shortridge

I don't have data, but I thought about how I use those magnets, cardboard fans, pens, combs, nail files, keychains, etc., when I pick them up at the state fair and such. They usually go into the back of my dresser, never to be seen again. The magnets might get stuck up on my fridge, but as purely utilitarian items. I really like the paper airplanes and camp flyers ideas. Simple, straightforward and they can be folded up in a pocket or purse to be easily carried while at the festival. Call me a goody two-shoes, but I'm opposed to handing out candy. If the fair folk will let you, a couple bushels of apples or oranges might be cheap and would be very well-appreciated and send a good, healthy message. If you're at an event during the summer, some large coolers of water & disposable paper cups (collected to later be dried out and recycled into firestarters!) would make you guys the hit of the fair.

SctDad - The issue is that Scouting isn't the military. The NWS heat index is something that almost everyone understands and is easily explained to those who don't. Why not use it as the baseline?

So why not just use the heat index that is simple to monitor and understandable by everyone? Either way, it's going to be hot. Hydration will be the key to health.

Well, this thread has quickly degenerated into the debate Beavah was specifically NOT asking for. That said, I'll enter the fray. LIBob wrote: Look, what we have WORKS for these boys. It works for my son it works for my nephews it will work for my grandsons. Offer the girls opportunities? Sure. but we should not put what we have at risk to solve someone else's problems. Fill in the blank, and you get a line that could have been spoken by any member of any ruling class or dominant group throughout history: "Offer the _____'s opportunities? Sure. but we should not put what we have at risk to solve someone else's problems." Jim Crow laws worked for the whites. Male-only voting laws worked for the men. But did they work for society? Were they truly the best we could do to improve the lives of all people? Did they reflect the values that we purport to uphold in the Scouting movement? Not hardly. What we have now is a hybrid, trying-to-have-it-both-ways system that stinks of National hypocrisy. The message that BSA is sending to teenage girls is that we welcome them and their money, but as female Venturers, they're still inferior members of the Scouting species - they can't earn the same Eagle award or be inducted into the same Scouting honor society that their male colleagues can. That's silliness to the nth degree, and any smart teenager can sniff it out. "If you can find some way to methodically and permanently exclude girls like A. and leaders like B. above then I'll listen to your case. Until then, I'm not even truly listening. So how do methodically and permanently exclude BOYS like A. and parents like B. from your Boy Scout troop? Seriously, I'm very, very curious about your system. "By 2006 UK scouting awarded more computer MB and more religion MBs than First aid or Camping MBs." Well, first of all, neither the UK equivalents to first aid and camping are required for the Queen's Scout Award, by my reading of the requirements(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen's_Scout). In the U.S., they are required for Eagle, which artificially inflates the numbers. So it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. [ / sarcasm on ] Secondly, here in the great USA, Computers MB outranks many of the traditional manly, testosterone-filled Scout skill-oriented MBs. In 2007, it whupped such badges as Motorboating, Sports, Astronomy, Hiking (!), Cycling, Bird Study, and Backpacking (!!! - waaay down on the list). So if you're saying that allowing girls into the UK program has made the Brits softer, you'd better take a good, hard look at what we're doing with just boys alone, because it's clearly gotten sissified. Maybe it was due to all those darn women leaders we added back in the day... [ / end sarcasm ](This message has been edited by shortridge)

Venturing as Scouting's Next Step: Look at the second page. http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/25-200.pdf ------ "Although its members have and continued to provide service and support to Cub Scouting, Exploring in the past, and now the new Venturing program, its roots have always been in the Boy Scout program." National is trying to have its cake and eat it, too. If the Order only provides "service and support" to Cubs and Venturing, then neither adult Cub Scout leaders or district Cub-side Scouters should be allowed to be members. Ditto for former Boy Scouts-turned-Venturers. ------ John has hit the nail squarely on the head with his point about camp staff. There *should* be enough active youth members in even a mediocre lodge to more than fill the staff ranks many, many times over. The fact that councils desperately search every year for qualified candidates is a clear sign that lodges aren't doing their job. So camp directors have to turn to "outsiders" - Venturers, college students, professional guides - to have camp ready for the BOY SCOUTS they serve. If the OA - allegedly part of the BOY SCOUT program, as some here have reminded us - can't do that, then it's clearly time to open it up and give some of the talented, skilled youth female Venturers a shot.

As a youth, I was a member of two fully-uniformed-at-all-meeting troops. We looked good, but guess what? We rarely went outside. And 50some meetings in the Legion hall or church basement can get boring real darn quick. No wonder they leave. Today, I would have no problem with a troop meeting in Class Bs, if the purpose is to facilitate troop activities. Where I would draw the line, however, would be on the jeans front. Not because they look bad, but because they're generally utterly impractical for the outdoors - hot, heavy and if you get them wet, fergitaboutit. As adults, we ought to be teaching our Scouts how to dress appropriately for the outdoors, not just how to wear the uniform correctly.

For what it's worth ... I would suggest using Webelos or Boy Scouts to actually conduct the ceremony. First, it's a matter of safety. Campfires are hotter than you think, and even with adults helping, the Tigers may get freaked out and drop / start waving the flaming flag around. That's no good. Secondly, it's a matter of progression. Have them watch a retirement ceremony as Tigers and Wolves, and gradually move up to involvement in the actual retirement later on. There's no need to jump in with two feet right off the bat. Give them a solemn ceremony and important job to look forward to in their Scouting lives.

The Candwich: Allegedly convenient for backpacking! http://markonefoods.com/ Just further proof that just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be.

FWIW - this is from the Camp Pioneer leaders' guide on your council's website. "Gas-fueled lanterns and stoves (canister type fuels are recommended over liquid) may be used for outdoor lighting and cooking. The use of gas-fueled lanterns and stoves in any tent or Adirondack is strictly prohibited. All fuel containers not in use must be stored in the camp gas shack. A responsible adult, who is knowledgeable in safety precautions, must do lighting and refueling; fuel is never handled by youth. The use of liquid fuels as a fire-starter is strictly prohibited." So whoever told you no propane was wrong. Cook, and be merry!

Co-ed all the way through, with a slightly revised age and program scheme. - Cubbing (Cubs) up to age 10. Arrow of Light is the highest award. The den is the core program group of the pack. The Jungle Book tale will need to be revised to reflect involvement of both boys and girls. - Scouting (Scouts) up to 14. First Class is the highest award, recognizing mastery of Scoutcraft skills. Merit badges offer an introduction to a wide range of program areas. The patrol is the core program group of the troop. - Venturing (Venturers) up to 18. Eagle is the highest award, recognizing both mastery of Scoutcraft skills and leadership abilities. It no longer depends largely on earning merit badges, but focuses instead on leading outdoor treks and organizing community-service projects. The Ranger Award recognizes superior mastery of Scoutcraft skills and instructor-level expertise in outdoor adventure. The Quest and TRUST Awards remain much the same. Merit badges may be earned, but they're not the focus. The patrol is the core program group of the crew. Sea Scouting remains a semi-independent part of Venturing. After that, you become a grownup. Varsity teams and Venture patrols are dead.(This message has been edited by shortridge)

I have to admit being a little skeptical of some of the things in this thread. A council that won't tell you the name of its camp ranger? A nonworking number for the food service director? Pshaw. In my council, the camp's phone number is listed on multiple pages of the leader's guide, which is signed by the camp director. But Cascade Pacific apparently has some really weird thing about privacy. The leader's guides don't include the camp director's name, nor the phone number of the camps. Questions are directed to the council service center, and to the state troopers in an extreme after-hours emergency (troopers can then contact the camp). This seems totally wacko to me. But is it usual practice for other areas?

Beavah - That's one heck of an angry face, eh? Part of my point earlier, which I may not have expressed well, is that the paperwork clearly got lost, which suggests that it probably didn't get a full, reasonable review by knowledgeable people. If I were a harried council staff member, probably not familiar with food service rules & regs, in the middle of the chaos that is summer camp and saw a letter requesting that an RV be parked at camp, I'm not sure I'd have read much further, honestly. An RV has no place at summer camp, and the OP has acknowledged that an RV may be overkill. I've never, ever heard of a no-propane rule at any summer camp, and I wonder if that's somehow been misinterpreted by the council staff. That would prevent almost every troop I know from hauling in those ubiquitous ugly, heavy car-camping lanterns. There are both alternatives for the campers involved and accomodations that the camp should make. But both sides need to come together to reach an agreement. If the camp simply does not have sufficient room in its fridge or freezer to store a lot of food, it would seem reasonable to me for them to rent a mini-fridge, for example. But it would also be helpful if the OP could develop a menu that minimizes refrigeration needs. I know the clock is ticking, but there appear to be a number of summer camp programs that specialize in offering gluten-free foods, some sponsored by various state celiac disease groups. The no-dairy restriction may complicate things, but I'm sure they could offer up some innovative menu ideas suitable to a camp environment. A list: http://celiacdisease.about.com/od/raisingaglutenfreechild/tp/SummerCamps.htm

If you don't get anywhere today with the food service director, go right over his head and call the camp or reservation director - the man or woman who is in charge of the entire operation, both the business and program sides. This may be a different person from the ranger (probably is). You may want to have your SM or ASM call for you, as they're probably known to the CD.

Heck, I love the red-topped socks! Or ... whatever fish wear.

I sympathize with your situation, but I also have to side with the council in banning RVs. There's no place for them in Scout camping, even at a developed residential summer camp. If one person is allowed an RV to cook in, why can't another person be allowed an RV to sleep in? ... it's a very slippery slope, especially when we're trying to disconnect kids from the man-made world. An instant fix to your situation would be patrol cooking, not eating in the dining hall, so that each patrol has control of its food needs. But it's a bit late in the game to do that. I'm assuming that what you need to store and prepare the food is refrigeration and a stove. Those can easily be obtained without parking an RV in camp. Purchase a medium-sized dorm-style portable fridge and pack everything in there, then plug it in in a corner of the camp's kitchen, so they don't complain about you taking up too much space in "their" fridge. Then use one of your son's patrol stoves to cook the food in their campsite. Done! Frankly, since the council clearly didn't assess your request on its merits the first go-round, my guess is that they saw the word "RV" and it got an instant rejection. In addition, a parent requesting that she be allowed to cook special meals for two boys in a motorized camper smacks of hovering-parent syndrome to many folks. I know you have good reason for your request, but there are alternatives that the council might be agreeable to. Think about how your son and his patrol handle food on a weekend campout. There has to be a simple alternative. He can't possibly need the full kitchen provided in an RV to eat every meal. I Googled "gluten free backpacking" and came up with quite a few pages that appear to have useful information. If other folks can prepare gluten-free meals on the trail, it's possible for your son and his fellow Scouts to do the same at summer camp. A few links: http://glutenfreediscoveries.blogspot.com/2007/04/backpacking.html http://www.celiac.com/gluten-free/topic/13770-gluten-free-backpacking-food/ http://www.glutenfreeforgood.com/blog/?p=332 Good luck! Edited to add: Don't feel blindsided. Think about the sheer volume of paperwork that one or two underpaid council clerks are bombarded with for summer camp registration, and feel sorry for them. A good rule of thumb for Scouting, especially when dealing with the council office, is never to assume anything. Edited again: Also check out recipes for freezer-bag cooking - dehydrated or other meals where you just add boiling water into a freezer bag, smush it up, and eat. All you need is water and a flame!(This message has been edited by shortridge)

Knots can be tricky things. The only way to truly know them is through continual practice in the field. Unfortunately, much of the backpacking and camping that we do today with modern equipment doesn't use knots. There are adjustable guylines that come pre-attached to tents and tarps. The idea of creating campsite gadgets, to some people, goes against the idea of LNT. One surefire way to learn them, however, is to do as Eagle92 says, and teach them. I spent five years at summer camp teaching Pioneering to Boy Scouts and basic knots to Cubs, but after the first summer, my hands could have been severed from my arms and they'd still remember how to tie a clove hitch.

One of the truly great things about the Order is the lack of barriers and walls. We are all brothers, and putting additional distinctions in place is simply counterproductive.

My daughter is 6 and loves the outdoors. We had problems hooking up with a local Daisy troop last year, but there's one at her school starting in the fall. I tried her first camping trip at age 4. We rented a campsite one off-season weekend at my old summer camp, set up the tent, tromped around in the woods, checked out the beautiful sunset over the creek, built a campfire, scorched marshmallows and hot dogs ... then it was time to go to bed, and the darkness was pretty scary all of a sudden! We beat a hasty retreat. The next time was earlier this spring, when she was 5, at a local state park that she was familiar with. She loved it and slept like a log. Her kindergarten class this year spent large chunks of time studying bald eagles, so she's really gotten interested in birds and nature. (It's not my area of expertise, but I'm learnin'!) For her birthday last month, she got a small daypack, kid-sized binoculars, two kid-oriented field guides, two cool flashlights (one is pink and looks like a pig) and a purple camp chair. She's rarin' to go again! And I'm looking forward to seeing the outdoors through a child's eyes.

Lisabob wrote: "I know at least one boy who is currently planning to stay registered with a troop ONLY so that he can remain involved in OA. If he could join a Crew and also be active in OA, he might have gone that route instead. I have heard the same thing from some other parents of older boy scouts/OA members, too." Color me confused ... I've always thought that Venturers elected to the OA as Boy Scouts could continue their OA involvement, wear the flap, etc., as Venturers. The prohibition that exists is against Venturers being elected to the OA as Venturers. So the boys you mention certainly could drop the troop registration, join the crew and stay active Arrowmen.

I assume you're dealing with the issue after the fact, based on your description. In that case, the first thing I'd do is sit down with the boys individually and review the requirements. Ask them, point-blank: Did you earn this merit badge? Did you do these things? I'm not talking about confronting them and committing a verbal assault, but just a friendly inquiry. Chances are they'll admit that no, they didn't, because ... (there weren't enough boats, there weren't enough PDFs, the boat was broken, the instructor didn't know what he was doing, the instructor said it was OK that they only got 5 minutes in the boat...). Ask them if they feel if it's right for them to wear the badge when they didn't earn it. Hopefully you'll get the right answer, and can direct your Scouts to a real MB counselor whom you've checked out. Secondly, write up a detailed letter - preferably co-signed by your COR - and send it to the program director, camp director, director of support services (or equivalent) and SE. Explain your disappointment with the program offerings and lack of standards, giving concrete, documented examples, and ask what is being done to correct the situation so that your troop will want to come back next year. The camp may have an excellent reason why one topic or one program area is suffering. Perhaps the volunteer Scoutcraft instructor they had lined up to teach Cooking and Pioneering got his vacation canceled. Perhaps the motorboat's engine suffered a last-minute meltdown. Perhaps the nature/ecology director they hired flunked National Camping School two weeks before camp was supposed to start. But even in those cases, it's contingent on the PD and CD to either have a backup plan of equal or greater quality -or- to cancel that particular program altogether. You should NOT accept that summmer camp MB instruction is of lower quality than the "regular" MB program. There should be no difference whatsoever.

That's just basic personal outdoor hygeine. Ask him if he read his Handbook, ever! My essential would be hydrate, even in the deep clutches of a frigid winter.

Rank advancement comes naturally if the program is of good quality, focusing on the outdoors and adventure. Leadership and team building will also flow from the program. Storming, norming, performing? Eeeccchh. It may be a good way to describe a process, but it shouldn't be the be-all, end-all of a good Scouting program. Slowing down or preventing rank advancement, if the Scout has fulfilled the requirements, is flat-out wrong.

Rank advancement comes naturally if the program is of good quality, focusing on the outdoors and adventure. Leadership and team building will also flow from the program. Storming, norming, performing? Eeeccchh. It may be a good way to describe a process, but it shouldn't be the be-all, end-all of a good Scouting program. Slowing down or preventing rank advancement, if the Scout has fulfilled the requirements, is flat-out wrong.

- Beavah wrote: "Da national office, to be honest, can be kind of depressing. Not the most healthy corporate culture. And the structure of the thing discourages a service-oriented philosophy. ... Thing of it is, there are some good folks in the pro and senior volunteer ranks, and quite a few fine folks. Da institutional structure just handicaps 'em badly." What specifically is it about the institutional structure at National that makes things so bad? What is preventing a good SE or deputy assistant thingamajig for Boy Scout programming from launching a new, positive, good idea? - Eagle 92 recapped the CSE's quotes. In reading them again, I was just struck by something that hadn't occurred to me before. "... it more important that we reach that child ... "... with the kind of things we have for children and we have for families ..." "Or is it more important that we get them in a tent next week?" "... when we say 'we want to take your twelve-year-old son but you can't come' ... " I'm struck by the repetition there. The mindset being expressed there is that of someone running an outreach program, an outsider approaching a group, a person offering services or programs. Scouting, at its core, is not a community-center outreach program. It's supposed to be locally based, bubbling up from chartered organizations that want to make a difference in the lives of the youth of a community, and drawing on existing connections and networks - those things that are local, grassroots, organic, all those buzzwords. I'm concerned that the "we ... them" mindset that the big boss is expressing is going to just lead to flash-in-the-pan initiatives that last as long as it takes the inner-city Scoutreach and Hispanic program coordinators to find better-paying jobs. That will surely lead to a dropoff in membership numbers down the road.

Here's one armchair psychologist's input on the situation. Could it be that this guy felt that since he was the ACM, and there was no CM, that he was actually in charge? I mean, that's one of the jobs of the ACM, to step in when the CM's not available. Might account for some of the escalation in his behavior, if he felt suddenly empowered or thought he was going to rise to the top spot by default.