sandspur

A strong SPL is your best bet, one who sees this behavior as a problem and wants to correct it.

Then, let the SPL know you will back him up.

Our ultimate sanction is that if the SPL decides to, he can send a scout home from a meeting or campout, the parents being called to come get the miscreant.

The parents are seldom amused by jrs behavior.

For what it is worth, a BOR decision is not final.

Case in point:

We had a scout present me (the advancement chair) with a record of passing his BOR. Unfortunately, when I checked (he obviously had not scheduled the BOR through me) I found he did not have enough eagle-required MB to meet requirements for the rank. Therefore, even though the BOR had not caught this and the SM had not noticed in the SM conference, the rank was not awarded.

In kittles case, it seems the BOR advancement was rescinded, rethought, whatever term you want to use. But we do not have enough information to know why. It may be the committee member brought to light a case where the requirements were not met and the BOR had not noticed. Maybe not. Her son is entitled to a clear answer and I hope it clears things up. I suggest she talk with the SM and advancement chair. If they are doing their jobs, they should be able to make the reasons for this action clear.

We had good luck with Way of the Wilderness (wayofthewilderness.com) . They will provide as much (complete outfit including food, tents etc) or as little (just canoes) as you desire. if they have openings, they have let us use their lodge for free on the first and last days.

Without revealing too much, is the CO a church? Hard to see any religious organization turning a blind eye to open dishonesty. But maybe I am naive

.

Still, I think to get the CO to move, a significant group of parents/committee members need to go to the CO and lay this all out. Have a new SM and committee chair ready to step in.

If that doesnt work, you need to leave and get your son out of this mess.

Lastly, I believe some of the real seal organizations (navyseals.com, or google phony seal) are pretty aggressive about outing phonies. Some pressure might be brought to bear here. Maybe you can make life uncomfortable enough that he will just leave.

Bottom line, there is no such thing as internet privacy.

If credit card databases can be hacked, firewalls breached, computers hijacked to do things while you are asleep that you dont know they are doing (DDOS attacks) why does anyone assume what is on Facebook is limited only to my friends.

If someone wants into a Facebook account badly enough, I would make the assumption they can get in.

I am not saying dont use it, just dont put anything on that page you wouldnt want to see in the newspaper.

OK, define our terms.

Boy Led is great, but that does not translate to Boy controlled

The adults are there for a reason.

My take: Let the scouts lead. Let them make as many decisions as they can, allow them to fail in small things as a learning tool. BUT, we are there to make sure they do not fail in the BIG things. We can nudge them back on course, keep them safe, step in to suggest the SPL does something that needs doing. But do not pretend we are not also in leadership roles.

I will not hesitate to step in with a carefully worded suggestion that is in effect a directive if it is needed to keep the ship off the reef. If we have to make it a directive and not a suggestion, we will, but only when required.

Put it another way: Allow the boys to make decisions, but make sure certain choices are off the table. Let the troop march up to the edge of the swamp, but not in to it.

You should not need blue cards or signed MB cards at any BOR. However, sometimes records get messed up and then it is useful for the scout to have one or both of those as proof the MB were indeed earned.

I have been on a BOR where the scout did not have the required MB for the rank according to the advancement chair (me). Yes, in our troop scouts frequently schedule and get BOR without checking with the advancement chair first but that is another story.

In that case, I asked for the blue cards, MB cards, summer camp records, ANYTHING to prove the scout had the MB he needed. He had no record of this (and did not have the actual cloth MB either) and so had to re-do the missing MB. Rank advancement delayed by many months.

I tell the scouts every time they give me a blue card to KEEP THEIR SECTION OF THE CARD, just to prevent things like this.

CA_scouter:

I dont think you have anything to eat humble pie over.

Look at the facts: For a one nighter, you had no fewer than THREE redundant water purification methods.

A. The filter

B. Backup chemicals

C. Your stove (to boil water)

The same three I carry myself, although on my last two trips I have been experimenting with a lighter UV steripen in place of the filter (Ive had good luck with it so far by the way).

Two filters would, in my opinion, be overkill and unnecessary weight and expense.

The steripen, by the way, has been tested independently and found to be effective against bacteria, viruses and crypto. It has some downsides (can only treat 1 L at a time, the lamp is fragile and needs to be protected, water must be fairly clear and not full of particulates that would block the UV) but it is fast (90 seconds), light (about 6 oz) and so far, reliable (although some have reported problems). If you carry chemicals and a stove as backups (see above) so far, my experience has been good.

Bacchus wrote:

You can argue that our modern translation of "straight" to mean heterosexual does not coincide with the Baden Powell translation of "straight", but you would have a difficult time arguing that the Baden Powell definition of "morally straight" allows an individual to be promiscuous, regardless of the gender with which they intend to be promiscuous.

Sure, but who equated gay with promiscuous? I think the ELCA (harking WAY back to the original post, if any of us can remember it now) said they would ordain those in a committed monogamous relationship, with the gender of the partner being irrelevant.

I also think ELCA has said they will NOT ordain those who are promiscuous, regardless of being gay or straight.

In my book, gay is having sexual attraction to one of the same gender. It does NOT equal pedophile or promiscuous, although a gay person can be those things.

If ones religion thinks gay=sin, I am OK with that, since religion is a free choice association. By the same token, if your religion does not equate gay with sin, again, I am OK with that. Your religion (and mine) are free to make its best interpretation of Gods will, and act on that. As long as acting on that does not harm others, we can argue all we want (and have fun doing it)and someday maybe God will tell us who got it the closest to right.

NE-IV-88-Beaver:

Thanks, you are of course correct on the acronyms.

Baccus:

I get your point, but we do not need to change the scout oath, regardless of what we decide.

If we retain current policy and practice, no change needed-to state the obvious.

However, should scouting someday change its position on gays, still no change is needed in the oath. Why? Because the change is one of interpretation. Morally straight is a general term which leaves a lot of room for individual interpretation.

What is morally straight for an Islamic scout, and LDS scout, an ELCA scout or a Catholic scout may not be the same in all areas.

So, if BSA were to say the gay issue was one for individual moral convictions not an organization-wide consensus, we are still within the oath.

Not trying to be a moral relativist here, just pointing out that the scout oath does not necessarily dictate one approach to this issue.

Does it make it right? Your call. And Gods... but I do not know HIS position even if others do.

I guess they are saying it is right for them. The RC church does not allow women to be priests. I do not agree, but as I am not RC I do not have to. The RC church can (and do) set their own policy.

The more interesting discussion (to me) is does BSA reexamine its own policies? ELCA charters many troops. This is not an issue yet, but does it become one?

Note I said BSA can reexamine, not that we must change. But it is OK to debate the issue.

On another point, for those who are not Lutheran, please recognize that Wisconsin Synod (WELCA) and the larger ELCA are two VERY different organizations even if both have the word Lutheran in their names.

In our troop, a scout can sign off if he is two ranks higher than the requirement being signed (must be Life to sign off on a FC requirement etc).

OldGreyEagle:

I see several issues:

1. The duplication of the same requirement in many MB. I was interested in how many counselors retrained/retested for each MB or accepted the requirement as complete if it had been done before at some point.

2. Yes, it is a pain for a MB counselor for canoeing or rowing to have to locate training and equipment for the requirement. Especially for one or a few scouts.

3. Is the requirement really providing the results desired since it is not required that CPR be demonstrated/tested/evaluated by a certified instructor (or even that the MB counselor be trained at all in CPR)?

4. If this is desired, seems better for the BSA to simply require CPR certification for everyone and then make the trainers and equipment available.

Eagle77:

I agree that is the best solution. But if that is what BSA wants, thats what we should do, and SUPPORT as BSA. I am certified, so are most of our scouts and leaders (not all since it is not required).

In other words, BSA (council level?) should keep the training/certification materials, mannequins and certified trainers on tap for troops IF that is the intent. Then, certify everyone annually.

But the way it is, we are backing in to the requirement, which I suspect is not being done in a useful fashion 99% of the time.

How many MB counselors are certified CPR trainers? I know, I know, the requirement does not say you have to be but, if not, how much good did you really do?

Not a BIG gripe I guess, but heres an irritant:

How about limiting MB/rank requirement creep? My current heartburn is the requirement in Canoeing MB that the scout must demonstrate CPR with a training device.

The same requirement is found in First Aid, Swimming, Water Sports, Rowing and almost the same in Lifesaving. Maybe elsewhere too.

So:

1. How many times does a scout have to do this? If the scout has the First Aid MB can we say he has passed this requirement for all the others? Do you have him re-qualify for each MB?

2. Cant we just keep it on the First Aid MB and drop the others? Seems silly that a scout cannot go on a week-long canoe trip and not complete the requirements for the canoeing MB there (since we did not canoe with the training dummies!)

3. If we want scouts to be able to perform CR, why not provide/require certification in CPR (at reasonable cost)?

4. Does the MB counselor need to be CPR certified (I am, but I guess you dont have to be). If he/she is not, how much good does this requirement really do? Of course, I am not a CPR trainer (another interesting point??).

5. Do you as a Canoeing or Rowing conselor feel the need to scramble to locate training dummies and materials or set up a full CPR course?

For what it is worth, if the scout did it for one merit badge, I call it good for the others.

Scoutdr:

U R rite! Cn we du it?

Back in Grad School, I was a teaching assistant for a basic course. The Prof was a burn-out case. He had used the same multiple choice tests for years, just passing out new answer sheets. A lot of the test forms even had the correct answers circled by previous students. Every Frat and Sorority on Campus had copies of the tests in their files.

Naturally, students just memorized (or smuggled in) a list of the answers (A, C, D, B etc.). The AVERAGE scores were in the mid-90% range!

I asked if I could write a new exam, and the burn-out just shrugged. Not his problem as I would grade it. So from then on the tests consisted of 6-8 short answer essays. You could hear the howls all the way across campus that first day! Someone even had the guts to complain to the Dean that I had switched the test! What fun!

Ah yes. I am old enough to remember when using a calculator, especially one with a memory function, was considered cheating. Now they are required.

Note: I am NOT saying cheating with cell phones is OK. But banning them wont work either. They are too ubiquitous.

I am afraid appeals to ethics wont work.

One quick, cheap way to stop this: Quit giving multiple-choice or true-false tests. It is easy to text a few letters. How do you text the answer to an essay question?

Prairie:

Agreed, but if food is involved, a tent is irrelevant. Plenty of cases of bears and other critters busting into a tent in pursuit of food, some ending tragically.

Is there really anyone who thinks a human in a bag in a tent is safer from bears than a human in a sleeping bag outside the tent, assuming the food situation is equal in both cases?

Two per tent arguments seem to break down into:

A misreading of buddy system or YPG-not a valid argument

LNT-fewer tent sites needed-seems a valid point, but on a case by case basis, not worth a universal mandate. (would you permit hammocks which leave no footprint and are more LNT-friendly than tents?)

Weight in backpacking-a personal choice.

More reassuring for younger scouts-Again, a personal choice.

Tents vs. no tents (weather and insects permitting) seems to break down into:

Modesty and YP in crowded areas (a valid point which I will concede under those conditions)

A belief one is safer from big critters in a tent than out of it-I am not buying it.

I see no valid reason for Philmonts no bivy sack or sleeping under the stars rule other than bureaucratic Isay-so.

"The rationale we were given at Philmont for not sleeping under the stars or in bivey sacks was that those looked too much like a log which bear could be inclined to roll over in search of bugs."

AAAAARG! Has this ever actually happened? Sounds like more of a rationalization, not rationale.

Contrary to popular belief, black bears are not stupid, nor especially nearsighted. A human in a bag is no log and any bear which cannot tell the difference is not long for the world anyway.

Whether Philmont or National Park rangers, I find you cannot argue with bureaucrats. They will simply invent a rationalization to shut you up.

SR540 Beaver:

Sounds like your troop has good, if historical, reason for the two per tent policy in your unit. If it works for you, go for it. However, if it ever comes up, you might want to re-consider. The 2-man tent I use the most is sub-3 lbs and packs to the size of a loaf of bread. It is in my pack. The pack is not really smaller (in size) with it left out. Times have changed.

Is your troop trailer really THAT tight on space?

And yes, boomerscout is right, I use my tent in areas where modesty and scout protection require the private area for changing. State parks, camporees etc. By sleeping under the stars I was thinking more of on the trail.

(This message has been edited by Sandspur)

For what its worth, a quick GOOGLE of Boy Scout Bear Attack shows several incidents in the last decade, but interestingly all but one involved bears attacking scouts IN TENTS. The exception was a scout on the trail.

Want to bet food in the tent (a safe bet with young boys) is more risky than sleeping without a tent? Im guessing that a scout is more likely to have cheetoes in his tent than in his sleeping bag.

Boomer:

Yea, I understand the theory.

But I think we over-react in trying to shield ourselves from the unknown.

Hantavirus is a possibility in some areas of the country. But (speaking as a microbiologist) I dont lose any sleep over it. I might think twice about bedding down in a cave littered with mouse droppings in the southwest, but other than that, Ive got better things to worry about. Besides, you can put a tarp under your bag.

And I suppose a bear MIGHT be more likely to see a human in a sleeping bag as food than a tent, but really, what is the risk from a bear in a group of a dozen or so scouts sleeping in a group? I think any bear that is hungry and aggressive enough to invade a herd of large animals like humans that a clearly not its normal prey is not going to balk at a tent wall.

Besides, where are your scouts camping anyway? How often are you really in high country/grizzly territory? I am guessing that most of the troops asking about mandatory tents and two per tent are in much more civilized areas (the state park?). When we camp in bear country, we cook some distance from camp, hang our food in bear bags or bear-proof containers and a few adults have bear spray in their packs (I bet that will set some folks off but were talking Griz country here!).

Nah, fact is as humans our primary sensors are our eyes. When they dont work well (night) we get nervous. That noise in the bush scares us because we cant see what it is. We set up tents on a calm, clear evening with mild temperatures because we psychologically feel more secure inside.

You need a tent if it is:

Rainy

Insect-infested

Very cold/windy

Other than that, you dont NEED a tent. I always have one (be prepared!) but using it is a personal choice depending on conditions.

Yea, join the new troop and dont look back.

One word of advice: Visit and audition several new troops if there is more than one other choice in your area. Troops and programs are different.

I would also ask the old SM or CC point blank what the issue was as Calico suggested. They owe you an answer.

I think your instincts are correct in that your son probably does know what the issue is. Unless of course the REAL issue is some legal action you took against the troop and the misbehavior is a smoke screen. Still, for the troop to get to this stage without contacting you first to have a chat about things is wrong, and I wouldnt associate with a unit like that if that is in fact what occurred.

Well, he has a point. I suppose legally he cannot require it since BSA does not BUT, If you can perform proper CPR, why not get certified? How can you demonstrate proper technique but yet cant perform CPR if needed? Besides, recommended CPR technique changes over time and you should be aware of the latest.

No reason you have to pay $40. Depends on the class, the instructor and the certifying agency. I just re-certified (along with a lot of scouts and scouters) and it cost $6 (that was just for the book).

I would think that requiring scouts to pay $40 to meet a MB requirement is wrong. If the MB instructor is a CPR instructor, he can certify the lads himself. If he is not, he needs to find someone to do it for them. If the certifying agency insists on a small payment, I suggest the troop pick it up. It is a good thing for the troop and scouting to have a lot of folks CPR certified.

Instead of wanting to check off the requirement, maybe the scouts could look at it like the accomplishment it is.

The life they save may be yours.

Talk about over-reaction

1. Philmont is not the final authority on the outdoors. But if they require tents, it is so the crews have appropriate shelter should they need it (in a downpour etc.).

2. Tents are not needed for experienced campers in good weather.

3. You are no safer with a buddy in your tent as opposed to the other dozen our so scouts and scouters a few feet away. Safe from what anyway? The boogie man?

4. That thin layer of silnylon protects from rain, wind, holds a bit of heat (sometimes a good thing, sometimes bad) and gives psychological protection from the big bad dark. Ye olde bear (or raccoon) wont be stopped for more than a nanosecond by a nylon tent.

5. Young scouts like the tent experience with a buddy to help with the homesickness. But no reason to require all other scouts to sleep doubled up if they dont want to. Buddy up those who want to.

6. No, bringing your own tent does not burden the group. If you issue the same amount of group gear to everyone, the solo guy just carries a few pounds more weight due to his tent. His choice. A lot of lightweight tents are in to 2-3 lb range anyway these days.

7. Maybe we shouldnt be teaching scouts to be afraid of the dark. If you dont need a buddy to take a catnap under a tree six feet from the group during the day, you dont need a buddy to sleep the same way just because the sun went down.