of the LDS Church.

 

Despite many attempts to work out a solution, Romney has not

returned calls to the Scout leaders after months of attempting

to negotiate with him.

 

"We also lost a great opportunity to house workers for the Olympics

at Camp Tracy," said Latimer, referring to a local scout facility.

 

A plan had been established to build a dormitory to house food

service workers, but that group has also indicated they no longer

plan to use Camp Tracy. No explanation was given to the Scouts

for the change of plans.

 

R. Lawry Hunsaker, council president, told NewsMax.com he was

surprised that Romney has ignored Scout leaders.

 

"We cant get him to return our calls," he said.

 

Hunsaker said other spokesmen from the Olympic committee have

indicated to him that Scouts in uniform will not be permitted

to volunteer at the Winter Olympics.

 

The Scouts are not the only ones having difficulty talking with

Romney.

 

Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, told NewsMax.com that he waited for

some time to get a personal response from Romney on the issue,

but a public affairs person called instead.

 

Cannon is a strong supporter of the Boy Scouts and joined with

others to found a Web site that collects money to help Scout

groups whose funding has been cut because of their decision not

to allow gay scoutmasters.

 

Cannon's congressional district represents the Great Salt Lake

Council.

 

"We were told its just an age-limit thing. The Scouts arent

old enough to volunteer," Cannon told NewsMax.com

 

Romney would not return calls to NewsMax.com.

 

"Our state has a strong volunteer heritage that has endured -

like the Olympic Spirit - for generations," said Romney in a

published appeal for volunteers.

 

"The 2002 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games will provide

a chance for thousands of Utahns to participate through

volunteering. And it is only through volunteer support that

we can succeed in 2002."

 

Although Romney would not respond to repeated requests for an

interview, Olympic Committee spokeswoman Caroline Shaw did call

to deny that the Scouts have been turned away because of the

gay controversy.

 

"The reality is we would love to take those volunteers, but we

have an age requirement of our volunteers. I believe its 18,"

Shaw said in a phone interview.

 

She said Scouts and their adult leaders were welcome to apply as

volunteers individually on their own, as long as they dont apply

as a group representing the Boy Scouts.

 

They also may not work as a volunteer if they wear a Scout

uniform, she said.

 

NewsMax.com learned that the claim of age is not quite accurate.

There are children under 18 who will be a part of the Olympic

ceremonies, but Olympic officials do not consider them to be

volunteers. Instead they are called "cast members."

 

"You know, they can certainly go on line and apply. Thats the

one area where we are looking for younger adults and children to

participate, and they can submit requests through going online

to be cast members and so forth," Shaw said in a phone interview.

 

Cast members participating in Olympic events may not wear Scout

uniforms, she explained.

 

"We have had some Scouts participate with us already doing some

cleanup out at Soldier Hollow and other areas," said Shaw in an

effort to show that Scouts can volunteer. The litter cleanup by

Scouts in uniform was a one-time event and was limited to only

a few participants.

 

The Greater Salt Lake Council has approximately 80,000 Scouts of

various ages, and 35,000 adult leaders.

 

Latimer said he found it difficult to believe that Romney doesnt

welcome such a volunteer force, and one that has represented so

well the American people.

 

Godfrey said he was still hopeful that something can be worked out.

 

"I just think that the committee needs to be aware that were here

and still willing and wed like to do something - perhaps more

than litter detail," said Godfrey. "Were here and wed like to

help if theres something that we can do."

 

Shaw continued to say the only reason Boy Scouts could not be

volunteers at the Olympics was because of their age, but she did

not address why Scout leaders in uniform were not accepted.

 

"Im sure we have volunteers, a large percentage of them have been

former Boy Scouts, including our president and CEO [Romney],"

Shaw explained.

 

"I dont think were in a position to give every organization out

there official status. Theres the Girl Guides and the Girl

Scouts; I dont know, there must be at least a million youth

groups out there," said Shaw.

 

"Theyre a fabulous organization, but there are a lot of great

organizations out there," she added.

 

Shaw promised to get additional details and call back the next day,

but three weeks have gone by with no further contact. NewsMax.com

made numerous efforts to speak with her again, but she has not

responded. Romney has also ignored requests for an interview.

 

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that the Boy Scouts of America

is a private organization that has the right to restrict who is and

who is not an adult leader. The Scouts have always refused to

permit openly gay individuals to be leaders or members.

 

Gay activists have since targeted the Boy Scouts, including public

protests.

 

Some groups have succeeded in getting many United Way chapters to

remove funding from local Scout councils. Some community

organizations have begun to deny the Scouts access to public

facilities and property on the grounds that they say the Scouts

discriminate.

 

This story was found at:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2000/12/15/214301.shtml

 

The 2000 WorldNetDaily.com published this story on Thursday,

December 14, 2000:

 

--------------------------------------------

School board delays Boy Scouts' eviction

Officials still intend to punish

organization for policies on homosexuality

--------------------------------------------

By Jon E. Dougherty

 

Officials with the Broward County, Fla., School Board have decided

to delay a planned eviction of area Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts from

all its public schools, following a lawsuit filed by the Boy Scouts

of America.

 

The Tuesday decision to delay the eviction by more than three

months is not a capitulation, stressed school board attorney Ed

Marko, because the board remains opposed to the BSA's ban on

homosexual scoutmasters and scouts.

 

Rather, Marko said, the board's aim is to "eliminate multiple

court hearings on the Scouts' request to a federal judge for an

injunction," according to a Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel report.

 

The board voted to evict the Boy Scouts Nov. 17 and had set an

effective date of Dec. 17.

 

But the BSA filed a discrimination suit against the board in

federal court Dec. 4, charging that the eviction unconstitutionally

limited the Boy Scouts' freedom of speech and right to assembly

under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

 

Also, the lawsuit alleges the anti-discrimination policy does not

apply to other groups using school grounds, such as the Brownies

and church groups. The BSA, in court papers, said the district's

policies outlaw all groups serving a specific age or having a

certain belief system.

 

According to district documents, the school board met in closed

session Tuesday and agreed to allow area Boy Scout troops and Cub

Scout packs to meet on school grounds and use school-owned buses

until March 30.

 

The board acted to avoid a preliminary hearing set for tomorrow

by U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks, said Marko. Attorneys

for the Boy Scouts had filed for an emergency hearing because the

Dec. 17 deadline was approaching.

 

Marko also said it made no sense to have one preliminary hearing

this week and then another a few weeks later, so yesterday he

asked Middlebrooks to delay the preliminary hearing after

informing him of the board's decision to delay eviction for

90 days. Middlebrooks agreed and canceled tomorrow's hearing.

 

The board issued a statement of its position after executive

session Tuesday, reaffirming its opposition to what it views as

discriminatory practices.

 

"The school board remains committed to the vigorous enforcement of

its policy precluding discriminatory practices on the part of those

persons leasing or using school board facilities or transportation,"

the statement said.

 

The BSA has been under attack nationally since the U.S. Supreme

Court ruled last June that it had a right, as a private

organization, to exclude homosexuals from its ranks.

 

Justices held that BSA, under the First and 14th Amendments,

has the right to free association and the right to set its own

policies and practices as a private organization under U.S. law.

The justices also upheld the Scouts' right to demand that its

members and officers be "morally straight," as the Scout oath

says.

 

Pro-family groups have come to BSA's defense.

 

"The Broward County School Board's decision to kick the Scouts

off school property under the guise of opposing discrimination

is deplorable and hypocritical," Jan LaRue, senior director of

legal studies for the Family Research Council, said last week.

 

"Its non-discrimination policy denies the Scouts equal access

to public facilities," LaRue said on behalf of the Washington,

D.C.-based public policy organization. "It denies them the basic

freedom of association that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld.

It seems there is no 'equal access' for the Scouts in Broward

County."

 

"We believe an avowed homosexual is not a role model for the values

espoused in the Scout Oath and Law," said a BSA statement. "Boy

Scouting makes no effort to discover the sexual orientation of any

person. Scouting's message is compromised when prospective leaders

present themselves as role models inconsistent with Boy Scouting's

understanding of the Scout Oath and Law."

 

It saddens me more than anything in my 16 year association with the BSA, that those who are doing all the talking on this issue seem to have lost sight of the those we serve. Almost every day we see news items about another youth serving entity that has decided to cut ties with the BSA and boot out the troop or pack. And exactly 'who does that hurt'??? In my area of the country there seems to be a extraordinary number of churches and school systems that see fit to do exactly that. Their arguement is an adult issue, not a childs issue. Why do adults see fit to make the children bear the brunt of adult disagreements? I personally have experienced adults saying things to our Scouts at fund raising time that make my hair stand on end! The boys had nothing to do with the issue that the adults are arguing about. But they are made to bear the brunt of the issue. They lose their meeting place. They lose their troop. They lose the program. And it seems to me that no matter which side of this issue ones finds him or herself on, no one remembers that the Scouting program is unique and valuable. It's the old 'baby thrown out with the washwater' scenario. Every time I see a troop losing it's place to meet and/or being disbanded through no fault of their own, I cringe. As I said at the outset, I am positively saddened beyond measure that adults have made the boy the whipping post on this one. For sure, this is an issue that goes right to the core, but whose core? Adults!! Let the adults settle the argument as adults and gentlemen. Let's not continue to saddle the boys with the burden of losing that which is truly unique in this world.

In the 16 years I've been with my troop, we've tried many ways to tackle patrol makeup. We've followed the National guidelines. We had a New Scout Patrol long before National suggested it. We've allowed the Scouts to pick their own. Etc. What we have now seems to work well.

 

With reference to patrol size, and specifically to the size suggested above, the National guideline for optimum size is 6-8 Scouts. We go for the high side, but never higher than 8 if we can help it. If we have to go to 9, so be it.

 

With reference to age, rank, etc., we have mixed patrols now, except for the New Scout patrol. That patrol lasts only from cross-over to September, when the school year starts, and the weekly meetings start again. During that time, the new scouts are encouraged to watch the existing patrols, meet the other scouts, see what they do and how they operate, and when the first meeting comes in Sept., let the Scoutmaster and SPL know which patrol they would like to join on a permanent basis. We never reconfigure the patrols after that (unless a serious discipline, behavior, or personality issue forces our hand). All the other patrols are made up of varying ranks and ages. The idea is to have a variety of experience within the patrol to teach and reinforce the skills of Scouting and the Patrol Method. Making the Patrol Method work without the varying ages was impossible for us. Practically all of our events are done by Patrol...camping, cooking, skills, hikes, fund-raising, community service, etc. We're fortunate in that we have 60 or more Scouts in the troop. This allows us to have what we refer to as a Senior patrol. The make-up of this patrol is a little different. Its members are the officers of the troop, other than the SPL and ASPL's. The members of this Patrol camp and cook together, but during troop meetings and other events, each of them has a specific responsibility. Each of the Troop Guides has a patrol for which he is responsible. He is the 'guide' for the Patrol Leader. With so many Scouts, the SPL can't always give attention to each patrol, but the Troop Guide can. He doesn't take the place of the PL, and doesn't run the patrol. He is there for guidance and question answering. This comes in real handy when the PL can't make the meeting and the APL has to take over. Usually this scout has limited experience, and the TG really helps him. Each Patrol stands together in formation, including the Senior Patrol. But when the agenda calls for it, they break out to their assigned partol to perform their magic. It works for us. And having the variety of experience within each patrol is invaluable for us.

 

Hope this is of some help.