qwazse

You typically only get that acre lot from a generous farmer or landowner. Some community parks/fairgrounds will give that, especially if the boys plan on doing some service. Game lands often have fields that large. Many wilderness recreation areas insist on that kind of spacing - in groups smaller than the average patrol, but that also predicates that your boys are have become disciplined in things like bear bagging, water purification, Leave no Trace, etc ... In the hills of WPa/WV; however, 50 feet can feel like a mile ... easily out of sight and sound. Where allowed, I'll bring my dog, who doubles duty as SPL patrolling each site. Problem is, he hates cyclists (we've learned the hard way), and we have to find places that don't appeal to mountain bikers! So, having him along is a rare treat.

Not bad. One part boy, one part America, two parts scouts. Hopefully girls will realize that means it's for them!

Early 80s bumper sticker,

Ours doesn't but I wish they did. My wide-brim leather hat wore out, and the company that made it, no longer makes that width.😪

Welcome. Thanks for your service to youth! Look forward to hearing your ideas.

Mixed feelings about the exemption. {Insert identity-vs.-achievement rant here.} {Insert, but- yeah, to do it right a reconciliation commission would need go clear back to 1970 or whenever the first tag-along did everything the award required.} The clever move would to remove the age 18 deadline altogether, then tell those young women that ASM while starting a BSA4G unit would fulfill the PoR requirement. But that would cause NESA to lose $$ as the actual # of Eagle awards plummet because last-minute scouts will procrastinate in perpetuity without a "last minute" to scramble them.

Those who do this regularly can explain why, but it's a lot easier to work with a "transfer report." Also post-modern nomads tend to put their faith in database output, but I don't think that's a prime factor. Anyway, have fun first. Patches will follow.

I am holding off bringing this up for a month or so. But here's my pitch: I will share the outline I got from Wendy Shaw's talk from training (and posted for you all a while back). I will then point out that I have not seen 5 girls willing to form a troop nor a female adult willing to be trained, but if you are out there, I have myself and a willing CO. The unknowns are the existing troop committee and PLC who may decide how "linked" they want to be. My house has a doorbell and a phone ... tag me before five teens come and ask to restart the Venturing Crew.

@Bobbys_mommy I wouldn't worry too much about the records. He has sign-offs in his book, right? At this level, it's not too hard to go over the pack calendar and cover the things he had completed there. Then, most things that he completed at home, you could go over with his new den leader. That's the point about dens, boys are able to able to get the individual attention they need. Speaking of individual attention. The downside of a den is it might become pretty clear pretty quick that your boy is an instigator. That's a good thing for a parent to know, but it might be tough on the boy as he now has to unwind some of the conduct that led to this situation. (I'm not saying his conduct wasn't partly or wholly defensive ... just that I've found that boys coming from such situations have a hard time letting their guard down.) An honest den leader will let you in on what if anything is going on. You just have to be prepared to work with it.

LOL. In my neck of the woods, I call that an entitlement mentality. CO gives us space, with that we hold a fundraiser that covers lots of costs (including most weekend camp fees). Pastor and parishioners attend happily. In return, life scouts knock on the CO's door asking if there are projects they can do. Kids who can't afford camp often get helped by anonymous donors. But, we do experience other "down-sides" to this arrangement. The COR does not keep close tabs on us. The current one was an explorer, and experienced a similar CO, so it suits her just fine. I'm sure if she made more effort, we would communicate more and be more efficient.

The most outdoor-oriented GS/USA troops are ones who have leaders in their mid-twenties (who are not moms), or they are leaders who already work closely with BSA and are translating the boys' program to their girls. The problem of "play-it-safe" SMs (both male and female, but mainly the latter) is imploding a lot of BSA units. I have two young relatives who quit their troop because the promise of scouting wasn't being delivered. Last I checked they were playing gaga ball in a pit at a Trail Life gathering. I don't blame boys who move on if 14 girls just "show up". The best-case scenario is one mom or older sister or retiree taking on mentor-ship with your best ASM. (I find senior citizens to be some of the most trainable people on the planet when it comes to this stuff.) The youth start their hiking/camping, inviting a former SPL/TG from among the boys' troop to help with basic training. Any CO who can't deliver that, shouldn't start. Like the Good Book says, "Count the cost."

This is where many of us take for granted that we've each gravitated toward the CO's who give us the latitude we feel we need to deliver the program we think we must. As a scout, I was always puzzled why a troop started up on the same side of our very small town as my own troop. Reflecting on it, I've come to realize that my SM, who was more than happy to have some rough guys as ASM (all good as gold, but not necessarily paragons of the church who sponsored us), was not the kind of guy everyone wanted to be scouting with. Although strict regarding manners and generous towards missionaries, he would be nobody's agent of protestant reformation. Same for the committee. Clearly, the church hosting our troop expected them to leave any preaching to the professionals. I'm sure it caused no small amount of discomfort to parishioners that we would sometimes attend scout Sunday and the Catholic church and share activities with the LDS troop. The Baptist church's troop, I believe, was somewhat different. Camp less. Preach more. Watch which lines you cross. Needless to say, certain types would work well with one CO, but not the other.

In that environment, any change would fail in a self-fulfilling prophecy sort of way. I would guide the 4 girls to find a 5th and form a different troop refer them to the 1/4 "strong yes" for their pool of leaders. Have the CO determine if they can handle this "linked" unit, or if it would be better off to have an independent sponsor. We had a minority strongly opposed to whatever I was doing with Venturing and blowing smoke in the CoR's face about it. It took a while to figure out that they were actually a very small minority. (Some parents switched to being in favor of the thing after discussion with their boys. Or, being impressed by the behavior of our girls.) But, if the reverse were true, relocating the crew to a different CO would have been a no-brainer.

I definitely understand the shifting sands feeling.

Yes. We are students of minutiae on this blog. That's mainly because most of us have taken flack for one thing or another by someone making up rules on the fly, and we found here the support for a breadth of reasonable ideas ... and correction for some stupid ones. As far as linked troops being a "botch up", I'm keeping an open mind. Although our friends in Western Europe have "anything goes" way of incorporating girls in their units, I've met scouts from other countries who've work with more segregated models. Although the one-off girl who tags along with her brother makes splashier headlines, the girls who've formed their own patrols and asked to be recognized as a unit ... that's a very classic model of growth. The scouter who you mentioned, was his troop looking forward to welcoming girls?

I've had scouts complain about being in a dysfunctional family. (These were not boys showing/reporting any signs of abuse, BTW.) I asked, "Are you alive? Then it seems to have functioned." I've known: CO's who wanted to charge rent. CO's who asked the troop to go to mass as if their camping activity extended to Sunday. Non Catholics could wait outside the church for that hour if their faith demanded it. COs who would not remove leaders who generated drama. CO's who welcomed (insisted?) that girls in the community be part of the program. Rogue troops do not happen in vacuums. I would say that if the CO insisted on something egregious, like refusing to send its leaders to training, that would be too far.

Aside to scouters: when you need to choose a health plan, ask if they have any youth employees. If they don't, inform them that you will continue your search.

Rogue troops. 'Nuff said.

We work for smiles. That said, money does make one smile. But, not in the same way that a scout who recognizes you years from now will. Tough choice. Just so you know, it never gets easier.

Not seeing new emojis from the tablet, But here they are on the workstation 🌟

Looks like the feed feature got hacked.

Daughter can't stand pink. As far as folks in my family who would wear it on regular occasion, Mrs. Q, to her regret, once bought me a pink Oxford shirt. Loved that thing. I made it look good. Wore it to work at least once a week and church at least once a month. But, most feminine patrol patch? Well, I would argue for cobra patrol. Females of the species tend to be larger and, supposedly sport grander hoods.

Mind = Blown. Serves me right for getting my info from https://www.scouting.org/awards/awards-central/whittling-chip/, I had no idea BALOO insisted on a wholesale confiscation of a cub's card. No merciful clips. No warnings. No temporary suspensions. Just cruel zero tolerance. OH THE HUMANITY I think I understand why @Gwaihir's instructor got it wrong. He/she thought that the consequences for violating the Whittling Chip contract would, by virtue of being cubs, be the least traumatic. But. the opposite is the case. With bunches of young cubs, and typically shorter terms in camp, you don't have time or youth leadership to coach self discipline. Moreover, a lacerated cub is more traumatic risk. Therefore, you don't have the luxury of giving each scout four chances. Boy scouts have markedly more time in camp, and a greater need to work with cutting tools. So, leadership has the latitude for and need to offer second/third and fourth chances by only removing leaving a scout with 96% of a card after the first infarction.

For sort of the same reason that I'm on point when cubs want a campfire, but prefer to nap while scouts are lighting fires. Whittling Chip assumes there is an environment of immediate adult supervision (sort of like when a dad is holding a power drill for a Bear scout properly goggled). The Boy Scout certifications assume there is an environment of youth leadership that may be patchy at times (sort of like a PL going off to play catch while a couple of his designees are still cleaning up dishes). The cards/buddy tags help leaders communicate. Communication helps discipline. Discipline helps learning. That's why BSA's official stance on them is that the Scout’s [totin; firem'n, and we may include swimming] rights can be taken from him if he fails in his responsibility.

Not necessarily. Although reasonably good at negotiating contracts, government is not good at mobilizing volunteers to improve park lands to suit community needs. Often times groups like BSA are very good at mobilizing volunteers and negotiating salaries, so depending on the desired outcome, it is often in the peoples' interest to invest grant some revenue to groups like the BSA. GS/USA had also been good at this, until recent years, and then its sell-off of multiple properties around the nation resulted them in loosing their "park cred". Thus, I can see how an appropriation for urgent repairs wouldn't sit well. Then again, appropriations for maintenance have not been popular for as long as I can remember. At least not as popular as new infrastructure that's likely to crumble within 3 decades. There are certainly other things that the private sector is very good at (tourism, resource extraction), and government should and does lease land use permits accordingly. The balance, however, varies from state to state. And, frankly, if I were BSA in the shape that it's in, I would be very wary of state appropriations. I suspect there are a bunch of local private donations that are justifying the state's appropriation.