John-in-KC

Actually, I think that would open up a tremendous line of conversation within the EBOR

BW, The legal background question goes to your continuing comments on liability. I trust Mr Chris Wolfe of the National Office, formerly with my Council. He's a CPA, and has taken accounting and legal training in liability. I've taken Scouting Liability at Commissioner College from him; but since I'm laity, and it was several years ago, I tend to listen when others discuss this issue anymore. I trust NLDScouter, who is a Judge, and Beavah, who hasn't quite said he's an attorney, but sure as heck as disclaimed a couple of posts. They've both talked liability from the perspective of the law. I ask again: Your legal background, Sir?

kahits, How did you get there from here, now that it's happened???

I know there is one judge posting here at Scouter, and from what he's described, he's at a trial court of record somewhere in New York. From everything I've seen, including more than one disclaimer, I'm pretty darn certain at least two other posters here are practicing attorneys. One might even sing he used to be a ........... As for me, I'm a tired broken down artilleryman who bangs public policy and database computer keys... but I used to be an Owl, and I have slept in a Holiday Inn Express. BW, your legal background is?

Excuse me? Direct hard hitting questions of someone who will momentarily be an adult is inappropriate? BALONEY. I would hope any BOR, be it Tenderfoot or 2d Silver Palm, is looking at the young man as a whole person and considering his maturity and maturation before it goes into session with him. I would hope the SM has talked with the Board about any areas where the young man needs less probing, perhaps even sympathetic and empathetic questions. I'd also hope he's told the Board areas where they can go for broke. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ B, to your specific question, getting the leader in question into an up close and personal two-deep environment, where others can model behavior, and keep the Scout out of the line of fire, is a technique I've used more than once.

I fundamentally disagree with BW. The young Eagle had every opportunity to say "I will be registered and voting for the general election. I'm not yet decided on who I will vote for at this moment, (or I prefer at this time to keep my support to myself). What we finally do, in the booth, is our own business, if we choose it to be. Folks have every right to shout their choice from the rooftops, so long as they don't do it within the set distance of the polling place. If this young man lives to be 80, he's got something on the order of 31 general elections. He's about to embark on the best part of being a US citizen, voting. Let him show that he's thinking wisely about that right! PS: Please congratulate the young man for us! (This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

Beavah wrote, in part: "I expect most of us advise Eagle candidates to wear their uniform when workin' on a project," I think there are times to wear the uniform during any project, and there may be times not to wear the uniform: - Certainly during the preliminary period before District approval, when the young man is trying to sell the merits of his project to the supported agency, his SM, his Committee, and perhaps his Chartered Partner. - Certainly at the end of the project the Scout should be in uniform to collect the project completion signatures from the supported agency. Let's be honest: The Scout isn't doing this out of total altruism, he's getting a step closer to Eagle. - Whilst doing the project? I think it depends. Some ELSPs (developing libraries for church missions... read about that in Boy's Life years ago) are no-brainers. Some projects are a judgment call. If the Scout concerned uses his common sense, he'll know when it's OK to wear the uniform, and when it's not. - As to BW's comment from p 27 of ACP&P #33088 "He does the project outside the sphere of Scouting.", I think that's a re-emphasis of the limitations in the Eagle Scout Workbook 18-936 (mandated by BSA Requirements #33215): 2. Projects involving council property or other BSA activities are not acceptable. To me, the read of the policy applies to whom the service of the ELSP is rendered, not the how. If you believe "outside the sphere" is "how", and you take the comment to its logical end, the Scout should use a volunteer labor pool, including appropriate adult assistance (power tools comes to mind) that is outside of Scouting. From my experience in my Council, I'd say a plurality to a majority of Eagle Leadership Service Project would never have happened under those conditions. Thoughts?(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

We still need someone from Cleveland and ECR... Does anyone remember Cory Woolson, who was our Chapter Secretary way back then? Since EagleSon is off to Mizzou this fall, this is what I'm listening to these days... (Those were taken while Marching Mizzou (which he'll be in this fall) was flying down to San Anton for the Big 12 fiasco. Oh, well... we were first out of the chute on that best of all bowl days, New Years Day in the Cotton Bowl.

Our Chartered Partner had a PGA Champions Tour event go on at the course across the street. Parking was at at super-mega-premium. Our Chartered Partner asked its youth serving organizations for adults to run the parking lot. The funds were disbursed back to the organizations based on how many manhours each organization furnished. The sign said "Proceeeds benefit VFW Post 123's youth serving activities."

Mark, I rather doubt your Camporee Director, PD, and area heads are to a person National Camp School trained/current. That comment is talking to Webelos Camp or Scout Camp or even Cub Day Camp.

Ed, Agree Webelos may camp (except during camporees) with Boy Scouts per conditions set in G2SS. My challenge, as I think Lisa's, is to BEARS. The Age-Appropriate Activities chart, which says "VISIT ONLY" for Webelos at Camporees, is dated 2007. Maybe we can use the internet wayback machine to see when that changed.

Actually, there's a teaching point in this: SPL (PD) never gathered the student PLs for a PLC to "walk the ground" of the campground before weekend 2. Our patrol, at one of our 3 get togethers between the two sessions, did indeed walk the ground, and selected our Patrol site. We designated exactly where each of us would deploy to to "mark the ground." When we were dismissed from our Troop formation to stake our ground, all but our PL took off like shots to their points on the ground; 30 seconds later, we yelled in unison "WE CLAIM THIS SPACE IN THE NAME OF THE OWLS." Everyone was pissed at us! PL brought SPL AND SM (CD) came down to talk to us. All we had to say was: When did you have a walking PLC to decide who got what ground for the campout? You didn't. We're not going to wait humbly while others take the good ground and we get crap. Deal with it." CD, SPL and ASM (Facilities) (by now) looked at each other and lowered their heads sheepishly. They had screwed up by the numbers. They walked away quietly... "It's your space." They had to apologize to the other Patrols for not doing their part of managing the Troop footprint. Moral of the story: Make darn sure there is a walking PLC before the camping weekend, and that all Patrols get opportunity to have good ground for the camping weekend.(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

Agree with Lisa, crossram, please, please cite your rule. It goes against G2SS camping section at the "meaning of words" level.

My one comment here is about economics. Gas just blew through 3.20 a gallon in Flyover Country. This isn't an area where SM can veto, but he has to help teach that money does not go on trees, and the cost of fuel is rising faster than most of our real world pay raises. Some outings will need the Scouts to collect cans for $$ in recycling, or other creative ways to get the $$$ to get the youth from here to there.

Don, Welcome. Troop 110, Reseda here, we met at Sequioia Jr High. Later Post 7. Walika 1970 for Ordeal, Brotherhood summer 71 at Chatsworth Park. 68 at Whitsett, 69 and 70 on Silver Knapsack, 71 John Muir Trail up north of Bishop and Camp Mataguay as SPL. Did you know Dave Weiss? He'd have been Reseda 73. In the meantime, since I AM talking about Reseda folks... The Toreadors are here We've made it very clear Our capes are on, Our swords are drawn, Red, Gold and White will win tonight! Our boys have have hit the field The other team must yield For Taft will fight with all her might To win the victory to-night! Down 2-3-4-5-6-7-8! Up 2-3-4...Boom Boom...TAFT HIGH! John Taft 74 UCSB 78

B and BA, Great task/standard matrix! It's at least a viable attempt to define "what right looks like!" It also underscores a point used much in military training: You have to be technically competent and tactically proficient before you can share the skills with others.

Having grown up in Southern California, having seen the Santa Susannah, San Gabriel, and Santa Monica ranges burn, I say again: The camporee organizer needs to contact the area Fire Chief, TODAY. The local Fire Chief, or one of his officers, needs to define the limits of the burn ban. If the ban is absolute, do not dare to try and slip around it. PERIOD. I grew up in the tinder box which is Southern California. If the fire danger is "extreme," then there should not be so much as a Bic being flicked. Scouts are Obedient. As for the over-scheduling of camporee events, that is a serious conversation in ADULT capacities between the Camping Chair, the Activities Chair, the OA Adviser, and the District Chairman.

Why do we have two threads on this topic running? I'm for doing the ceremony at noon.

Have to agree with Gold Winger, there are some boots which I could and did wear all day comfortably. Long ago, I ripped one of my maleolus ligaments on a run. I like ankle support... a lot! I'm also a believer of boots in the field.

To all: The first thing the organizer should do is discuss the exact limits of the ban with the area fire chief. If the fire danger rating is already "extreme", then we want to support mitigating any risk of a brushfire. Long ago, I grew up in Los Angeles. I remember the Santa Susanna/San Gabriel/Santa Monica brushfire in the fall of 1970. We didn't do outdoor PE, the ash was falling so badly. With the expansion of the LA metro further into the mountains, the fires we've seen on TV in recent years only make matters worse; now it's not just rugged land, it's communities. kahits, I'd move the tapout ceremony to noontime. There are American Indian traditions and ceremonies which happened in the full light of day as well as in the evening. While the Order models on the Lenni Lenape, IIRC the Chumash are the local Southern California indian. What of their traditions?

The REI catalog is always calling !

One thing to think about: Working two different units as a Committee means extra burden to the worker bees. In start-up units, that means more time. Your volunteers are going to be on a healthy learning curve as it is. That said, there is no reason not to have the Chartered Partner support two units. The COR, as keeper of the vision, can be the lynchpin in this. BTW, and this feels important to me: Please remember that just because units share numerals and chartered partners does not guarantee the Cubs will naturally migrate to the Troop. In fact, there is nothing at all stopping them from going wherever they want. From my experience, the quality of the program delivered at the Boy Scouting level is the secondmost strong determining factor in boys migrating up. What's the strongest factor? It's a negative, actually: Urinating and defecating contests between the adults. I've seen it happen more than once Promoting solid adult interrelationships may not get you more boys, but it will certainly help keep those you have from running away.(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

I'm an advocate of Instructional Systems Development as a training management methodology. In the Armed Forces, folks in the schoolhouses also know it as Systems Approach to Training. It's a modified form of Taylorism, where the environment is broken down into discrete tasks. It's an extremely flexible typology for training. It allows for individual study, classroom, controlled conditions, and full field conditions in developing mastery of the task. From everything I've read and seen in the 9 years I've been on the Scouter side of the street, I do not have a clue of how National designs and develops training. From my perspective having held an Army Instructor additional skill identifier, it seems there has been minimal effort to identify student performance expectations. The major exception I have encountered is BSA Lifeguard. A lesser exception is WB21C (yes, I rate the quality of the BSA LG curriculum, as implemented in 2003, as better than WB21C implemented in 2005). We pay lots of money to National... every member x $10 bucks is not chump change. In addition, as I understand it, there's a tax on the FOS campaign from National (either that or my finance director is cranking out the bull). Finally, National itself does fundraising at the major corporation level. It seems to me the National training developers should explain why they waste perfectly good oxygen and funds to the volunteers in the field.(This message has been edited by John-in-KC)

Sue, The only advice I have is for the TG breakouts. Our course, each TG used a "briefing book" and stand, and document protectors to hold the slides. Problem: The white print of the slides, seen through the cellophane, looking at the camouflage BSA standard WB background, was well nigh impossible to read at 3 feet, let alone 6-8. I'd rather see the "instructor version" (plain black and white printing). If you have someone who is nearsighted, use him for a sanity check of each presentation before you give it to the TGs for implementation. If necessary, increase the font pitch and the number of slides. Does that make sense?

Yep, this went around last fall... just as BW was coming back onto the forums. Hey Sue, congrats on being ASM for TG's on the next course!!!! John I used to be an Owl... C-40-05