qwazse

She should see the look on female venturers' faces when I give them a patch from a council/area activity! Something between "What am I supposed to do with this?" to "I am surrounded by dorks!"

What's unfair is that there was only one Small Boat Sailing MBC, and that the scout's sailing coach was not recruited to be a another one. Regardless, it's hard to imagine that in the age of hand-held recording devices that this would be an issue.

@Cindy121, welcome! There are no rules. I have scouts show up with boxes of knives to sell at a formidable mark-up. I tried to discourage parents from giving their begging sons cash to buy them. But to no avail. I am not a fan of business transactions during troop activities. But, I know that's spitting into the wind. I just make sure that my kids use their own $$s, bargain hard, or do without. What I try to insist on is a full disclosure of revenue vs. expenses. That way boys know what is going into the SPL's pocket when they "buy in" to the game.

If your assertion is true, and labor-differentiation by sex is an inevitable consequence of adolescence, then why does National see the need to legislate it? They could simply say, "Troops may now welcome girls, if they do, we recommend segregated patrols that ensure each scout gets a fair distribution of chores." (FWIW, in my patrol growing up there were some boys who we would never have cook for us -- if we could help it.) Moreover, I don't see how "linked-troops" avoids this. PLs in the traditional troop may like their boys' cooking. PLs of BSA4G just can't stand what their girls pull out of the pot. The one troop declares their patrols as cookers, the other troop offers their patrols to fetch wood and water. Everyone's happy. Thus that linked troop will have effectively differentiated chores by sex. What I found in scouts who group up co-ed in other countries was that they were especially adept at dividing up chores. Boys were as good at cooking as girls. So, they must have taken turns at some point. As far as I can tell, the only reason National is doing this is because they believe this is the only way they can make it palatable to reactionary leaders leaders while giving the revolutionary leaders a place at the table. Or, this is the best way for them to monitor program growth in hopes of pitching it to COs looking for the next big thing.

I don't know why this is sad. A council has a particular scouting culture. It's worked for them. Another council has a different mix, and now can adjust to that demand. Maybe there are scouters there saying, "Sadly, the CO down the road is rolling out BSA4G."

Really? Speculation is just now going on? I don't speculate. It doesn't matter what size font they print FAMILY SCOUTING on the flyer. I choose the most sensible name and stick with it. So it's BSA4G until someone proves otherwise. If they were "Scout Troops", then why does my CO need two of them? The only reason would be because there's two programs. The existing one for boys and a new program for girls who want to do the the things boy scouts do. My crew never needed two advisors. Why? Because it was one program. Our pack never needed two cubmasters for the same reason. By pitching it as the separate program that it is, we share an honest vision of what I think most scouters are willing to provide. No double-speak.

Not sure how this is a federal lawsuit? That said, 90K for a state-wide contract sounds like chump change. Not sure why the council wouldn't pay up, unless the quality of the service was so bad they had to use a different provider to meet the needs of its campers. This might come down to a determination of who breached first.

So the first scentence ("No."), doesn't mean "No"? Not a very progressive step in welcoming young women.

I wouldn't train particularly for any badge. But, I would check over the years if felt I gained enough to counsel an MB as I accumulate hobbies.

No. But the further in that we hike the fewer we get! Is that disruptive of the patrol method? Yes. Does it help adult association? Yes. It certainly gives some people for the SM to talk to when the boys are on autopilot. Note that we have not had the trouble other troops have had with helicopter moms. Most moms don't join us. The ones who do have been great. We have had some helicopter dads, the physical distance helps us manage them by setting the tone.

It's great to see your passion, but you need to find a balance. Either you let your son move on and stick around in an official position with the pack, or you move on with your son and plan for a period where the pack will be in a slump. We have involved adults who do both, and it either works as long as everyone is welcoming and flexible. But, let's say you move on to the troop, and nobody takes up the slack. Time for a plan B. Use your experience with your "found Webelo" to ask for help looking for middle-school boys who aren't on anybody's radar because they are no longer or never have been cubs. There's lots of ways to do that: plan boy-talks at schools, visit PTA meetings, community fairs, put up flyers, etc ... One dad did that for us and we had some awesome boys join our troop. In other words, you have options with or without a pack. Be prepared to leverage them.

You can only rarely work with a toxic attitude. It's a good sign that you haven't seen one in this scout. About half the time, I've seen casual or uncommitted scouts really grow from the challenges we've thrown down -- turning into intentional and dedicated young men. But you never know who will succeed until six months later. Still, it's worth the effort.

@David CO is right if indeed this boy has a toxic attitude. In that case apply the same rules to a different POR If the boy has just been treating scouting as a side show, and is changing his attitude, he could wind up encouraging boys to not slack. We can't tell which it is from this side of the Internet from @gblotter's troop. Only an ASM or a mature scout who knows the boy can help discern that.

They don't call it "House Flipping MB!" In a year and there'll be routine maintenance, alarms to check, shelves to hang, touch-up paint, holes to spackle. Try to get the church's custodian into the habit of sending the COR over with a list of things to check and repairs to make. Have the SPL go over it with the PLC and see how they can divide and conquer. The first drywall nail I ever pounded (heck, the first cut I ever made with a mitre box) was in our scout-room. One work-day with about four other boys and the SM did wonders for my self-esteem.

@MarkH, welcome to the forums. IMHO, your troop was right in letting scouts elect their SPL for as many terms as they can stand the youth. The job is not a "let every eager scout take a turn" kind of position, any more than captain of a varsity school team would be. It may be that your son's leadership style was "unpopular" with the boys. Either he needed to improve his style, or the boys are wrong. Doesn't hurt to learn early in life that both are possible. Your SM doesn't have a purpose for his JASMs. His loss. No point in a responsible boy like your son taking a useless job. If he's having fun as an O/A Rep then he should lean into that. It could be that there's a boy or two who aren't getting elected. Sharing his experience could be helpful to such a boy who doesn't understand why his peers rejected him. Likewise with the Outdoor Ethics Guide ... if boys are learning cool skills from him, he should keep it up and see if he can find which scout would qualify to be next year's guide! On the flip-side, devoting all of his time to his venturing crew would also be a "win." A troop is better served by a boy who heavily invests in the program he loves then comes back with his crew-mates to support an activity the troop would like to try rather than a boy who mopes and feels stuck (although it sounds like that's not your son).

My gut tells me that the PoR is where you will really want to see his growth. There are simple reasons for this: He hasn't spent his time as a life scout around the troop, and it doesn't sound like you have heard from any of his peers or his other coaches teachers, etc ... . You need to vouch that you personally have seen how capable leader he's become. A PoR like TG is not about the number of dog-and-pony shows he puts on. It's about guiding boys in becoming a solid patrol with great leaders. It's also about helping the SPL with a couple of boys who joined late or are playing "catch up" for whatever reason. Lot's of applicants have Eagle Scout on their resume. Few have "Troop Guide", fewer still can write a good essay about it. But, those who do will likely stop an admissions officer in his/her tracks. Being skilled in welcome newcomers is something that colleges actually pay for. So, rather than lay out a minimum number of meetings etc..., team up with your SPL and make a plan like this: He will be given the position for two months. At that time your or the SPL (or you, during SMC's) will touch base with the scouts he's supposed to guide and ask them, "Do you know your troop guide's name? Did he help you? How?" Based on what those boys report, the SPL and you will decide if he should hold the position for another two months. If not, you'll meet with him offer him a week or two break in which time he can look at the troop meetings/activities and see if there's another position of responsibility he'd like to try. In all cases, continuing in a position will be determined by the net result (for TG, the net result is boys who feel they were guided well), and because you're also trying to develop the SPL's leadership, communication. So, part of the position involves attending PLC's, cracker barrels on camp-outs, etc... because what he observes as he fulfills his PoR will help the other boys fulfill theirs. The plus side for a Life scout: if he's attending regularly, he'll have access to caring adults who will want help him succeed in his project and other paperwork. Needless to say, we should all be doing this for every PoR we hand out. With most scouts who attend weekly, we can let them in on these real benchmarks gradually. But, just like Son #1 who signed up to be the kicker his Senior year, if you haven't been around, you need to know up front that you'd better put in extra time, learn your special team's every move, and learn how to tackle the star running backs that nobody else could stop! If you lay out specifications like that, and the boy doesn't flinch, then he's probably ready to score the deciding point in playoffs earn eagle.

This "long-leash" principle is pretty common. We need to remind ourselves that we're dealing with an age range of 10.5 - 18. Moreover, the age of our parents is even wider. That's a lot different than most schools and sports leagues. When our school board decided to consolidate middle and high school kids into the same building, there was a huge outcry from parents of elementary school kids. I had had a positive experience when my 8th grade was moved to my high school, but I was less perturbed. Some of my teachers were brought up in one-room-schools (the old buildings were historic landmarks ... some of which we'd pass while hiking), so in addition to scouting, the concept wasn't strange to me. But, for others, thinking about all that is a bit traumatic. That's why the ideal committee guides the parents of younger scouts, the ideal SPL/ASPL looks those parents in the eye, greets them, and engenders trust, and the ASM's keep a good pulse on what's eating at the SM so they can assist him accordingly. Sometimes rules help give parents a vision, sometimes they scare and blind them. I like @Eagledad's home-grown "parental homesickness" diagnosis. It might help folks see where they fit in that big field with their boys' patrol in the far corner from them!

Keep talking guys, I'm teaching trek preparation for UoS this month. I will gratuitously steal any good strategies that you've tried or are trying.

Welcome to the forums @eaglequestions2018! I love listening to youth pow-wow! Sounds to me that the sole beneficiary is the Town Council. Son #1s community park improvement project had the same situation. Lots of stakeholders needed him to pull everyone together. A councilman was his sign off.Likewise, for you, all of those other organizations are volunteers who you will mobilize to complete the project. This is one of those hidden leadership development lessons: set up an efficient, yet appropriate, accountability structure.

Yes, @JustAScoutMom, I knew you were joking, but it made for a convenient contrast, so I ran with it. And @Eagle94-A1, you've got a hot mess more complicated than physical distance. It's no different than the chronically homesick kid. Your boys give it the college try, and they still can't fix it. It's starting to be clear that the scout is using his dad as a crutch to shirk responsibilities. Work's not getting done. The kid's patrol looks like slackers. Everyone's discouraged - including Dad. ... It was about time for the SM to give that "go big or go home" speech. If @krikkitbot decides to rely on SPL/TG leadership development instead of laying down the law, could one of these daddy's boys wind up stuck in a rut? Maybe. Will the boys in all three families dig their heels in? Probably not. Will the SPL/TG gain some "in the trenches" skills? Maybe. Enough to be worth the hassle of the one kid who 4 months from now is still leaving his patrol in the lurch? Probably. But suppose after 6+ camping nights, one boy doesn't change his behavior, and gets the "go big or go home" speech, and the kid opts for home ... he will at least have amassed a few nights camping where some older boys took the time to march across a field and hold open the door for him to the promise of scouting. He and Dad leave with a few skills that they can build on with their family. And, his memories of camp might draw him back in a year or two.

Forgive me if this is redundant to my last post, but I want to emphasize that this is not a hill to die on! You have 3 families where the boys like being with their dads. That's a good thing. None of these boys are older than 12, I'm guessing. That's a good thing too. The majority of your boys must be deciding to tent with a buddy. It sounds like if you told them to choose a site with their patrol on the opposite side of the field, they would. You're in a good place. You just need to find that field. (Otherwise, if like our boys, you find yourself in close woods, pick sites on opposite sides of a stream or a mound. Certain terrains make as-the-crow-flies distances bit unnerving for most folks.) Trying to motivate these scouts to bunk with their buddies via back-channels with other adults or by slighting them with "W3" rhetoric is just a huge waste of precious time you will need getting to know your PLs and the scouts whose parents aren't around when they need a safety net. Does your SPL do bed-checks? Is he in the habit of "doing the rounds" throughout the day and checking on your patrols (including the adults' site)? Little things like that build the trust parents need. If he (or your TG) shows up first thing, greets the dads who've had their scouts tenting with them, and offers to walk their boys over to their respective PLs to start in on something fun (like, maybe, breakfast), it will go a long way in enabling the boy and his parent to trust their new patrol. It could be as simple as, "I need help mustering the PLs. Want to join me?" I'm betting three weekend campouts of this kind of respectful behavior, and these boys will be bunking with their patrols. Bottom line: don''t make this your administrative problem. Make this the boys' leadership development problem.

Home repairs MB ... not a bad thing for boys to learn. It's also a lesson in "The more you own, the more it owns you!"

^^^ sounds fantastic indeed.

Don't sweat this. Let a vision of the pinnacle scouting experience being hiking and camping together with a boy's mates grow gradually. I remember the last time Son #2 came across the field in the wee hours of the morning complaining that he couldn't sleep, andI let him hunker down in my bag with me. Not one of my stupid rules was going to keep me away from that cherished moment. The physical distance has to do with patrol method, not YPT. A 1st-year's patrol is often still his family, not his friends - especially as young as he can cross over these days. When you're making the dad's coffee and the boy pops out of his tent, ask the little fella if he slept well and let him know his new patrol across the field will need him.

I don't wear mine because it's small relative to my frame. Otherwise I think it's a good idea.