SeattlePioneer

I do a simplified Raingutter Regatta for a recruiting night event and I'll be doing it Saturday for our pack overnight camp. I use pretty much any kind of .75" wood for stock, and you can use a circular saw to cut out rectangles and then a pointed nose for a boat. The boats I make are 3"x7.5." I harvest an old roadside sign or two that use corrugated plastic on a wire frame. I cut the wire frame into pieces for masts, and use a grinder to point a point on one end. Cub Scouts then pound the mast into the boat with a hammer. I paint the plastic sign white to cover up advertizing, and then cut the sign into pieces for sails. The mast is used to impale the sail. When boys register for the race, I give them a "Boat Racing license" and a boat. The Scout and parent then work to decorate and assemble the boat. I spray paint boats in various colors so the paint will be dry, and boys use crayons, felt pens, Legos or whatever to decorate their boats. Boys pick who they want to race against. The winner of each heat wins a sticker to apply to their boat racing license. Small sails and short masts work best, minimizing the capsizing of boats and rubbing sales on raingutters. Often boys wind up adding multiple sails. I have the Racing license as a file I can e-mail if desired. Around here I can print out 25 in color for free per week at community center computer centers and such. I do pretty much the same thing for Pinewood Derby, with all Scouts and parents working together to first build and then race their cars.(This message has been edited by seattlepioneer)

I keep my sleeping bag in a duffel bag with plenty of room for it. When I'm backpacking I use a rather large stuff sack for the sleeping bag, extra clothing and whatever else I want and cinch it on my Kelty Tioga frame pack with a couple of straps. My priority is to make it easy to get things out and packed up. Making things small is a bogus waste of time in my opinion. I'm in the GREAT OUTDOORS! Why should I care how small my sleeping bag may be?

Hello Moosetracker, > Unfortunately, the longer this thread gets the more disgusted I get with too much nitpicking detail that can't really be understood by a reasonable person acting in good faith. Too much of an attempt at top down management and control when it would be better to trust the good faith of the leaders involved. Especially when when push comes to shove, units are just going to do what they consider to be reasonable in any case, with perfectly satisfactory results.

Hello NACAP, There were three adults plus myself whop formed the BOR. One of those adults was a half hour late and apparently hadn't been able to commit to attending the BOR. My ability to commit to being there made it practical to schedule the meeting, I suppose. The Advancement Chair/Assistant Scoutmaster had a copy of the advancement rules, and was well prepared for the meeting. I don't doubt he was aware the Assistant Scoutmasters aren't supposed to serve on a BOR. You have to understand I've just been appointed as the UC, and this unit tends to have leaders who are suspicious of the district and council. Our District Advancement Chair has made an effort to sell use of the on line advancement reporting, and I made an effort to sell that to the Troop Advancement Chair, who was distinctly not sold on that as a practice. He had a 1" thick collection of paper advancement reports and prefers to rely on his own documentation of advancement by the council. That probably makes sense for someone who is well organized and good at record keeping. The council and national aren't anything to write home about in that regard. So anyway, having lost in one effort to promote recommended practices, I wasn't going to pick another fight. Not that time, anyway. > Thank you --- I'll read up on that.

> Yes, that's exactly the problem. It's a formula for a failed unit. That's why it's a bad model to use. People who are in that position usually lack the ability to effectively ask people to help and delegate things to do --- they usually need help, whether they recognize it or not. That's why I pick the Committee Chair as the most important position to fill effectively. That's the person who should be conducting the rest of the orchestra and finding new people to fill various positions. When an effective Committee Chair is available, usually no one is overloaded with things to do and all the jobs that need to be done are manageable and don't require heroic workloads no one is willing to do. Pick a dud as CC, and suddenly things are no longer getting done. Leaders who see the vacuum created start taking on additional tasks they really shouldn't be doing. Ultimately you wind up with the "Cubmaster who does everything" or whatever, and I high risk of failure when that person finally leaves. That's what I tend to see, anyway. So.... what kind of a Committee Chair does your unit have?

Unless patrol members are rolling in dough for some reason, I'd be looking for alternatives to spending a lot of money with a patch maker. Patrol members ought to be able to design a patch they like on a computer and then to print it out on some kind of printer stock, followed by laminating it, for example. The artist in the den could reasonably be expected to execute his design on a blank patrol patch or some other medium, repeating it for each patrol member. A creative patrol could no doubt come up with other possibilities.

Well, we had a very nice BOR for a well qualified Star Scout who is advancing to Life today. Three unit leaders plus myself. The unit Advancement chair was very well organized and with a lot of experience in the job. Also he is an Assistant Scoutmaster. I made no comment on that. I used several of Lisabobs questions, which I thought were excellent. Thank you! This Scout will be 17 in August. He has quite a lot of work to do to complete Eagle by the time he is 18. He has two older brothers who Eagled. I thought he would do well to find an adult coach to help guide him through the Eagle hurdles and keep him focused on the various tasks that need to get done. Do any units encourage that kind of support? Anyway, this was a good experience for me. I'm invited/planning to attend the Troop Committee meeting which will be in another ten days to get a feel for for the Troop Committee is working.

Hello johnponz, AQt the time I was asked, it didn't occur to me that there was an issue --- not until it was raised here. I think NACAP's post contained pretty authoritative interpretation of the equivocal language in the Advancement book. Still, I'll probably ask my DC for his opinion when I see him, just to see what kind of answer I get off the cuff. You'll notice that, as often recommended on the board, I didn't accept the opinions of others as binding, or to be bound by people's interpretation of the ambiguous language of the Advancement guide. But NACAPS post made a reasonably authoritative reference to a specific discussion of this issue, which seems to clarify the ambiguous language. Still, I'd be surprised if that interpretation is widely understood, although several people in this thread suggested it as a practice without the reference. Anyway, it's been an interesting discussion. I'll be leaving shortly to do the BOR.

Under what circumstances would you award the Scout his Eagle Award when it's been approved?

Of course that would be nice, but the last time Washington State went for a Republican President was in 1984 and it doesn't look good this year either: http://www.270towin.com/states/Washington

Hello NACAP, Thanks for your post, which provides convincing support for the idea that Committee Members have the primary responsibility for conducting Boards of Review. I'll still do the one scheduled for tomorrow, but I'll keep that in mind for future reference. Thanks!

There are some real adventures available in the North Cascades! Was your trek done in conjunction with the Camp Sheppard program? I know that was there, but I'd never paid too much attention to just what kinds of things they did.

A meeting of mostly Ron Paul delegates to the Washington State Republican Convention (June 1-2) was held last night. The following is likely to happen when Washington State Republican Convention Delegates elect delegates to the National Republican Convention: 1) Washington State has ten Congressional districts. Delegates to the state convention will caucus by Congressional district and each Congressional District caucus will elect three delegates and three alternates to the Republican National Convention. Several Congressional districts have majorities for Paul, Santorum or Romney, and where those majorities occur they will no doubt result in the delegates for that Presidential campaign electing the delegates they wish to go. 2) Ten delegates will be elected "at large" by all the delegates to the state convention. The Paul campaign is attempting to negotiate an agreement with the Romney campaign to form a joint slate of delegates, dividing those ten delegates between the two campaigns in proportion to the number of delegates each campaign has. That would maximize representation of Romney and Paul delegates and eliminate Santorum and Gingrich from sending any delegates to the National convention from among those ten positions. 3) The Permanent Chair of the Republican State Convention, the Republican State Committeeman and Republican State Committeewoman are also automatic delegates to the National Republican Convention. A Romney-Paul alliance was not one I anticipated. There is not much love lost between those two campaigns, generally speaking. But it's a way for the Paul campaign to maximize their delegates if they make this deal happen. 4) Two people will be selected to vote for US President in the Electoral College should Republicans win the state by a majority (unlikely).(This message has been edited by seattlepioneer)

I thank infoscouter for presenting the most relevant information on the issue of who is eligible to sit on a Board of review in his earlier post. I have considered the issues raised in posts, and my conclusion is that I'm eligible to serve on a BOR and this BOR in particular. The general requirements to serve on a BOR are given as follows: >> Under the terms of this provision, I'm eligible to serve. The second regulation that applies is as follows: >> As I described earlier, the Committee Chair found that he does not have three Committee Members available to serve on the BOR this Sunday, and he asked me to serve. I see nothing in any of these rules that would preclude me serving. When I've attended formal training on being a UC, I don't recall any trainer suggesting that UC weren't permitted to serve on a BOR. In attending every district committee meeting since 10/2004, the district advancement chair has never suggested UCs shouldn't serve on a BOR, and I've never heard the council Commissioner suggest that at the meetings and Council Commissioner Conferences I've attended. Nor do I have any reason to think they MIGHT object, although that of course is a guess. In short, I have to conclude that my friends here who have done me the favor of offering their counsel are mistaken, and have made the mistake of reading into the rules something that isn't there. Secondarily, neither my district or council leaders have interpreted these rules in the way some have suggested to the best of my knowledge.

Excellent questions, Lisabob. Just what I was looking for! Basement, The BOR is scheduled for May 27th and the next Court of Honor for June 4th. The Committee Chair said the BOR would have to be Sunday if it was going to before the COH. I hadn't confronted the issue of a UC sitting on a BOR before. I didn't consider it an issue. I was asked by the CC if I could help out to make his program work better, and since I could, I agreed to do so. I have no idea how old the Scout is, but I have no reason to suppose he's up against aging out of the program. If that makes it an "ego thing" as suggested by Baden P, help yourself!

Other Committee Members weren't available to serve at the BOR at the time it needed to be scheduled.

Hello acco, The way it worked for me is that I presented and sold my ideas for program to the Troop Committee and we negotiated an agreement as to what the program would be. They then supported the program they agreed to and I aimed to carry it out. The point person I worked with most often was the Committee Chair. Personally, I never had an occasion to decide who worked for who. We cooperated well enough that that was never an issue. The same applied when I was recently Cubmaster for two years. One of my tasks in rebuilding a pack that had been down to a single boy was training a new Committee Chair, who has done a good job after some time in grade to learn on the job.

Personally I favor neckerchief slides that I have made myself. For the temporary Bobcat Den I organized after our recruiting night April 2nd, new Scouts made a neckerchief slide that was a name tag as well, to help everyone learn their names. I combined that with neckerchiefs cut from a colorful thrift store sheet, so that boys would be "in uniform" with a neckerchief and slide near the beginning of our first Bobcat Den Meeting. I wear the same neckerchief and slide myself, to set the example. At our May 21st Bobcat Den meeting, our six new Scouts all completed their Bobcat requirements, which will be awarded at our June 2-3 overnight camp. The Bobcat Den is now disbanded, with the new Scouts folded into their regular dens, which will be formed at the overnight camp as well.

Does anyone have any particularly good or thoughtful issues that might be raised at a LIFE BOR they would like to suggest? I'd be glad to benefit from the experience of those who have a history of doing these boards.

They have two, but not three people available on a holiday weekend with the next meeting night (June 4th) scheduled to be a Court of Honor. InfoScouter, your reference says who should NOT serve on a BOR, and I see nothing about Unit Commissioners listed. Indeed, apparently SM and AS can serve on Boards of Review as long as they aren't for their own unit. I would say that the following cover my participation:

For Scout Troops Or Venturing Crews who want a real off trail adventure, consider Washington State's Ptarmigan Traverse. Plan to have some good route finding and climbing skills. This is NOT a BSA High Adventure/Disneyland style of outing. This was actually pioneered by some ex Scouts decades ago. http://www.summitpost.org/ptarmigan-traverse/154644

Guide for parents--- VERY good idea! I've seen some good ones. I wonder how often they are read?

As a recently appointed Unit Commissioner for a troop, I was asked to sit on a Board of Review for a Life Scout I don't know on Sunday along with two adults from the Troop Committee. I've always been AS or SM when I've been a unit leader for a troop, so I haven't had occasion to sit on a BOR in my Scouter service, which began in 1981. I'll have to read the BOR section in the SM Handbook. Any other advice?

I had no problem accepting Cub Scout rank awards over the summer especially. After the new school year started, I encouraged parents to work on the new rank. But if they wanted to complete the previous one, that was OK with me. Never had anyone turn in electives late. I'd be inclined to draw the line there. If I was a SLACK Cubmaster, so be it. I'd save being a stickler on advancement for Boy Scouts, and Eagle Scout in particular. (This message has been edited by seattlepioneer)

Generally speaking, I consider bylaws a waste of time and effort.