jmcquillan

grekonsz & momof2scouts,

I've been in contact with a friend who has had "long-haired Eagles". He has no pictures he can get, only the memories. But be on the look-out for an email.

Is your hair worth the hard feelings that will result from forcing your Scoutmaster to bend to your terms.

Excuse me, DD, but I wonder just where you're coming from with that remark. Whose hard feelings? The SM because the Scout had his own mind? Or the Scout because he was forced to do something neither he nor his parents wanted him to do? Might I try changing that around as a for instance, and cast it back at ya?

Is an Eagle worth the hard feelings that will result from your Scoutmaster forcing you to bend to his terms?

And this from someone who is putting voice to his opinion that the Scout should learn to fight his own battles and not depend on other adults, or Mom & Dad.

What's more important to you...self-repsect or the badge? You seem to be telling the Scout to fight his own battles and learn to deal with adults, on the one hand. But on the other, this one, you're basically telling the Scout to give it up!! You're telling him that the kowtowing to his SM to get the Eagle is more important than his own self-respect, more important than what might be his own principles right now...as a kid...as a Scout... You're telling him that your opinion and message...(his hair is unimportant)...is more important than his own mind. You're telling him that his stand on his long hair is a childish attitude, and that he should give it up and become an adult...and all the time telling him that he should be "learning how to resolve problems on your own" (your words). Aren't you really just trying to tell him that you don't like long hair...that he should "bend" to the terms of the Scoutmaster? How is that learning what you preach? That's simply learning to give in to the personal tastes of an adult. And adult who should be helping the young man to learn decision making...not kowtowing. For Heavens sake...the Scouts parents don't find anything objectionable to their sons appearance...nor does anyone else, so it would appear. Only the SM seems to be forcing the issue to get the Scout the "bend" to his terms. What kind of learning is that?

If I might make a suggestion here...

This problem definitely sounds like one that requires an adult to Scoutmaster discussion, not an Eagle candidate to SM discussion. This is basically an issue of not adhering to National Policy, as others have pointed out. The Scout should not be required to, or placed in a position where he has to, take issue with his SM on National BSA policy. The committee should be handling this, but perhaps the spark may have to come from some other concerned adult...some other adult who sees this as breaking ranks with National Policy, and allowing ones own personal tastes on hair length to dictate troop policy. Perhaps the SM is just not in tune with how far his reach in establishing policy extends, and has unwittingly overstepped his bounds. Perhaps not. Be that as it may, the Scout should not be made the pawn in the process. This is an issue for adults to remedy, and it should be rather simple, as the National policy is clear, as others have pointed out. National sets the policy, no one else can modify it in any way...even for length of hair.

Interesting articles, to be sure. But I'd be a little more interested, sctmom, were you to include your thoughts and reasons for the thread.

I chuckled at the ever present spin the ACLU included in the beginning of the article on Americans employed in the private sector of the economy...

They said...

There are 80 million people employed in the private sector of the American economy. Only about 20 million of these are union members protected from unjust dismissal by collective bargaining agreements. The remaining 60 million are employed "at will".

"At will" employees serve at the unfettered discretion of employers. They can be fired for any reason, even a bad one, or for no reason at all.

...apparently, if you're not a union member, your employer employs you only at his own unfettered discretion. That, I think, is quite a slam at the majority of private sector employers, as the "spin" here is that you're not protected, your employer knows it, and he's gonna git' ya when ya least expect it....

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA..........

...all those employers are, by ACLU spin, monsters awaiting they're opportunity to trash us.......

Just my two cents...I posted on another site sometime ago regarding this very same issue. Writing troop policies and rules and regulations can be a daunting task. It can also be quite dangerous unless the author(s) remember that the basis of all rules and policies in Scouting must come from that which is published by the BSA. For my purposes in Scouting, as a Committee Member, SM, ASM, and other leader positions, I always tried to remind those helping to author such things that all policies and rules should be written such that they point directly at the Scout Oath, and the Scout Law, no matter the subject. Your list sounds pretty thorough, and could be divided somewhat into adult oriented and Scout oriented subjects. But making sure that both ends point to, or come from, the Oath and Law, will serve to reinforce both of these tenents for all leaders and Scouts...and non-participating adults.

Both ways have their upside and downside. The obvious upside is the enthusiasm and excitement with which the project is approached by those intent on starting a troop. The downside, is finding the other side.

Years ago, the troop I was with needed a new CO. The one we had no longer had the interest in sponsoring a troop. Depending on which part of the country you hail from, finding a CO may be easy or difficult. In the New England area, it seems to be easier to find folks to participate on the "troop" side, than the "CO" side. Our troop had quite a difficult time finding a new CO. In fact, when we found an organization willing to listen to our sales-pitch, it was only by advertising ourselves as self-sufficient, not requiring major funding, and having a place to meet already, that got us in the door. The CO we have now could have lived quite nicely without a Scout Troop. They were willing to add their name to our banner only by the circumstances outlined above. Prior to finding this CO, we had contacted the few churches and other possible organizations in town, all of which were polite, but no interest, thank you very much. I believe starting a new troop in the area would run the same situation.

Of course, this does not mean that there are hordes of enthusiastic adults here who are chomping at the bit to participate. They are hard to find, also, as history has proven around here time and time again. My own personal take is that in what some might refer to as the "blue collar" towns, interest in Scouting is more prevalent. There exists more active interest on the part of parents and other adults to jump in and work at Scouting...or to sponsor it as CO's. In predominantly "white color" towns, there exists far less interest. Perhaps that stems partly from the plethora of other "youth" participation organizations that garner more value in the eyes of parents than does Scouting...like youth and school sports, for instance. In my own district, here in Massachusetts, the towns run the full spectrum from the truly blue collar to the magnificently wealthy white collar. Guess where Scouting exists in greater numbers and with more enthusiasm? In the more blue collar towns, the CO's seem more at ease with Scouting, and far more participatory in the life of troops, fund raising, and leadership. In the wealthier towns, writing a check for this and that is easier to do than getting involved personally.

So, I think that where you live plays a large role in how troops start and exist. Sometimes, everything necessary for a new troop is at hand, and all that is needed is one person on either side to provide the initial spark. Sometimes, the spark is all the is there, and it goes out all too quickly.

My question is, at what point do I quit trying to improve the adult relationships and move on?

When running headlong into the brick wall begins to hurt more than you're willing to accept. If I can venture a guess, here,...it sounds like you've already passed that point and are looking for someone to help you reinforce your decision. Well, here's some reinforcement.

It's really quite obvious that the SM doesn't have clue about how things should be run within the picture you've painted. It's also fairly obvious that taking him to task, by yourself, as a committee, or with the help of the DE, (if he'll get involved), will result in verbal fisticuffs, with either you or the SM leaving. He shouldn't have such control over the troop for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is that he has no ownership, but sees that he does. In this situation, he can pull the rug out from under the troop at any time he decides to walk. Thus, if you and the committee and the DE decide to tackle the problem, rather than move on, be prepared to fill his position, raise funds of your own as a troop, start the appropriate bank account(s), and start searching for new equipment.

Other than moving along to another troop devoid of the problems you describe, there's nittle else you can do, for he holds all the marbles, unless the CO will get involved and oust him. Is that likely?

Public school all the way. When my two sons reached high school age, they opted to go to a local agricultural vocational high school (regional) as opposed to the town high school. But the Aggie was still public. I don't think they, or the Mrs. and myself, could have made better choices.

I've gone through this same problem as CC for a Pack and later SM for a troop. It finally dawned on me that the only way to get the others off their collective butts and move to find a replacement, was when I set a date, and told the whole committee that upon that date, I would be leaving, retiring, gonzo, and that it would be in their best interests to have someone lined up to take the position as of that date....sooner would be better. They dragged their collective feet still, but when the advertised date arrived, I bid them all goodbye, and went on with my life. I've remained on as a general committee member, but I do not take on roles that require more than what I want. The committee found out in short order that dragging their feet, and hemming and hawing, and not attending to the task at hand of finding a replacement, was a big mistake. I did not worry about hard feelings, for it was my life that I needed to get on with, not theirs. Their kids were now in the troop, not mine. And I realized that the longer the older experienced guys like me stayed around, the less the newer folks felt they needed to get involved, as the "old guard" would always be there. The day I retired was a big wake up call for all the parents of all 65 kids. Sometimes you just have to set the date, and walk whne the day comes. The remaining adults need to take the reigns and walk the trail as you have done for 6 years. Don't be afraid to walk, and get on with things.

Terry,

I participate in a number of forums, some are Scouting, some are Philo & Politics, and I'm a moderator at a couple of them. I've got to give you credit for attempting what you're doing in the Politics and Issues Forum. Leaving the doors open for any member to speak his or her mind, on any acceptable subject to the forums, without running interference, and avoiding the obvious temptation to squelch some things is very tough. It's especially hard when the rules are pretty much in the honor system arena. My limited experience tells me that there appears to be little to the middle of the road on this subject. You either tell folks that they're on their honor to follow the rules, or you sit at the screen 24/7 and be the bad guy. Sometimes you have to come down like the proverbial ton-o-bricks just to remind folks what the rules are, and how the honor system works. But if it's decorum you seek, even letting the forum run with little moderation is a lot of work.

Good job. Good luck.

Ditto to what Ed said. Second two are "could-be's", but would need more detail to render an opinion.

As I said above, I rarely wear "much" in the bag. I might have indicated that I always wear "something", if for no other reason than to keep the bag clean. And, no, I can't explain these things scientifically. I only know that I can't sleep comfortably when I'm all bundled up in a lot of clothing and the bag. And I really can't stand the "mummy" bags. They're far too restricting. The one I have is a modified mummy, more rectangular than mummy. Room to move within the bag at night is a must for me. What I haven't mastered yet, though, is keeping the bag on the pad at night. The Thermarest I have is old enough to be before the advent of the new anti-slip fabrics that are used today, and I tend to slip off the pad at night sometimes, if not almost perfectly level.

If you're not backpacking, and weight is not of the utmost importance, then the closed cell pad idea is a good one. When winter camping and I tow my own sled, I'll bring along a peice of closed cell foam padding a little bigger than my "ThermaRest" pad, and place it under the ThermaRest. Then the ThermaRest (fully inflated as others have said), and then the sleeping bag...all inside a tent, of course). I found a great bag at REI. It's a zero degree bag, man-made fiber insulation, with a flannel lining. I'll bring my next-day clothes into the bag with me, but I rearely wear much in the bag, even on the coldest nights, except the wool hat, of course). The padding underneath, and the bag with flannel lining (no cold spots) makes for a very warm and comfortable nights sleep. I've been out in this ensemble in the winter for a couple of years now, coldest night was 2 below not factoring wind chill. I was just fine...nice and warm and the pads made for a comfortable night. I'm not a small guy. I'm 6'-3", and around 900 pounds...only kidding...although it feels it sometimes...I'm really "only" about 250 lbs.

The Mrs. tells me that I should never consider a new hat when the activites of the previous 24 hours have put me in the spotlight, or granted me some new award or success. She figures that I should let the swelled head regain it's normal size before comtemplating the hat.

Of course....I've never tested her theory....

Once an Eagle, always an Eagle.

Or so they say... I wouldn't be in favor of eliminating the square knot. I think there are many who would still like to wear it. And I wouldn't be in favor of any new badge just for adults. I would, however, be very much in favor of allowing adults who earned the Eagle to wear that Eagle, the one they earned, their very own sacred Eagle patch, on their adult uniforms.

My first thought at this subject was along the lines of, "why rock the boat?" But upon thinking about it, there's really no good reason to not allow those adults who earned it as a Scout, to wear it as an adult. Now, there might be some who will argue that every rank should be afforded that priviledge for adults. Personally, I don't think there's a lot of adults who would want to wear their Second Class patch, as that's as far as they made it, but I could be wrong. I do feel, however, that as much as the BSA and it's participants over the years, have made the public image of the Eagle to be one of high esteem and importance in a young mans life, one that is advertised as the achievement of Astronauts and Presidents, so to should it be allowed to continue as he becomes an adult leader. Let adult leaders take the patch from their boyhood uniforms, and wear it proudly on their adult uniforms. Something le Voyageur said about the explanation to his Scout made all the difference in my mind. A boy should not be told that the goal he strives towards is one that he can't advertise with the same gear as an adult.

A friend of mine in Scouting has been Scoutmaster of his troop for almost 30 years now. And there's no sign that he's ready to call it quits. Nor is there any sign that the troop is ready to let him go. He has somewhere in the neighborhood of 65 Scouts in his troop. He also has about 70 registered Scouters...all in uniform...in his troop. His SM position is the ideal. He's surrounded by significant talent, and is able to stick to the job as defined in the books. I took my direction from him, even though I never achieved his mark.

I was a Scoutmaster for two terms in the troop, totalling 15 out of 20, oops, now 21 years in Scouting. When my own sons graduated, people would ask how long I'd stay with it. My response would always be: As long as it's still fun, and as long as the troop will have me. Yes, there came that point when it was no longer fun (old thread somewhere around here), and I retired. But I didn't leave Scouting.

I don't think there should be a term limit to any Scouter position. Scouters in many areas are very hard to come by, and, unless they prove themselves to be totally inadequate, a detriment to the troop and program, or some other problem, troops should be pretty glad to have them. Few parents nowadays are willing to jump in and lend a hand, even if their own sons are involved. BSA in some places could be understood to mean Baby Sitters of America. Without the determination and good will of those who will jump in and do the job....the job may never get done in those places.

Darned I wish this editting thing would work....

The Girl Scout thing was a tongue in cheek thing, of course. Through the roundtables, some really significant events were planned with the GS, and everyone had fun, even though the Girls always won the cooking events, and sometimes the log sawing..........

When I first got involved in Scouting, I didn't even know what roundtables were for the first year (as SM). I wasn't trained, and didn't know that many Scouters outside the troop. Upon learning of the event, I started going, learned about training, got trained, and then went to every round table, not missing one, for my next 5 years in Scouting (every month). The guys who were running them at the time made them simply terrific. They were activity laden events. Hands-on stuff. We were all doing the stuff that was suggested for teaching or for games at our own troop meetings. I even remember lighting a candle...from 25 feet away. They were simple things, but very, very active. And that's what I missed most after those guys retired. The roundtables started on a downhill slope until I retired as SM and then ASM. They became just discussion groups. No activity. Little new information was provided. No guest speakers. The old guard used to bring in the salespeople from Eastern Mountain Sports from time to time to introduce new camping equipment options. They used to bring in folks from the animal rescues in the area, with animals, to introduce us to creatures we wouldn't find in our backyards, and talk about programs available to Scouts. They'd even bring in guests from the...of horrors...Girl Scouts to talk about interactive events from both Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts. We'd spend some time together with the Cub Scout Leaders to briefly discuss needs and issues pertinent to both groups, then we'd split up to separate sessions. We did have some time for discussion groups ("round"tables), but those rarely took the entire evening. There would be times when the discussions were quite necessary and important. But most of the time, the events were made fun by the interactive things to do, and the sharing of knowledge, trips, events, troubles, et cetera.

Most of all, the thing that made the old roundtables quite enjoyable, was that they were planned. There was a schedule of events. There was no guessing about what we'd be doing on the part of the staff. And the events would be well advertised in advance so that every leader in the District knew what was on the program.

The we got away from that. The folks who volunteered for staff were well meaning, but poor planners. And the roundtables now are still poorly planned and run in our District. Attendance is at an all-time low. And one would think that would send a message to both the staff and the District Executive. Many have tried to lend a hand, and even volunteered for staff. But the present crew thinks they're doing fine, and treat roundtables like their own little fiefdom. It's too bad, for the gatherings could be as of old, if only those who sould do it right, would be allowed to do it right.

Moral of the story??? Keep it fun!!!

I'll chime in here a little on the conversation between FScouter and Bob White about refusal for BoR. In our troop, one of the things we've been able to accomplish, as part of the chain of command, is the chain of communication, at both the adult and Scout levels. And it has been long standing troop policy that BoR's are done only in full uniform as defined and required by the troop. A boy showing up without that full uniform is informed that he'll have to wait until it's rescheduled. That's part of learning responsibility for ones actions. The lines of communication are constantly drilled within the troop, so that even the smallest little thing is attended to. And the requirement for full uniform at BoR's is part of that. The candidate is reminded numerous times by his PL, his SPL, his SM and AMS's, and....guess who else...his PARENTS...for they become part of the communication tree, too. We run things that way, and the parents absolutely love the fact that their sons are being called on for not following the rules that are constatnly part of the communication tree. The boys all know what they're supposed to be doing and how, at all times. Should they choose to forget, or not conform, they're reminded. The luxury we've been able to gain over the years is a parental participation that agrees with the way things are done...for the most part. If a boy is refused a BoR, he and his folks get a note saying why. The nice thing is that we know that if the boy goes home complaining, Mom & Dad will simply ask him why he didn't follow the rules. Win/win, there. It really works to reinforce the responsibility part of life. And that's part of what we're trying to instill in the guys, right?

Oh, as an aside, I should say that the candidate is inspected presented to the BoR by the SM and the SPL. The candidate knows that the SPL will be looking to see that he's presentable for the BoR. Sometimes it's a wonder when a candidate will show up at a meeting expecting a BoR during the evening, but will be lacking a uniform part, and the rest of the corps will work with the SPL to make him presentable, hoping that the adult leadership is unaware. Watching them work together on those kinds of things can make it all worthwhile sometimes.

Dan,

I believe that the text in the SM handbook is refering to the fact that many troops supply special "troop" neckerchiefs and hats, but not all do, and therefore, as those items are allowed to be different from troop to troop, they're not considered as part of the official "full" uniform. That leaves the door open for troops (like mine) to not consider them part of the "full" uniform. I might be wrong here, but I think the hat, the neckerchief, and perhaps the t-shirt are the only items that are viewed as parts "a" uniform that can vary from troop to troop, allowing for special designs, colors, et cetera.

In lieu of some magic that bans those posting things we might not want to read, it's better to simply ignore the offensive posts, pretend they and their creator don't exist, and go on. Eventually, and hopefully, the offender might go elsewhere as no one will talk with him/her. I know many will say "Easier said than done"...but it's also an easier route to take than trying to incite a moderator, webmaster, or other authority. At least it is for me.

Troll???........what troll?

Oops...didn't see your post until mine was on the way. But....

Bingo, you've hit a good idea there. If there's another organization who might work with your son and really appreciate the telescope, that sounds like a great way to go. It eliminates the Director and his methods...unless, of course, the school has a clone just like him.

An Eagle Project is sort of like a contract. Once the project is accepted and approved by the Director, the candidate is responsible for completing his end of the contract. Unfortunately, it's a pretty one-sided contract, for there's no way to force the Director to go forward with what he originally accepted and approved. And that smacks of changing the rules in the middle of the game. It happens, though, in Eagle projects and in life, and isn't good either way.

It occurs to me that the publicity about the project could go either way, too. A successfully completed project deserves accollades and publicity to show the community what has been accomplished. A project that is approved and accepted, but hindered by the mind changes and unresponsiveness of the original sponsor deserves some publicity, too. That's a long shot, and not very Scout-like. But if it was my project, and the sponsor changed his mind, and wouldn't meet a timely schedule as originally agreed, I'd be tempted to let others know about it.

Yes, I have seen this before, and there are really only two trails to walk here.

In most cases where this happens, the project sponsor (the director?) really has no clue as to what an Eagle project is all about. He only knows that there is some kid who wants to do something for him, and get credit for it in Scouts....how cute. The Director probably isn't aware of what his change of mind is doing to the project, the timing, the Scout, and possibility of screwing the whole thing up for all. He only knows what he wants for a finish product, and approaches the situation as if he's dealing with an outside contractor...someone he's paying. That attitude and lack of understanding can kill enthusiasm and a project. Thus, the first trail is to have someone, other than yourself, sit with the Director and explain the situation in fine detail, so the Director understands how working with an Eagle candidate is far different than hiring someone, and how his "change of mind" is putting the whole thing in jeopardy.

The second trail, unfortunately, is find a different project before time runs out for your son.

It may be that talking with the Director will solve the problem as perhaps he has no idea of the timing and emotional impact. It may be that he doesn't care, and the second trail is warranted. Hopefully not...but that may be the case.

Good luck.

There's a whole lot of different ways to raise money. Three methods that I can think of are:

BSA sponsored methods...like Popcorn. No up-front cost, need everyone to participate to make it profitable, only part of the profits come back to the troop.

Selling non-BSA things...like candy, Christmas Trees and/or wreaths, etc. These can have substantial up-front cost as you have to buy the product, and then sell a certain amount to cover costs. They need substantial participation. All the money, after covering costs, goes to the troop.

Services...which require little or no up-front cost, and depend entirely on participation and donation. Some of these I've seen:

Car-washes: water and location donated...small fee...a lot of man(boy)power...good weather.

Christmas Tree Collection: after holiday collection and disposal of trees...small feee...donated vehicles and trailers for collection...coordination with town disposal facility.

Fall Yard Clean-up: raking leaves and disposing of them for small fee...many hands make for quick work.

Bottle Redemption: I've seen troops that actually run redemption centers with Chartered Organization assistance daily or weekly, and troops that do it a couple of times a year. Requires man(boy)power, vehicles, location, appropriate plastic bags, gloves, etc.

The key to the succes of these things around here is that nobody else does these things. Working around other fund raisers of other organizations is easier.

Most of the troops in this area do not go in for the Scout Fund thing. All the money is put in the general troop fund. Out of that fund, most everything for the year is paid for or partially funded. The key is having a good treasurer who can keep track of incoming and outgoing, and knowing what money can be used for what purpose without breaking the bank. Partial funding of things like camping trips helps to keep the cost down for the Scouting families. Oh, and every dollar earned in a given year is spent on the Scouts in the troop that year. in our troop, if we started with $100 in the account, we'd end the year with $100, even if we raised $5000. All of the $5000 would be spent on the kids. Sometimes that meant that part of that money went towards buying a new trailer for the troop. But that was seen as money going back to the kids also.