qwazse

Well @@Stosh, that day may come -- or it may not, but I think your speech trickles down to lay leadership as "don't make waves".

There is nothing hypocritical about finding non-incendiary terms for broad movements. The organization in question identifies itself as restrictive in terms of sexual ethics. The prevailing mood nationally is toward a permissive ethic. As far as I can tell, this is precisely what people are arguing about. If you have more neutral terms for these opposing sides, suggestions are welcome. Now the published desire of certain activists is to ensure insure that BSA goes further in mandating a permissive ethic, regardless of the wishes of the chartered sponsor. So, my repeating to a board -- one that recently came off of litigation to preserve it's right to uphold restrictive sexual ethics -- that "there IS no legal action" rings sufficiently hollow as to give half of them pause. Add the one guy who thinks two dozen 10-year-olds will wreak havoc on a building, and the scouting proponents can't overcome a motion to table. @NJScouter, obviously, I think none of this is rational. I am just describing a situation where perhaps other programs are fast-tracked, but rolling out a BSA unit is shelved. If the opposite is occurring elsewhere, it would be encouraging to hear that story.

Take the "or equivalent" to mean parallel Red Cross certification. In fact, if a RC supervisor like the Women's Air Corps retiree who taught me how to swim (as in we 5th graders knew we mastered the stroke when she stopped cussing at us) runs the pool, don't even think you'll be allowed to walk in with your BSA-trained staff and borrow the facility. She wouldn't be prejudiced against BSA Guard, she just would make darn sure people who she knew could forestall death (i.e.,the ones she didn't have to cuss at during drills) were managing your event. Of course people are different. And the ones who have never had to rescue a drowning victim will behave differently than the ones who have. I'd be more worried about a manager who doesn't give you a hard time. I would be REALLY worried if trainees like E94 felt like they couldn't demand to extract tired swimmers.

Thanks for making my point, Merl.It's not the legal action itself. But, the potential rhetoric promised to all who step outside "the line." That's what certain CO's have limited stomach for. Sticks and stones, no problem. Names, they hurt.

Or, you only do that which you would put up a fight for.

Trailer or none, when I have new drivers (to scouting), I circle them up at departure time and review Risk Zone basics. (Do not caravan. Meeting point is at xxx. Directions (with cell #s) enclosed. If you don't know where that is, speak up. Stop and call as often as you need. My navigator -- crew VP or SPL usually -- has my phone, so your navigator may text if need be. Whoever follows the traitor, if you can't see the into the cab through the mirrors, someone's doing something wrong.) Even with veteran transport, we circle up before departure. Bottom line: get your head in the game.

dozen's hopefully. But, all are parents' second choice. So, instead of five Cubs now who bring five or ten more in the fall, and maybe that many more by end of year, we have once enthusiastic parents whose favorite elders (I cannot possibly understate the trustworthiness of this particular lot) are giving them a "not yet." This is not an excessively deliberative body. If there's an idea and a half dozen folks who want to go for it, green lights are everywhere. The fact that this item was pushed back on the docket for several consecutive months speaks volumes to the liability threat from activist's statements.

First, welcome to the forum and congratulations.This is one of my favorite activities (preferablly at 6 AM in the middle of a lake with at least 200 yard lengths). No you don't have to swim 3 miles to get three patches! Take your card to the scout shop and order as many as you need. I would suggest, however, that you somehow mark the first patch you were awarded (e.g. sew a black thread in the back) so that you can save it in your collection once you've worn it a season or two. The manager of your pool usually has specific requirements as to what he/she considers qualified supervision. Follow them. National camp school also has generic guidelines for acquatics staff in case your are concerned that your pool manager is too easy going, start by looking here http://www.ncsbsa.org/resources/ncs/. Basically, you want to set aside the lanes that you need, make sure there is a minimum of cross-traffic, and have some system of accountability. As far as training the swimmers, use a step-up program over several days (e.g. 100, 440, 880 yards ... then a mile) so that everyone's comfortable before the day they do the mile. (Obviously, if they all just did swimming MB, you can start at 880. If it's been a year, and the boys aren't all swimming regularly, start everyone at 100.)

This is entirely recycled info, which we've already discussed elsewhere. A halving of rate of decline implies stabilization of membership ... like a year of slightly cooler temps than last implies cessation of global warming, Zach Whals is right that we have a lot of work to do ... For example, we need to convince activists to whole-heartedly support the the rights of CO's to vett leaders along the lines of restrictive sexual ethics. Rhetoric like his and Dale's (whose very predicament was directly a result of the absence of such a notion) is the stated reason why I'm dealing with a cagey CO. Maybe the five cub scouts who could have been registered this spring don't amount to much. But if in every community across this country there are five potential recruits whose membership is being delayed (let's hope merely delayed) to every one's that is being smoothed over, we have problems. I don't what that true ratio is. I just know that the BSA is still in decline. The permissive have yet to prove their worth numerically.

Yep, when I was SPL I didn't touch QM stuff unless asked. (Airing out wet canvas after a rainy trip might be an example of when I'd be asked.) Never had a new scout patrol, just a new patrol of me my APL and bunches of crossovers, who after after a couple of years, became mighty fine PLs in their own right. I guess that's why I never felt my job was an imposition. Never talked to the SM about it, unless I was in over my head. Went to JLT after being SPL for a while. Only then did I realize that patrols sometimes need a little help, and some people needed trained in what I thought came naturally. (Turns out I probably was learning by example and just didn't notice.) I also learned that boys from my neck of the world made light of burdens and city scouts were wimps, but that's a different story.

Hey Zuzyson's SM,! Yeah, you with the mystical hacker skills that can actually make scout net work ... Are you reading this forum? If so give us a nod. We're all,friends here. Don't feel like you have to explain yourself or anything. Message our moderators if you'd rather not air laundry here. They can relay to us only that you're reading. I just figure it would be healthy if folks understand who might be on the other end of thier keyboard.

Are SPL's more occupied than they used to be? I don't recall the position being a burden to me. I can't recall what MBs I was earning at the time ... probably nothing too serious. I'd fill out a roster, march to flags, report attendance, chill at the trading post, inspect camp, help resolve the conflict du jour, chill in the hammock, go with SM to leader's meeting, go shoot/swim/hike during open program, catch some tree frogs for the camp snake. I leaned on my PL's a lot. They rose to the occasion. In general, we find the PL's to be the most occupied with their time. It's on them if food isn't picked up, cooked, and dining area spotless immediately thereafter.

Our boys absolutely refuse to consider any other camp (and campsite) than the one they've gone to for decades. Even after merging with a majority of boys who went to a different camp, seven boys held fast to their tradition. In fact, this year a dad came who had been in this troop at this very camp (on this very site) as a youth!

The detractors aren't former scouts, or parents of former scouts. I think we have the opposite problem. This is a young congregation (basically, the college students who never went home). They put a lot of "muscle" into the church -- both in terms of program and building. Their boys are scrubbing walls and planting flowers on clean-up day along side everyone else. Once a month the 4th and 5th graders load up bags from the food pantry for distribution. So, there is zero confidence that "one more program" will yield more service time than what we already have. My most credible pitch was that I've seen the program makes leaders of parents. Who, having brought kids through scouting, were better teachers and board members. That definitely resonated with everyone. But that's a pretty long-range vision ... and it could theoretically be accomplished at some facility that didn't get as much traffic as this one.

My recent foray into being "commissionerish" (helping some parents get their church to sponsor a Pack for their boys) indicates that this is easier said than done. Multiple parties want "fixes," and they want them before we even start building capacity! I'm just glad that task didn't involve any of my kids. It allowed me to keep a broad view of opportunities. Zuzyson is an inadvertent stumbling block to his dad's role as UC. Dad should have told council to pound sand for as long as he'd be a troop parent. That way SM could gripe to Dad about how some other UC was blowing smoke, and maybe Dad could take the SM's side, but say "Yeah, UC X is a blowhard. But, you know, maybe under all that smoke there's a fire to douse."

A friend's son and everyone in his troop endured the night and are now returning home.

To be clear: in either BoR scenario I would expect the boy to be approved. I just don't see one being more comfortable than the other. That's a why conference with the SM soon after transfer would be in order. The boy could make clear that if the SM doesn't want the conference to be completed on that day, he'd be okay with it. But in the case of Zuzyson, with sports season looming that may be kicking the can quite a few months down the road. In context, maybe the best thing he can do in a troop of crossovers, is talk to his coaches or his fellow athletes and see if they can set up a clinic in the gym to help new scouts with fitness requirements. Or if he transfers to a unit without that many cross-overs, for fits and giggles, set up an athletics MB class. Maybe even invite his troop to be color-guard at one of his team's events. There has to be a way to make this fun for the boy and good for the new troop at the same time.

The leading church in this new denomination is an active contributor to scouting in my district (down and across the river from the proposed CO's district). But, the denomination gives its congregations latitude in youth program decisions. So, the issues come from folks who have never seen the benefits of BSA in their families or in any club they belong to. I figure they'll come around slowly. I sincerely doubt this divides the congregation. Parents don't change churches because they have to take their sons someplace different for scouts. In one sense it's healthy to work with a group of parents other than those in your own church. You get a good lesson in "no matter where you go, there you are!" I would like to keep the parents together, but that may just not be practical. Some live a bridge or tunnel away from each other. (That's how we measure distance in the 'burgh.) Some already have their boys in disparate packs. A promising sign would be getting them in the same room to discuss what's really important to them ... and getting the boys in an adjacent room discussing what's really important to them. @@MrBob, not in this section of town. A shame really since the college ROTC pulls together students at different schools, and the VA hospital is in this neighborhood. But there are some other civic groups and fire halls. Parents have options.

How to fix busted toes: tape them together until they're healed. Just saying, if together you all can get eight newbies (because the odds of a boy in the audience seeing one of his buddies in a shared presentation could be that much higher)... that's a rising tide to float both boats.

I can also see it backfiring. A committee member might ask, "So you felt that our troop wouldn't think you deserved to be Eagle when your transferred. What did we do to make you think we'd be so unfriendly? Why not at least try to have that SMC on your first campout? Did our SM seem unapproachable? Wouldn't a real Eagle jump at the opportunity to have a conference with his new SM about his experiences on the advancement trail?"

Six months? One week at camp is all I need. Heck, a morning fishing or five miles hiking with the boys gives me nearly all I need to know about each one.

Team up with the other troop that visits your middle school. Try to have an assembly in school, and at the PTA. (Especially at the PTA, bring some of your older scouts to impress the parents.) Have a flyer with info on both troops (meeting nights, locations, etc...). Obviously this works best if the troops meet on different nights and the locations are fairly distinct. Lacking success, make a plan for how you all will take care of the youngest boys as they age out. The end of the troop should not mean the end of scouting for these boys.

This promotion was at the request of members of the congregation who were parents of elementary school boys. They wanted it to be at their church thinkng that would be ideal for their boys. But, maybe that's myopic. @@Stosh, I'll add to their options that they knock on nearby doors. I'm torn between encouraging parents to start a pack on their own vs. joining existing packs in their respective neighborhoods.The boys do look cute together, but being their own clique might not be the best for them.

Well, the potential CO, who I said was a little cagey, tabled discussion of starting a pack until the spring. Enough parents and their boys had asked for it. There are no other units of any kind in the vicinity. I think we could grow rapidly. But the CO is a bit of a "crater church" -- families who join while students migrate to 'burbs.. So maybe another night of commuting was not gonna be worth it just to keep this cadre of boys together. The potential of engaging international families was there, but some internationals might be looking for a coed program as is available in their own country. The church staff was overwhelmed with the notion of one more program. The vote was split along the lines of folks whose sons (and one daughter) had been in BSA. But the tipping point seems like the membership policy ... this church being a group who just left a mainline denominations because of abandoning decorum to accommodate the perennial activism of those with permissive sexual ethics. The "we stand behind our sponsors right to select their volunteers" mantra just did not wash with them. Missed opportunity? I'm honestly not sure. I'd rather have an intentional CO (I think) than one who just says "sure, just turn the lights out when you leave."

'skip, a former advisor relocated to SC. She may know people. I'll send her the link to this page.