Lisabob

I worked on camp staffs for years in varying capacities, many of them unpaid and most of the rest seriously under-paid. We worked hard but I have extremely fond memories and it was such a learning experience for me. At 14, there are things you can only learn from someone other than your parents (well that was true for me anyway) and camp is a great place to learn those lessons. Hopefully your son will enjoy it too. Congrats to him!

So I guess in your case DH could double as "Designated Hitter" too then! Stick with it gwd, it sounds like you have a great group of scouts and parents. And they sound like they'd do most anything to keep you!

About 45 scouts 5 "regular" patrols 1 NSP patrol 1 SPL/ASPLs patrol Age-wise, most of our guys are 11-15 with one patrol of mostly high school juniors & seniors about to age out. 10-15 ASMs and 10-12 committee members Some ASMs have specifics: 1 for new scouts, 5 patrol advisors, 1 "Doc Boo Boo," 1 adult QM, etc.. Several are floaters. Same on the committee side, some with portfolios, some who pinch hit.

How far do you let boy-led go? Well I think you set the parameters: here's what we (adults) can support. And then you let them fill in the details. You have a small troop so it might be a serious burden on the adults to do both. Sometimes we have to make choices. OK, that's part of the parameters. What do your boys want to do more? If they really prefer to do the "shooteree" then that's fine as long as it is their choice and not because some district big wig brow beats them into attending. If they say sorry, we already have a plan for that month and we're sticking with it, maybe whoever ends up planning next year's district event will understand the need to get the dates out in a more timely fashion. If they decide to cancel the spelunking this month, is there a chance that they could schedule it for another time (say, over the summer or early in next year's calendar) to make it up, if they wanted to?

I suspect it is as much about the age as any generational thing or dislike of the outdoors. Give him a little time to grow on his own and you may be surprised to see him return to those same activities that, right now, he has no interest in pursuing. In the meantime, there are at least other people's kids with whom to share your love of the outdoors! And they're lucky to have you around.

Hi baden, Wow, are you ever tempted to ask them how in the world their district functions with all these key positions opening up so often? On the one hand, it's nice to be wanted. On the other hand, I think if I were you I'd take what you wrote here, slap it in an email, and forward it to your DE, FD, DC, and anybody else with even a minimal sense of humor who is likely to come begging for volunteers! Or else, start wearing disguises to RT and sneaking in through the side door when no one's watching...

I agree, there's no reason you should step down because of this, unless you actually WANT to step down. I wonder, though, if part of your concern has to do with the fact that you're a female SM in an overwhelmingly male setting? I know for myself, there are times when I have been concerned that some of "the guys" would perceive me as being less able or interested in some activity just due to my gender. Like, for example, the time a Scouter was giving his recruiting speech to a bunch of us and he singled us "ladies" out for tasks such as refreshment coordinator and secretary because "you moms may not want to camp or hike but there are still domestic tasks to be done." Grr. GRRR. (hackles raised) Yeah, I laugh with him about it now. So I think that if I were in your shoes, the concern you voiced would cross my mind too. And then, as others suggest, I would try to know my own limits, be reasonably open with others about them (esp. the boys but also their parents - kids tend to parrot their parents' opinions, after all), and get on with being as good an SM as possible.

I still haven't heard from anyone regarding what an SE does? Any input there? (other than making the life of a DE miserable)

Thanks everyone for your responses. I will share these with our committee chair as we move forward. I really appreciate your willingness to offer your views and experience in this, as with all things scout-related.

We have a policy on the books that says any scout who misses more than 50% of meetings and camp outs may be excluded from certain "activities" that the troop holds a couple times a year, such as lock ins, bowling nights, troop night at the movies, etc.. These "activities" are generally highly popular so the feeling is, this is an incentive for boys to attend at least half the "regularly scheduled" events. Although it is on the books, and occasionally comes up for discussion, in two years I haven't seen it enforced yet. And I think it may be counter productive. If we have kids on the fence about the troop and then we tell them they can't come to their favorite activity of the whole year, well why would they stay? Alternately, if our meetings & campouts are that unappealing, then maybe something's wrong there. We have no % rule for rank advancement.

OK LongHaul, this is my totally anecdotal sense of some of the things a DE should be doing, based primarily on what I've seen OUR DE do over the last 5 years. Others are welcome to fill in details or contradict based on their superior knowledge (I mean that!) of how things are "supposed" to be. Our DE attends Roundtables. He doesn't run them (RT commissioners do that) but he does provide information/announcements about what's going on at the pro level in the district. He also fills in for district volunteers who can't get to RT, to deliver their announcements about upcoming programs. Our DE helps recruit district volunteers. I'm not sure that this is technically in his job description but I know he does it. In some ways, he's in the best position to do this because he comes into contact with a wide swath of people, unlike most of us who are only familiar with our unit or our community. Our DE advises volunteer-run district committees. I'm on the district membership committee (still...another thread for another day!). When the DE comes to our meetings, he is there to help us understand what the district's goals are as they pertain to membership issues, what the boundaries are in terms of BSA rules, etc., and to help us see how our membership ideas or programs or services either dovetail or (sometimes) conflict with other district activity from other committees. He gives us the larger district & sometimes council picture that those of us on the committee do not have. Our DE helps various district committee chairs determine a program or set goals for the year. He provides the larger district, council, and BSA context in which to do this. Our DE attends most council-level meetings as a voice for the district and again, as an advisor to council-level volunteers. Our DE sometimes acts as a UC ought to, helping units solve their various problems and answering questions for unit leaders - owing, perhaps, to the weakness in our UC program. Sometimes he does so because the problem is beyond the UC's ability to resolve, particularly if things look like the unit might fold. Our DE often helps do unit-level FOS presentations. Our DE helps volunteers start new units. Our DE helps units smooth over relations with their COs when things are not going well. While I am fairly sure he doesn't meet with each CO every year (as apparently he is supposed to do), I know that he is willing to meet with a CO when problems arise. Our DE makes sure that district services such as leader training are provided by the volunteers. Our DE fills in the gaps where volunteers didn't do their jobs or where no one would volunteer for some reason to do a task. Our DE attends practically all district events from district pinewood derby to district cub day camp to district klondike to...you get the idea. He's always there, always willing to lend a hand with anything the volunteers need at the last minute. Our DE has served on the council Wood Badge staff though not as CD. Oh. And our DE makes A LOT of phone calls to check up on district volunteers. Sometimes maybe too many...I prefer to sleep more than this guy apparently does. Now our SE? I honestly have NO IDEA what he does. But if I had any poetic skill what so ever, I'd be penning my "Ode to a Good DE" right now!

LongHaul, it's funny that you chose that particular example. I work in a university where our last Dean was chosen by fiat by the university president, with no input from either faculty or students (via their student gov't). Both groups are angry and both have demanded input into the process in the future. And I happen to think both are correct to do so. The Dean is also harmed by the process that the president chose because he has no loyalty from anyone (except, perhaps, the president). He is widely viewed as the president's lapdog, imposed upon us, rightly or wrongly so. At the same time though, universities do not purport to be "student led" or even "faculty led" (to the utter shock and dismay of some of my colleagues!) in the same way that troops claim to be "boy led." So I do think there's a limit to the comparison. I guess as a troop we are extraordinarily fortunate. We have a deep, talented, and functional pool of ASMs and committee members to draw from. With few exceptions, just about any one of them would do a reasonably good job and several would do a great job. All give as freely as they can of their time, skill, and experience. To the extent that rifts occur, they are minor as most everyone recognizes that each other member has his or her heart in the right place. One thing that has come up though, is finding ways to give more authority to the boys (to be "boy led" in a more meaningful way). So when the PLC requested a voice in this process and framed their request in the context of being boy-led, it was something people at least wanted to give some thought to rather than say "no."

Interesting feedback and please keep it coming. To answer ASM915's question, yes all three are ASMs with the troop and longtime scouters. All have been trained for their positions and have a record of doing their jobs well. Two have boys still in the troop and one's son has aged out but the adult has remained active. All three are well liked and respected by adults and youth alike. Although I have my preferences, at the end of the day I'd be happy to see any of them as SM and I think most other people feel that way too. We really are lucky. Eamonn, I understand where you are coming from. Although (given the above) I'm not so worried about that right now, I can see where it might be a problem in future years when we might have fewer excellent candidates for the position. Or, for that matter, when we might have boys on the PLC who could be less interested in asserting themselves in a reasonably mature kind of way. How would you propose, then, to take the boys' views into account in the nominating process, if not by granting them an opportunity to interview candidates and to have a vote (we're talking one of probably 12-15 votes here - the committee is large)? Or were you saying they shouldn't have a voice in the nominating process at all? I'm not sure.

We're in the process of looking for a new SM because our current SM is stepping down after 2 years of service (it has been the norm for people to serve 2 year terms in this troop and while I see both good and bad sides to this, that's how it is.) This year, the PLC asked to have a direct voice in the process. Specifically, they want to know who the candidates are; they want the candidates to address them at a PLC; and they've requested some sort of a "vote" in the process. One proposal is that, after hearing from the candidates, the PLC would hold their own anonymous vote and the SPL would then be charged with voting however the majority of the PLC did, at the troop committee meeting's vote. All of the voting would be anonymous and only the SPL would know for sure how the PLC decided (or whether the SPL was true to that decision, for that matter.) The rationale is, after all, it is a boy-led troop so shouldn't they have a voice in who the most important adult leader will be? This was brought up by a couple of boys on the PLC and not by an adult. The committee is considering whether to agree to some, all, or none of these. Having looked at the information in the troop committee guidelines, it seems there's some room for interpretation here. I am aware that the ultimate choice in SM is made by the CO, in consultation with the Committee Chair, but in our case, the CO is uninvolved and they'll go along with whomever the CC tells them to pick. So it's back to the committee to make the choice. How would you feel about the committee giving the troop youth leadership a direct role in this process as suggested above? There is division on our committee as to whether this is "bending the rules" or maybe breaking them, and also whether it is a good idea ("are the boys mature enough?"). There is a concern that this is a "slippery slope" to, well, I'm not sure what. I'm seeking input and perspective. By the way - we have maybe three candidates who want to be SM and (in my view anyway) they'd all do a good job, though they have very different strengths and visions. Our committee is also large and nearly everybody on the committee is actively involved in doing something to benefit the troop - not a bunch of "ghost" members. Even assuming the SPL did get a vote it most likely wouldn't change the outcome anyway.

Eamonn makes a good point. I feel I kind of know what the DE should be doing because I've interacted a lot with our DE. I know for a fact that our DE - probably like many others - ends up doing things that, ideally, we volunteers are supposed to do because (as a district) we didn't/couldn't/wouldn't do it. I admit I have very little idea of what the SE is supposed to do! Or how, exactly, being a field director is different from being a DE. We have a district that has a FD and no DE, while other districts in the council have DEs and no FD. So I'd be curious to know what the FD is actually supposed to be responsible for too! Maybe our professional staff doesn't get the respect they deserve (?) precisely because so few of us understand their jobs and for the most part they don't take the time to explain their jobs to us. Anyone here care to enlighten me?

We lost a young scout and an ASM as a result of this sort of talk last spring on consecutive camp outs. The scout was offended and shocked, and the parent wasn't willing to allow his child to spend a lot of time in an environment where that sort of behavior was the norm. The boys who were using this kind of language the most were also younger scouts in the same NSP as the boy who quit. The SM decided to hold up some of them on advancement (scout spirit) and things improved mildly for a little while. But I don't think we've effected any sort of lasting change. Just the other night my son was telling me about some of the vile things some of these younger guys were saying (in a troop meeting! not even on camp outs!) and how difficult it was for him - not much older and a PL trying to be responsible - to try to stop it. He didn't feel he had the tools or ability to do much about it, to his frustration. Now on one hand, some kids are surprisingly sheltered and apparently have never ridden a school bus! On the other hand, there's really no excuse for this sort of talk. Looking back, I think there was insufficient attention to setting the right tone with our new scouts from the start. Nobody - adults or older youth - made a big deal about any of this until after that one scout and his dad had quit, although it isn't as though no one was aware of the language (the dad had brought it to the SM, ASMs, and Committee's attention the month before they quit). Also, I don't know that the SPL was even aware of the problem and I am certain that he wasn't much involved in resolving it. I wonder if having the SPL get involved would have made a bigger impact on the guys with the foul mouths and also might have given our more sensitive scout a feeling that he had a powerful "buddy" in the troop who would help him. (Of course this is another aspect of our troop's own issues - our SPL missed more campouts than he attended and might not have been around at all during this time - hard to lead when you aren't there.) So how to stop or anyway reduce it? Personally I think this is an area where the older scouts have a great deal of influence as role models, maybe more than the adults. But for that to work, those older scouts have to interact a lot with the younger guys, either in vertical patrols or as very involved troop guides or instructors. I like OGE's method but I suggest it needs to be paired with more pressure from your older youth leaders too.

In the "other" schism thread on pro's/vol's gwd posted the following list as examples of the things her DE has to contend with while trying to meet his responsibilities. I'd say this list about sums up why there appears to be a divide between Cub Scouters and Boy Scouters too. Thanks, gwd, for making it so clear. Number One: Volunteer leaders that will not step up to help plan a District event: Day Camp, pinewoodderby, camporees, etc. Troops that sit back and wait for feeder-packs to supply them with new Scouts each year Troops/Packs that do not do Scouting for Food Troops/Packs that do not do any community service projects Troops/Packs that do not any recruiting other than that provided by the DE Troop leaders and Pack leaders that have no interaction Leaders that are better than everyone else because they've been doing it longer New leaders that have never been given a feeling of being part of the crowd in a district that is largely the "old guard" - especially true in the Boy Scout level

I can't say how much I appreciate our DE who has been here a long time and serves us well too. Maybe, this being his second career, he has no need or desire to play the BSA game and "move up, move on" because his roots are in this community. His boys went through troops here and he was once a volunteer scouter here too. Whatever the case may be, I'm really glad we have him. Our SE does seem to change every couple of years and I have no idea whether any of them are any good because I don't get to see them in action (and haven't really sought out this info, not having time to do anything about it anyway). I will say this though. Brent, you may not realize how unusual your area is - at least from what you've posted. First it seems like you are in a very affluent area if 38 families can and will pay upwards of $12K in Family FOS. That wouldn't happen much where I live. Second, it sounds like your council has made some extraordinary commitments to ensuring access to facilities. We aren't charged a terribly high rate, but all units ARE charged, for using council property. So it is a little harder to "sell" the argument that we should pay in FOS instead of paying user fees because we DO pay those fees plus paying for the programs that take place at the camps. Still, I will agree that people who complain about camp facilities and are then unwilling to help improve them in some way are missing the point. Third, in councils that have a troubled and lengthy history of misuse of funds (such as CAC where LongHaul is), I am not surprised that there is a much greater level of acrimony surrounding any requests for donations. The trust just is not there and isn't going to be for a long time to come.

Contact your local law enforcement and ask if they have (or used to have) a DARE officer. If so, ask that person for a couple of suggestions because they are used to doing these things with elem school-aged kids.

Presentation style could be part of the issue for sure. The material in a couple of those required activity pins is prone to being a bit dry if we aren't careful about presentation. (Example: citizenship pin comes to mind - and hey, I teach this stuff for a living but it can be done well or it can be done poorly) If she's having a hard time with some of those requirements, maybe she needs to use her resources and find others with different styles to help her out. For example, some of the citizenship requirements can be turned into a game (jeopardy style or something more active). She could invite an older boy scout to help teach flag etiquette (#s 3& 4). She could combine a visit to a community leader of some stature (someone interesting like a judge or sheriff or mayor) with #7 and at least part of #2. She could make #6 into something like a Den Leader's minute at the end of a meeting. If there is a military reserve unit or Nat'l Guard post in your area, maybe she can get one of their outreach people to stop in to a meeting and cover a little of this material. Boys are "wowed" by that. Or maybe she's feeling a little burned out (if she has been a DL for a long time, hey it happens to the best of us at some points) and needs to more actively recruit the parents and others in her den to help her plan these things?

Yeah this is a great theme for a camp out and should be a lot of fun. Just be careful though. For those who maybe haven't seen it, the mythbusters show is very enjoyable but check out all the safety precautions those guys take! They actually do some pretty dangerous things. The safety factor seems to get lost in the minds of a lot of teen aged boys so be extra sure that they know where the limits are in terms of which myths you seek to bust.

Generally speaking I'd agree with what's been posted so far about working with (and around) parents. But let me ask this: Is the problem really that the WDL has tried to get the boys to do things they are not interested in doing? For example we had several boys who just did NOT want to do the artist pin. Their loss in my opinion, but ok, their choice too. We arranged opportunities for those who were interested but many DLs seem to think that all the boys should earn all the pins when in fact the program doesn't require this. If we push too hard with some of these it becomes another thing, like school, that the boys "must" do because some adult said so rather than something they "want" to do because it might be interesting. From your original post it isn't possible to tell what sorts of activities we're talking about or what the dynamic is. So it is impossible to know with any certainty which direction to go in search of solutions. The above might NOT be what's going on, but it is a possibility.

Talk with your DC. S/he may have no idea that this person has a negative history with the unit. But focus on the relevant matter - that this person is not someone your leaders can work with due to past problems - not on her personal hygiene which, however unpleasant it may be, does not sound like the main issue from your initial post. If DC were to say "too bad" then I think I'd take it up a step and talk with the DE.

I would want a membership chair - a person who handles all paperwork dealing with registration and rechartering. I don't know a lot about ships but in a more generic context I would also want an advancement chair (paperwork again!). Since advancement plays a somewhat different role in crews and perhaps in ships, maybe this is less crucial for you, I'm not sure.

John, I have to agree. I'm thinking of opening a new thread titled "The 2007 Ed & Merlyn smackdown" just for them.