Lisabob

Pete - please keep in mind that as currently constituted, the webelos shirt options are left to each parent (not the den leader or pack's decision). THe reason for this is primarily economic, I guess. Some boys may fit into their blue shirts all the way through webelos II while others may outgrow the blue shirts early in the webelos I year. Most WDLs I know, therefore, suggest to parents that the boys wear the blue shirts for as long as they still fit, and then that it makes the most sense to buy a tan shirt (though if they really want another blue one, that's ok too...). This doesn't require that much flexibility on the WDL's part and it is in keeping with the notion that "a scout is thrifty." Not to mention that there are enough other common elements to the webelos uniform that group identity should not be an issue.

We don't do that because the adults can't be there at 3 or 4 in the afternoon. I imagine that's the case in most places these days. However, if you have enough adult leaders with flexible work schedules and/or who do not work, great. As a side note though - around here the middle schools schedule most of their extra-curriculars right after school (including social events like movies and dances), so that would be an additional conflict for us.

No, the boys are not required to earn the Webelos rank in order to choose an emblem. As for placement - den emblems can be worn by webelos scouts on either the blue or the tan shirts. Here's a link to the BSA's uniform inspection guide for cub and webelos scouts. The relevant info about the den emblem for webelos is found in the "right sleeve" discussion. http://www.scouting.org/forms/34282.pdf

I really like BL and my son has subscribed every year since he joined. But I have to ask this...why do you want your unit to be 100% BL and what do the people in your unit think about this? We belonged to a pack where nearly half the pack's members came from families with low enough incomes to receive free/reduced school lunches and while BL is great, the parents did not want to pay the extra money to subscribe and the pack didn't have the money to fund it for them. In contrast, the troop my son is in now is 100% BL but the charter organization pays the subscription fees so it also isn't an issue for the boys or their families. Personally my thought is that, while BL is a great value and an enjoyable magazine, reaching 100%BL is more about marketing than anything else and that might not work in all packs and troops.

There could be a hundred reasons why and the response might be different, depending on the reason. Here are a few I've heard, that I might be pretty open to: the current den meets on a night that is difficult/impossible for the family to make; the current den includes boys who all attend the same school/class, except for one child, and the other den includes boys from a mix of different schools/classes, where the child might fit in better; there is a history of personal animosity between the den leader and a particular parent and both agree it would be better to have the boy in the other den. On the other hand, if the parent's perception is simply that one den is "better" than another, I'd start asking a few hard questions (or let the Committee Chair do this, probably better). I'd want to know what the perceived problem is in the current den and what, if anything, the parent is willing to do to fix it. Especially with Tigers this is a group endeavor and if the parent only wants someone else to do the work then I'd use that as an opportunity to educate them about their role in the program too. Example, I knew one Tiger DL who was fabulous with the boys but terrible with written communication to the adults. If a parent wanted to switch dens over something like that, then I'd ask them to first consider helping the DL out with communications(this is what ended up happening and it worked out well for everyone). It could also be that the Tiger DL is really not well suited to the position and is not doing a good job - in which case the committee chair and cubmaster need to know sooner rather than later so they can either help the DL get on track or, in a worst-case scenario, find another DL. That information needs to be filtered through the CM and CC though, not through other den leaders, so I'd really direct the parents to talk with these folks first before making any kind of commitment to moving the boy. There might also be a size disparity if one den is filled to capacity and another is smaller. In that case again I'd ask the parent to consider why moving the boy to the larger den might not be a good idea (less personal attention, more of a zoo). In the end though I've rarely seen a situation where a boy (parent) really and truly wanted to move and the final answer was "no."

You know what I think is funny about that last point, It's Me, is that the boys who I see sticking with scouting are NOT the ones I would have expected if success in scouting were based on initial preparedness or skill. Scouting, even Boy Scouting, seems to be a haven for a lot of kids who do not quite "fit" elsewhere and who are not particularly "good at it" at first. But you're right, many parents do make this assumption and discourage their boys from sticking with the program. A shame for those boys, who probably would've benefitted tremendously from the program if they had stayed on. But you can't tell other people how to parent their children.

Brent I think what you are describing is fairly typical and to a large extent reflects forces beyond the troop's control. The questions I would have if I were looking at joining this troop are related to the overall strength of the patrol method in this troop and to different potential causes for shifting attendance. Specifically: 1) How often is turn out low enough for a camp out that it becomes necessary to combine patrols? If it is just occasional that's one thing; if it is half of the time or better, that might make me wonder. 2) Do the patrols ever do any activities on their own? If so, what and how often? Is this actively encouraged by the troop? This would be a good sign of a troop with a strong patrol system, in my view. (though I also think it is a fairly rare occurrence!) 3) If turn-out at camp outs is lower, why is that the case? Who sets the agenda for the camp outs? Boys or adults? How far in advance is the schedule set so that people with other obligations can at least try to plan around them? It could be that the boys are not attending because they aren't that interested in the activities (if they didn't have a say in choosing them) or because their parents aren't given enough prior notice. 4) What's the cost of attending typical camp outs and what opportunities do boys have to raise that money through troop fundraisers? A lot of troops around here charge $10-$15/camp out and that can add up for some people and result in lower participation levels. Hopefully the troop provides opportunities for the boys to earn this money. 5) Is there an identifiable "core" of boys who are nearly always in attendance, or is it really a rotating cast of characters? The latter is more problematic than the former. In my son's troop of about 40 boys, there are about 15 who attend practically every event. There are another 15-20 who attend more often than not, but who work around various other scheduling issues like sports, band, work (for older boys), and in some cases, parental custody issues. Then there are about 5 boys who seldom attend and to the extent that they do, it seems fairly random. And I have to agree with Barry that you just have to work with the boys who are there. Those who aren't should also understand that they are going to miss some things in the process too; advancement and election to leadership may be slower (or may not happen at all) if you aren't present.

I agree that you don't want it to be all advancement all the time. Fun is key and also I think the camp out should be a reasonable reflection of what your troop is really like. I went on a camp out with a troop when my son was a webelos scout and there was no resemblance to how the troop really worked. I'm not fond of misrepresentations of that sort.

While I understand Gonzo's concern, here's the thing. If cub leaders wait a few years to do WB then they're practically done with the pack by the time they're working their tickets. Consider that you usually sign up for WB sometime between now and May, and the course is usually held somewhere between June-Sept. Then you have 18 months to complete the ticket. So someone who is a wolf leader right now would likely be a bear leader when they take the course and could be halfway through Webelos by the time they finish their ticket. For packs to receive the full benefit from the current WB people NEED to take the course early on. This is different from boy scouts where a) many people who are leaders have been involved with BSA in some way before (probably in a pack at the least) and b) boys tend to stay for a longer time in a troop - hence, parents also stay longer, and c) where there's much more of a tradition of parents staying involved even after their child is done with scouting.

Regarding the tickets, you may want to hold off a bit. You really do not need to go in with your tickets already laid out because they will probably be (hopefully be) informed by the topics you discuss during the first part of the course and your relationship with your mentor(s) that develops as part of the course. One thing that might be more useful is to take some time over the next few months to think about what your role in your pack is and what you hope for it to be. But your views on this may change considerably as part of the WB course so keep an open mind too.

For cub leaders you need to have completed the appropriate training for your position, ie, NLE and position-specific training. BALOO is not required (though I highly recommend you do it anyway if you haven't already). Since you'll be a bear leader next year, you might want to decide whether taking outdoor leader training for webelos leaders (or whatever it is called where you are - it keeps changing names here) in the spring. But again, it is not required for cub leaders who want to attend WB. When I went through WB a couple of years ago as a webelos leader we had a wide array, from people who could probably live just fine for months in the middle of nowhere, to people whose outdoor experience was primarily related to back yard bbqs. Not surprisingly most (though not all) of the Boy Scout leaders in attendance had stronger skills in this area because the boy scout program is much more outdoor-focused. You'll get a wide variety of personal views on this topic of how outdoorsy you ought to be. My take, based on my personal experience in WB, is that you should certainly know some basics (how to put up your own tent is good!) but that the course staff will work to balance out patrols so that no one will be in a patrol of the blind leading the blind. Some of your patrol mates will likely be able to teach you some new things in terms of outdoor skills, just as you may be able to teach THEM some new things in other areas of the course.

Hands on stuff is "cool." Make as much of it "do" as opposed to "watch" and you'll have happy boys. Fire building is a biggie (outdoorsman #7). Cooking something simple (dump cake? dutch oven cobbler?) that they can eat later in the day is a plus (outdoorsman #8, depending on how you structure it). Whipping and fusing a rope is fun (outdoorsman #10). Depending on the kind of dining fly you have available then maybe set-up w/ knots (outdoorsman #11). Do you have a good first aid instructor? Look at some of the readyman requirements 5, 6,, 7, 12, 15 here. (though I'm not suggesting you even try to complete all of them!) Our troop has done this using stations set up by each patrol and the visiting webelos are broken into groups who then rotate through the stations. Seems to work ok, although ours is a large troop (5 patrols at present) so that might be a little tougher with a small troop. Good luck! Remember, KISMIF.

Over the years I've talked to many parents who have sons in an either-or position (football or scouts, basketball or scouts, baseball or scouts...there have been times where we had cub scouts who only attended a handful of meetings between these three seasons and that was it for the entire year. And because there are so many competitive leagues around here it didn't seem to matter what night we scheduled den meetings for either.) Some of them (the parents as well as the kids) just want to have a few nights free when they don't have anywhere to go. Many of them, especially as the kids get older and more serious about sports (webelos-age), have said they want their children to understand about commitment - that you have to be there at least most of the time to be a real part of anything. While I agree that scouting can be flexible I do also understand that the above views are important to a lot of parents. And if that is how they see things even after you've explained how flexible scouting is, then there is likely not a whole lot else you can do there. They have prioritized and scouting isn't as high on their list as it is on yours. So make sure they know they are always welcome to come back if things change, but then focus on having a great time with the rest of the den. I suppose another alternative - if you really think they'd like to stay in scouts and the problem is simply your den schedule - would be to help them find another den or pack in the area that fits better with their scheduling needs.

I know this is a little off the wall but can anyone help me identify the following? My nephew told me that for Christmas he wants a cool gadget that one of his friends who is either a boy scout or a cub scout (not sure which) got from scouts. It is a small orange flashlight about the size of a roll of quarters with a chamber in it for catching (sucking up?) bugs. Since he knows my son is in scouts he is apparently hoping I'll know what he's talking about. Sad to say, I do not. A search of scoutstuff.org did not turn up anything similar and google isn't doing it either. Does anybody else know what he is talking about? If so can you give me a lead? Thanks!

In some ways I agree with you Barry. However I don't lay most of the blame at the feet of (most of) the scientists; rather, in many cases, I believe we can fault our own, dear, elected leaders. For example, Congress has oversight authority and if the members of Congress (or the public for that matter) believe that federal grants are being sloppily administered then it is up to Congress to investigate the matter, take the various bureaucracies to task, and then keep an eye on things to ensure that grants are better administered in the future. Congress is supposed to be the public's watch dog in matters of oversight. Additionally I find it offensive when members of Congress use the "pork" or "ear marking" process to procure research funding for their state or district, such as the guy out in the plains who got federal research grants for the study of cow flatulence at one of his state's universities a few years ago (Clinton era). I'll have to see if I can dig up a specific citation again for that one but it did actually happen. Now if Congress fails to take seriously the above, then that's our fault for continuing to elect people who can't or won't do their job well. This isn't to say that all scientists are blameless, but as individuals they're in a much more difficult position. To start up a new private lab takes gigantic amounts of money and while people might contribute to a campaign led by the likes of M.J. Fox or other celebrities, we're not talking about just a couple of million here. This is also a tremendous professional risk which essentially requires said scientists to leave behind their jobs in the public world (say at universities or gov't research labs) because you cannot realistically run labs in both contexts at once - too draining/taxing. There might also be conflicts of interest. Since the "rules" of the academic world require continued work, progress, publication, etc., in the university-affiliated lab, any academic scientists would likely need to quit their jobs to do this for that reason too. (If you think the administration of major research U's would be happy to see their faculty engage in research entirely outside the context of the U in place of university-affiliated rsearch, guess again because that's not how university politics works.) Given the tremendous and entrenched barriers to setting up private labs then, I find it hard to blame individual scientists for not bucking the system. What I've heard from colleagues in the "hard" sciences and particularly in biology fields is that our better young scientists are warned away from research tracks that would lead to a focus on stem cell type work because a) that's not where the money is, b) that's not where the jobs are, and c) there's too much personal/professional risk involved. I'm also hearing that some scientists who do want to pursue these fields are choosing to study and work in other countries as a result. Regardless of one's position on the ethics of stem cell research my point here is that we may be losing an edge in terms of attracting and retaining some of the brightest scientific minds of the current, and future, generation(s) and that will necessarily cause us problems as a country beyond the issue of stem cells. Funny how these threads morph, isn't it? How'd we get from Rumsfeld to stem cells???

Barry, while what you've written is true, there's a big gotcha in the policy as currently written as well. Current law says that any lab that receives federal funding cannot engage in embryonic stem cell research (beyond existing, flawed, lines which nearly everyone agrees are useless). Problem is that almost all of our major research labs in this country receive federal funding for some of their work at least indirectly. So to do stem cell research you'd need to set up duplicate facilities that are well equipped and staffed and that do not receive any federal funds - very costly, very redundant. Among other side effects, this may be driving some of our best up and coming scientists away from fields that include stem cell work because it is also not a successful way to run your professional (scholarly) life, where research grants are almost all based on federal money and academic tenure requirements most places are such that you'd better be able to do your research at an established facility without threatening the continued funding and existence of other people's programs by engaging in projects that will cause the lab to lose their federal funds eligibility. I submit the above without reference to my personal views on stem cell research - just an observation on how the current rules are really a good deal more restrictive in practice than they may appear on the surface.

A quick follow-up. I mentioned to one of the ASMs that my son seems to hold in high esteem that he was thinking about resigning as PL so this other boy could take over. The ASM found some time to have a little chat with my son and whatever he said worked well because my son came back from his camp out last weekend and said "Mr. X said he thinks I'm doing a good job. I guess I'll stick with it." Amazing how powerful a couple of quiet words can be! Thanks for the input!

Jeff if you're referring to what I wrote then I would suggest you look again. This isn't about not wanting to be "mean" and it isn't about "mollycoddling" a boy. I'm in complete agreement with It's Me and others(read previous posts) that the boy should lose his knife, his whittling chit, and that he should have to write a letter of apology and that his parents should be in attendance. I have not suggested that we should allow webelos (or anybody else) to get away with bullying and threatening each other with knives. My point is simply that we need to ensure the punishment is effective without going way overboard. As for what's appropriate vs. overboard, Beavah and I disagree there. But that does not equate to sweeping it under the rug nor does it equate to being unwilling to take necessary steps to keep people safe and "in line" as you have suggested. And I would say the same applied to It's Me. He had to deal with the situation in coordination with a bunch of other people, while all we on this forum have to do is play armchair quarterback, and I think he did a pretty good job.

Beavah, if this boy were a little older I'd be more inclined to agree with you. But we aren't dealing with a boy scout here; we're dealing with a cub scout. Admittedly there are shades of gray (difference between a 2nd year webelos scout in November and a first year boy scout in February isn't much) but I still think it is worth bearing in mind that this kid is probably only 10 years old. What would be appropriate for a 12-13-14+ yr old boy might not work here. Not to mention that standing up in front of a pack of 100 is pretty daunting. Many kids, rather than do that, would just quit. I'm not sure I see how putting the boy in that position as a cub scout where quitting is a likely outcome will help him. On the other hand, maybe talking about the situation in the den with all of the boys present would be more logical. Those are the other boys who really need to know that the situation was dealt with (post facto) in an appropriate manner anyway. The pack's Tigers probably don't even know that this whole matter took place. Anyway I tend to agree w/ It's Me; it is easier to provide harsh suggestions in the abstract than when you are faced with a flesh and blood boy and his family and you don't want to see them quit. Reality tempers those instincts toward harsh punishment. SSScout, I did WB in 2003. There are "what if" scenarios at various points in the weekends but I do not recall them being a major focus of the training. Of course things have been revamped a bit since then and role playing of that nature might be more prevalent now.

It's Me I think you did a good job of finding a balance. While I understand where others are coming from with regard to public punishment, it is important to keep in mind as well that this is a 10 or 11 year old boy we're talking about. For most kids that age, just the thought of getting up to do anything in front of 100 people would be scary enough, let alone, to have them witness your punishment. I hope this boy learned a serious lesson from his experience but I also hope he isn't made an example of for the rest of his time in scouting. Everybody deserves the chance to grow from their mistakes.

"Another question for the forum members: in the short term while I try to get folks in the community to help, can the members of our committee and our ASMs sign up as MBCs so we at least can get started doing the paperwork right? " Yes! That will certainly make your life easier to start with. Here's a link to "a guide for merit badge counselors" on USScouts.org which you may find useful. http://www.usscouts.org/boyscouts/MBCounseling.html Also here's a link to the registration form for mbcs. http://www.usscouts.org/advance/docs/33405.doc Note that the mbc's do register as scouters (but usually don't pay a fee if that is the only position for which they are registering) and they are supposed to be approved by your council so once you get people who are willing, that's an important next step. (though frankly, it doesn't sound like your council is too worried about this given the process you've described for mbc's right now! But to do things by the book, you'll need council's approval.) Also I know some councils limit the number of mb's any one person can sign up to counsel. You should check with your district/council advancement chair to find out about this.

Just curious here. If your district/council doesn't use blue cards, how do they track completed mbs? Do they collect and sign off on the USScouts worksheets or something? Can you enlist the help of the young/new scouts' parents on this front? If you can "sell" the idea of MB counselors to them (the way it is supposed to work) then perhaps they would be willing to sign on as mbcs. Even if only for one badge each and even if it isn't for Eagle-required badges (though that would be helpful), that would be a good start. Can you talk with your local first responders about signing on as mbcs? We've had excellent luck with that for badges such as first aid, fire safety, finger printing, crime prevention, and emergency preparedness. Are you close to any of the social studies teachers in your middle school/high school? Tap them for the various citizenship badges. I think the big first step is getting buy-in from your younger scouts (PLC), their parents, and your committee so that you are all in agreement that you will build a mb program that works the way it ought to, prior to getting people signed up. Once you're all on the same page you can tap your scouts/parents/committee to help you locate willing community members to sign up as mbcs. Keep us up to date! And good luck! Lisa'bob

Actually Mark I don't know if that ought to be your last resort. Thinking about some issues that have come up in the past in the troop and packs I was associated with, it seems to me that sometimes you can AVOID many behavioral problems by being upfront with parents. For example, for some boys you can come up with a code word or other discrete signal to let them know when they are getting out of control. For others a self-imposed quiet-down period helps. For some a buddy or shadow is really necessary to help them identify and correctly interpret social cues. You can do trial and error and find out some of these things yourself over time, or you can ask Mom and Dad what works to start with and skip a lot of the "error" part of "trial and error." Also and speaking strictly as a parent here - I don't want or need a report on every little thing my kid does, whether he looked at someone cross-eyed, etc. But if he is acting out in such a way that it has become a major disruption then I EXPECT to hear about it from the troop leaders, preferably earlier than later when he may have developed this mis-behavior into a habit. And I would expect them to seek my input into how to work with my kid to help him overcome any problems or quirks that he has (and we all have some quirks, don't we?). Also, especially when it comes to grossly inappropriate behavior (physical space issues and racial slurs fit here in my book) then if some other boy in the troop is engaging in such behavior against my kid then I also expect troop leaders will talk with that boy and his parents. So no, don't run to mom or dad at every turn but if you aren't including them in the pro-active approach to your discipline issues then I think you probably ought to start doing that.

If it isn't signed off in the books then it hasn't happened. Get them used to that notion now before they become boy scouts, where they are responsible for getting things signed off on their own if they expect to advance. Tracking sheets are great and I use them too. But it puts the onus on you - the adult - rather than on the boy, to be responsible for his advancement, if that's the only record of accomplishments. You might try awarding some kind of small prizes for the boy(s) who bring their book(s) to get them into the habit. Lisa'bob

Hi Eaglescout, It's great that you are working to strengthen the patrols and you've received good advice here. Just a word on setting up scouts with email - you may want to check in with their parents and let them know what you are doing and why (or have the scouts get a signed consent form from their parents), especially for your younger scouts. Some parents are very cautious about having their kids on the net and will want to know exactly what you are setting up. They probably are more worried than they need to be but it is better to be proactive about this rather than have to deal with angry parents after the fact.