JMHawkins

In the exchange between Fred and Eng61, I think there was an interesting topic. Specifically, Eng61 said:

"I don't think it is necessary for all the adults in a troop to drop everything and do a BOR right now just because some scout or parent demands it. "

I, in fact think it imperative this not be the case... it's a bad lesson to teach that the world revolves around an individual. Most of our politicians have that view.

The key word in that quote is, I think, demands. Replace "demand" with "request" and things take on a different characteristic. But Fred and Eng61 both have reasonable worries about teaching the wrong thing. Eng61 is right that dropping everything to accomodate the scout can foster a sense of entitlement that isn't good for him to have. On the other hand, refusing to treat him as an individual and making him just another cog in the bureaucracy to be processed according to rigid rules teaches him another, equally bad, lesson: that it's okay for those in power to be dismissive towards individuals under their thumb. In both extremes, the adult leadership is modeling a style of leadership we don't want to pass on to the scouts.

They key thing is the Committee serves the troop, not the other way around. "The Troop" includes the scouts in it and the adults on the Committee (as well as other adults too). Doing things in a way that completely subjugates either one to the other is ultimately wrong.

Fantatsic recruiting job. I know how had it is - I'm trying to work myself out of one of my jobs right now.

-... . .--. .-. . .--. .- .-. . -..

As they kids say these days, fixed it for ya. If you're going to use dots, use dots.

Kudu,

Back when the First Class Journey was a requirement for, well, First Class, wasn't part of it writing up a report on what you saw and did during the trip? I assume some semblance of grammar was expected in the written report. Well, when's the last time anyone had to chase down a runaway punctuation mark anyway. It's not important any more.

That's like here in New Hampshire.. If you force me to wear my seatbelt what else is next? Are you going to force me to brush my teeth by law, mow my lawn weekly by law, join the army by 18?.. Tell me where I can and can not work? Tell me who my frieds are? etc. etc. etc.

We can all get carried away playing the "What if" game.. You just need an active imaginations, to paint a picture that the sky is falling.

Y'know, it's pretty funny when you look back. Over the years there have been a lot of laws passed that caused those folks with active imaginations to predict dire consequences, saying it was "the camel's nose under the tent" and the same people who just passed this law will try to (insert dire exaggerated prediction) next. Kinda like Kudu predicting the next traditional element of scouting to be banned by G2SS.

What's funny about it is the Chicken Littles have been almost 100% right. And that's not funny in a ha-ha way, but funny in a better to laugh than cry way.

Maybe they're not actually saying the sky is falling. Maybe they're really saying "Hey, some guy is throwing rocks at us from up there on the roof!"

What we do as a troop is present a program that covers all of the rank requirements in the hopes that they will take advantage of it.

That makes sense. Especially since most of the T-2-1 requirements can be done in any order, whatever is going on when they join is probalby something they can take advantage of.

We don't teach them something and automatically sign off because they were present.

I wish the troop running Trail to First Class last year at our District MB clinic did things your way!

Thanks SR540,

Thanks for the link. That midge stove gave me an idea that might solve one my design problems!

...that is what we encouraged the packs to do so we could get some experience and comfort under their belts before summer camp and so we were not having to start new scouts in tiers over several months...

SR540Beaver

How do you handle non-Webelos who tend to come in at random points in the year (or maybe cluster at the begining and end of summer)? Are they able to jump into your NSPs and catch up?

Our troop gets new scouts all year long. We're still pretty new and recruit aggressively outside of Cub Scouts, and those guys come in whenever. So we don't really have a schedule built around getting new guys ready for Summer Camp since we get them all the time anyway. Our schedule is more about what sort of places we can go at what time of year.

We did cross over a bunch of Webelos, plus signed up some of their non-cub friends from a soccer team, in December. Their first campout was January. Friday night the temps got below 30. Saturday morning was a steady cold rain giving way to snow around noon, which lasted on and off for the afternoon. Sunday morning we woke to a freezing drizzle while we broke camp and packed up.

Every single new kid said he loved it. 30 person snowball fights and earning their Totin' Chits seemed to be the highlights. I was really proud of their PLs. One of the new guys is the son of a friend of mine, and his dad told me he came home from the meeting two weeks before the campout with a list of gear his PL strongly suggested he get to stay warm. This was our 3rd straight sub-freezing trip, and the scouts are getting pretty good at it. They helped the new guys just like they were supposed to.

Myself, I'm looking forward to some warmer weather...

From the Pack side, there are two packs in our town. One had two WebII dens, the other one. The dens have all scheduled their own crossovers, independant of normal pack meetings and on their own schedule. One (the one above) crossed over in Dec. because all their guys were ready. Another crossed over in Jan (their first campout will be Klondike), and the third (same Pack as the Dec den) will cross over this month. A couple of years ago our pack did a crossover in June because it took that long for the guys to finish. Not sure when my son's WebI den will crossover next year, but I'm pretty sure he'll want it to be as early as possible.

This: http://www.garlington.biz/Ray/WoodGasStove/ is the basis for my first go. I'm a little worried about the high profile of it and may want a wider pot stand (though honestly it's not really any more tippy than a PocketRocket on top of an 8oz canister).

Ultimately I want to make a gas wick version, which will be even taller and definely require a folding pot stand around it. But it should burn even cleaner. I'm drawing up my own design for this based on lots of previous research and a few of my own ideas. I'll post updates when I have anything worthwhile.

A safety geek just might identify and quantify this tidbit of info as part of the risk associated with homemade alcohol stoves and suggest other camp gadgets as alternatives.

If you mean "geek" as in "a person obsessed with a particular subject to an unhealthy and unsociable extent" then you may be onto something. Also if by "safety" you mean "authoritarian prohibitions unsupported by evidence or data" instead of "the condition of being safe; freedom from danger, risk, or injury" I might agree.

Perhaps you meant "geek" as in "an expert or enthusiast" but that definition doesn't fit the facts as currently presented. And perhaps there is data supporting the decision and real thought behind it. I'm asking for the data, thought process and debate that went into prohibiting DIY stoves - the intellectual aspects of the things. So far I'm getting nothng but one story about a kid tragically misusing a first aid kit. There's something missing. Here's an opportunity to clear up the confusion. If something is too dangerous to allow even with proper training and precautions, a real safety expert would be able to explain what makes that so.

Perhaps you have the PHA for commercial alcohol stoves you can share? That's a place to start. Are all the PHAs done available somewhere on-line? It would be a good resource.

I'd highly recommend having boys make wood-gas stoves...

Yep, I think you're right. They're a little bigger and heavier than alcohol stoves, but (depending on how much of a stickler you want to be for LNT) fuel doesn't need to be carried in many places. OTOH, though they're not prohibited by G2SS, they may be prohibited by your friendly neighborhood federal land manager.

FWIW, that's my next project with my son though, a "gas wick" version.

buy a manufactured alcohol stove, it is just that simple. Alcohol isn't banned it just isn't recommended......

Yeah, but I'm not really as interested in cooking with alcohol as I am in making the stoves. It's the DIY that matters. A penny alcohol stove, or just a simple cat food side-burner, are frankly great projects for scout-aged boys to learn how to make things with their own hands.

I almost all-capped that, because I feel like shouting it. We need to encourage more tinkering, more mechanical aptitude. The self-confidence to make something yourself, especially something "dangerous" like a stove that actually burns, is a great thing for a kid to have.

These stoves can be made safely, but we don't even try any more. Just go buy something at the mall and throw it away when it wears out. Opportunity missed. And there isn't even a halfway decent explaination. Somebody did something stupid with a first aid kit, so making your own stove is banned?

Why is it fine for the Catholics to regulate(more like meddle in) the personal lives of employees via economics, regulatory mandates, but, it is not OK for the government to do the exact same thing to them.

Because the Catholics don't run a prison system for people who refuse to follow their rules?

Or, if you're worried about employment, the worst the Catholic Church can do to a doctor who doesn't want to follow their rules is say he can't work for them. The government gets to say he can't work for anybody.

Right now we have a liberal Democrat as President. Four years ago we had a born-again Christian. A year from now we could very well have an LDS President appointing a new cabinet. Are you sure you want D.C. deciding who's the decent person and who's the ignorant fool? Whatever side of the debate you're on, the other side has been in power before. Do you really want to bet the farm that they never are again?

Another way to look at it: "it ends well" (perspective makes a difference - just sayin')

Wait. Win all you can... Can you all win...

Have you just come up with a replacement for TGOL?

Oh yeah and a trading post - boys love the trading post!

Ha! We spent a week-end off-season at our local Council camp and the scouts were bitterly dissapointed that the trading post wasn't open.

For physical facilities (assuming they're staffed by good staffers), my preference would be:

-developed campsites with tent platforms, dining fly area, campfire and latrines that can withstand constant occupation over the summer.

-primitive campsite areas slightly removed from the developed portion

-"Parade Ground" large open field with flag pole

-Program areas for various activities (preferably with shelters, it rains a lot in our neck of the woods, even in summer)

-Lake with swimming, boating, and fishing facilities.

-Archery, Rifle and Shotgun ranges

-Council Campfire bowl large enough to hold all the troops who would be at camp the same week

-trails.

-Shower facilities

-First aid and camp office facilities, but NO DINNING HALL! Scouts cook for themselves in their camps.

-Other activity structures as affordable (climbing wall, COPE course, etc).

-A trading post that looks like it was built in 1842 and last modernized around 1924. Bonus points to put it on the lakefront with a cargo dock and a row boat that brings in "new shipments" every couple of days during camp.

I think most of the folks here understand the terms but they are used so much and so poorly they become hackneyed. Don't confuse dislike for jargon as ignorance.

Oh, yeah, the folks here. I was referring to the author and his sources.

Personally, my experience is that most of these terms are expressed by management in an effort to either intimidate those inside the organization or impress those outside of it.

Y'know, now that you mention it, I think jargon starts out as colorful but useful descriptions of something (e.g. "lots of moving parts here") used by people who know what's going on. but gradually they get picked up by the clueless, at which point things degenerate into drivel. From the article, it sounded like the professors thought "lots of moving parts" was a positive description.

Other bits of jargon are invented by the clueless in the first place.

Hmmm, well, it would be funnier if the folks writing it weren't a little clueless about some of the things they're bemoaning.

For example:

Core Competency...Do people talk about peripheral competency? Being competent is not the standard were seeking. Its like core mediocrity.

Oh, being competent is a fine standard to seek. Organizatons that are "merely competent" in the fundamental activities necessary to their function tend to succeed. Organizations that don't know what fundamental activities they need to be at least competent in are likely to fail. And a "Management Professor" who thinks competency is the same as mediocrity isn't paying attention to how much incompetence exists in business today.

Buy-in...Asking for someones buy-in says, I have an idea. I didnt involve you because I didnt value you enough to discuss it with you. I want you to embrace it as if you were in on it from the beginning, because that would make me feel really good.

No, actually, asking for someone's buy-in is saying "I have an idea and your support is important to me. What do I need to do to get your support?" Or, in other circumstances, it can be a leader saying "this is what we're doing and we need everybody to support it. Either support the program or go elsewhere." Certainly not a pleasant directive, but there are times when it's the right thing for a leader to do.

Lots of Moving Parts

Pinball machines have lots of moving parts. Many of them buzz and clank and induce migraine headaches. Do you want your business to run, or even appear to run, like a pinball machine? Then do not say it involves lots of moving parts.

Ah, but if your business is already running like a pinball machine and you'd like to communicate that problem needs to be fixed, you might say "lots of moving parts here folks... we need to cut down on the chaos."

Boil the Ocean

This means to waste time. The thinking here, we suppose, is that boiling the ocean would take a long time.

BZZZZ! Wrong. "Boil the Ocean" doesn't mean to wast time, it means a plan that requires more resources than the company could possibly devote to it. It's a plan that's unworkable because it's too big.

Punt

In football, to punt means to willingly (if regretfully) kick the ball to the other team to control your teams position on the field. In business it means to give up on an idea, or to make it less of a priority at the moment. In language as in life, punt too often and youll never score.

And to go for it on 4th and 20 deep in your own territory means the other team will probably score and put you in an even deeper hole. Punting is a very usefull tool. It lets you focus on your priorities.

But I guess the article just highlights the real problem with jargon - people using it when they don't know what it means. Some of those people are business professors at fancypants universities...

Thanks Richard.

I was kinda hoping though to see the actual analysis that BSA had already done as part of revising the G2SS. I've spent enough time in corporate corridors to know you can't have a useful discussion when one side of the debate is driven by information hidden from the other side. Plus, as Beavah said, you can't just analyze risk, you've got to analyze benefits and comparative risks with other alternatives. If we just look at risk in isolation, we'd never do anything.

Is alcohol more dangerous than iso or white gas? Is it more dangerous to store, transport, fuel, etc.? Are relatively simple homemade stoves more dangerous than commercial stoves that require occasional maintenance? (what happens if a scout doesn't tighten the nut on the generator when he replaces one on a white gas stove?). I have my own ideas about the answers, but I'd really like to know what hard data other people have on this subject. I might learn something.

OBTW, I belive it is against policy (maybe it's just a local policy) for units to stock pile rank badges. Of course that doesn't stop anyone. They don't want badges to be awarded without the advancement reports being turned in. Yeah, it's a silly, ham-fisted rule.

Occurs to me that if the leaders of a given unit can't be trusted with rank badges, there are bigger problems than rank badges in that unit.

Yah, but if the government controls most of health care funding, what choice do they have?

The tragedy of public life today is that, by overcentralizing, we force ourselves into intractable arguments that we just don't need to have. We don't respect the difference between "you must" and "you should" any more, so there's limited opportunity to live and let live.

Helping poor people cover medical costs is a fine and noble thing for a government to do. Doing it by running a national insurance policy is about the dumbest possible way of going about it. Unfortuantely it's the way that gives people in DC the most power.

But kings arguing with monks usually doesn't end well for either side.

You'll note also that Hazardous Weather Training came about after settlements on a few weather-related deaths too, eh?

In which case, BSA handled it pretty good. People getting killed in avoidable accidents because of lack of knowledge = do something to increase knowledge. Good solution. The Hazardous Weather traning is mostly common sense, but it's good to reiterate it. It's especially useful for folks travelling to parts of the country with different weather patterns and hazards than they're used to.

But banning stuff because of accidents? If something got banned every time there was an accident, kids wouldn't be allowed out of their bedrooms without padded hazmat suits.

For me, instant recognition is shaking the scout's hand and saying "Congratulations" when he earns the award. Followed by a short announcement at the closing of the meeting saying "Joe Scout has earned his Tenderfoot rank..."

The cloth comes the next time the AC can get it, and the scout get's a formal mini-ceremony to hand him the patch. Finally, at the next CoH he's recognized again for whatever he's achieved since the last CoH.

A few years ago, there was an incident involving the misuse of alcohol by a scout. It resulted in another scout's death.

Thanks Buffalo Skipper. Any further details you can recall?

...as alcohol is particularly flammable as it readily vaporizes at most any temperature...

I'm not sure I'd characterize alcohol as "particularly flammable" in comparison to other chemical fuels like white gas. They're fuels, they're all supposed to be flammable. Especially considering that the non-alcohol fuels are pressurized, they will readily vaporize also. And yes, the penny is hot - so is the burner on a white gas stove. So is, for that matter, the water boiling in the pot above either version.

Stoves get hot, they burn, the fuel they use combusts. I think your 2 cents "...a training program on liquid fuels (like SSD, Climb on Safely, etc.) would be more effective way to dealing with the hazards of fuel handling and usage" is a good idea.

[edit] PS, one of the reasons I'd like more info on the accident(s) is I'd like to know what happened so I can guard against it myself. Absent details, I assume any accident that happened with alcohol fuel is also possible with white gas fuel as well. Something like the on-line hazardous weather training would be a nice resource.(This message has been edited by JMHawkins)

From the spun thread:

In BSA's Scouting Community Richard Bourlon, BSA's safety director, indicated the policy change was due to "high profile" accidents involving alcohol fuel handling. From his comments the policy changes were not made on the basis of material properties like flash point, vapor pressure or combustion product toxicity relative to those of recommended chemical fuel.

I got to thinking about this because recently I slipped on some mud and landed on my backpack. My (commercial) white gas stove must've taken the brunt of the fall (though I could have sworn it was my right hip...) because when I fired it up, there was a leak in one of the bends of the generator tube. Made for some minor excitement, what with pressurized explosive fuel spewing out and all.

I also recently made - with my son as a family activity in no way associated with BSA - a couple different designs of can stoves. We did time trials on them to see how fast each could boil a pint of water, how long it could keep it at a boil, etc. Fun afternoon...

Anyway, I cannot really believe that a Penny Stove holding 1 oz of non-pressurized alcoohol is more dangerous than a stove you have to pump to pressurize that holds 16+ oz of white gas. From the quote above, it sounds like relative safety wasn't part of the consideration.

So, by way of fullfilling all sections of the 7th point of the Scout Law ("A Scout is Obiedient: If he thinks a rule is wrong, he seeks to have it changed in an orderly manner"), does anyone have details on these "high profile" accidents? Seems like the first step in revisiting this unfortunate decision is understanding what fears drove Irving to it.