qwazse

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.

Oooh, but maybe if it's a chip card with bluetooth! Without even taking it out of the scout's pocket, it could automatically retract a corner, then update Scoutbook accordingly. Once all four corners are retracted, it would sense when Johnny is approaching a blade and send a push notification to the nearest leader. "Warning! Warning! A scout in your vicinity must report to re-training immediately!

You mean the one that the adult is holding the trigger on? While the daughter stands behind with safety goggles, spotting? All we see is conduct well within the intent of G2SS.

@RememberSchiff, are you talking about the craft drill? The one with the hand crank? Or, did you just figure you'd toss that in while the fish were biting? @cocomax, how do you like those red sunglasses? Updating score: 0 YPT violations 0 G2SS violations 1 harsh reality:

Let me go on record (with some trepidation) that my WSJ troop is looking for its 3rd ASM. If the worthy candidate is female, I would like the opportunity to field a patrol of western PA girls.

Have you read the roster? Do you know how many adult leaders are on it? How many were present? Looking at the news wire story https://www.apnews.com/1ea6dd147080464881e604e575233aab/Beyond-cookies:-Thousands-of-girls-are-becoming-Cub-Scouts I see at least one female adult in one of the photos. Plus, on the opposite side of the lens ...according to the byline, "Holly" is a female name. Girls were on one side of boys on the other, dens were separated. So, @cocomax, did you miss these proofs that this pack is compliant with early adopter rules, or ignore them? In order to trick us into your narrative, what other truths will you obfuscate? Who else will you bear false witness against?

Correction: it was a group of two dens, one of four boys the other of four girls, in strict compliance with the rules.

I'm getting nervous. Not for being "converted" anytime soon, but that this thread might get more posts than a far more general one ...

Sigh, it doesn't look like questions from one who wants to be converted, but on the outside chance ... Discipline. Which is not usually acquired after merely one conversation. An undisciplined scout will risk life and limb of himself or his fellows in the presence of a different leader (youth or adult), that leader will correct the scout. This could repeat itself any number of times with different leaders. None of them aware that this scout has been "rolling the dice", and in that ignorance, each will allow the scout to continue this game of Totin' roulette. Because stopping at a corner is itself an act of discipline sufficient to communicate one's estimate of a scouts' hazardous behavior. Did the scout give the troop two dimes for the card? Accurately communicating risk is improving, not damaging. Firstly, scale does matter. The cost of an award often determines how it should be treated. We don't deface or rip off Totin' Chip or Firem'n Chit patches. Secondly, risk matters. Although it's a disgrace to your troop, your country, and your mamma, the risk that life or limb would be compromised to a wrapper (corner of a card ) on the ground is negligible. Likewise regarding reverence, the Almighty's graces are such that the brunt of irreverence is carried far from the camp. Such as scout is better served by tales of scapegoats. Thirdly, although we don't deface patches, we do demand that scouts live up to their uniform, and - for heinous infractions - will suspend him. That suspension includes being denied the privilege of uniforming during suspension.

You can say it, but without prior permission from GS/USA, you can't add it to any promotional flyer for a BSA activity that you intend to open to Brownies, Daisies, Cadets, or Ambassadors

I'm calling dibs ... But, I was looking to generate some scouting-relevant discussion. This being I&P, TT's "joke" is not far off even though it smarts. Every adult leader in PA is bearing the brunt of the assault trial(s). I have no doubt this and #MeToo plays into the liability calculation.

We range in size from 2-4 patrols. I find that with the APL's present, we have a pretty fruitful PLC for up to 3 patrols. Things start to deteriorate with 4 patrols forming a PLC of 11 (SPL+assistant + four pairs from each patrol + troop guide), and others can tell their experience with 5 more. From https://www.scouting.org/programs/boy-scouts/patrol-leader/

Take no thought for tomorrow, for today has enough troubles of its own. Sorry, I didn't write the rules.