NealOnWheels

Ok, here is how I would analyze this: Does it fall under prohibited flying activities: Hang gilder - NO Ultralight - NO Experimental aircraft - NO if properly rated Non-tethered hot-air balloon - NO Search and rescue - NO Does it fall under the exceptions: Commercial aircraft - NO Flying - YES but see Flying Plan Checklist Tethered hot-air balloon - NO So it looks like it is a PERMITTED activity provided I jump through all the hoops in the Flying Plan Checklist which among its many requirements includes an appropriate Airworthiness Certificate. I predict the next revision of the Guide to Safe Scouting will explicity prohibit gliders.

Yah I know what you mean but that is how the proposal reads. I can imagine that it gets shot down in May's vote with the conservative faction asking "why should we leave?"

It is a proposal that may or may not be enacted at a vote in May. The proposal allows the creation of a "Traditional Methodist" denomination to be split off of the current "United Methodist" denomination. Individual conferences and/or local churches can elect to go the Traditional Methodist direction. If they don't act they remain United Methodist. If they have a vote they can switch to Traditional Methodist. I am thinking many of the overseas conferences would go the Traditional Methodist route as the are generally much more conservative than the US part of the church. Across the US I am thinking you will see individual local churches going both ways. I can see turmoil at the local level as each church makes their decision. There will be members that jump from one congregation to another over these decisions. Or leave to different churches altogether to avoid the controversy. In my own congregation there is a mix of conservative and liberal viewpoints many of them very strong. I see this a bad situation brewing. Hopefully I am wrong. As far as Scouting goes? I don't see much of an impact. I know of no local Methodist church that has a negative relationship with Scouting even with the membership changes. I would expect the same support from both denominations.

From the Guide To Advancement: "Completed reference responses of any kind are the property of the council and are confidential, and only review-board members and those officials with a specific need may see them. The responses are not to be viewed by or returned to the Scout. Doing so could discourage the submission of negative information. For the same reason, those providing references do not have the option of giving the reference directly to the Scout and shall not be given the option of waiving confidentiality. Once a review has been held, or an appeal process conducted, responses shall be returned to the council, where they will be destroyed after the Eagle Scout credentials are released or the appeal is concluded."

The advancement chair is correct. Someone writing a letter of recommendation will be more open about a scout if they know the scout will not read it. For the purpose of the requirement we want to have both the positive and negative. Otherwise it becomes a mere box checking.

"$500,000 for burial service" Seems a tad bit high.

"leaving the boys to go on an unreasonably dangerous hike without any supervision" This is exactly why we can't have patrol activities without adult supervision.

See the latest Guide To Safe Scouting. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34416.pdf Look on page 85 for the section "Service Project Planning Guidelines". "Look closely at page 88 for Health/Sanitation Considerations". It seems to me it states participants should provide health forms available (I would think part A & B would be appropriate).

My council lost most of their records to a flood. Because of that my online record shows I took Scoutmaster training in 1910.

Exit the tent first then apply. Not a good idea to get repellents on the tent fabric. Especially DEET which will attack the nylon.

Might be "soft" but still larger than a tennis ball.

According to the Guide to Safe Scouting the pavilion was not a suitable safe building. "Safe Building—one that is fully enclosed with a roof, walls, and floor, and has plumbing or wiring." As far as I can tell the Guide to Safe Scouting only mentions the recommendations of the National Weather Service. It does not say it is a requirement of scout units. But I would not want to take chances with scouts. The Hazardous Weather Training would be something good to review as well.

I find this phrase curious... "Associating with organizations who do not have similar brand history, program portfolio, and track record for safety dilutes and tarnishes our brand, and allows Boy Scouts to leverage the reputation of Girl Scouts for their own purposes." I can understand wanting to maintain their brand identity but this just sounds like they have a superiority complex.

From the Guide To Safe Scouting Youth Protection & Adult Leadership section: "Appropriate attire is required for all activities.". Of course nothing defines what "appropriate attire" is for any given activity. Need to use some common sense.

Thank you for volunteering!