Lisabob

I'm not in favor of paying for awards as your boy earns them because the message that this may send to some families is, hey, if your boy doesn't earn any awards then you don't have to pay anything! Sadly, I know adults who would most likely interpret it that way and then put no effort into helping their kid get what he should out of cub scouts. I also think it can be a financial hardship for some. Those beltloops do add up. And while I agree that boys and families ought to have a financial stake in the pack (like paying a set dues level or expectation that everyone participates in fundraisers), I just can't see telling "Johnny" that everybody in the den except him earns and gets awarded the ___ beltloop, because his parent didn't want to pay for it.

Grit, Vilkommen! Jeg boede i Danmark en gang, for meget aar siden. Nu bor jeg i Michigan i USA og min 13 aarige dreng er Boy Scout med en Troop herover. Jeg skal vaere glaede, at hjaelpe, vis det er muligt. Vi har ogsa Scouting venner og familien in New York, som kunne maaske hjaelpe dig. Hvis duu har lust maa du gern sender mig email til: nbs1651 @ yahoo.com PS - I apologize for my rusty Danish - it has been a long time! best, Lisa

Jambo, I did not intend to say you were being untruthful. Sorry if you mistook my intent. What I did intend was to say that perhaps a bit of clarification is in order, because people who are quite new to scouting often come to this board seeking answers. I would hate for someone to come here, read something that might be incorrect, and then go back to their unit preaching it as gospel truth. Consequently, I suggested that we - collectively - ensure that the correct info is being presented. We all err occasionally or type a little to fast, or haven't had the requisite amount of coffee yet, or what have you, and I see nothing wrong with the forum members gently correcting, or asking for clarification from, each other. That's all I had in mind. And I don't know anyone whose first name is "Bob."

About that pack trainer position - at least around here, it is severely under-utilized. As far as I know, I'm the only person in the area who has ever registered as PT - and I have gotten to know an awful lot of cub scouters. I disagree a little bit that the CM should wear this hat too, because while training is important and the CM should encourage the DLs to get to training, the CM is already so busy with making the program "go" that it would be helpful to have someone else on the committee in charge of keeping up with training dates, keeping training records current, and cajoling people into attending. Also, PT can be a powerful position to advocate change in a unit that is suffering, or is sub-par. Sometimes it is better for someone who isn't the CM to do that too - esp if the CM is part of the problem. But, John, I see what you're saying too. And I'd rather have more CMs serve dual roles as CM/PT than not have PTs at all, which is where we're at around here.

Jambo, I am not certain I understood what you wrote in the way you meant it. To be clear: all troop property does NOT belong to "BSA Inc."; it belongs to the individual COs that charter the troop. Consequently, if a troop folds or changes COs, they should seek the permission of their (old) CO to take troop equipment with them, or else make arrangements to return it to the CO or dispose of it in some way that the CO approves. Perhaps there are different rules for OA? I'm really not sure, though I expect it is likely since OA is not sponsored by a CO. But let's clarify this here, because a lot of people who read this board will take what they've read here as "truth" and we don't want to misinform them.

Yes I think it is - I'm pretty sure I've seen TM print outs that include it for boys in our troop.

OK I don't know about surfing, but anarchist's post reminded me that Pamlico Sea Base (on the inner banks) in NC has both a strong water program (sea kayaking, sailing) and extremely helpful people with knowledge of the coastal area. If you contacted East Carolina Council where Pamlico is located and asked them to put you in touch with some Sea base folks, they might be able to help you scope out some options for surfing, even though they, themselves, do not offer a surf program as far as I know. They're just that helpful down there. If you call that council, ask for Teresa and let her know the crazy Michigan troop from this summer says hello.

My advice: Start looking around for other troops. I understand that your church is the CO for both your pack and the troop you describe. But really, if things aren't going to improve quickly (and 6 years is not an acceptable time span) then you do yourself and the boys in your pack no favors by persisting without looking for alternatives. Nearly every place has at least a couple of troops within driving distance, often within the same town. Find out what other troops are near you and start making arrangements to get to know them. Neither you, nor your pack, nor the families of boys in the pack, are obligated to join a specific troop, no matter whether they have the same CO or not. Time to branch out!

I think it is definitely something to be encouraged - perhaps not required though. Some years ago, as a cub leader, I tried to get parents interested in the physical fitness award, in hopes of getting the boys to try it together with their families. No dice. Maybe it is time to try again though.

Could you talk to any of the people in your CO's church who don't have boys in your pack? There may be a couple of adults with older children who would be willing to do this for 6-8 months. Or, if the CO church isn't interested, start thinking of the other social networks you have in the area. Leaders do not need to have children in the program, though in most cases I suppose this would be ideal, and they don't have to be affiliated with the CO (as long as the CO is ok with this - which most are). Also touch base with your DE and perhaps your district membership committee (if they are active). They ought to be able to give you a good read on what other units in your area are robust and might have an "extra" adult to lend a hand. Just because your son's troop is a little weak in terms of leadership right now doesn't mean that all troops in the area are. Does anyone from the pack attend roundtable? This is a good place to talk with leaders from other local packs and troops to see if they know someone who could help out too.

The pack we were part of sells popcorn - our troop does not. If you decide to set a goal for your cub scouts, keep in mind that you won't be able to force them to meet it by penalizing them. If you try, you'll end up with some people quitting scouting over popcorn. If you set a buy-out, you will have some of your wealthier parents take the attitude that they can simply buy whatever their son needs, rather than teaching him to work for what he wants in life. This is inevitable with buy-outs, whether in scouting or elsewhere. You have to decide if that's ok with you. If you set a goal or a minimum "requirement," as Greg points out there are always people who struggle to meet it for reasons that are beyond the boys' control. So it will be important to organize den- and pack-level events where all kids can participate even if their family members aren't real gung ho, or aren't well connected, or whatever. Show and sells can work, especially if you are in uniform. Pick stores where they aren't selling popcorn inside. Lowes, Home Depot, etc.. A pack or den photo display helps too so the boys can show people what they do in cub scouts. To do well, show & sells require a little advance communication with local shop owners and possibly with other packs in the area (depending on how saturated your market is). Finally, rewards - as the purpose of the popcorn sale is to raise funds for the pack and since you've suggested that money is tight ($7 dues is extraordinarily low), I recommend you look for very low cost rewards. I love the pie in the CM's face type of rewards because they are fun, simple, and cheap. But if your sale goes well and you have lots of left over money, why not spend it on something scout-related? How about buying the boys their next rank book, or their new neckerchief, or something like that? In years where our sales went really well, we used the money to fund day camp. Kids didn't necessarily care that they saved mom & dad $40 but they did "get" that they got to do fun things at camp because of the popcorn sale, especially because we had them include photos from camp on their Pack Photo Display that we set up whenever we did show & sells.

You know, this might be the wrong time for this person to be CM. She might be in that position because she couldn't say no, or she thought she'd have time and didn't realize the scope of the commitment. Or she might have felt that if she didn't do it, no one else would. Or her circumstances might have changed and she is no longer able to do it. Chances are good that she realizes she isn't doing the best job. You, as the past CM, are probably not the best person to have that conversation with her unless you are already good friends - and that doesn't sound like the case here. The difficulty is that whatever you say may come across sounding like "you are not doing it the way I did it." So a little evaluation may be in order. I don't blame you and your wife for being annoyed. I think it is reasonable for your wife (not you) to let the CM and ACM (especially the ACM) know her sentiment. But I think it needs to be the CC or the COR who has the conversation with the CM about whether CM is the right position for her. And I think you'd want to consider if there is someone else ready who will do that job if she steps down, before you push the point.

We always did what ScoutNut describes. I am not a fan of the opt-out but I guess I understand why it is popular. I really, really, am not a fan of the pay-go method for cub scouting. It penalizes the boy for something that is generally out of their control. And, as you've described it, it is also (IMO) a bit dishonest to charge the family more than the various awards actually cost. This is cub scouts we're talking about here! Awards should NOT be a profit generator for the pack.

I think I'd explain to the scout what happened and ask him, scout's honor, to please complete this requirement and touch base with you when he had. You certainly can't/shouldn't withhold his rank at this point. He'll probably understand and say "no problem." I have to agree w/ Ed that the requirement itself is a bit silly, but it is a requirement none the less.

Now hold on there Beavah, I have to say I resent the implication that I support an entitlement approach to grades (especially!) or advancement. I do not. I do think that there are times when we have to ask whether we are truly doing a service to a boy by interpreting an admittedly vague requirement in such a way that, just as he thinks he has met it, we change our interpretation to make it harder. That seems pretty unfair to me, yet it also seems to be what Kittle is describing. If a troop wants to take a hard-nosed approach from the start, I guess that's also their prerogative. But be consistent about it!

Err, pack, shall we make that the THIRTY years' war instead? At some point I guess I figure if a war is lasting for decades, 30 - 100 - what's the difference, right? But in fact it was the 30 years' war I was thinking of. I'll claim lack of sleep as my excuse, as I've been staying up late finishing Harry Potter over the last couple of nights. (Thanks LongHaul!)

Wow Trev, it appears I've been granted some sort of extraordinary ***POWER*** (said in a booming, echo-y sort of voice, with dramatic music and lightening flashes in the background). So exciting. C'mon pack, they did eventually reconcile - if only for the reasons you mention (they weren't good enough at killing each other all dead first! Stalemates often produce reconciliation because reality sets in on both sides.) But hey, today, we don't see that many places where Protestants and Catholics are going at each other with swords and bombs, now do we? A few year's ago I'd have added a caveat about N. Ireland but even that has cooled down considerably these days. And heck, I can't think of any predominately Christian countries who aim nukes at each other, either. I believe that's note worthy considering the tumultous history of Christianity. I'd have to say that if you take a very long-range view, that counts as reconciliation of a sort. But like I originally said, maybe the 100 years war isn't the best example, just the only one I could think of.

Short answer: Most of our guys are at tenderfoot around 4-8 months (after summer camp, usually) and 2nd Cl not too long after the end of their first year in the troop. Most boys are at 1st Cl. at around 18-24 months, but this varies more widely. Is 1st Year/1st Class really desirable as a goal? I'm not so sure. I like it as an emphasis (ie, we will provide opportunities for all boys to learn the basic skills through 1st Cl in their first year with the troop) but I don't see attaining the rank within that time frame as a great indicator of the success or failure of a troop program. In the last three years we've had one or two boys get 1st Cl. within 12-15 months of joining but I don't think that is reasonable (or desirable) in most cases, at least for our troop. At the end of that first year most of these guys do not have the maturity to handle the leadership expectations that tend to go to scouts 1st Cl and above. And so they are prone to sit at 1st Cl for quite a while and some of them get pretty frustrated with that. Also, the boys I know who did make 1st Cl/1st Year did so mainly because their parents pushed them very hard to do so, and not surprisingly they tend to see advancement as a race and a goal rather than a process. And then there are kids like my son, poking along, just recently made 2nd Cl after 2 1/2 years - and only then because he wanted to do a MB at camp that required him to be at least 2nd cl. It isn't a program issue - he's active and can do the skills, he's just not that interested in advancement. I had to laugh recently because part of the new Quality Unit rubric is apparently related to the % of scouts who advance a rank in a given year (or something like that - not sure of the details) and word is that boys like my son could drag a unit down!

Beavah, I had this great answer all keyed in and then my computer froze up and I lost it. Grr.. (oops, the bear again). Yes I recognize that parents need to step back and with a boy who is 14-15 I think it would be entirely appropriate for a parent in Kittle's spot to have a conversation with the boy first - see if he even wants parental involvement here. If not, then that wish needs to be respected too. But there are also times when a parent (even of a teen) needs to be an advocate. If the troop committee is bullying kids over the difference between a full pull up and half of one, then this is an appropriate time for parents (with Junior's consent) to have a quiet, yet perhaps pointed, conversation with these other adults. They may have a good reason for this policy - but they owe the boy a clear and consistent explanation of what the expectations are and what else he might do to try and meet them, and it doesn't sound like Kittle's son has received that. Now maybe bullying is too strong a term. Obviously I don't know these folks personally. But, c'mon - you aren't going to let a boy make the very first rank of boy scouting for over three years because he can't do a full pull up? That's more than a little harsh and makes me wonder whether these adults have their heads in the sand. Perhaps they do not realize the effort this boy has put into this. And yes, this supposes the boy has legitimately done everything he could do to improve his performance. But I can imagine him getting discouraged. So what have these same leaders done to try to encourage and help him? We are not here to hold the bar continually out of reach and then just let the boy figure it out on his own. We are here to help boys develop and reach and yes - eventually grasp (usually!)- things that they thought they could never accomplish on their own. This doesn't mean lowering it either, but let's at least make sure we're helping them learn how to reach it! Swimming, now, is a somewhat different issue to my mind. First, swimming is a life/survival skill, while doing a pull up is not. So it deserves a somewhat more stringent interpretation and we do a very serious dis-service to a boy by signing off on his swim requirements if he has shown improvement yet still sinks like a rock every time. Note that I'm not advocating that. Second, the chasm between having even the most basic ability to swim, and not having that basic ability, is enormous. The difference between doing half a pull up and one pull up? Not great. Probably not enough to be the difference between survival and failure to survive. IMO definitely not enough to refuse a boy rank advancement for more than 3 years, considering that the wording of this requirement is vague and lots of reasonable people interpret it differently. And third, at least boys who can't/won't swim have made it to the first rank. I don't know how others see this? But around here most troops do not view "Scout" as a rank. Perhaps this is wrong-minded of them (and me), but Scout is basically just the joining requirements and tenderfoot is seen as the first rank. So until a boy makes it to tenderfoot, he isn't very well established in a troop. Thereafter, who knows, he might be a tenderfoot for a day or for 8 years. But at least he has a foot in the door. I feel for Kittle's son not only because it sounds to me as though the committee is being a bit unreasonable and not only because I don't think it is the committee's job to decide how to interpret requirements (I think that really falls to the SM, though I hope that he'd seek to build consensus). The kicker for me is that this scout has been told by SOME of his leaders that he has met their expectations, and now SOME OTHER of his leaders have moved the bar. That's not right and they may need another adult to step in and point it out so they can all get on the same page.

Jambo, Thanks for the congrats but they are premature. My son is not anywhere near Eagle. He has been a boy scout for a little less than 3 years. He was a cub scout for 5 years before that. I hope he'll be an Eagle one day, but that's up to him and we'll see. He's not particularly driven by the advancement method, for better and for worse. No, I was sitting on an EBOR for another scout - because I am a member of our troop committee - and an active district committee member (in various guises) as well. Prior to that I was a cub leader for several years. I grew up in a scouting family. (My parents met at scout camp - Dad was on staff at the BSA camp, Mom was on staff at the neighboring GSUSA camp. My godparents were - you guessed it - scouts and then scouters.) If I'd been a boy I'd almost certainly have been a boy scout! As it is, somehow I missed out on Explorer Posts. Venturing didn't exist when I was a kid or I'd have joined that for certain. Girl scouting in my area was lame and I quit out of sheer boredom, sad to say. So although I have less experience with boy scouting than many here and I am the first to say I have a lot to learn, please don't suppose that I'm "just" a parent of a scout with no basis for analysis, either. Right now one of the things I'm working on is developing a better district recruiting plan for boy scouting. Exactly the sorts of things you mention - poor/non-existent advertizing, lack of access, and yes sometimes people's unfounded attitudes about scouting - are the issues we are trying to overcome here, as well. Right now we're working on taking advantage of community events to do our boy scout recruiting, because we too have access issues in the middle and high schools. And we want the boys to see what scouting is like for themselves - not just listen to some presentation in a classroom or auditorium. So we'll be doing a big outdoor, hands-on display/activities later this summer and again the fall. We're working on plans to do district-wide lock ins at a local sports complex for potential new boy scouts and we're helping local troops get some free media publicity for the exciting things they do (both in terms of service, and in terms of trips, events, high adventure, etc.). You are absolutely right that it is difficult to get the word out and sometimes the barriers seem ridiculous. But it isn't impossible, and as I've discovered while working on this membership plan, there is also a great deal of residual, un-tapped good will toward scouting in most communities, too. Oh and yes, my name is Lisa. the 'bob comes from "And a good old BOB WHITE too!" Everyone in my patrol became a "'bob."

Well ok, here's my historical example of reconciliation. The 100 years war ended with a compromise of sorts. Rather than rulers fighting each other and rampaging all across Europe to determine once and for all which version of Christianity was "right," they agreed that each ruler would get to choose for his or her own country and they'd quit killing each other (as much) over this issue. Results: arguably, the growth of the nation-state, perhaps some of the Enlightenment era philosophy that forms a basis for western political systems still today, and relative stability and peace for most people, unless you happened to be in the religious minority within your own country in which case all bets were off. Not that I think that's a great example, mind you - sort of a "live and let live" attitude brought about by exhaustion as much as anything else. But we've got to work with what we have, right?

Excellent point, Tami. If you're going to disclose your budget, disclose enough details so people understand the bigger picture. I'd also encourage you to disclose how and where their dues money is being used. A lot of people - especially at the cub level where many parents are new to scouts - wrongly assume that the basic registration fees all go to the pack. In fact, that money is going off to national and does nothing to support the pack in any direct sense.

I don't know of any cub packs who require or expect the cub uniform pants either, and I know quite a few packs. Let's keep in mind that cub scouts are a little different from boy scouts. A lot of families in cub scouts are not sure yet whether they're fully committed to scouting - the boys and the parents are test driving the program. By the time people get to boy scouting, they tend to be hooked, and willing to pay a little more for the pants. Sometimes people make the comparison to sports and I understand that - you don't play soccer without shin guards and cleats. But yeah, when Johnny is 7 years old, you also don't buy the most expensive shin guards and cleats you can find. And around here, a lot of the rec leagues help by providing several sets of different sized shin guards to each team (just like little league used to supply us with batting helmets and catcher's gear). The "uniform" for most rec soccer leagues consists of a cheap T shirt. More expensive sports like football and hockey typically have most of the gear available either for free or for rent just during the season, rather than forcing everyone to buy it new every year. Some cub packs run uniform banks - many do not. I do know troops (my son's included) who expect the boys to wear BSA pants and I have no problem with that. But they camp in their uniforms every month. In addition to weekly troop meetings, they hold occasional separate patrol meetings, PLCs, do service projects, do fund raising, have other activities, and travel in uniform. So they wear that thing probably 12-15 days out of a typical month. In contrast, most cub packs I know operate on a more limited basis. They may have 2-3 den meetings and a pack meeting each month. They also do some service, fund raising, etc., but generally they are not as active as troops are. The cub scouts probably only wear that uniform 3-5 times a month. And they're already spending more money on the changing neckers, slides, hats, and books for each rank than most boy scouts do (once you get your slide and book you're set and most troops don't even use neckers and hats - but those who do, don't generally require new ones for each rank). Now yes, they could wear the traditional cub pants to church or to school. But I've never liked the quality of the cub pants. They required a lot of altering to fit most of the boys in my son's den, the material wasn't that great (too polyester-y), and they cost more than better-quality navy pants from practically any dept. store. Not to mention that very few cub-aged boys in this area wear dressy navy pants to school, and if they did, they'd get ruined on the playground or in the art room in no time anyway. So - $40 plus alterations for low quality pants that the boy is only going to wear a few times before outgrowing them? Many families will just say no. The fact that national supply has come up with the switchbacks for cubs too is a good sign - those are pants that a boy might actually wear in day-to-day life too. But I still doubt that the cub switchbacks will sell as well as the boy scout switchbacks, because boy scout troops are more active and have more opportunities to wear the uniform, period. I have noticed, though, that when you get to webelos and you start telling parents that the boys will need the olive pants/shorts for boy scouts, then the parents are somewhat more willing to purchase them. Maybe by that point they are more committed to the program? I don't know for sure. Please don't take this as anti-uniform. I have come to respect those who are in favor of uniforming in general, and my views on the scout uniform in particular have evolved a bit. But I'm not sure it is realistic to get worked up over the blue cub pants, because all the evidence I've seen suggests that there are many parents who just are NOT going to go along with this.

Kittle, THREE AND A HALF YEARS???!!! It is time to tell these folks to knock it off in no uncertain terms. Ohhhh, my mother bear instinct is coming out. Print off our replies and show them to your son's SM. Let him know that this is past the point of ridiculous. Remind him of the first-year, first-class emphasis coming down from BSA. Even if you/the troop don't fully buy into that emphasis, 3 1/2 years for a boy to make TENDERFOOT (assuming he is honestly trying) is just wrong. Remind him that it is his job, NOT the committee's, to set the standard for a sign-off. If all you've said about this in the past is correct, these folks are so hung up on their skewed view of advancement that they've lost sight of the larger aims of scouting. Last I checked, our aim was NOT to beat boys down because they can't do pull-ups "well enough" for some committee member (boy, I'm tempted to say that committee member had better be able to do the pull ups too). What on earth is wrong with these people?

I'm in agreement, John. Another way to think about this is to consider the popularity of BSA high adventure programs. These do not generally include luxury accommodations and in fact may be pretty far from that standard. Rather, they are popular because of the program and the challenge that they offer to the scouts. Similarly, one of the most popular "elective" MBs for boys in our troop is the wilderness survival MB. Hardly about having access to flush toilets and A/C cabins! I've known camps with gorgeous facilities and weak programs. Yes, they may do ok in terms of filling spaces, but often they have a very high staff turnover rate from one year to the next, and few returning campers. That, to me, is a sign of an unsuccessful camp in all ways except, perhaps, making money. And honestly, even upscale camps are not usually big money makers! A strong program and a great staff can make up for a multitude of minor shortcomings on facilities. The same just cannot be said in reverse.