Lisabob

I'm not Fuzzy (couldn't begin to compare either). But we've done the "every boy must have one parent/family member/friend involved in one activity" approach. My experience: you will not get 100% involvement. Some families will simply refuse or worse, they'll sign up but you'll never get their actual help. Others, you may be thankful for their lack of involvement. We've had a very few over the years that scare me and I wouldn't necessarily push for their involvement. THat's rare though. However, taking this approach will net you SOME volunteers. If you do this, I've found it helps to have someone already in place as the "lead" person for the event. People will sign up more readily as "helpers" than as "leaders," though in reality the difference between the two is not much. It also depends on how and when you make the pitch. We tried it at round up night and found it fell flat. Too much going on, too many brand new people unwilling to take the plunge. We had better luck doing it at some very popular event a little later in the year.

Kurt I must say I don't see a whole lot of difference between the rule your pack adopted (parents carry the knife) and those rules which other packs have adopted, which you have said go against the BSA programs. In both cases, the pack leadership have stipulated that they are going to put additional safeguards in place.

Boy I've been there! We did try requiring each den to have a parent rep. on the committee (or at least, to attend the committee meetings and report back to the den). It didn't work - they just didn't show up. The best thing we were able to do was to be very targeted and persistent in recruiting new adults. We asked specific people to be involved in specific jobs with clear starting and ending points. We would tell people that "so-and-so recommended you for this position," which surprisingly, worked pretty well in many cases. There were still times when it was the same three or four people who ended up doing everything. I don't know if committees are less important in packs than troops? I do think they're less likely to be well organized. By the time we get to the troop level, most of us have experience as adults in scouting - which isn't the case, by and large, in the cub pack.

Thanks LongHaul, for the info and the link. I checked out the link and I have to say I'm more worried now. I wish I could say I had complete confidence that all would be fine. As it is I don't. The boys have been working with the SM and one of the ASMs for the last couple of weeks in skill, talking about (really, listening to the adults talk about) cold weather camping with an emphasis on dressing properly. Last week I know they discussed hypothermia. My boy, unfortunately, was in the hallway supervising some kids who had made a mess and needed to clean it up, so he (and they) missed most of this. Even when he was there, I'm not sure how much of the information sunk in. I know they have not discussed building quinzees at all and from your description and the info on the weblink you provided, this is more than a matter of digging a hole in a snow mound. It looks like it requires at least some prior knowledge and planning. I will talk with his SM about this to feel out his perspective. This will be my son's first really cold weather experience. I don't want to hold him back due to my own misgivings and I don't wish to scare him, but neither do I want him to be in any real danger, of course. I prefer him with all his ears, nose, fingers & toes intact and functional! From talking with him, I don't think he understands that cold weather of the sort we're having here (sub-zero before the wind chill) can be a serious safety issue, as opposed to just a comfort issue. He has learned over the last couple of years not to complain much about discomfort, for fear of being teased. That's good as far as it goes, but I'm not sure if he would speak up if he were actually in trouble at this point.

Our pack did the arrows on a plaque carved like the sunburst on the AoL badge. We made them to reduce costs and to make them unique to our pack. They turned out very well and the boys (and parents) were impressed. Took some time to do though. You can purchase them made to order, plaque and all, on the web but it'll cost you. You can buy arrow kits from your scout shop but again, they're more expensive. Sorry I can't help you much with the other two questions. We nixed an "indian tap-out" ceremony that one dad wanted to do because it was a) cheesy/stereo-typical in its portrayal of "indians" and b) maybe inappropriate (he suggested something more like slapping the kids rather hard than a simple "tap"). I think it might have been a variation on some OA ceremony that he remembered from his youth. But I can imagine situations in which some kind of native-american themed activities would be appropriate.

Jeff, I agree with you that it is never too early to start teaching respect for tools, even if one isn't going to be using those tools. I also agree that more training of leaders in tool use and safety is a good idea. I'm not sure about OWL (or whatever the outdoor webelos leader training is called in your area)? But I know in OLS (for troop leaders) there is a component on knife, saw, and axe usage. Not to say one part of one day is enough; I think it is really intended as a reminder, rather than a primer. One place where I don't agree is your statement that trained leaders should be able to ensure safety with knives and cubs. My view is that this would be true of older boys, who are less likely to act in irrational or simply un-thinking ways around such tools. But as mentioned before, most 6/7 year olds just don't have the developmental capacity for abstract thought (what will happen if...). Thus they tend to be quite unpredictable because they do things that aren't "logical" to us. This doesn't make them bad kids or "knife wielding maniacs," it is just how their still-forming brains work. We might be trained as leaders in how to RESPOND to such situations, but the thing with knives is that we want to prevent, rather than respond to, problems, accidents, injuries. I wouldn't be willing to take that risk as a leader of tiger cubs. It is too much to ask.

With the temperatures in my neck of the woods dipping to a chilly -10 or so, and windchills around -25 to -30, this thread came to mind again. I admit the thought of sleeping in a tent in winter isn't something that excites me at any temperature, but is there a point when it really is too cold, and if so, have we reached it? The one "good" thing about our current cold snap is that we also have more snow. OK. I like snow and I like snow-related activities. Followed by a nice cup of hot something and a hot shower. Except now my skinny little 12 year old says he thinks he wants to try building a snow cave on their upcoming Feb. campout and sleep in that! If possible that sounds WORSE to me than a tent in February. I don't know if anybody in the troop actually knows how to do this - I know my son does not, other than "you make a big pile and dig out a hole." He saw another troop do this at their January camp out. Can it really be as simple (and safe, in sub-zero temps) as all that? I surely don't know, and honestly hope I never have to try it myself. I'm no slouch and can tough out a lot of things but truly this meets my definition of "not fun." Local vets have been on the news around here talking about the dangers of these extreme temps to cats and dogs, I'm not making this up. They're saying not to leave pets outside for any longer than absolutely necessary to answer nature's call. I'm having a hard time thinking that it isn't ok to leave "Rover" out in the yard for a half hour or an hour, but it is ok to send my child off to sleep in a pile of snow for the weekend. Those of you crazy enough to ENJOY this sort of thing, help me see straight on this one. At what point am I right to kick into "worried parent" mode?

I just want to say thanks for all of your thoughts. It helps to get other perspectives sometimes. I really have to get out the door to work so just a quick question to ScoutNut and Mollie - when you decided to go back as Tiger DLs after your child was done with cubbing, how did you decide which pack to work with? We have 8 or 9 in our town, at least as many again in the next town over. For now I wouldn't want to go back to the pack my son came from (I'm well known there but I think the CM would view this as encroachment on "his" turf - not my intention but I fear he'd take it that way anyway). I also am wary of joining up with a pack in really bad shape - the giant sucking sound you would hear might be me, getting sucked into doing a whole lot more than just Tiger DL with the pack! And that's my second question, did you have any kind of explicit understanding with existing leaders (CM, CC) that the ONLY thing you would do would be Tiger DL? I wonder if that would help avoid the above concern. I'm not settled on doing that yet but I admit it is an attractive thought. I think my husband would believe I'd gone off the deep end though...

Have you laid things out for the mother here? She may be unable to control him for a variety of reasons, but is she clear (have you made it clear) on how this is impacting other families in the den? Sometimes parents seem oblivious to the behavior of their own child; they have blinders on I guess. How does this child act at school? Sometimes kids are better behaved when the parents aren't there - not suggesting you tell mom not to attend! - but is this a general behavioral issue or is it really about the parent's lack of parenting skill? If it is a broader problem, is this a child with an emotional or behavioral disorder, or who is being treated for ADHD? It isn't your job to diagnose of course but I think we in cub scouting see a lot of children whose parents are just beginning to understand that no, "johnny's" behavior is not typical and yes it is a real problem. I also think we get a lot of kids where the parents are at whit's end and are hopeful that scouting will "fix" a boy's much deeper problems, which of course we cannot do. But it does help if we at least know when there is a medically diagnosed problem in the mix. Although I think it helps tremendously to have some insight into the causes, and a good channel of communication with an involved parent is helpful too, that still leaves you needing to address the actual behavior. Here are some things I'd consider: 1. As a den, come up with a (short) list of rules for behavior. To the extent that you can, involve the boys in creating the list. 2. Consider incentives for boys who meet the behavioral expectations. It can be something simple (sticker chart, den dangles, whatever). Maybe consider allowing them to do something special when they reach a certain level. Someone on this board once told me they used a big candle and when the candle had burned down to a certain level then the boys would get a treat, but if they misbehaved at a den meeting, etc, then the candle would be blown out that day. I don't know if that would work for your case? It seems like it puts a lot of pressure on the group to police their own. On the other hand, peer pressure might be a useful force - depends on your group dynamics. 3. Be clear with this boy and his mother that disruptive behavior like climbing into the exhibits and hurting other children will be cause for him to go home. Make it stick. Tell them both you want him to be involved but that in order to do that they need to respect the rights of others too. For that matter, be clear with the whole den that these are your expectations of all of them. 4. Make sure the other parents are clear that you understand their concerns and are working with the whole group to address them. By the way I agree completely that "teaming up" this parent with a "buddy" parent is not going to work. First off, there's a natural reluctance to step in and parent someone else's kid, especially when the child's own parent is right there. It will likely lead to resentment. Second, it probably won't work - boys are quick to pick up on the dynamic and the response before you know it from the boy to the other parent will probably be "you're not my mom/dad, I don't have to listen to you." Third - sheesh! We don't join cubs to parent other people's misbehaving kids! Did your CM express interest in doing this? If not, what makes him think anybody else would want to!?

Desserts. Can you have dutch oven cobblers, hot iron pies, smores, something? Food is a way to bring people together and besides that's what many kids think of when they hear the words "camp fire." Do you have troop guides or something like that? If so, are any assigned to work with the new scouts? They can serve as the bridge between your new members and existing social groups in the troop. If you don't have a formal troop guide structure in place, maybe a couple of scouts would be good choices to do this on an informal basis. Don't forget to make sure your adults mingle with the new scouts' parents too. I've found adults are just as clique-ish as kids, although they may not realize it. Simply mentioning it ahead of time to the adults in your troop may be all you need to do there.

That's fantastic. Thanks for posting.

ScoutNut, just FYI, the level of "restriction" on the cub rank badges may vary from place to place. Within my own council, sometimes it even depends on who is working the cash register that day. I've had parents go to the scout shop and deck their kid out with ranks the boy never came anywhere near earning! A promise to bring in the paperwork "next time" almost always suffices for cub awards around here, and by the "next time" no one at the council shop is likely to remember that this person said the same thing "last time" and never produced the papers. Maybe your council is stricter about these things.

I must second what Scoutnut said about getting the whole pack involved in a pack campout. I know when we finally convinced our pack to do this, the response was very good and came from some unexpected quarters too. In fact this helped us identify some new people who were good resources for camping and outdoor activities, and it gave them a reason to get involved (esp for a few parents who had previously viewed cubs as not up their alley and said they were just waiting til their boys were "real boy scouts" in order to get involved). Do this on the up-and-up and you'll avoid so many problems while reaping many more benefits. I do know a lot of cub leaders who use that "it's just family and friends" excuse to try to cover for things that they want to do, but that aren't allowed under the cub rules such as wolf den camping. I think this is a very risky idea. Most of the time the other parents (esp the ones hosting the event) do not understand the extent of the risk until after the fact and indeed they may never understand the risk they took, if nothing goes wrong. Worse, if it really is a cub event in thin disguise and something DOES go wrong, there is a potential for other people in your cub leadership such as your committee chair, CM, outdoor activities chair, CO, and possibly others, to find themselves dragged into the resulting legal mess even if they had no idea what you were doing, because they are supposed to ensure that pack activities are done in accordance with the policies. So as a fellow leader in the same pack, boy I'd be annoyed with you for doing something like that. Of course chances are nothing will go wrong but still. Do this more than once or after being told not to and I'd be looking for a pack where I could trust my fellow leaders. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh. It also teaches the boys that the rules only matter when it is convenient for you to follow them, and that the rest of the time you are happy enough to bend the rules. Yeah, they're sharp when it comes to things like this. Elementary school-aged kids tend to be very rule-oriented and have a strong sense of right and wrong. Of course you aren't going to prohibit people in the same den or pack from getting together outside the confines of scouting and often times there's a strong overlap in terms of social circles. But then, who organized the event? Do the cubs expect it to count toward cub advancement? Is it advertized primarily at other scout activities? Are fellow scouts the only ones invited to attend? What's on the agenda and is it clearly scouting related? These are the things that can help set apart a scouting event vs. a non-scouting event that happens to include some scouts.

This is one case where I would be very likely to say NO. Just because the G2SS and the age-appropriate guidelines don't/didn't explicitly prohibit Tigers from earning the whittling chip doesn't mean it is necessarily a good idea for them to do so. 6 year olds are not known for their ability to engage in abstract thought (what will happen if I do this...) or for understanding the long-term or even permanent nature of some consequences to their actions. They live in the immediate moment most of the time. I want to ensure that a boy who earns his whittling chip has the judgment and maturity to use his knife properly and I doubt most first graders possess that. As a practical matter - I'm a believer that we learn to use tools in context, ie, when we have an appropriate application and need for them. I believe this helps develop a healthy respect for the power of the tool and likewise, avoids un-necessarily scaring kids/parents or creating phobias. I'm not sure what your typical 6 year old needs to use a knife for in this day and age, in our society? If having a pocket knife and whittling chip is really about feeling "grown up" then what are you going to offer this boy down the road when he wants to feel more grown up again? Sometimes I think it is ok to say, "you're not quite ready for that yet but you will be in a year or two." And then maybe suggest something else that he can do NOW instead. Maybe he'd like to do some simple wood kit projects like building a tool box or bird house, for example. If the parent persists and the consensus of your pack or den is that you don't want to do this, I think you're within your rights to say that he is welcome to let his boy have a knife at home but not at cub scouts at this point in time.

Tom, I hope your son and the other boys in the den do like the troops they chose. It may take a little time to adjust though and hopefully everyone (boys especially) understands that. I only have one son so I've gone through this whole process just one time. But my impression is that a good cub program CAN be, but isn't necessarily, an indicator of whether boys will like boy scouting. I've seen several who loved cubs but who stumbled after joining boy scouts and never found their place. Or to be more accurate, who didn't stick with it long enough to find their place in the troop. The leap between pack and troop is a big one and some boys aren't really ready for the independence, the responsibility, and the interaction with older (sometimes a little rougher) boys, without the adults there to mediate as much as may occur in cub scouting. Some boys will hang in there and take the time needed to make the adjustment (generally, because their parents are encouraging them to do so, in my experience). Some won't do this and will quit. We can try to mentally prepare the boys and their parents for this while they're still in cubs, but it also depends a lot on them, their maturity, and their desire (parents too) to persevere. And I think the latter depends a lot on the degree to which the kids and parents are already over-scheduled. If mom and dad are constantly ferrying kids around to a hundred different activities already then they may be a little relieved when their son finds boy scouts to be a bit tougher going and voices thoughts about quitting. I know a lot of parents who told me that in sort of guilt-ridden tones. I don't mean any of the above as an apology for packs running a lousy cub program or troops running a lousy new scout program - they have to uphold their end of the deal too and hopefully you've found a troop that understands that. I just think that the success of the cub program is an imperfect indicator of success in boy scouting because the two are so different - far more different, in fact, than I thought they would be when I was a Webelos leader and cub parent. One thing's for sure. Having done this one time through, I would definitely change a few things about how we ran our webelos program if I were to do it again. Too bad my only son was also my guinea pig! Still he seems to have survived with no lasting damage...I think....

That last point may be a good idea if it fits with your strengths. The CM is the most public face of the pack because s/he runs the pack meetings and appears to be the "go-to" guy or gal. But really the CM's job is to make things fun, to be a little bit of a clown, showman, etc. THe CM is also the one to keep track of the den leaders and offer guidance, assistance, etc., to them as needed. The CC is the behind-the-scenes detail person. If that suits you better then yes, maybe you should serve your pack in that capacity. Just be aware that even the CC isn't a "power" position in reality. By that I mean, unless you want to end up doing everything yourself (bad idea) then even as CC there's a lot of cooperation with, and sometimes accomodation of, other people and their ideas about the pack. So think carefully about what you prefer, and also about the strengths of anybody in the pack who you might recruit to help you fill one or the other of these two important positions.

Gonzo I think the webelos option is based on pragmatism. By the time kids get to the start of the Webelos II year most will have outgrown the blue shirt they've had since wolves (and now, maybe since tigers!). Buying another blue shirt for the few months they're still in the cub program is a little silly when they could buy a tan shirt and keep it right through to boy scouts. At any rate I know that's how most of the parents I knew in cubs thought about it. I was happy when this change occurred. Beyond that though, sure, I would be happy to see a more functional shirt as described above by others.

Thank you fgoodwin. I knew that my DE had pointed me toward a written definition of "family camping" somewhere, I just couldn't recall where it was (this was a few years ago).

I agree with eagle-pete that your CC is over-stepping her boundaries a bit. On the other hand, my experience with cub packs has been that, more often than not, they are loosely organized and loosely run. This isn't ideal and sometimes it causes a lot of problems that would have been avoided if everyone just knew and stuck to their job. But it is reality. And keeping in mind that the level of experience with the BSA among adults in a typical pack is usually much lower than in a typical troop, and that leader turnover is typically much higher in a pack than a troop, one needs to be careful not to alienate the adults who are willing to volunteer. Suggesting they get RE-trained or get out may well do that! If she is leaving in May anyway, at this point the best strategy is probably to wait her out, work with her where possible, adjust around the edges where possible, and start looking NOW for a new CC with whom you can build a better relationship. As for the debate about when to cross from cubs to boy scouts: Back when I was a webelos DL and had no experience with the troop side of things, I reached the conclusion that it made a lot more sense to do cross over in April/May than in Feb. The major reason had to do with the readiness of brand new scouts to do winter camping right off the bat; in Michigan Feb/March can be very cold. There is also a strong case to be made for separating Blue & Gold - which should be about ALL of your cub scouts - from cross over, which is really about your Webelos II den. Some B&Gs I've attended get so drawn out that by the end the younger boys are either dropping off to sleep or getting extremely rambunctious. We didn't end up changing our cross over, but we talked a lot about doing that for future years. So I can understand where your CC might be coming from on this. However: Now that I've been involved for a couple of years on the troop side, I am glad we didn't make this change. As others have suggested, doing so would've slowed down the integration of the new scouts into the troop, made summer camp seem more of a challenge, and let's face it, by Feb. of their webelos II year, many boys are a little bored of cub scouting and ready for something new. Holding onto them longer might increase their drop out rate. Two or three months is a long time in the eyes of a 10 or 11 year old. But again, from the perspective of a cub leader who has little or no familiarity with the troop aspect, this may not be apparent.

I agree the "family camping" distinction muddies things a bit. And I know many cub leaders who rely on this in order to do things that otherwise would not be allowed. However, whenever I have sought clarification on this, (at least here) our DE has always stated that "family camping" is something that the district or council can sponsor (ie, family camping at the council camp property), but not something that can occur within the pack level. His take - and I have to agree - is that there should not be a highly fluid boundary between "pack" event and "family" event because that then puts the pack in legal jeopardy and encourages leaders to play just these sorts of games. Thus I think it unwise to suggest that when the designated BALOO person leaves the premises, that the event suddenly changes in nature from pack to family.

We have a couple of scouts whom others might characterize as "deathbed Eagles." One of these boys hadn't been active in the troop in at least a couple of years, though he would show up from time to time. I'm sure he has a busy life (what teen doesn't these days?) but he wasn't known for being particularly active in school or his community and he defintiely wasn't in a position where he had to work to support his family. So I don't know what he was up to rather than scouting. He did come back this fall, shortly before his 18th birthday, to do his service project. He passed his Eagle BOR and I think he may have attended 1 or 2 meetings since then. Now he's an adult (well in the BSA's eyes anyway). Nobody in the troop expects to see him anymore and if he did show up most of our younger scouts wouldn't know who he is. Is this a deathbed Eagle? Maybe. But then I don't know what this young man was like when he was active in the troop because that was a couple of years ago, before my son joined. Apparently he had been active and fulfilled everything except for the service project requirement at that time. Then again maybe he just slid through doing the bare minimum even then. In the first case, people who call this young man a "deathbed" Eagle in the disparaging sense might be misguided - after all, he may have made significant leadership contributions to the troop when he was a life scout at age 14/15/16, and newer troop members just aren't aware of that. In the second case, the fault lies more with the adult leadership, esp. the SM, who allowed this boy to slide on through for such a long time without any serious thought or effort. Boys will rise to the level of expectations we set for them. We have another boy who is a life scout now, and his 18th birthday is looming. He's working to finish his Eagle requirements in time. Some leaders in the troop have privately made comments about this boy also becoming a "deathbed" Eagle, or somehow being undeserving. In part because he waited until he was 17 to go from star to life to (perhaps) Eagle. Also because this boy was registered but inactive in another troop for about a year, had quit scouting altogether for another year or so, and then joined our troop at the age of almost 17 with the expressed desire to earn Eagle. Since joining our troop he has been active most of the time, except during marching band season (this is a graded activity in school and he plans to go on to music school for college, so it matters a lot to him). He is seeking opportunities to work with our newest scouts as a guide or instructor. He's a good role model and an all-around nice kid. Oh and by the way he served his previous troop as SPL - twice - prior to becoming inactive. Should he make Eagle, some will call him a "deathbed" Eagle in the disparaging sense because he waited so long and took a hiatus from scouting. Personally I think the fact that he made the choice to come back and to focus on scouting again after such a long break is admirable. It shows me he values scouting and that he has the maturity to understand that leaving a thing undone can have a lasting impact. By the way, he's already talking about how he can "give back" to scouting as a soon-to-be adult. His first thought: he wants to sign on as a music merit badge counselor, something we have very few of in our district. I don't know whether the boy in the first case will proceed from flapping to soaring because I don't know him well and have no idea how he perceives himself, or how that may change as he matures further. I'm pretty sure the boy in the second case will be gliding along soon enough. I hesitate to label either of them "deathbed" Eagles.

This is something I've been thinking over for a while and I'd appreciate your input, as this forum is the best scouter network I have. When my son was in cub scouts, I started out as "just" a parent. After a year I thought that maybe I had something to offer so I joined the pack committee, went to training, and started helping out here and there. That was nice. Shortly after that though the pack went through a leadership crisis and a bunch of people quit, including our CM, some den leaders, and our CC. Suddenly I and a couple of others found ourselves in the deep end and I got a lot more involved because there wasn't anybody else to do things. I went to Woodbadge, together with our new CM. I earned my beads and, I hope, helped the pack develop a more stable leadership base and a better program in the process. Not to mention learning a lot about myself and improving my own skills. When my son crossed into boy scouts a couple years ago I took a more backseat role again. He needs the space to grow without me being so involved and besides, I didn't know the boy scout program as well. So I joined the committee, lived through training, and I've learned a lot about the program. But I haven't been super-involved and that's fine. These days I'm mainly doing paperwork to help along a variety of troop projects, very much behind the scenes and not terribly taxing stuff. I don't want to be an ASM - we have 8 or 10 ASMs now, all of whom probably do a better job of it than I would. I have been involved, on and off, in a couple of district membership positions. I learned that membership is not the job for me! In large part, the problem with district positions is that they require umpteen meetings, almost always on the same night of the week and that night just never works for me. This isn't something I can change. (Not to mention, I'm a terrible counter of beans. My perspective is that we should focus on strong programs and the membership will come, rather than pushing, pushing, pushing registration. This is the wrong perspective for that job.) My thought, upon getting involved here, was that maybe I could help bridge the webelos-scout gap for some packs and troops. But perhaps the district level is too large for me to be successful because I found myself working with over 30 units and I never felt like I had much connection to any of them. District roundtables are always on that same night of the week that rarely works for me so helping there isn't an option. I've lent a hand with some trainings, and I like doing that. I also think I'm good at it (This is what I do in my day job; different content, same basic skills.). But our district training staff is a loosely organized crew who just get called together in the week/couple of days before our bi-annual leader training days, and most folks seem ok with that. So there's not a lot to do here. If asked, I'll be happy to help out on occasion in the future with training but it isn't an ongoing task. I like the idea of being a UC "friend to the unit." Except that the UC role in reality doesn't seem to match very well with the ideal. I'd be happy to be a "friend" to a couple of units; but not to half the district! Most of the UCs around here are people who are essentially "retired" from scouting and frankly they're not very active as UCs either. So I'm a little leery of offering my services there. I've thought about just finding a pack somewhere that needs a hand and volunteering there? On the other hand, I think it is better when pack leadership comes from within since those are the people with sons in the unit. So I guess I'm trying to re-design my mental "ticket" in scouting and I'm not sure where to go. I don't want to be that person who seems to be involved in running every event. I don't want to wear my scout uniform more often than my "civilian" clothes! But I do feel more of a need to contribute, if I could just figure out where and how I fit. Your thoughts?

I decided to spin off so as to avoid hijacking gwd's thread. We've been talking about smaller/larger troops and recruiting issues. Well two years ago when my son was crossing over we decided not to join the smaller troop in our town. Instead my son chose the largest troop (30-45 members most of the time). Looking back, I can identify some reasons for his choice and my agreement that held up to the light of day, and some that did not hold up so well. Although my son has found his place and is mostly happy in his troop now, I think he might have been better served in his first year or so, had he joined the smaller troop instead. So I've thought a lot over the last couple of years about how and why we made our decisions. Here's what I came up with, FWIW. Sorry it is rather long - but then I've had two years to think it over! 1. Among the boys, a sort of "herd mentality" took place. Each wanted to stay with his friends from the den and pack and so it was a collective choice. In the long term, not such a great way to choose a troop - of the 12 boys from our pack (two dens), today only 3 are still in scouts at all. Who knows if these boys would've stayed, had they joined the smaller troop? But picking a troop based on current friendships is no guarantee either. 2. One not-great activity plays a stronger role in making a decision than several good interactions. We visited two troops in several settings (meetings, camping, activities, etc.). The smaller troop was very kind and most interactions were fine, but they held one lock-in just before cross over that was just not so hot (poor facilities and not a lot of interaction between their boys and ours). It wasn't bad, it just wasn't what the boys had expected. That's what the boys in our den seemed to remember, unfortunately. 3. The larger troop had a schedule of activities planned that was jam-packed and included some pretty ambitious trips and events (like going to Yellowstone). The smaller troop had a full schedule too but it wasn't as flashy. I think this had more influence on the parents than on the boys, to be honest, and wasn't the best way to judge the troops. One thing I've since noted - the small troop participates in our council-wide programs and high adventure options pretty regularly, while the large troop we joined rarely does, preferring to go it alone. 4. The larger troop came across as highly organized. The smaller troop wasn't disorganized, but it was less formal in terms of organizational structure. Tired parents and cub leaders (including me) liked the aura of organization in the large troop. 5. The smaller troop's CO is viewed by some as a drawback - it is a very conservative Catholic Church and the priest is somewhat controversial, locally. The troop's main relationship with a pack comes from the private school associated with the church too, so there's a perception by some that maybe church leadership have a lot of influence. Truth is, the CO is like many others, not very involved beyond signing paperwork a couple times each year. This isn't something that bothered me but I know it bothered some other people. Unfortunately it isn't something the troop leadership ever addressed (although it might have been a difficult thing to put words to). I had gotten to know the SM and ASM of the smaller troop through Wood Badge and they are really wonderful people. They had mentioned at various points that they were trying to expand their recruitment efforts and make connections to other local packs. At the same time I was trying to help our pack make connections to other troops in the area, which had fallen apart at some point in the 5 years or so prior to our joining scouting. It seemed like a good match of goals and so for about a year we worked together at establishing links between our pack and their troop. At the end of the day, when none of our boys joined them, I admit I was disappointed. So were they, I think! I don't know if they ever saw it as a sort of "pay off?" But I do know that since then, they have done nothing to reach out to either that pack or (as far as I can tell) other packs in the area. While I guess I understand that, it also frustrates me. They didn't get any boys from our den but that was the first year that they'd had any contact with our pack, too. If they'd kept up with the other rising den leaders and/or the CM, perhaps the following year they would've had a better outcome. In fairness, the pack's den leaders after I left really didn't reach out much either - they waited for troops to come to them, and only the larger troop did that. So it seems that both the pack and the troop are back where they started: no longer-lasting ties were forged and neither benefited from building a new recruiting relationship. The next pack leader who comes along and wants to offer more choices to the boys than just the one troop will have to re-invent the wheel (as I feel I did) by going out and finding the other troops in the area and aggressively trying to establish contacts among strangers. Same is true from the troop end, instead of regular contact now it will be a major undertaking to make a connection to the pack since turn over among adults in packs tends to be high and if you aren't in contact regularly, you may quickly discover that no one you know is still there. That's a lot of work! I do wish both sides - pack and small troop - would've thought more about this from a longer-term strategic perspective when the opportunity was there. However I think the onus is more on the troop since "institutional memory" tends to be longer and more stable there, than in most packs. Maybe that's a convenient dodge on my part though.

Short answer: you don't go (or you turn it into a day-only event), or you come home early in the second scenario. Longer answer: if the problem is having enough trained people to cover these sorts of contingencies, you might try a) letting parents know that you won't be holding the event if a shortage of appropriately-trained leaders occurs (along with an invitation to them to attend an upcoming BALOO session!) or b) banding together with other packs in your area to "share" Baloo trained people as resources or c) contacting your district and council training folks and asking if they can help you locate some BALOO-trained individuals who might be willing to help a pack in a true pinch. If the problem is that your district/council doesn't offer BALOO training, polite harrassment (in the positive sense) is in order. Start bugging your district and council training teams. If that doesn't work, start bugging your DE. Let them know all about the fabulous programs your pack would LOVE to offer, if only they'd get off their duff and provide the necessary training to enable you. And then be willing to help them offer that training, or at least to help them round up enough people to take the training, to make it worth while. Longer answer still: I've had this conversation with our DE a few times over the years. I've received all kinds of interpretations of the BALOO rules, including that "lock ins" don't count, that it covers only pack, but not webelos den, camping, and that as long as the BALOO individual approves the paperwork they may not have to attend the event. On this latter I think the interpretation is flat-out wrong. On the other two I'd tend toward saying the BALOO trained person ought to be there too, although the wording does not specifically reference webelos dens or lock ins - I'm not fond of twisting the wording to fit your convenience (in the lock in scenario I had someone assert that if you sleep in a cabin then that's a lock in, not camping...). But exactly what the local interpretation of the policy will be? Well that's up to your local staffers in no small part. But if it were my name on the dotted line in terms of potential responsibility, I'd be as unimaginative and uncreative as possible in my interpretation and just go with what seems to be a fairly clearly defined policy.

OneHour, actually I agree with a lot of what you had to say. When I said it seems as though larger troops can do virtually nothing and still they get new scouts, I certainly didn't mean to suggest that this was a good idea. Yes, it will eventually lead to decline for the troop. It certainly isn't a strategy for staying vibrant or for recruiting new leaders. However, an entrenched troop may be able to "coast" for a while on reputation alone before word starts getting around that they aren't what they used to be, especially if they have a "feeder pack" relationship established. I've seen this happen around here, anyway, unfortunate though it is. You're right as well that some of the things I listed as potential strengths of small troops may also be strengths in larger troops. But I was trying to approach this from the perspective of how to market a smaller troop, and how to counter some of the common perceptions about why joining a small troop might be a bad choice.