Lisabob

Ed, I agree that BALOO needs to be more widely available. But I don't know if we could realistically fold it into the existing basic leader training, which is already quite long. Maybe one option would be to offer EITHER NLE OR BALOO in the morning segment (BALOO for those who have already done NLE), and then position-specific training in the afternoon. While I'm generally in favor of online training, I'm not sure BALOO makes sense to do that way. I did BALOO several years ago now. But I recall having a fairly active, hands-on session. We talked gear with people who knew a thing or two about what to buy and not buy. They had examples of everything from tents to backpacks to stoves there to check out, hands on. We did a little bit of cooking. We wrote a camping plan. We set up a duty roster. All of this might be difficult to duplicate on line and was of use to people who had either very limited camping experience, or who were not used to BSA's way of doing things and regulations - ie, most cub leaders!

Sorry it took me a little while to find this thread - somehow I tend to overlook the areas that are not part of the "regular" categories of this forum. This is exactly what I am wondering about though. In the axe yard thread I asked about a scenario where a scout with significant behavioral/emotional disabilities should or shouldn't be barred from using sharp objects like axes. When dealing with behavioral issues, how do we decide whether a condition is likely to be permanent? It could be years before we know or concede that and even then, things might change with the advent of new medications. This seems like it would be easier to figure out with regard to physical conditions. In the meantime, this scout will be unable to advance past tenderfoot. Do we wait until the scout (or his mom, in this case) is so frustrated with the program that they demand we "do something?" I would prefer to see the troop be a little more pro-active, but that then requires an acknowledgment (by mom first) that this is likely a permanent disability. And I also don't know that the troop ought to be in a position of telling parents and boys to seek that diagnosis. So I guess I'm wondering how to find the balancing point here. What sort of alternative requirements would make sense anyway? I can see substituting hiking or cycling for a scout who is unable to swim for whatever reason - all physical activities and we do make those three MBs optional (pick one) for Eagle. I'm not sure what a logical substitution for knife/axe/saw handling would be. Lashing? Cooking? Some other camp skill?

Well ok gwd, why didn't YOU want that sort of a troop for YOUR son? Some parents do want that sort of experience and you probably will be happy to see them go to a troop that is willing to cater to them. Many more parents will be happy to see the program run the way it is "supposed" to be, with all the opportunities for character development, citizenship training, and personal fitness training, which are after all the "aims" of scouting. Don't sell parents (or their boys) short. Tell 'em what your troop's program is designed to offer and let them see for themselves. I think you'll find you are attracting people who are committed to the real scouting program.

I agree with 1hour - focus on your troop's strengths rather than talking about other troops' weaknesses when recruiting webelos and their parents. I found myself doing a lot of that this year, but I'm also lucky in that the five troops in our area are all pretty decent. But for this woman, who is asking you to sit in judgment of the troop they joined, I suggest you help her get signed up for troop committee training or something. Let her hear from someone besides yourself how things are "supposed" to be done. Maybe continue to help her understand how YOUR troop works, but at some point you may have to be honest that she's putting you in an uncomfortable position by constantly asking if the troop her son joined is "doing it right." You know, I was pretty skeptical when you mentioned in another thread that a bunch of boys from the other troop were going to camp with you this summer instead. But I'm beginning to wonder if they won't simply decide to switch to your troop as a result of all this.

GSUSA, not GSA. I apologize. And I don't doubt that the idea isn't original - but it was the first time I'd heard that variant, myself. Usually what I get is "why can't girls join the cub pack?" and not "why won't the BSA run an all girl program?" I don't know a whole lot about the GSUSA program, other than that I was in it for a couple of years as a youth (yes, I quit when I could stand the cookies and crafts no longer. I joined 4H for a while instead.), and what I hear - repeatedly from other parents with sons in the BSA and daughters in the GSUSA. Of course, this latter source may be biased. But I keep hearing the same things. I'm told that parents and family are not welcomed, unless they sign up as leaders. I'm told that the area council provides poor to non-existent service, support, and training, making being a leader very unattractive. I'm told that the program is weak for younger girls especially. If half of all that is true, it bodes poorly for the program. Unfortunately, telling the parent of a 9 year old to wait until she's 14 and then she can do all this cool stuff under the umbrella of the BSA is not a very appealing answer! As we know with boys, those who aren't involved in scouting at a younger age, or who drop out at a younger age, are far less likely to return as middle schoolers and high schoolers. The same is probably true for most girls.

First off, I apologize for being complicit in the temporary hijacking of the other thread. I was going to apologize over there, except then I'd still be hijacking, wouldn't I. Here is what the BSA has to say about the purposes of scouting: "The Boy Scouts of America was incorporated to provide a program for community organizations that offers effective character, citizenship, and personal fitness training for youth. Specifically, the BSA endeavors to develop American citizens who are physically, mentally, and emotionally fit; have a high degree of self-reliance as evidenced in such qualities as initiative, courage, and resourcefulness; have personal values based on religious concepts; have the desire and skills to help others; understand the principles of the American social, economic, and governmental systems; are knowledgeable about and take pride in their American heritage and understand our nation's role in the world; have a keen respect for the basic rights of all people; and are prepared to participate in and give leadership to American society." Source: http://www.scouting.org/factsheets/02-503.html Reading the above, what strikes me is that religious belief plays almost no role in the purposes of scouting, as defined by the BSA itself. There is really no reason that a boy couldn't benefit from ALL of the above goals no matter what the status of his personal religious belief - or lack thereof. The one phrase above that mentions religion is quite vague and subject to interpretation, so let me ask this: what values come to mind for you when you read that little bit about "have personal values based on religious concepts?" Which personal values, and what are "religious concepts" anyway?

While I agree, Ed, that it isn't always bullying, in this case I believe it was. The boys who were doing this tend to gang up on one or two others (not always the same one or two others) and make it a very unpleasant atmosphere. You know at this age having your sexuality called into question - repeatedly and in graphic detail using some pretty nasty suggestions about who, what, and where - is probably one of the worst things that can happen to a boy, not to mention just being rude and inappropriate. Add to it an unwillingness to cooperate on anything that the targets are trying to do from cooking to taking tents down, constant criticism, swearing, and just generally berating the victims. This is from people in the same patrol. I know if it were me I'd have a very hard time trusting these guys in the future when we were supposed to work together. As a parent I admit that I'm so tempted to deal with this by calling these boys' mothers and letting them know what their little darlings were doing. I've known their moms for 5 or 6 years and I think they'd be most unhappy to hear it. On the other hand I think my son would be absolutely mortified if I did that and I'm trying to respect that he wants to handle it himself. Also, I'm not happy that he and the other boy being targeted responded in kind. We've discussed that. From his view though he felt he had no good options. Largely due to the way schools around here paper over these issues with ineffective "anti bullying" programs, he doesn't trust the adults in charge to take the problem seriously or to be able to "fix" it. And he might be right too. Even assuming the best intentions, adults cannot be everywhere, even less so in scouting. As for the the senior youth leadership of the troop, they were pretty much absent on this last campout too and the few older youth who were there are the types who are more likely to join in than put a stop to it. Delaying advancement is an option but it is a long-range consequence when I think shorter-term responses are necessary in order to effect change in behavior. You bet, though, that this is something that will be in my mind when scouts come up for advancement. I don't know what I would advocate that the troop do - I'm just unhappy to find we keep dealing with this same issue over and over again. And you know what really gets me? One of the instigators is mad because once again he wasn't elected to be PL! You'd think the cause and effect relationship might start to sink in here after a while.

That's kind of an interesting point Oren and I'll buy that moms and dads tend to see things a bit differently. What's funny is that I *have* had dads of new scouts mention this to me - at least one or two every year for the last three years now. Maybe they're just less likely to say anything to other guys? Anyway, my kid's biggest "success" to date: learning to make pancakes! This cracks me up since we do make pancakes at home...not hard...but they did them at a campout last fall and I swear we had to have pancakes for about three weeks straight - cooked by chef son of course - after that. At last night's troop meeting after our new scouts' first campout a couple of new parents mentioned they'd been eating foil dinners for a couple nights as a direct reflection of their sons' patrol menu from the campout. Good signs, all.

I had a funny conversation with someone today. The dad has a son who just crossed from cubs into boy scouts and a daughter who is in girl scouts. They are very disappointed with the girl scout program. Poor organization, poor leader training and support, not enough outdoor and adventure emphasis, GSA's stance discouraging parental involvement, etc.. I was expecting to hear the dad lament that his daughter can't join cub scouts and boy scouts but no. Instead he said that what he wishes for is a parallel all-girl program, just run by the BSA! Hmm, talk about potential for growth...of course the GSA would probably have a cow.

Gonzo, here's where I think things get interesting. I don't believe that allowing atheists to join would necessarily mean removing religion from the BSA. (although I don't think most units - perhaps outside of those affiliated with the LDS church - actually pay more than the barest lip service to religious ideals of any kind anyway.) To my way of thinking, the problem with the DRP and in this aspect of the BSA policy isn't that the BSA is a private religious club (however dubious that claim of centrality may be). The problem is that the DRP suggests that one must be personally religious in order to be worthy of association with others who are already in the club. Why not throw the doors open to atheists, with the understanding that there are some elements of the program that ARE religious in nature, and that some units stress these more, or less, than others? In other words, no need to change the actual program, simply the entry requirements. Those who can stomach, if not downright embrace, the program will join. Those who find it offensive, won't. But they won't be able to say that the BSA kept them from joining - they will have made their own choice. Now Merlyn may not agree with that, I don't know. But I do think it is a fairly reasonable position.

Do you attend the monthly roundtable meetings? **Seldom Do you even know what they are? **Yes Does your roundtable staff conduct good meetings? **Sometimes Are they worthwhile attending? **Sometimes, but my experience is that RTs are nothing like the interesting and often thought-provoking exchange of ideas that occurs here on this forum. In the past our RT was located about a 30-40 minute drive from my town and was always on the one night of the week that was the most difficult for me to attend. So I seldom went. When I did, the program was of variable quality. Cub RT seems more focused; these are people who want ideas and answers right now. Troop RT always strikes me as mainly an old-boy network/social hour punctuated by long-winded speechifying about this one's or that one's pet project or gripe over how things "used to be better." I really don't have patience for that. Especially since my poor kid has to attend with me if I'm going to get there at all. Starting this month our district RT are moving to a location that is a 10 minute walk from my front door. They're still on the worst night of the week for me and I'd still have to drag my son with me in order to attend. But, without the driving time it goes from a 3-4 hour commitment to a more reasonable length and we'd be home before 10pm on a school night. So I am considering giving it another try. Maybe the program has improved, we'll see. (ever the optimist!)

Careful how you define that "we" there in your last sentence Gonzo. The sentiment you express is far from unanimous even within BSA circles. For what it is worth, where I live (not a terribly conservative area) Christian groups and other religious groups routinely use the schools to host meetings. In fact many churches use the school gym or cafeteria on the weekends and evenings rather than having their own building. Students are allowed to start religious clubs such as bible study, etc.. The rule is, if students can have other clubs at school then they can also have these sorts of clubs AS LONG AS they do not actively seek to proselytize and they can get a faculty member to serve as their adviser. I believe there was actually a Supreme Court case dealing with this very question in the mid-90s but I'd have to look it up and I'm feeling disinclined to do so right this moment. But the larger problem with letting "the community" decide who should or shouldn't use school property and for what purposes is that it depends on how you define "community." If you aren't very careful then you can easily end up with a tyranny of the majority where only like-minded folks are "admitted" into the working definition of "community." But reality just isn't that simple because even the most outwardly homogeneous communities include people of different viewpoints, orientations, religious beliefs, and opinions. They may get trampled in a majoritarian model of decision making though.

Hey now, I've met plenty of dads who freaked about this stuff too! Not just moms, and not all moms either. Maybe more accurate to say "suburban parents?"

That's really neat. Thanks OGE!

I don't know what I would say to someone else's child. I might tell my own son that a) life isn't always fair and that b) respect (self respect and respect for others) doesn't come from getting a piece of cloth, it comes from living up to the promise that piece of cloth represents. Some people might be satisfied with pretending, but I'd encourage my child to strive for true respect rather than the just the trappings. I think it is tougher to know what to say to other people's kids because you don't want to appear to be supporting rumors or maliciously undermining a kid who (as you said, like it or not) is now an Eagle Scout and what you say to a group of boys will spread quickly. More so if you are a respected leader in their eyes. What you say to your own child is between you and him.

Just one thing? That's tough... OK I'm going to cheat. I want to change "just one thing" for cubs and "just one thing" for boy scouts, and "just one thing" for the BSA in general. Maybe these are only half baked and they'd probably change if you asked again in a week or so. In General: I'd drop the DRP. Boy Scouts: I'd make the advancement process more routinely rigorous, less of a potential rubber stamp. I'd allow troops to include the SPL, ASPL, or PL in a portion of the BOR - not to give them a veto, but to include them in a discussion of scout skill and scout spirit. They will have a better sense of how a scout is doing than some committee members, who might not ever camp or even attend weekly troop meetings. Cubs: I'd require some sort of pack-level training to include all parents, or as many as possible, whether they're leaders or not. I'd do this on an annual or biannual basis. Have a roving district training team to deliver it to each pack. Too many parents in the cub program have no idea how the program works because no one tells them (leaders never went to training and are "winging it"), and the results are predictable: we lose a lot of cub scouts. Those who stick around typically don't find out about the many support services and programs that the district provides until they've struggled to re-invent the wheel on their own for a year or more. Also many younger parents are having their first go-round with organizational behavior when their kid joins a pack, and it isn't always pretty. So do a "cub pack challenge" sort of training to teach them a) the program and b) team building/recruiting/how to work together. (Yes I know some of this is covered in pack committee training, but not all, and often not well, and usually only a couple times a year, removed from the pack setting, without non-leader parents present.) This assumes that it would be a high quality training, and that it would be delivered effectively by people who are good trainers. That's probably a dangerous assumption. So maybe I'll add one more change: I'd wave my magic wand over district training teams everywhere and make them all competent!

If this young man has been doing this for five years then I doubt there is much that you, or anyone else, can do at this point to make him stop. Either he is going to come to a realization on his own or he isn't. I think you give it one last, good faith effort though. You bring in his parents, another ASM who will back you, the COR, and the scout. You lay down the rules. "Continue this behavior and we will send you home." Maybe require a parent to attend all events with him. Hand him a list of other troops in the area and invite him to contact them if he gives you a hard time. But if these other troops wouldn't put up with it, why are you? It sounds to me that while he may have checked off most of the boxes, he is still a long ways away from being an Eagle. Make sure you explain that to him, his parents, and your CC. The CC is an ex-SM of your troop for a reason, right? People wanted to see some change and you're the one they chose to do it, right? Maybe get a UC or the COR to talk with him and remind him (perhaps not so gently) of this. As SM you work "for" the committee but you, not the CC, are in charge of the boy-side of the program. Chances are good he knows what he's doing to undermine you and needs to be told in clear terms to knock it off. As for your own son, that's truly unfortunate. I hope you'll be able to find a way to work things out so that he can continue in relative peace. Of course I don't know you and your son but I think pulling him from the meetings and only allowing him to attend camp outs might send the wrong message though, possibly to him and definitely to other boys.

A couple of other questions based on watching mediocre new scout programs at two camps. 1) How big is their program? Would your couple of boys be lost in a sea of other new scouts? What's the ratio of leaders/staff to new scouts in the program? 2) If they're doing MBs or some other program feature instead: are these new scouts going to thrive on that, or is being thrown into the mix with a bunch of older, better prepared scouts likely to intimidate them? (this is more about the personalities and maturity level of the new guys) I think one of the allures of the new scout program is that it is relatively "safe" for these younger guys, many of whom are away at camp for the first time in their lives. But not all boys need/want that protection, and not all programs do a very good job of even that, let alone of teaching skill.

How lenient: A young man fails to request permission to enter the yard. While in the yard he fails to assure clear distance around him (other people/objects) prior to using an axe. No one was hurt but someone else was in his way and could have been hurt. He repeatedly embeds his axe in the ground. He jokes about "going after" another scout with the axe. This is a scout with diagnosed, serious, emotional and behavioral impairments. He is prone to impulsiveness, he is unpredictable, and he can sometimes be oblivious to consequences or to how his actions are perceived by others. He has a temper sometimes. I am trying to imagine how a scout like this can be anything other than a safety problem waiting to happen in an axe yard. Does that mean he will never make it beyond tenderfoot? Are the alternate requirements for scouts with permanent disabilities something to consider in a case like this?

I need to voice a little bit of frustration here. Why is it that 11-12-13 year old boys seem to believe that the way to "lead" or assert power is to call each other names, use foul language, engage in incessant conjecture about other people's sexual preferences, put downs, etc.? I'm not talking about a gentle joking-as-inclusion sort of way, I'm talking about nasty stuff here. And at what age do they begin to outgrow this? We've had a number of talks in the last year in the troop about bullying. We've had a couple of younger scouts (new cross overs) leave the troop. We've had a few more come close. Every time I think we've sort of pounded it into the guys' heads I am disabused of that notion by some fresh incident. Most recently today I got an earful from my son about some things that were said at his last campout. Unfortunately, while my son and another boy apparently were the targets, they also admit that they flung some rather undesirable rejoinders back, thus escalating the situation and removing them from the high ground. There are some "ring leader" types of boys in this situation (two brothers in two different patrols) but I cannot realistically say it is only those boys who are doing it. It seems like this is the way middle school aged boys treat each other. Among parents there is a division between those who think "boys will be boys" and that some are just too thin skinned on one hand, and those who are appalled at this sort of incessant behavior (often just under the surface until all of a sudden, things explode) on the other hand. What do you do that works? Maybe there isn't much that works. I know we've talked about this before on this forum, I'm just feeling frustrated is all.

Who supervises your axe yard - scout, adult, both? How lenient are you with younger scouts (finishing 1st year) when it comes to safety and judgment errors? We've been talking about scouts with ADHD and other disorders in some other threads - in this context with tools that demand respect, how do you deal with a scout who has impulse control issues or difficulty with understanding consequences (medically diagnosed problems, not "typical kid" stuff)? Bearing in mind that banning a kid from an axe yard indefinitely means he'll never advance to 2nd Class, what is a reasonable approach here?

Terry, I'll bite on that last one. Here are some things I personally really enjoy about this forum and some of our "gang:" Eamonn, I love your stories about Rory and your Big Walks! I appreciate your input as someone who has seen the business side of district and council matters. And if it weren't for your posts about the Ship, I am pretty sure I would still not even know that Sea Scouting exists, despite living in a Great Lakes State where you'd think there might be a higher profile for Sea Scouts. Beavah, I appreciate that you want to take a look at things from a practical perspective, even though we may differ with regard to prescriptions. Getting down to brass tacks (how does this work in your troop/pack/crew/ship) is important and in my experience that gets glossed over too much. Oh and I'm glad to see that your Minnesota rodent accent appears to be fading a bit! Give it another year and we'll have you completely cured o' that, eh? (joking...) Eagledad and SR540Beaver, your advice from the perspective of folks who have been there and tried that over the years is extremely helpful to me and probably to others too who (like me) are still stumbling through and trying to figure things out for the first time. GWD, I appreciate your perspective as an SM for a small troop. Personally, I'm always happy to hear about the many successes you have had with the troop in the last year or so. But it is also helpful to me to understand the variety of experiences that fellow scouts and scouters have, rather than only having my own experiences to rely upon when dealing with a problem or situation. Oops, I've exceeded my quota of three...sorry. But really, sappy as it might sound, I view all of you many regulars who make up this forum as some of my most valuable scouting resources. I really don't have anywhere else where I can post a question or thought about scout-related issues and expect to get thoughtful and often helpful responses. Our area roundtable doesn't cut it, and sometimes it is hard to discuss unit-level issues with other Scouters in the unit - just too close to have any perspective and there's always a worry about hurt feelings having bad long-term consequences. So, I'm very glad to have found this forum and thanks to Terry and the rest of you for the time and resources you put into it.

Yeah I actually like the online version pretty well. It is certainly better than the initial YP training I got, which was to sit in a darkened room, watch the video, and pick up a "trained" card on my way out. For that, I spent 2+ hours in the car driving to and from training?! Additionally, when you are dealing with an all-volunteer training staff you get some good, some bad, some really bad. At least with the online course everyone who takes it gets the same basic information, presented in a reasonably competent manner. So while there are always advantages to doing a well-taught "live" course in almost any subject, I've come to be an advocate for the online YPT as a reasonable substitution.

Most summer camps offer a provo program for scouts who want to attend without their troop. Why don't they utilize that, instead of making you responsible for filling in another troop's program deficiencies?

Yeah I wouldn't be feeling too sorry for the DE right now. In the other thread you mention that there is a new troop starting up that is going to make your own troop's continued existence more difficult. Guess who makes these choices about starting new units...that's right, your DE. And he's upset that an event he planned last minute (instead of doing the hard job of recruiting and training an activities chair who could have done this months ago as would have been appropriate) isn't working out well, thus making HIM look bad. Tough. Time to talk turkey with him. Districts exist to support units, not the other way around. What has he done for you lately?