qwazse

Not to promote stereotypes, but ... Throughout my life, I've noticed average British youth tend to be a little more reserved than other youth. Simple example: at World Jambo, I struck up a conversation with two young women from Kent who were watching me hang a flag. They had heard that the Indians were giving henna tattoos. I showed them the one they gave me and pointed to their camp, encouraging them to pay a visit. They looked at me sheepishly, and asked me if I would make introductions for them, which I gladly did, and soon they had called to their mates two campsites down, and soon Mumbai's lawn was full of English scouts having a henna party. As the week wore on, these girls became bolder. It's a rare American youth who would feel that they needed my assistance. But even our lifesaving instruction usually involves training youth to be firm and directive. It doesn't come naturally.

That said, this troop is doing the right thing by putting itself "out there." What I would like to have heard is not only does the church offer its kitchen, but that sometimes boys come before meetings to cook dinner with their patrol. It's one thing to brag about your tools, it's another thing to brag that your boys know how to use them!

Peer-to-peer recruitment among youth is doing just fine. Purveyors of recreational drugs rely on it to secure their future clientele. If scouts Eagle-and-out it is because they don't feel: needed. The adults will do all the work anyway. challenged. The troop isn't pitching Palms and other awards properly. respected. They aren't being asked to visit elementary and middle schools in uniform to promote the program. They aren't attending naturalization ceremonies, or opening a session of local government, or helping run a booth at a community festival. wealthy. Someone isn't offering them a job to pay for the next big-ticket event. humble. They think they've "arrived" and haven't figured out that they should take their place among other scouts (BSA or GS/USA) in their community. loved. Leaders don't greet them with enthusiasm, younger scouts don't want them at their campfire. Scouters in general don't care about their friends. All of that is quickly perceived by younger scouts.

Is that an inside-the-beltway way of saying "We've just about hit rock bottom?"

I think that's the difference. It doesn't take much effort in any Western PA town -- even Pittsburgh --- to find a ravine or ridge to claim as your own. Our local GS/USA troops take advantage of that, even though camp closures have made it harder for them. It's a rare girl around here who want's more outdoor experience than her GS troop offers. In terms of unique camping opportunities with Scouts BSA: I know of, for example, a troop who shares a cooking campout with GS/USA and BSA troops. Has been doing that for years. So, most girls get their camping "fix", and folks simply don't see the sense of a steep registration fee just to walk into the woods. I'll have to compare notes with the leader in my district who started a Scouts BSA troop for girls. They were an enthusiastic lot when I met them in May. They might just be Venturers in a year. But, I'm not sure if that's translated to growing beyond one patrol.

Quack practitioners.

No slight. Just saying it's a big country. I''m observing in my community is a strong preference for GS/USA as the program for their girls to achieve what Boy Scouts achieve. That's a credit to their leaders. No point in starting a troop here among mostly contented girls. So, I'm just buying their cookies. In communities where it is seen as as a (i.e., one of many) program for their girls, Scouts BSA is launching a troop or two -- roughly the size of a patrol. In communities where Scouts BSA is the opportunity for girls to achieve what Boy Scouts achieve, you will have the 5-patrol Scouts BSA girls' troops.

Because our GS/USA troops are outstanding, and I don't want to jeopardize my cookie supply chain.

I encourage SMs to counsel the badges in areas that they are better than anyone else. I earned Music from my SM.

ScoutBook does not recognize MBC's by district. It asks a search radius. It's not clear to me if it limits us to our council. Just say "yes", don't worry about what scoutbook does and continue on as a small dirtbag.

The latest NASA/NOAA report, including links to gory details: https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-noaa-analyses-reveal-2019-second-warmest-year-on-record One of those links https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201913 shows that we in North America are a little late to the warming party ... In a link to the press conference slides https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/briefings/20200115.pdf, we have a note about Alaska's bumper crop of +6 deg F warmer this decade than the previous 8-decade average. We have been spared loss of life, but doing so in the US wasn't cheap. The last slide in that set shows that in the past four consecutive years we've endured more billion-dollar disasters per year than any time except 2011.

Talk to your DE. Each council does this differently. For ours, the commissioners call you, and you just have to renew youth protection. Even if you've done it for another position, you might have to fill that background check release form (the one they rolled out last year) again. It all depends on how the registrar organizes the council's files. Then, once you've jumped through the hoops, log in to Scoutbook periodically and see if your name comes up under the appropriate MBs. Better yet, have your ASMs log in and be sure they can find you. Again, that link depends on the registrar, and if you've got one who's slow on the uptake or simply overwhelmed, the connection between your member id and the badges you counsel might not be made. In spite of the hassels, the registration requirements for MBCs have really helped provide our youth with up-to-date lists. I imagine the embarrassment of a scout calling a counselor, getting the spouse or other loved one, and finding out he/she died four years ago.

So, did you actually confirm two crews? Or, did you get put in the lottery for two crews?

This has been coming down the pike for a couple of years. Nation-wide fewer packs have been sending their leaders to round-tables. With some districts now the size of councils, travel to RTs has been a limiting factor. My prediction: expect to see more issues discussed/resolved via Scoutbook forums and more home-grown online training. There will be some interactive online forums, but that will vary with the volunteer pool and access. Also, expect to see packs and troops within reasonable travel distance forming ad hoc districts.

I do make an effort to get introduce our senior scouts to executives. I think it is important that pro's see the "end product." DE is a discouraging job in the face of shrinking membership. It is definitely not an end in itself for most pro's. But, it can pay a few bills, and if one sticks with it for a couple of years it demonstrates that you are willing to work harder than average. Future employers value that in managers. And, it is one of those rare jobs where you talk face-to-face with a lot of people, and help them navigate a complicated organization on behalf of their kids. Some of those people run business, and need employees to help their customers navigate their complicated company, so the opportunity to network is not trivial. Honestly, the only way to make a DE's job easier is to show up at HQ with a pile of membership applications and maybe the address of an interested donor that you met without his/her assistance.

Just a little update ... this year starts with WOSM officially welcoming as it's 171st memo: Afghanistan National Scout Organization (ANSO) https://youtu.be/TQX0GjqbOrA

Tell me about it ... the Orothodox half of me has been waiting for you all to come back for 10 centuries. But that half ain't roses either. Although sure of themselves when it comes to restrictive sexual ethics, they are unparalleled in global political intrigue (living up to every nuance of the word Byzantine).

Unlike the BSA, the UMC parishioners affirm one catholic (i.e., universal church) in the Apostle's Creed. Letting issues be local or regional is not an option. That is why the folks who are slinging a permissive sexual ethic want the restrictive folks to operate under a different name. They believe that their permissive ethic is the outflow of a united methodical Christian exercise. Basically they are saying to the traditionalists, "You can have your heresy, we'll keep the brand." Obviously the folks with the restrictive ethic would rather the permissives move on, but to my knowledge they've made no offer to give them their capital. The offer to keep properties at (presumably) no cost for separation is a generous one. For reference, many churches among the rising Evangelical Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians, and other spin-offs of the PC/USA paid substantial sums for an amicable separation.

Bugling seems to have the same problem as pull-ups. Really hard to increase your count if you only practice on weekends. It seems that there should be a way to sync this with personal management or personal fitness. @SSScout, I think you should write a scouter's guide to skills acquisition. Call it How to Get There from Here.

Call the captain at Seabase and ask how to best put in for multiple Big Munson dates. Most troops have one date for any adventure. That's why the system is set up to pick that first, and troops select as many adventures as they would likely accept on that date. Then, if you "lose" the lottery in the first round, you are contacted about other similar adventures/dates that "winning" troops passed on. I sort of wish they'd have an instant run-off. As soon as you are registered you get assigned a number. That determines your "draft" order. A low number means you'll likely get your pick. A high one means you have to wait for the low numbers to lock in their choice. The top of the draft has to make their pick of adventure and date in a week. It's a little rough on the troops who get a high number, but at least they know that they should prepare to accept scraps or start looking for a plan B.

The restoration of migratory bird sanctuaries in the Middle East is a perennial challenge. One conservationist deploys scouts to help.

It would be wrong to be outraged. In parts of America ... unless it involves charcoal or mesquite ... men are not to be making snacks or cleaning up after. We may disagree, but only on subjective grounds. Some folks have found certain efficiencies when sexes live up to assigned expectations. When we're working with volunteers, there is no winning strategy that will change that unless in a given unit a female is obviously the best choice for direct-contact leader and the men would do better assisting her, and the men work at the chocolate factory. On the other hand, Son #2 was the go-to guy when anyone in his class needed a cake baked or when his buddies (of either sex) needed someone to cook up breakfast. And, when daughter-in-law was still in training, it was clear that Son #1 was the better cook. They are evenly matched now, and I've seen him chased out of the kitchen to go watch the game on a regular basis. Finally, if you like to taste the chili in your chili, pray that the lot of them -- including Mrs. Q -- are otherwise occupied and I take over the spice rack.

I'm in a community that firmly believes in that the ideal unit leader would be male. I do worry that many good leaders for our boys are being passed over because they are women. Heck I always told my crew up front that they got stuck with the least qualified adult for a crew advisor. But, I also have to admit that my belief takes a back seat to what parents believe. The opposing opinions are intrinsically subjective. By the way, considering how hard it is to get my bulk where it can grip the plug, oil changes would go a lot more quickly if the gals took ownership of them.

I think this depends on what one observes in their community. We boys responded to den moms pretty well, I think, because there was no uncertainty of the belt that would come down upon our backsides if word got to our dads that we were the least bit disrespectful. That seemed to be pretty much the culture nation wide. So, moms were seen as the ideal den leaders. Then, in Webelos we got a male leader and boy did we give him a hard time! In other parts of the world, older teens are seen as the ideal den leaders. Parents are nowhere to be seen. The few adults were mentors to the older teens who ran the program. So imagine a scoutmaster for about 120 youth, both sexes, ages 5 to 20. I had friends raise their kids in Czech scouting. They missed the involvement of adults. On the other hand, their boys had an exceptional level of maturity. I'm sure there are places where much older men are the ideal leaders for the youngest scouts. Now, when it comes to managing adults as well as youth, I've seen that forceful men can wind up getting baited by these "high speed, low drag" dads, and a unit can get strangled as well as flourish. It's a rare CM who can insist "not in this pack" and still be everyone's ally in raising their kids. BSA has put us in a position where parents have a lot of say with their Cub's advancement. I enjoyed this because it gave me and my sons a checklist of things we (and Mrs. Q) could do together. But it does leave the door open to cerebral types who think it's a good thing to eek the bare minimum out of a kid's life as a scout.

Nobody wins law suits by admitting that things are better now. Worse, statistically the guy's kid is at greater risk at home -- even before factoring in that the kid is living with an abuse victim with trust issues. What's next? Vetting parents and relatives?