scoutldr

I find it really hard to believe that there are almost as many LFL members as there are CS and BS combined! I don't know a single LFL member in my council and at district meetings, it's never mentioned. If I were looking for "paper members", this would be the first place I would check. Over the past year or so, I have percieved a general "decline" in all areas of scouting...camporee attendance, RT attendance, etc. As of this date, we only have about 20 CS registered for our district CS Day camp. That's an average of about one scout per Pack. BS Summer camp numbers are abysmal. Camp is filled to about one-third capacity and most of those are out-of-council. (all I hear is "get rid of the heat, humidity, mosquitoes and ticks and we'll come back", but it's no worse now than it was in the 60's) What's going on?

...and you may not allow smoking during a BOR, either. :-)

The answer is voting. Make your representatives understand what you expect of them if they expect to get re-elected. Then go to the polls and follow through. Unfortunately, with a 20-30% voter turnout rate, they know it's an idle threat. Most of those who do vote do so without a clue of what the candidates stand for or what the issues are. They vote on who's "cute" or who promises the biggest tax break (that they can't pay for) or "anyone running against Bush". The same thing applies to Council and District operations. If you want a say in what happens, make sure your COR attends the meetings, because they are the only ones who can exercise your unit's vote.

There is no "BSA policy" on this. It is true that all troop property, including money, belongs to the CO. Perhaps a nicely worded letter to the original unit's COR or IH would explain the situation and get a positive response. If the camp fees have been paid, it may be a simple thing, assuming you are going to the same camp, to have the registrations transferred to the new unit. If the CO agrees to this, it's done deal and the troop committee has nothing to say about it. Your DE or DC should run interference for you. Sometimes adults can ruin everything.

I believe one of the duties of a DE is to meet with every CO at least once a year to review their charter responsibilities. Sounds like that's not happening. If I were you, I'd be looking for a new CO. Ours is not much better, but at least we get a meeting place.

Perhaps this is the reason that more and more commercial campgrounds and state parks are making it hard or impossible for scout groups to camp there.

It is one of the SM's core responsibilities to conduct troop-level JLT. Is he doing that? With elections every 6 months or so, this should be a regularly scheduled thing on the troop calendar. We also ask the question, "what would you do to make the troop better?". Frequently we get "do more camping" or "play different games". Then we explain to the scout how he can make that happen...that he needs to express his ideas to the youth leadership, and it's not up to the adults to make it happen.

BOR consist of at least 3 committee members. A parent may not serve if their son is being reviewed (and preferably should not be in the room but you can't prevent them from "observing" if they insist). The BOR chair can be anyone, but most commonly it is the troop CC or advancement chair. SM and ASM may not serve.

We use the FRS radios...we always have at least one per car. If we get out of range, cell phones are a back-up.

I learned to play the organ while in Scouts. If I press down the "trumpet" button and play bugle calls, does that count? Flugelhorn vs cornet? This just goes to show we can take ANY topic and debate it until the cows come home! I love this scouting stuff! (thanks to Barry!)

A scout or scouter who is not rated as a "Swimmer" may only ride as a passenger in a canoe and only if accompanied in the canoe by a qualified Lifeguard (BSA, Red Cross, etc). ALL participants MUST wear approved PFDs at all times. Safe Swim Defense and Safety Afloat training are now available online at the BSA web site. I just ran through Safety Afloat again and it only took about 15 minutes. I recommend everyone do that as a refresher.

The way it's supposed to work is the paid Scout Executive serves at the pleasure of the Executive Board, a group of volunteers led by the Council President. Too often, however, the Board is hand picked by the SE and they don't pay any attention to what the SE and his corps of paid professionals are doing or how they are achieving the numbers...nor do they have the backbone to stand up to him and tell him how they want things run. In a non-profit corporation, it is indeed the Executive Board (volunteers) who have the fiduciary responsibility and should be answering. They allowed it to happen.(This message has been edited by scoutldr)

I'm sure OGE meant to say "may NOT be done". If a scout chooses not to do this, there's nothing you can do about it. This probably won't present a problem until someone challenges your unit's right to do this and appeals to the Advancement Committee. Then they win. Push comes to shove, your unit's charter can be revoked.

I always enjoy David's well researched posts. It's interesting to get an insight into what the Founders intended vs. what we have today. Looking forward to the book...maybe we can get autographed copies?

I was raised to eat what Mom put in front of you. You were allowed to "not like" a food, but not until you tried it first. If you didn't like what was on the table, you wait until the next meal...no special orders. I never did develop a taste for raw onions or oysters. Can't think of anything else I don't like. Meatloaf is not my favorite, but I can tolerate it. My own two sons were raised the same way...the older became a country club manager and quite the chef, but still won't eat chicken on the bone ("it's just gross"). He makes a mean honey-glazed salmon and sauteed garlic spinach. The younger still won't touch lima beans or mayonnaise. Compared to some of my scouts who live off of froot loops, peanut butter and trading post junk (which is nutritionally void but profitable) all week at camp. At dinner time, they just sit there. My only concern is dehydration and electrolyte imbalance, since we typically have temps in the 90s and dewpoints near 80. They are not required to eat balanced diets the rest of the year, so I'm not going to fight it for one week at camp.

I received the District Award of Merit in 2003...the award was a plaque accompanied by a knot. I have also received the Cubmaster Award, Cub Scouter Award, Scouter Training Award and Scouter's Key. No medals.

I always jokingly tell the parents (in earshot of the scouts), that my only obligation is to bring back the same number of bodies, preferably alive. If they come home hungry, dirty, wet, cold or mad, it's because of the choices and plans (or lack thereof) they made, not me.

I had to get mine on Ebay. If anyone has an extra Cub Scouter Award and/or Cubmaster Award to sell or trade, send me a PM. PS: Welcome to the forum!(This message has been edited by scoutldr)

Agree that the situation in dan's first post was over the top and uncalled for. If parents do not want their children to talk to "strangers", then they need to ensure that their kids don't answer the phone. Almost everyone has callerID now...that should be a way to decide which calls to answer, and it provides a record until deleted. I also agree that it is proper telephone etiquette to identify your self and affiliation when calling "Hello, this is Scoutldr from Anytown Council Boy Scouts, may I speak to Scout please?" That being said, I also prefer e-mail...I can zip out a message and in 10 minutes have the info go to 40 units, while playing phone tag with that many people could take a week of evenings on the phone, and I simply don't have that much time to devote. Unfortunately, when I ask for information (e.g., where are you going to summer camp this year), I typically get about a 10% response. I don't expect an instantaneous response, but within a week would be nice. I also do not bother people with useless information (i.e., "spam"), but it's usually to gather information that I have to report to District or Council. I don't require a thoughtful dissertation...a simple "Camp Runamuck, 35 Scouts, 2 Leaders" is all I need. I don't know what the answer is...nobody knows how to RSVP anymore, either, but that's a different forum.

Ditto what Fscouter said. The patrol eats as a patrol. No exceptions unless there are documented religious or medical issues. Early in our troop's history, I remember cooking up spaghetti and serving it. One scout stepped up and said "where's the parmesan cheese...I don't eat spaghetti without parmesan cheese!"...to which I replied, "Fine, it's your choice"...and dumped his portion back into the pot. He changed his mind when he realized I wasn't kidding.

Welcome to the campfire, SaintCad. As we say, pull up a log and set a spell. There are several theories about the BSA position against homosexuality. The official party line is that the BSA believes that homosexuals cannot provide a good, tradtional family values role model for impressionable young men. Another theory is that several large mainline religious denominations who use the Scouting program in their youth ministries are holding the BSA hostage if they should alter their policy, potentially removing thousands of members and millions in financial support. There are many Scouters who disagree with the policy and believe that the BSA should end the dichotomy presented by the mixed messages (be friendly, courteous and kind, but kick out the homos). On the other hand, there are many Scouters who think that the discrimination is justified and that all gays should be shunned because they are going to burn in hell. As more and more denominations (e.g., Episcopal) begin to accept homosexuality the BSA is presented with a dilemma. Do they revoke the charters of those units attached to organizations which do not support the BSA stance, or do they just look the other way to preserve membership numbers? There are surely many gay scouts and scouters, but it should also be noted that the BSA has not (to my knowledge) engaged in any "witch hunts". But, if a member should openly "avow" a gay lifestyle, their membership is quickly and quietly revoked without recourse. In some councils, it has been reported that memberships are revoked based purely on rumor and hearsay. Among experienced Scouters, it is generally accepted that discussions of their sexual orientation, whether gay or hetero, simply have no place in the scouting environment. Boys just want to camp, have fun and learn cool stuff. My personal opinion is that the BSA will evolve over time. When I first started in Scouting some 44 years ago, women could hold no positions in a Cub Pack except Den Mother. There were no women Scoutmasters and certainly no "Arrow-women", and there were separate units for blacks. I was a member of an Explorer Post in 1969 when the Exporing program (precursor to Venturing)first went co-ed. Now I hear there are all-female Venture Crews. Who woulda thunk it? Times change, and the BSA will have to continue to change too if they want to remain relevant to society.(This message has been edited by scoutldr)

OK, that does it...use of the 00000 word should not be tolerated in this or any other forum! (Does it mean "hugs"?) acco, thanks for the enlightenment. I'd still like to know specifically what the "service to youth" entailed.

Ditto, ditto, ditto. Fred is just passing on BSA news articles. Don't shoot the messenger!

This illustrates the downside of having myriad committee members (and/or ASM) who serve no real purpose.

Doesn't matter what the explanation is...it is incorrect.