qwazse

But, where did you get that thought? I mean, for example, on the other extreme ... I always love the Boy's Life "Scouts in Action" sketches, and would turn to them first to see who was featured and why. But it never crossed my mind that you wouldn't need a BoR for the meritorious conduct awards. I mean, it made sense in my mind that the scout's troop committee would talk to him and review the incident, then send a letter or something to their council and, in turn, to National, to nominate the boy. That review would be as much a BoR in my mind as anything. After 3 decades I finally knew someone worthy of one of those awards, and I learned that no face-to-face was necessary, just a lot of paperwork. But it wasn't like someone told me in advance that it was one way or the other. I just had it in my head that that a BoR was how scouts got any award of importance.

I wanted to probe the notion that Boards of Review should be only for rank advancement. (E.g., Since Eagle Palms are awards they should not require a board of review.) Where did this idea come from? Not from the handbook, as far as I can tell. Scout is now a rank. Even so, it requires no boards of review. Venturing does not have ranks, but they do have awards. The core ones require boards of review. (Okay, Venturer requires a "meeting" with the advisor and crew president.) We have sent some scouts to disciplinary "boards of review" ... ones who've started tuning out the SM and needed to hear that some other adults were expecting better behavior from them. You all can debate how kosher that is, but it's helped us get through some rough patches. So, in my mind, sometimes a scout was up for review, sometimes he wasn't. Those times weren't ever distinguished by a rank vs. an award being in play. Is this something that anyone wrote about? Taught in a course? If you thought this was the way things should be, can you recall who gave you the idea?

Ooh! Maybe like when I was in grade school and we got paddled: one for each year of age on our birthday ... Mom pins the medal. Dad places the necker. SPL breaks out the hickory switch and delivers a swat per palm!

Or, should we read the sidebar: You've Been Pranked! Now Create A Story & Trick Your Friends!

LOL, NJ. You all are high speed! We usually have a good cadre who take 3+years. Typically swimming in that 250 acre lake (even though we're only testing them in a 200 sq ft section of it) looms large for many of them, but it can be anything and usually it boils down to a lack of focus. Needless to say, all of our guys have racked up dozens of nights camping and oodles of service hours ... to the point where I chide adults when they announce a project and add "counts for service hours." These boys don't care! So, I am coming from a different point of view. Time outdoors is not what keeps our boys from ranking up, so in my frame of reference, it is a wasted stipulation to an already wordy requirement. I'd rather the requirement read: Do 10 activities that you planned in advance with your troop or patrol during your regular meetings.

I remember as a youth, when we had our blow-out fundraiser of Christmas candles (pretend the pun was intended ), our SM told how nervous he was walking to the bank safe deposit box with all of that cash. Of course, we'd never hold it against him if some thug figured out that the nervous guy walking down the street was loaded with coin. But, I'm sure we would fill terribly responsible. I think my dad made a bank run twice a day when business was hopping. The register would be emptied and brought home if for any reason the safe deposit box was closed.

Flagg, I could be wrong, but I think this one is as much about scouters in general feeling micromanaged as it is about LDS being bent out of shape that its 11 year olds can only advance to 2nd class. I'm told that some scouts can go for 6 camping nights without ever their knots being proven in a storm. Never seen it happen, because any scouts I know wind up camping with me.

No @@Stosh, you don't get it. I don't need a scout mark time to know if a scout has mastered skills. I need him to set up a tent and sleep in it, to make a full set of hearty meals for his patrol, to navigate well, to recite the pledge, the anthem, his rights/responsibilities, and help another boy or two along the way. It may take 3 nights in the woods with my troop, it may take thirty -- depending on how little.he camps with his youth group, family, or folks outside of scouting and devotes time to practicing those skills. But I don't need BSA telling me that X of ten of his activities with the troop need to be overnight camping.For a given boy and his patrol, they might need to be visits (in uniform) to the county seat, a nature society, barn raisings, first aid meets, and emergency prep drills. The list may be as diverse as the number scouts times ten.

Welcome to the forums, and congratulations to your scouts for their dedication and hard work. Have you tried to look up conservation societies for the river, or for state parks along the river?

Oh, I get it. in the face of an overwhelming mandate from it's constituents, BSA was necessarily compelled to do the opposite. :/

I'm no fan of bean counting. Although I do want youth to get it into their heads that this is an outdoor program, I'd rather focus on mastery than marking time.

Flagg, I get the exuberance on safety. I've just seen that an adult with years of bad habits is as much of a hazard as a youth with a one year solid track record and attendance at safety courses. That said, I wouldn't take any youth's with a license for granted. Immaturity could be a problem. So looking case-by-case makes better sense than counting on an age boundary for safety.

I think it would be insanely cool if having been a counselor one summer, and learning about the capabilities of these campers, to develop a service project that would involve these campers. Even if this is the scout's first time on staff, he could talk to the camp director in advance, explain his situation, and see if there is something out-of-the-ordinary that he could get everyone to accomplish. Just showing up as a counselor and doing whatever counselor's normally do ... that's routine maintenance. (Although I bet that in itself can be a real challenge.) Doing something that mobilizes everyone and gives them a sense of pride they wouldn't otherwise have ... that's soaring like an Eagle.

How else is the kid going to earn motor-boating? Whatever you do, don't let some hack like me get behind the wheel!

Since when did a sash chock full of little round patches, a stash of PoR patches (to one day hand down to nephews and great-nephews), cool event patches, religious awards, etc ... amount to "no credit"? Maybe I am a stuck-in-the-mud sentimental old fool. Perhaps it's because I remember my Palm BoR to be one of the most enjoyable conversations with my committee. I could look dad and all of the professors and the mom of the best scout I've ever met (she passed away last week BTW) in the eye and just talk about college plans, the big 50-miler I was planning, what I'd do for my last week of summer camp, considering the ministry, etc .... I enjoyed the brief time I was on the committee of my son's troop doing the same with another couple of fine young men coming up for their next Palm. I want boys to hustle up and make rank then knock off a few palms so that they could have what I had ... a chance to relax and really rub off on my guys without any paper-pushing ... maybe to look at some need and say "I know how to line that up" ... maybe to have some swagger around camp to hunt down guys from Jambo and say "didga get your bird."

Well, are they not viewed the same because they are open to different groups of youth? Or, are they not viewed the same because they have different requirements? If co-eds complete the same requirements, is it not the same award? On the other hand, if someone of the same sex, for an award of the same name, completes different requirements -- say, starting August 1st, did he earn the same award as the one earned by someone else by completing different requirements on July 31st?

I have no idea why this is necessary. In the current requirements how is it extra work for no recognition? Scout gets colorful patches to deck out a sash for his ECoH. Palms recognize that, above and beyond that, he worked intentionally with his troop or patrol to develop and practice more leadership. At least until August, that's what they recognize. It doesn't benefit scouts. It makes all past Eagles think less of them. I see this as being very divisive. The only thing that I would have changed in the existing requirements is instead of starting the "palm clock" at EBoR, start it at the ESMC.

Hard to say. "Any ship in a storm."

I learned it from the ARC, in grade school I suppose. Later instructors taught me that acclimation to water temperature and stretching were overriding factors. Of course, the county pool had a grill and vending machines, so we figured it not a big deal. That, or was worth it to them to have cramped up kids for the sake of making some coin. I figure it was a ploy to minimize having to evacuate the pool due to unwanted "deposits".

Yep we're all about unsolicited advice!That, and @@Stosh told us not to beat a dead horse after a topic was marked solved. Yours was the first after he spouted that tidbit. So I figured it was a good opportunity to tenderize those steaks in spite of him. Good scouting to you, and thanks in advance for all you do for the boys.

It may not sound like it, but I'm kind of a status quo guy. It's a lot easier to ask folks to do what most seem to be doing anyway. I think only OPs and mods have access to "solved" buttons. I've only seen them on threads that I started.

I like the general notion of +/- 1 for strongly liking/disliking a particular reply. Being limited to so many a day helps a reader focus on the best/worst posts. Especially you should use this if you are a bit rushed, or if among a lot of replies in a thread, one resonates especially true/false. no obligation, but if you have time, and can put it in words, explaining specifically what you liked/disliked. using "Report" to let a moderator know that you think a post violates the rules of the forum -- not when you disagree with someone's opinion, think there are factual errors, don't like their choice of nickname to your user name, etc... encouraging OPs to mark one reply to their topic as "solved", especially if they actually followed its advice and got a desirable outcome. I think the icons are pretty good as-is.

Sometimes,I think venturing youth should be called Advisormasters! Honestly I don't care as long as they don't call me late for dinner (especially considering what good cooks some of my officers have been). I think "scoutmaster" was not intended to mean "master of scouts" so much as it was intended to mean "master of scout skills." I suspect some people prefer the former definition, because if they accept the latter, they would have to bear the brunt of ridicule from guys like me when they fail to tie a timber hitch!

Thanks for the update. SM's who overstay their position miss out on all manner of opportunities. Hopefully there are other, wiser troops in your district.

The logo, at the time was Scouting USA. ... That 70's show.If it's the BSHB, trail to Eagle, patrol method, it's Boy scouting. No matter if it's 5%, 50%, 95% girls. But I don't even think we'll be at 1% based on what I've seen in my region. As long as we recruit girls who would proudly be Boy Scouts, we will be just that. If on top of that, thos girls recruit the types of boys who've drifted away from our program, we could even be more true to our charter than we have been for decades. If we try to girl-up a program, then yes, we should drop pretense of being in it for the boys.