shortridge

Seems like you're in a really, really difficult position. I don't envy you in the least. You've gotten really good advice here, and I hope it works out well. However, I would say this. If it was the church's desire to restart the pack, then it's the church's responsibility to make sure the pack has proper leadership. Before you transfer to another pack (which seems like the best option for you!), you and the DE need to have one final sit-down with the IH and explain to him or her just what is going on and how the charter will again go defunct. Make sure the CO knows the consequences of its lack of leadership - explain just how the COR bailed - and then go about your business. That way, the church can't start raising a ruckus after the fact, and the DE can cover his behind by saying "Hey, the CO didn't want to keep it going any more."

Bart, First, I'd review all the promotional materials that the unit leaders have been given about this summer - the leader's manual, brochures, etc. Use that as a baseline. If your CD has promised something, make sure you deliver unless it's impossible. And make sure it's clear that your role is not to sign off on requirements, but to teach skills. Second, have a sit-down with your CD and PD about how many Scouts are signed up, what type of resources you have at your disposal, how many staffers you'll have, whether you'll be able to call on other program areas (get a nature geek to teack plant ID?) for help, etc. A rough head count in advance is ESSENTIAL. If you end up with 60 kids and you only have enough equipment and supplies and staffers for 20, you'll be in trouble. Third, you are only about two months away from the start of camp. Don't bite off more than you can chew. You can always expand next year. Fourth, design it around patrols as much as possible. Don't require patrols to attend - you'll get one or two kids from a troop that does mixed-age patrols, and should mix them into the others. But try to keep a unit's patrols together as much as possible. Fifth, NCS does offer an FYC director training program. But before going, talk with people who've already been about whether it would be more helpful for you to go for Scoutcraft or FYC. The former, from my experience, covers the exact same Scouting skills that FYC should cover. I'm not sure that the FYC program would teach you how to start one from scratch. Sixth, since you're the Scoutcraft director, focus on Scoutcraft-related skills, and don't worry about the swimming stuff. You don't have to cover every single requirement - that would be impossible. However, if it's possible, get a nature geek for a guest session, unless your own nature skills are expert-level. Seventh, with your CD and PD's permission, ask units who send Scouts to this program also send along an adult leader to assist with instruction. That'll help substantially when you get 60 kids signed up at the last minute and have only two staffers to teach. Eighth, try to set aside a physically separate area for the FYC campers. Make it special - get or make repros of the original Brownsea patrol flags, build a cool gateway, have a floating flagpole, develop a short but sweet morning ceremony or ritual, take on the persona of BP, come up with a neat name for the program ("Brownsea," "First Scout," "Baden-Powell Training"), etc. etc. Ninth, run a cool evening program just for the FYC campers - a night hike, a neat cooking program, even an overnight depending on your resources. No one else allowed except your new guys. Tenth, congratulations, and a pox on the naysayers who say you can't do both jobs at the same time. My first paying job on camp staff was actually three jobs - commissioner (unit check-ins and -outs, daily campsite inspections and visits, loaning out equipment), Scoutcraft instructor (teaching Scoutcraft MBs) and FYC instructor (teaching skills for the FYC program). We had three staffers handling all those roles. In the 15 years since, they have been spun off - there's now a camp commissioner, a Scoutcraft program staff and a Brownsea program staff - but splitting yourself is doable, especially for just an hour a day.

If you organize campsites by chapter, that promotes accountability. Require everyone to check out with the chapter chief, and then assemble all the chiefs to make sure everyone's signed out. If someone comes up as still being in camp, start making calls. No one should be going to an inductions or service weekend and just "floating" aimlessly. Everyone should have a specific job, which introduces another measure of accountability. At check-in, have the secretary or check-in staff note the member's job - physical arrangements? general work crew? ceremonies? - and then pass those lists out to the crew chiefs. If someone doesn't show up for their job on Saturday morning after breakfast, you start looking. That also provides a chance to hook in those new members coming to the first weekend after being inducted who *are* just kind of floating - "Oh, you don't have a job yet? Let me introduce you to Paul. He's in charge of the kitchen crew, and we need someone to cut up onions ..." After Saturday evening, candidates should be welcomed by their chapters and taken under the wing of the chapter chief. The elangomats can continue hanging out with them if desired, but in my experience, most elangomats just want a hot shower and a nap.

Oak Tree, The B&G club stuff you linked to was produced by a local club, not the national organization, and consisted of small items - a t-shirt, mug, water bottle, daypack, etc. Ditto for the YMCA items. An organization can commission high-falutin' stuff to give to its donors, sure. But to hawk it to its members - many of whom are having difficulty in their families paying bills or finding a job - creates a huge psychological disconnect between National and the grassroots. In another year or so, all the 100th anniversary junk that was ordered but never purchased is going to go on sale when they realize that people aren't buying it. Maybe then I can pick up a pair of cufflinks for cheap, eh?

FScouter, I never suggested that the pieces of overpriced crap were being sold at a loss. The question I asked was what's the actual return on investment? In other words, does it make sense for National to spend all that time and energy on creating a bunch of new items every year that only a tiny handful of people will ever click the button or fill in the form to order - when it could be spending time and energy on outdoor equipment and program resources that its members will actually use? It's especially head-shaking-worthy when you look at the fundraising strategies of other youth-oriented nonprofits. Do you see the YMCA or the Boys & Girls Clubs of America publishing a catalog offering logo-emblazoned cummerbunds, crystal and clocks?

FScouter - But what's the expense of conceptualizing, creating, manufacturing and stocking all these gee-gaws and doo-dads? You've got to pay a designer, a craftsman, a machinist, an assembly-line worker and a stockroom and shipping clerk, in some form or another - either contracting or paying them directly. You're giving more work to attorneys who have to handle licensing and contract issues and accounting people who have to handle additional items and entries. So for a $69.99 collectible coin, how much is National actually pocketing to go to the pension fund or reduce registration fees or whatnot? Is it worth it? Or could Irving perhaps get more accomplished for America's youth by focusing its energies on tents and packs instead of cummerbunds and coins?

To start, I could have sworn that I read somewhere fairly recently that one of National's goals was to position the BSA as a premier outdoor equipment provider. I thought it was in the strategic plan, but can't find that reference now ... does anyone know what the fuzzy sector of my brain is talking about? Anyway, the fact that National keeps churning out this type of high-priced crap that seems to be designed solely to give to donors (and prospective donors) is no surprise. I remember reading the catalog as a kid and being amazed even back then at how many pages were devoted to junk vs. actual camping equipment. I guess someone out there has a need for a Rogaska Crystal Box with Universal Emblem ($124.99), or the Winchester Eagle Clock ($175). And if you're on a budget, you can always give that someone special an Antique Brass BSA Coast Hook (just $17.88). I suppose my fundamental objection is that someone or someones in Irving is spending their time to conceive of, craft and create it all. Yes, people will buy any old junk, but talk about what has to be a fairly limited return on investment! I suppose some pros and council board members are still wearing the 100th Anniversary Cuff Link and Stud Set ($159.99) with their day-to-day suits. But is anyone really ever going to wear the 100th Anniversary Cummerbund ($9.98, helpfully available in both Navy and Black)?

Or could it have just been based on knowledge of orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) development and it's relationship to risk taking behaviour...... Sure, it could have been. So since you work in Irving, can you point us to the studies National examined in this regard and the experts it consulted with? My fourth edition of the Handbook for Scoutmasters says Scoutmasters had to be 21 years or older - in 1947. Did we really know a lot about the orbitofrontal cortex and risk-taking back then - especially when the first MRI wasn't published until 1973? I don't mean to be rude, but please don't urinate on my leg and tell me that it's raining.

Beavah, First, as to your contention that the G2SS is a guidebook, not a rulebook, I offer some excerpts, with bolding added for emphasis. To maintain such an environment, the BSA has developed numerous procedural and leadership selection policies, and provides parents and leaders the following online and print resources for the Cub Scouting, Boy Scouting, and Venturing programs. Thus, the G2SS is the primary source that provides these policies to parents and leaders. It is not simply a compilation of optional guidelines. The BSA has adopted the following policies for the safety and well-being of its members. These policies are primarily for the protection of its youth members; however, they also serve to protect adult leaders. Again, policies. Not guidelines. Now, as to the YP violation reporting requirements. All persons involved in Scouting shall report to local authorities, as is required under state and federal law, any good faith suspicion or belief that any child is or has been physically or sexually abused, physically or emotionally neglected, exposed to any form of violence or threat, exposed to any form of sexual exploitation including the possession, manufacture, or distribution of child pornography, online solicitation, enticement, or showing of obscene material. No person may abdicate this reporting responsibility to any other person. Notify your Scout executive of this report,or of any violation of BSAs Youth Protection policies, so that he or she may take appropriate action for the safety of our Scouts, make appropriate notifications, and follow-up with investigating agencies. Seems simple enough. Unit responsibilities. ... Adult leaders of Scouting units are responsible for monitoring the behavior of youth members and interceding when necessary. Parents of youth members who misbehave should be informed and asked for assistance. Any violations of the BSAs Youth Protection policies must immediately be reported to the Scout executive. Reporting any violations is thus given as an explicit unit responsibility. This section also draws a clear difference between misbehavior and YP violations (see below). The unit should inform the Scout executive of any violations of the BSAs Youth Protection policies. This is the third place in the new G2SS which makes this statement. I dont think, as you seem to, that requiring reporting of all violations was some sort of an unintentional error made in the revision process. Additionally, you try to cloud the issue by claiming that a Scout not following the Oath or Law is a Youth Protection violation. It is perfectly clear if you read the G2SS in its entirety that that is a member behavior issue, not a YP violation. Member behavior is covered by additional elements in the G2SS: The unit committee should review repetitive or serious incidents of misbehavior in consultation with the parents of the child to determine a course of corrective action including possible revocation of the youths membership in the unit. If problem behavior persists, units may revoke a Scouts membership in that unit. When a unit revokes a Scouts membership, it should promptly notify the council of the action. The unit should inform the Scout executive of any violations of the BSAs Youth Protection policies.

For the record, this is the relevant section from the G2SS about reporting violations to the SE: "Notify your Scout executive of this report, or of any violation of BSAs Youth Protection policies, so that he or she may take appropriate action for the safety of our Scouts, make appropriate notifications, and follow-up with investigating agencies." I think it speaks for itself. Beavah and others can feel free to disagree, but it's pretty clear to me. We have a responsibility, and the SE has a responsibility. Simple enough.

While I might undo the bracelet for use in lashing together a shelter, snare or some other item, I certainly wouldn't use that paracord in any type of emergency rescue scenario - hauling someone up a cliff, etc. The sweat and oils from the wearer's wrist would degrade the quality of the rope pretty quickly.

They were upset because you had gone to take a shower and weren't in the campsite to receive an honor you weren't aware of? Surely there's more to this story. FWIW, you don't have to be "tapped out" or "called out" (the preferred term) in order to be inducted. That's a common misconception.

Ah, gotta love consistency ... There's also this Whittling Chip Certification form - http://www.scouting.org/filestore/cubscouts/pdf/512-028_WB.pdf - which states that only a Bear or Webelos may earn the Whittling Chip.

Perhaps the boys will surprise you.

If your experience is anything like mine, the vast majority of the kids will never have picked up a pocketknife before. You'll need to start from point zero. - Emphasize safety - demonstrate over and over again the basics. Picking up a closed knife, pulling open one blade, how to hold it ... the stuff we adults don't think twice about. Practice handing a knife to someone else - and the "thank you" rule - multiple times. - Get plenty of adults on hand to watch closely (make sure they know the best practices, too!), and have PLENTY of room for safety circles (I hate the term "blood circle"). Don't try to cram the group around a single picnic table. - The whittling should come later, only after they've got the safety stuff down. Soap carving works great, but have some sticks on hand, too.

Give them more than just three months. That's, what, 9-12 troop/patrol meetings max? Three campouts? At that age, that's barely enough time to get your feet steady under you, let alone show leadership.

What is Scuttlebutt, and how is it done/played/performed?

The G2SS is not policy. That at least they made clear in this revision. It's an internal guidance document to advise scouters. < bangs head against wall > Beavah - We've gone around and around on this topic on other threads. You say the G2SS is not a policy document. Yet we as volunteers are referred to it as a basis for our decision-making. So what, in your opinion, is the policy document on BSA's Youth Protection rules? If the G2SS does not include the rules, which document does?

Just out of curiosity... why?! The SE and others are human, just like your unit leaders. But, unlike your unit leaders, the SE will have no first hand knowledge of the situation. Wouldn't it make more sense to allow those who are familiar with the situation handle it - especially seeing that it seems to be a relatively minor violation? For the reason that I articulated earlier - because what may be an isolated, minor incident in the eyes of a lone volunteer may be part of a pattern of activity when viewed by the person at the top who has access to past reports. Under your logic, local vigilantes on the scene should be allowed to handle crimes instead of reporting them to the police. The police have no first hand knowledge of the situation, after all ... just like the SE.

The rules say "Notify your Scout executive of this report, or of any violation of BSAs Youth Protection policies" talking to the scoutmaster allows you to determine if this was a youth protection violation or a misunderstanding of some kind. But if it is a violation, as volunteers, we don't have the latitude to decide that it's a major problem / serious violation / big deal. If it's a violation, of any kind, we have to report. Beavah's statement that only incidents that could trigger an insurance claim or garner publicity should be reported is flat-out wrong.

Beavah, I respect your calls for use of good judgment, but I just have to say that here, I think you're way off track. One person's "really serious stuff" is another person's horseplay. A single "minor" incident observed by one person may actually be the latest incident in a pattern of misconduct that provides the final piece of the puzzle for the SE. We don't have the full picture - but we do have the obligation to report. In addition, you ignore the fact that there are MANY more types of abuse than just sexual abuse. There's neglect - emotional abuse - physical abuse. All deserve attention. The G2SS is not the be-all and end-all of policy documents, to be sure. Nor is it always clearly written. However, it does contain several perfectly plain-language directives on this topic - not suggestions, not optional guidelines - that leave no room for interpretation. My comments are bolded in brackets: All persons involved in Scouting shall report to local authorities, as is required under state and federal law, any good faith suspicion or belief [not just an allegation, as you state] that any child is or has been physically or sexually abused, physically or emotionally neglected, exposed to any form of violence or threat, exposed to any form of sexual exploitation including the possession, manufacture, or distribution of child pornography, online solicitation, enticement, or showing of obscene material. [This list is MUCH broader than the narrow category of incidents which you cited, and it is not limited to abuse "in the program."] No person may abdicate this reporting responsibility to any other person. Notify your Scout executive of this report, or of any violation of BSAs Youth Protection policies [this is as clear as crystal], so that he or she may take appropriate action for the safety of our Scouts, make appropriate notifications, and follow-up with investigating agencies. ... and, a bit less verbosely: The unit should inform the Scout executive of any violations of the BSAs Youth Protection policies. That's the rule, whether you like it or not. National chose to put those words in that order, and it's not up to us to decide that we like the older version better. The SE gets paid to handle these kinds of things, and sees the big picture while we just stare at a few pixels. If you disagree with the policies, write a letter to Irving. But you can't ignore them.(This message has been edited by shortridge)

I shouldn't be surprised that there's a Wikipedia entry for that topic ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

I've never seen or experienced it at any camporee. At summer camp, full uniforms were required daily for the retreat ceremony and dinner in the dining hall. But no one ever did a by-the-book inspection. There were a lot of swim trunks worn with those Class A's...

Well, it looks like the OP has left the building. I do want to respond to Beavah's statement, however: "Predators really start outside of scouting, eh? Become friends with da family, see the boys when no other scouting adults are around. Adult-on-youth molestation by anyone other than a parent or relative rarely happens on scouting events, and then only when the person has been doin' it outside of scouting for a while." Not all predators follow this pattern. Beavah's generalization shouldn't keep anyone from reporting a YP violation. And not all abuse is sexual - there's emotional and physical, as well. Both can happen during a long 1-on-1 car ride. There is no excuse for a trained Scout leader to violate this basic principle of youth contact - none whatsoever. Just have another Scout ride with you. It's so simple I'm amazed it has to be said. I'm sympathetic to the nephew/friend of the family arguments that have been brought up here, but remember: It's to protect you as well as the Scouts.

First, congratulations on being tapped to head up the campout. Sounds like fun! Second, since you're in charge, have a meeting of the minds with your SM and SPL and make sure that they support you and are OK with you overruling the "military-minded" adults. It's your call, not theirs. Third, the priorities for survival, according to the BSA, are: 1. Positive attitude. 2. Stay put if you are lost. 3. First aid. 4. Shelter. 5. Fire. 6. Signaling. 7. Water. 8. Food. Take that list back to the "military-minded" individuals and show them how far down food ranks on that list. Tell them you've chosen to emphasize the other elements for this event, given that you can live weeks without food - as the BSA teaches. Rendering first aid, getting protection from the elements and getting found are much more important hands-on skills. Good luck! Keep us posted on how things work out.