Liz

That’s a great poem!!

Sadly, it’s not the same one this gentleman was reciting. It began with just a long catalog of woods like “Birch, Maple, Fir and Ash,” (just random woods I don’t recall which ones there were) and something about how all of them were good for making campfires. 

We’ll be selling at the same location in a couple of weeks. With some luck maybe he’ll stop by again. 

While selling Camp Cards at the grocery store today, a mature gentleman stopped to buy a card and tell my daughter a little about his time in Scouting which I’d estimate to have been in the 50’s or so. He said he remembered all the old camp songs and poems and partially recited one about gathering wood. It started off as a list of different types of wood like Beech, Ash, etc. I wish I would have thought to ask if I could record him reciting the whole thing but alas, that idea didn’t come to me. I had never heard the poem before. Anybody know what it might have been?

20 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

That is much harder than it sounds and requires dedicated adults. Even harder are two dedicated CCs and SMs. Don’t just ask for volunteers, seek out talented adults and personally recruit them. 

Barry

I'm not giving an opinion on the practicality of it. Simply providing clarification since it was stated above that with linked troops there are two separate committees even if the members who sit on each committee are the same people. That is a misunderstanding of the definition of a linked troop. 

A CO *may* have two completely separate troops with two separate committees in the same way that they have a separate committee for a pack and one for a troop and/or a crew or what have you, but that is not a "linked" troop that is just two different units chartered by the same organization. 

39 minutes ago, ValleyBoy said:

 I am against and do not in no way like the term linked troops.  As far as the question about the committee each of the troops have there own committee even though  as in your case the members of both committee's might be the same. 

"A chartered organization may also have “linked troops,” which means a shared troop committee with separate troops for boys and for girls." 

https://scoutingmagazine.org/2018/10/hello-scouts-bsa/

So, nope. Same committee overseeing both troops. Not just the same people sitting on two committees. 

Back to your regularly scheduled forum thread...

2 hours ago, ScoutMom45036 said:

I understand the suggestions, but knowing my kid, I have to set clear boundaries with how much time he spends with me at camp. Thanks for speaking up for anxious kids, though.

I think that's the real key - knowing what works for your unique kid.

8 hours ago, mrkstvns said:

If you have an overly anxious child, do everyone a favor....stay home your first year.

A youth with an actual anxiety disorder is not going to EVER going to get to go to camp if some accommodation isn't made for the first time. Staying home the first year just puts it off because now 2020 is the first year... and 2021... until the kid ages out and never makes it to camp at all. 

If we're talking about homesickness in the general realm of "normal" I totally agree with you. A lot of anxiety is normal and is best handled by either jumping in with both feet or waiting for another year of maturity to help the anxiety go away. Kids with anxiety disorders tend to have it get worse, not better, with age. The more experiences you can expose them to in a safe and positive environment early on, the more activities they'll be able to handle as they get older. 

I wasn't clear from the original post whether we are talking about a "nervous" kid or one with a disabling level of anxiety. My response is based on my own experience raising kids with actual anxiety disorders. Fortunately my kids did the whole cub scout thing and were already acclimated to camp by the time they were in a Troop, so they were fine going without me and when I went (which I did some years and not others) I wasn't there to support them, but just to be another YPT-trained warm body or whatever it is that they make adults attend camp at all for. The secret I found to getting them more independence is to do whatever was necessary to make them comfortable the first time, and usually within a few hours they were off and running on their own. But in situations where that wasn't possible, they often just missed out entirely and weren't able to overcome their anxiety long enough to get started. I think it took us three times (three years running) of waking up the morning of the 50-mile backpacking trip (which I could NOT go on) before I was able to get my oldest child to get out of the car and actually leave with the troop in spite of a debilitating anxiety attack. 

The important thing here is to make a decision about whether the child actually NEEDS a crutch to get started, or whether the child NEEDS to just be pushed. Or, I suppose, needs another year to shake it off; but depending on the kid that could mean never going to camp because there always has to be a first time and it doesn't get easier for kids with real barriers.

Thanks!

I'm kind of stuck at "Most Creative," "Sportiest Looking," and "Sparkliest" cars. Help me out here.  

I don't know the answer, but I will give a hint in case you need to fill out multiple applications.

I got so tired of trying to write cramped information in the tiny background section that I downloaded an official PDF of the application, filled it in on my computer, and saved a copy. Now whenever I need a renewal or transfer or whatever I can just edit it a little to suit and print another copy.

My older children were both in the OA. It was what kept them in Scouting until age 18, and for the older one led to joining Venturing for another couple years after that primarily in order to remain engaged in the OA. The younger one is now considering becoming a Scouter. They LOVED the OA. They loved the camping and the community service. They signed up for every OA activity that was offered, which was not true of all the other Scout opportunities. Neither one became Eagle Scouts, but in all honesty I think their activity in the OA was more valuable to them in the long run than earning Eagle. I'm not claiming that is broadly true, I'm only talking about my own kids here. 

I would gently encourage, but not push, the child to give it a try. He doesn't have to remain active if it's not for him. If he really doesn't want to even try, don't make him. But I think if he does try it, he won't regret it. 

Yes, it is "more work." In my experience as a parent of OA Scouts, it's the best and most satisfying work they could possibly be doing.

11 minutes ago, SSScout said:

 Candy Stripper(do we still have that?)

 

🤣 I think I would draw the line at the school newspaper recommending students become  Candy Strippers. Candy Stripers might be acceptable. And yes, they do still exist but they aren't called that anymore and they don't wear stripes, at least not at my local hospital. 

Anyway, I think it would be interesting to find out what exactly the guidelines are in terms of why Scouting falls outside the realm of acceptable and other activities fall inside. But I think it's kind of sad that kids can't recommend what they want in kid-written articles.

As straight peanut butter to dip carrots into or something, I think you're right. It misses the mark as far as flavor and texture. But as a mix-in for hot cereal, it's an awesome boost of protein and blends more easily than a traditional peanut butter. And it's lighter for backpacking. I use it as an ingredient a lot but it hasn't placed my Costco sized jar of Adams Chunky. 

2 minutes ago, mrkstvns said:

Powdered peanut butter, eh?  I've never heard of such a thing....is it sold in grocery stores?

Yes, I've seen it in grocery stores and there are several brands. I have some that's chocolate flavored that's Jif in my cupboard right now. I think PB2 is the leading national brand. It can be ordered on Amazon too. Vitacost.com has its own brand as well as carrying the national brands. It's good for a lot of stuff.

On 2/2/2019 at 5:51 PM, qwazse said:

Regarding grits, oatmeal, cream-of-wheat .... for it to be a legit backpacking breakfast, add a dollop of peanut butter for the requisite protein infusion.

Not as high in calories, but for a shot of protein and more lightweight than peanut butter is *powdered* peanut butter. Reconstitute with water and spread on a bagel, or just add it to your hot cereal of choice. It's actually quite good. I use it in cookies, smoothies, and lots of other things around here. 

2 hours ago, dfg890 said:

Disagree wholeheartedly.  Some girls tend to be more visual learners, some boys tend to be more tactile.  Most people tend to have multiple preferences for different learning styles.  The continued belief that one gender prefers certain learning styles is not born out by recent studies. 

This 100%. 

My daughter has receptive language delays. I can't explain ANYTHING to her to save her life. Literally. She appears fairly typical most of the time, but it was her inability at 4 years old to follow two-step instructions like "get your shoes and bring them here" that led me to argue with her doctor until she agreed to write a referral for an evaluation. Hands-on, and she learns as well or better than a lot of her same-age peers, but verbal instruction... she might as well not even have ears. She may be able to repeat the instructions back to you verbatim, but she won't be able to actually put them into action until she at least sees it being done or, better yet, has the ability to experiment until she figures it out on her own. 

To a lesser extent, I'm largely the same way. I have an abysmal ability to retain information that's given to me verbally. I can read stuff and remember it forever, but tell me without pointing it out on a map or at least letting me write it down that I need to drive 1 mile, turn left on Pearl street, go three blocks, and turn right on Ruby street, and I'm going to attempt to drive 3 miles and turn left on Ruby street then 1 block and turn right on Pearl. 

This whole idea that learning styles are based on gender is bunk. 

12 hours ago, awanatech said:

It's too bad that as Scouters, some pretend to go by the rules (on paper), when in reality, so many dance around the rules that are set in place.  And then we wonder why our youth take it upon themselves to decide which rules to follow and which ones are ok to just pretend that we follow. Either we have co-ed dens, or we don't.  If co-ed Dens are what BSA wants, then why do we have to whisper it?  If co-ed Dens are not what BSA wants, then why do we pretend to follow the rules, on paper, but really openly go against it? 

I read the rules very closely and we discussed this with our DE. On the cub scout level, there is no limit in the rules to how many of the activities need to be separate or how many can be together. In our Bear dens, with two girls and two boys, it not practical for us to separate any of the actual activities by gender. But we are following the rules and have two den leaders and the kids are registered into two dens. 

We are working on forming a girl troop and whether we end up with a pair of linked brother/sister troops or just a stand alone girl troop, we will still follow the rules. We may have more or fewer joint activities depending on what the two PLCs want to do, and it remains to be seen how much the two troops (if we have two) might look to outsiders like a single co-ed troop; but we'll follow the rules and each troop will have its own Scoutmaster and its own SPL and its own PLC. 

There's still a great deal of flexibility within the rules to have a plenty of joint/crossover activities. There is no reason to break those rules to accomplish what you need to accomplish given your unit's circumstances. 

5 minutes ago, dfg890 said:

I fear the same for my oldest who will cross over next year.  I don't know what girl troops exist, and I believe we are going to keep fight to allow our pack's partner troop to become co-ed.(seperate patrols perhaps, or what have you).  I think a lot of the camporee issues will be mitigated by having co-ed units.  As for shenanigans, I was a scout and participated in plenty of shenanigans growing up.  I'm not sure who didn't.  I think following YPT and such would mitigate that, though no one can really control what scouts do on their free time, and lets be honest, a girl troop and a boy troop wouldn't mitigate that much at a large jamboree, but there are tons of adults around, so I think those fears would be overblown.

It's a tricky thing, and there are bound to be growing pains.  At least it seems that camporees aren't too often.  I can count on one hand the number I went to as a scout, but maybe some go to way more.  I went to philmont, I went to camp, it was fun and we had a blast.  Certainly didn't care much about scoring when I was a scout.  Liz, I think we should work to find other packs like ours because I know there is strength in numbers.  I'm hoping to attend the national meeting (or at least a rep from our pack) armed with literature and our experiences so that we can perhaps reach some people who can affect change.  

I agree that separating camporees would be a logistical nightmare.  I'm likely on next years committee for our cub games, and I'll do my darnedest to advocate for fairness, though much of the scoring was arbitrary and controlled by the Scouts running the event, with the adults providing logistical support.  Hopefully we can instill in them the need for equal treatment.

Look, this doesn't need to be hard. 95% of my packs activities go off without a hitch with our On-paper separate dens.  The only time it comes up is at these multi-pack events where the district is there to force the rules. There would have been zero drama at our cubgames if our girls had of been left to be scored with the rest of the cubs at their level.  Heck, if we didn't check a box on a form indicating their gender, you wouldn't be able to tell if they were even girls when they're in uniform.  And that's the point.  They don't notice, they don't care and the boys in their dens view them the same.  If we separated them, it would foster division instead of unity. It would create way more animosity, and it's clear that's happening on a more national level.  Co ed dens are the easiest solution.  It might not work for all, but it sure as hell needs to be the official stance.

I'm sorry your District isn't supportive of how you're running your dens. Ours knows, understands, and is fine with it. They understand the challenges of running a program with very few kids in it. It would be different if we had 16 Bear Scouts, but we have 4 as our combined girl/boy total. If we were going to attend a district event we'd make sure in advance that they'd be allowed to function as a single den because otherwise they won't function at all. 

Maybe your CO would be open to starting a linked troop for the girls. I actually like this as an option because it allows the units to pick the advantages both of single gender and two-gender groups. Some activities can be planned jointly, and some activities can be planned separately, and it gives the members of each troop to experience youth leadership and the patrol method. 

The whole concern about shenanigans kind of makes me laugh. How long have boys and girls in general been going to school together through the teen years? Going to various non-scouting summer camps together? Going on class trips and church outings and mission trips and band camp and and and and and... some kids participate in shenanigans, and some don't, and that isn't going to change. Adults need to be diligent at keeping it to a minimum, and the more determined kids will do what they're going to do regardless of what safeguards the adults put into place. Just like they do in every other aspect of their lives. Maybe it will help to look back on when we were kids, and think about what we and/or our friends were up to, and own it as part of the growing-up experience, rather than cringe with dread. I'm not saying we should not be discouraging risky behavior, but maybe we should be a little more realistic about how much risky behavior we can really prevent and have some acceptance that mentoring youth is not without risk. 

3 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

There weren't as many details given as you imply and many of the details were conflicting by the different ways they were presented.

Barry

I guess we're just perceiving things very differently. I feel like we had PLENTY of information, and I don't know what else they were supposed to convey that they didn't. 

18 hours ago, ValleyBoy said:

Is this one a regular square or rectangle shaped cover? Or is it more kite-shaped? Homemade or purchased? Tarp or nylon rip-stop? 

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

The girls program has been rammed down the throat of the units along with confusing information and a bit of hostile marketing, which has lead to more of a us vs them introduction than a lets work together for a common goal. The BSA is in trouble and adding girls is probably the best path to survival. But it should have been a team effort from the units to National. Instead National kept everything close and secrete. Nobody knew what was going on until it happened.

I'm not seeing at all what you're seeing here, Barry. 

We've known for well over a year that a program was going to be released that would include girls in the full Scouting experience. They told us that long before the details had been worked out. We've known since I-don't-know-how-long what that program was going to look like... I don't remember when they finalized it but it's been at least since last Fall, or last Summer. That's been plenty of time to figure out what's happening and plan for it. And nothing is getting rammed down anybody's throat; no Troop is being required to form a troop for the girls to come alongside. Maybe there's something going on in your Council or District that isn't happening here, but certainly in my experience I'm seeing the vast majority of the existing Troops remain as stand-alone boy troops with only a handful of existing COs starting girl troops. 

7 hours ago, dfg890 said:

 

" Girls are going to want yogurt parfaits because they are pretty while the boys want watermelon for its seed spitting opportunity, if you get my drift."

Wow. Just wow. 

This is certainly not my experience at all. Most of my daughter’s friends are boys and one of the reasons she didn’t want to join Girl Scouts is that she wanted a program she wouldn’t have to exclude her friends from. Even in Kindergarten when we discussed joining GS she perceived it as something she would want to invite her friends to. So I looked into Campfire for her only to find it isn’t active in our area anymore, and she didn’t join anything until cub scouts opened up when she was in 2nd grade. 

In our pack the separate den thing is only on paper. The girls and boys don’t even know there are two dens. They just know they have two den leaders. It’s a small pack and only two boy bears and two girl bears, so segregating the dens would really limit what we could do. Den meetings generally are one boy and one girl each because of geographical distance - the boy den leader runs weekly meetings on one side of town and I run them on the other side of town and each of us meets with one of the others’ scouts. Pack meetings and additional activities are done with all the bears together and the other den leader and I coordinate those as co-den leaders. 

My daughter is already sad about not being able to do the same thing when she eventually crosses over - she doesn’t want to do separate Troops. But reality is that due to parent temperament I don’t think either of our boys is going to join Scouts BSA anyway - I’ll be surprised if they stick around for Webelos. The kids all love it but the parents are busy with other things so we’ll see. The girls are the ones whose parents make sure they show up pretty consistently to activities. 

I'd love to see more *photos* of the various set-ups in the field. If I can avoid dragging a heavy framed cover thing on outings, I'd sure like to. Especially shorter outings, where it hardly seems worthwhile to drag that thing out for 24 hours or less. But the reality of our location is that outings happen in the rain or not at all, so good covers are necessary.

8 hours ago, Eagledad said:

I am skeptical because not only do I not believe a typical NEW unit can get to speed in one month under normal circumstance, I don't believe the scouts would set that as a goal.

 

Has it occurred to anybody that many of these girls have been unofficially but actively involved in BSA alongside their brothers potentially for years? Some of them may have been heavily coached by older brothers to help them succeed, too.

Am I the only one whose kids were involved in a troop where younger sisters were an ever-present fixture at all the non-council events they could get to? If allowed to go to Campboree, these girls would have been learning alongside their brothers, coached by their brothers, and eager to finally get recognition for all the stuff they'd learned. Just two or three girls with this kind of experience would be enough to motivate and provide the expertise for the whole troop to do extremely well at Campboree. 

It's also entirely possible many of the other troops in this area really just need to step up their game. I haven't been to Campboree in my area yet, but from what I hear of the other adults talking, it sounds like there only a couple of truely competitive units and the rest of the troops just use it as a camping trip. Not at all like the Campborees my older kids competed in. 

And nobody said they swept the Campboree and won every prize. They said the girls made it into the "top three" for each competition, which means to me that other units took home a fair number of first place awards too. I'd wager there were probably only 3 or 4 units total who took all but a few of those competitions. 

3 of my 4 kids experience abnormal levels of anxiety. Anxiety is its own beast and is not the same thing as "separation anxiety" which should resolve itself within 24 hours or so of arriving at camp.

You know your son better than anybody. Do NOT be afraid to attend camp with him this first time if that's what he needs. If you feel he really just needs the push, don't be afraid to do that either. But don't push him if you think it's just something you "should" do. Push him if, in your experience, you find those pushes actually help him grow. If you have found in the past that those pushes make him feel more anxious, it's probably better to just go ahead and go, so he sees it isn't so scary. Next year he'll be more familiar with the location, and with the other kids, and possibly even the staff. 

If you go to camp, perhaps volunteer to do something that will keep you busy, but still available if your son needs you. Maybe help in the kitchen, or supervise a merit badge station, or whatever. If your son's anxiety is too high he can hang out and help you with your task; and if he's feeling OK he can go around camp with his patrol and have fun. 

22 hours ago, bsaggcmom said:

But in my experience as a severe allergy sufferer for decades and the mom of an Eagle Scout with asthma I have never seen an allergy attack cause a fever. Not even a low grade fever.

My husband routinely gets into the trap of letting his allergies get out of control and developing sinus infections as a result, leasing to fevers. So the cause may be slightly indirect, but allergies can still be the primary cause of something that can lead to a fever. 

I have a slightly different take on the potential solution, having gone through several years with my kids in an entire Troop full of allergies. Not specifically the camp fire allergies, but the need to adapt the way kids camp due to the medical needs of the members. In our case, we had one whole patrol give up on the idea of cooking as a patrol. Yes, it meant they lost out on certain valuable leadership skills and weren't as practiced at one of the things they had to do for Campboree, but with two Celiac kids in the troop, two different dairy allergic kids, one allergic to beef, and I forget what all else, we put all those kids in the same patrol and they all cooked for themselves on personal backpacking stoves. 

It also reminds me of the time one of the kids in my son's Webelos den decided he was determined he was going to earn EVERY PIN - but was completely phobic of water and couldn't swim at all. The entire den rallied around him and worked over several sessions with gentle guidance from the adults as to how not to make it worse to help the one kid get over his fear so he could learn to swim well enough earn his swimming pin. After several gentle acclimation efforts, we rented out a small swimming pool for a "swimming pin" activity so nobody but the den and leaders would be there and they all cheered him on while he ran through the requirements (and everyone else breezed through them too). It wasn't necessary for this kid to earn this one last pin, but it was this Scout's goal and his friends supported him in it. In my book this was one of the most successful examples of the values we are trying to teach in Scouts. 

What I'm getting at is that it's entirely possible to camp without a campfire at all. Perhaps your PLC can be tasked with the job of "how do we support this Scout in getting at least his 11 nights of camping without making himself sick?" That could look like a number of different things, which might be "no camp fire at all" or "choose a camping spot that can be further away from the fire pit" or something else entirely, and it should be up to the boys to figure out how to make it happen - but it should happen. 

As a side note, if you haven't taken your son to an allergist, I would recommend that. If you've already done that, you're ahead of me.