shortridge

IMHO, Scouting's main bad rap has to do with the ban on gays. A survey this summer found for the first time that a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage, and that number is only higher among people under age 30. National isn't just losing the battles with cities and local governments, but it's losing the demographic wars as well. The ban is seen as bigoted among the next generation of parents, many of whom have close gay friends or relatives. And they don't want their children to be members of a bigoted organization. Scouting's not even on their radar when it comes to activities for their children. I disagree that Scouting was built on "conservative social values." Read the original handbooks. There's nothing written by BP, Seton or Beard that laid down the anti-gay, anti-girl and anti-atheist lines that the cabal in Irving has drawn in the sand on our behalf. Seton cheated on his wife with his secretary, whom he later married. Is that a conservative social value? Being trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly - those are all universal social values, neither conservative nor liberal.

- One of the most important things is making sure each Cub has plenty of space in which to work. This is not a project to work on with eight kids huddled around a single picnic table! - Get a length of brightly colored ribbon or thin cord to tie through the handle/loop on each knife. It makes them easier to spot when they're dropped (which they most certainly will be over the course of a Cub's career). - Sharpening is perhaps the most difficult thing to teach Cubs. Talking about angles and degrees doesn't help them much. The best thing to do is show each of them up-close, 1-on-1, how to hold the blade properly, and then watch them do it. - Whet their appetites ... tell them that when they become Boy Scouts, they'll learn how to use an axe, saw and hatchet!

I bought some overpriced popcorn the other day. I was walking out of the local grocery store with my daughter, and a Webelos jumped in front of us: "Excuse me, sir, would you like to buy some popcorn?" I didn't have any cash, so we went back into the store and hit the ATM. The two Webelos Scouts did all the talking - a full sales pitch! - and made the change. The two dads just handled the money. I could have gotten it inside the grocery store for about a third of the cost. But it was worth it for me to see the little guys so enthusiastic and serious. Is it worth it for the general public that doesn't have a connection with Scouting? Not a chance. Trails End in its current configuration is an unsustainable fundraiser, especially in this economy.

What exactly is the concern about "improper photos"? That the Scouts will post photos of themselves drinking/smoking/skinny dipping to a public FB site? IM Kathy wrote: "We do keep our site private so that all info can only be seen by "friends" so we don't have to worry about some looney getting a hold of pictures of the kids." Actually, those privacy measures don't count for squat. You could still have a member who downloads the photos and then reposts them to a public area or site, and then they spread to who-knows-where. There really is no control over anything online any more. Bottom line is that if you don't want photos spread over the Internet, don't put them on the Internet.

Short answer: Nope, no changes. Longer answer: YPT guidelines for two-deep leadership explicitly allow non-registered parents to attend. ("Two registered adult leaders or one registered leader and a parent of a participant, or other adult, one of whom must be 21 years of age or older, are required on all trips and outings.") That said, especially with YPT online, it makes plenty of sense to me for a troop to require that any adult accompanying the unit must take the training first. It just puts everyone on the same page so there's no confusion. Additional unasked-for question: You invite the dads. What would you say to a mom who asked to come? Say, a single mother, or a mother whose husband is a long-haul trucker or overseas in the military?(This message has been edited by shortridge)

A comparison: SCOUTING: Creativity and self-directed learning and leadership are paramount. Scouts learn at their own pace (except when pushed by helicopter 'rents) and largely decide what they want to work on. Scouts are in control of the schedule and trip planning, with patrol make-up largely chosen by the patrol members themselves. Adults take a background role of advising and mentoring. SPORTS: Generally speaking, boys are joining teams whose members are chosen by adults, competing in games whose rules are written by adults, practicing skills selected by adults and playing matches on a schedule planned by adults. Coaches call the plays and organize the practices.

Looks like they were out there 5 days. I am in awe at your incredible powers of discernment! There's nothing in that story that even remotely comes close to hinting at suggesting the possibility of being lost for five days. Not even anything that says they were out overnight. In fact, the event's website which you apparently found (as you cited the list of teams involved) clearly states it's a one-day event, Sept. 18. If they'd been out longer, a search would already have started for them.

Some solutions: For the long term: 1. Have your son earn the money to buy the replacement poles. He lost 'em, he buys 'em. For this weekend, he could: 2. Rig a lightweight plastic tarp over the leaky tent. 3. Put an extra dose of waterproofing sealant on the seams of the leaky tent. 4. Buddy up with someone in a non-leaking tent. 5. Try pitching the non-leaking tent in a poleless configuration. It's doable, but difficult - involves lots of ropes and tie-off points, so it only really works when you've got a lot of trees around. But it'll definitely make him appreciate the value of the poles.

It really depends on the activity time. There's no good uniform answer. Make sure you count in time for travel and waiting, plus a stop or two at the trading post or equivalent ... and some unstructured patrol time as well.

Wow. Just, wow. That statement is so full of fail it boggles my mind. No unit can change advancement requirements by putting POR rules in place? Well, how about LDS units! (I don't mean to single them out, but they're the example that sprang most quickly to my mind.) By separating 11-year-olds from the rest of the troop, they don't allow the 11-year-old boys to serve as SPLs - thus adding an additional requirement, that of age, to serve in that POR. It's the same as SMB's example of requiring DCs to be at least First Class. [ Sarcasm Alert! ] But if that's the way National says it's supposed to be, I therefore fully expect the National Youth Development Team to issue a bulletin within the week informing all LDS units to cease and desist this horrible, awful practice of COs adapting the Scouting program to their own needs. [ Sarcasm End } Give me a break.(This message has been edited by shortridge)

"...the Scout has not demonstrated sufficient mastery of Scout skills to represent the troop to a group of Cub Scouts." This wording seems oddly specific, yet does not appear in the job descriptions or requirements for den chief that have been previously cited. Where did it come from? Oddly specific ... I like the sound of that! No, it's not an official anything - just came from my brain. Here's my thinking. If anything, a den chief needs to be the superlative Scout, able to easily handle a group of young boys, teach Scout skills, lead spur-of-the-moment activities, assist the den leader with anything and help plan program. That requires a substantial degree of maturity and experience. The DC really is the public face of the troop, more so than almost anyone else in the unit. He's the first introduction to Boy Scouting that many Cub parents will get. He has to be on the ball with everything. If he doesn't know basic Scout skills - how to start a fire safely, how to tie the basic knots, how to pitch a tent - or have enough experience to spin tales about how great Boy Scout adventure is, he's not going to be much good at his job. First Class may not be an appropriate hard-and-fast rule, but in my mind, it's certainly a good first hurdle that a den chief should be able to jump with no problem. If you put a young, inexperienced Scout into that position, odds are that you're setting him up to fail.

"So, if the youth is not being considered there should be real reason. Not a made up Rank Requirement." A sufficient and valid "real reason," in my mind, could include that the Scout has not demonstrated sufficient mastery of Scout skills to represent the troop to a group of Cub Scouts. How do we judge mastery of Scout skills? By attaining First Class. It's very logical to me. I'm sorry for the boys you cite in your example of the idiotic trainer at the Pow-Wow - but that was the mistake of a trainer, not a rule imposed by a Scoutmaster! And there were other options for those disappointed boys even if the district screwed up. What was the reaction of the SM and CM when told that the boys they selected and approved as den chiefs were turned away from training? Did they fight it? Did they set up training themselves in conjunction with the den leaders? Seems to me it's those leaders you need to also be having a chat with about backing up their boys and sticking to their guns. ---- OK - hypothetical situation here. You're a trainer. You're running some sort of module on local unit leadership, and you outline the position you've taken here as a fact. I ask you for the citation in the BSA literature that says a Scoutmaster may not require a den chief to be a certain rank. What book do you hand me?

No, a sheepshank!

First, a tangent: Den Chief is a Position of Responsibility, not Position of Leadership. There is no such thing as the latter. Now: You seem intent on creating an argument where none needs to exist. The Scoutmaster and SPL have a great deal of flexibility in appointing troop leaders. None of the troop PORs - den chief, scribe, historian, librarian, bugler, instructor, troop guide, etc. - are open-ended jobs - you can't just stick your hand in the air and get it. It doesn't make sense to make a Tenderfoot a troop guide or instructor, does it? Yet your line of thinking suggests that if a boy is interested in the job, he must be appointed. See how that falls apart? Therefore, if a Scoutmaster and SPL decide that all den chiefs - the young men who are representing their troop to the next generation of Scouts - must have a basic level of Scout skills and outdoor experience, as exemplified by having earned the First Class Rank, that's their choice - part of their responsibility to their troop and the pack. You will find nothing - nothing - in BSA literature saying that they can't do this. Your touchstone appears to be the line throughout the literature which says (and I'm paraphrasing) that a leader cannot add to or subtract from rank or MB requirements. Fine. That completely overlooks the fact that service as a DC - or in any other POR! - can have nothing to do with advancement. A boy can serve as a den chief outside the advancement "system." Perhaps he's an Eagle who wants to give back to a den. Or maybe he just doesn't want to advance any more. Maybe he just wants to serve! I am not defending such rules. I am defending a SM and SPL's right to put them in place as a way of carrying out their troop program. - - - - You wrote: "First Class can be obtained in 1 year, so really how much mature are they?" Let's flip this around. First Class can be obtained in 1 year, so why make such a fuss over nothing? Den Chiefs are supposed to be older Scouts, not boys who've just crossed over themselves, anyway. So it's not that big a deal.

From the Boy Scout Handbook (11th Edition): "In addition to your own gear, you might carry some patrol or group equipment. Your share might include several pots, part of a tent, a camp stove, and some food." This is standard backpacking practice. You might want to read up a bit before you start throwing out your son's gear.

ScoutMythBuster, Under your line of reasoning, Scoutmasters cannot use any criteria not listed in the requirements to turn down a boy interested in being DC, no matter how unqualified. Since there are no requirements except approval by the pack and troop, they cannot be turned down - which would turn DC into a free-ride position, open to anyone who can find a willing pack or den, regardless of qualifications, skills or maturity. How much sense does that make? Whether it's a unit-level across-the-board rule or the SM's discretion and judgment - it doesn't really matter how you phrase it. The SM has that ability.

I think you may be overthinking this a bit. Scoutmasters have incredible latitude and flexibility in appointing den chiefs. If they don't want to appoint anyone, that's their choice. If they only want to appoint Star Scouts, that's their choice. If they only want to appoint First Class Scouts and above, that's their choice. You say that SMs have to have a "reason" to reject a potential DC. Why couldn't one of those reasons be that the Scout in question needs more seasoning on skills? That's certainly as valid as anything.

Because the Scoutmaster must approve den chiefs, he or she can certainly impose a local rule or practice that they have to be First Class. There are lots of good reasons for that, IMHO, including skills and maturity. But it's not a national rule.

JoeBob - if I were you, I'd develop a replacement phrase for "bun warmers."

Like Beavah said ... it's animals or birds ... 3.Submit satisfactory evidence that he has trailed two different kinds of wild animals or birds on ordinary ground far enough to determine the direction in which they were going, and their gait or speed. Give the names of animals or birds trailed, their direction of travel, and describe gait and speed; or submit satisfactory evidence that he has trailed six different kinds of wild animal or birds in snow, sand, dust, or mud, far enough to determine the direction they were going and their gait or speed. Give names of animals or birds, their direction of travel, and describe gait and speed.

Trademark lawyers? If I buy a shirt, I'm going to wear it wherever I like. If I end up on TV, so be it.

Try to find and use a good den chief to whom you can turn over large chunks of the program from time to time. That'll give the Webelos a direct role model. Dump the indoor craftsy meetings! Outdoors, outdoors, outdoors! Pick a den emblem, cheer, make a flag, etc., as an early introduction to the basics of patrols.

Communications skills are indeed critical to leadership. The most highly skilled Patrol Leader isn't going to have much luck taking his patrol on a wilderness trek if he can't articulate the plan to anyone. But that's really not what we're talking about here. We're talking about a formal project proposal much like is done in the business world. It's not a test of a Scout's communications skills with his peers, but rather a question of how well he can communicate with the adults who must approve the project. My question is whether any of the people who sit in judgment of the writeup themselves ever make errors in grammar or spelling, or occasionally write a convoluted sentence. If you're going to go after someone's writing, you need to be darn sure that your own is absolutely perfect. Some of the creative spellings I've seen from Scouters make me cringe in agony, and some of the writeups in my council newsletter are just atrocious. We have lots of different educational and literacy levels among Scouters, just as we do among Scouts. (Remember, a 14-year-old's Eagle project writeup is probably going to vastly differ from a 17-year-old's. They shouldn't be held to the same writing standard.) Why do we expect absolute perfection from our Eagle candidates when we don't from our adult leaders and professionals?

Well, my W.A.G. is that this fellow is trying to foment a rebellion or insurrection among the Scouts and make himself the new SM. That's about as good a scenario as any, given the amount of information we have to work with. You don't say if this guy is an ASM or committee member. If the former, the SM needs to do a sit-down with him and inform him that his conduct is unacceptable. You don't go around polling Scouts about what leaders they dislike, or informing them that you dislike the other leaders. That's simply unprofessional. If he wants to continue to serve as an ASM, he must be at the SM's back and not try to play petty political games. If the latter, the CC needs to have the same conversation.

That's certainly an option. But since every Scout earns different merit badges in a different order, that's really the best way to tell it apart from others'. From a practical perspective, the MB sash is generally only worn to special events like Courts of Honor and Scout Sabbath and such. It's not something for the field, nor generally even for regular troop meetings - a little too constricting. So he's not going to have too many chances to lose it, no fear.