SR540Beaver

Proud Eagle, Yeah BUT........this is the OA DANCE TEAM. This is what THEY do. THEY too should have a plan B. If Billy is sick and Tommy is grounded, who are their back-ups? These things have to be scheduled as they are usually in high demand. If they are going to be a dance team and schedule events, they had better be able to deliver unless something really MAJOR prevents ALL team members from being there. OA are not the only folks who can have a dance team. Because the OA dance team is in such high demand and can only make so many events, we have a Troop that has put together a dance team to help do B&G's and crossovers. It is great PR for recruiting into their Troop.

Where there is smoke there is fire. It is possible that the boys have conspired to individually blame him one at a time....but how likely is that? My son has a buddy that I didn't really mind him spending time with. I kept hearing "things" about him from other people. It turns out that he has a "mouth" and is something of a bully at times. He has always treated my son good, but not other people. Even bullies have to have friends I guess. My son has a pretty good head on his shoulders and knows how to say NO, so I still don't worry too much when he is around him. I have warned him about being known by the comapny he keeps though. Bottom line, I never saw what other folks were telling me about until I started watching for it. Many bullies will only strike when there are no witnesses. The SM and ASM's and PLC need to keep an eye out for this boy to catch him in the act. It is hard to address if all you have are accusations. I remember EagleDad counseling me on how to handle boys who were misbehaving. They assigned an adult to basically shadow the boy everywhere he went. It didn't take the boy long to figure out he would have to change his behavior if he didn't want a permanent new best friend.

Yeah....what my buddy Barry said! Troops are like churches, families or fingerprints. Everyone is similar, but different. The Cub leadership need to be active in the district and district roundtables and get to know the troops and their leaders. They can convey information about individual troops to the prospective scouts and their parents to help find a custom fit. When my son and I stated our adventure, I thought I liked the idea of a smaller troop. That didn't work out too well for us and we discovered we liked a larger troop much better.

Make them a NSP with one of those 17 year old Eagles or one of the 16 year old Lifes as their Troop Guide. That would be a good way to re-involve them if they are willing to make the commitment. Also, assign an ASM to oversee the whole thing. Consider suggesting to the PLC that they devise a plan to reallign the patrols when the NSP is 6 to 9 months old. Create 3 new mixed age patrols. That way, the patrol can have longivity and history instead of being "in name only" because they are all the same age and have either become inactive or aged out. what happens to the 16 or 17 year old who still wants to be involved and all of his buddies are still registered, but never show up? Is he a patrol of 1 even thought there might be 5 or 6 names on the roster. If you have mixed age patrols, this never happens and the NSP can be integrated in when ready and keep bringing new blood into the patrol.

Let the boys experience as many troops as possible and let them and their parents be the judge. I have a troop that meets in a church that literally backs up to my housing addition. We could walk to it. However, my son and I travel about 22 miles one way to get to the troop we are in. There are numerous troops within 5 miles of our house, but none of them measured up to the troop on the other side of town.

Here is a link from the BSA website for "Selecting Quality Leaders". http://www.scouting.org/boyscouts/supplemental/18-626/index.html

Beavah: "You need to go find some new committee members. Since BSA training doesn't cover this, you need to find some people who have experience with this stuff already...." Actually, BSA does indeed have training for the recruitment of all unit level adult positions. However, many units "tweak" this and instead take the warm body approach over the BSA's method.

Congrats for reaching the esteemed position of being a fellow blowhard!!! Don't hold your breath waiting for those royalty checks to start rolling in for all the posts you've made.

Our current troop does not have the SPL present for troop committee meetings. We have not been there a year yet, so I can't say that he never attends. In our previous troop, the SPL (my son) attended the troop committee meeting each month. There was only one time he was asked to leave the room while a "boy" problem was discussed. The CC and SM both wanted him there to report for and represent the boys along with the SM. The only harm that I could see that it did was take away about 2 hours out of his month that he couldn't be on the phone or computer.

Another fellow Okie to spruce the place up! Welcome!!!

Scoutndad, From the Snopes FAQ: Q: How do I know the information you've presented is accurate? A: We don't expect anyone to accept us as the ultimate authority on any topic, which is why our site's name indicates that it contains reference pages. Unlike the plethora of anonymous individuals who create and send the unsigned, unsourced e-mail messages that are forwarded all over the Internet, we show our work. The research materials we've used in the preparation of any particular page are listed in the bibliography displayed at the bottom of that page so that readers who wish to verify the validity of our information may check those sources for themselves. The truth of the matter is that Gore never claimed to "invent" the internet. People are welcome to research for themselves from the listed references.

Check out US Rep. John Linder's Fair Tax proposal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairTax

Like Google, Snopes is a wonderful thing. http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp Claim: Vice-President Al Gore claimed that he "invented" the Internet. Status: False. Origins: Despite the derisive references that continue even today, Al Gore did not claim he "invented" the Internet, nor did he say anything that could reasonably be interpreted that way. The "Al Gore said he 'invented' the Internet" put-downs were misleading, out-of-context distortions of something he said during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN's "Late Edition" program on 9 March 1999. When asked to describe what distinguished him from his challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, Gore replied (in part): During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system. Clearly, although Gore's phrasing was clumsy (and perhaps self-serving), he was not claiming that he "invented" the Internet (in the sense of having designed or implemented it), but that he was responsible, in an economic and legislative sense, for fostering the development the technology that we now know as the Internet. To claim that Gore was seriously trying to take credit for the "invention" of the Internet is, frankly, just silly political posturing that arose out of a close presidential campaign. Gore never used the word "invent," and the words "create" and "invent" have distinctly different meanings the former is used in the sense of "to bring about" or "to bring into existence" while the latter is generally used to signify the first instance of someone's thinking up or implementing an idea. (To those who say the words "create" and "invent" mean exactly the same thing, we have to ask why, then, the media overwhelmingly and consistently cited Gore as having claimed he "invented" the Internet, even though he never used that word, and transcripts of what he actually said were readily available.) If President Eisenhower had said in the mid-1960s that he, while President, "created" the Interstate Highway System, we would not have seen dozens and dozens of editorials lampooning him for claiming he "invented" the concept of highways or implying that he personally went out and dug ditches across the country to help build the roadway. Everyone would have understood that Ike meant he was a driving force behind the legislation that created the highway system, and this was the very same concept Al Gore was expressing about himself with his Internet statement. Whether Gore's statement that he "took the initiative in creating the Internet" is justified is a subject of debate. Any statement about the "creation" or "beginning" of the Internet is difficult to evaluate, because the Internet is not a homogenous entity (it's a collection of computers, networks, protocols, standards, and application programs), nor did it all spring into being at once (the components that comprise the Internet were developed in various places at different times and are continuously being modified, improved, and expanded). Despite a spirited defense of Gore's claim by Vint Cerf (often referred to as the "father of the Internet") in which he stated "that as a Senator and now as Vice President, Gore has made it a point to be as well-informed as possible on technology and issues that surround it," many of the components of today's Internet came into being well before Gore's first term in Congress began in 1977. It is true, though, that Gore was popularizing the term "information superhighway" in the early 1990s (although he did not, as is often claimed by others, coin the phrase himself) when few people outside academia or the computer/defense industries had heard of the Internet, and he sponsored the 1988 National High-Performance Computer Act (which established a national computing plan and helped link universities and libraries via a shared network) and cosponsored the Information Infrastructure and Technology Act of 1992 (which opened the Internet to commercial traffic). In May 2005, the organizers of the Webby Awards for online achievements honored Al Gore with a lifetime achievement award for three decades of contributions to the Internet. "He is indeed due some thanks and consideration for his early contributions," said Vint Cerf.

Sniff sniff.......do I smell an excellent SM Minute?

In YP cases, even if there is doubt, do the right thing and report. Me and a fellow ASM from our home troop served as ASM's for one of our Jambo troops. when we were touring DC before attending Jambo, it was brought to our attention by some of our senior boy leadership that one of the scouts said he was physically abused (not sexually) by his step father. Our "dilemma" was that the boy was from our home troop and his step father was our SM and friend. Talk about a sick feeling in the pit of your stomach. We "knew" it wasn't true, but we couldn't ignore it. Our SM and his wife are very dedicated and active Christians. They are dedicated scoutes who also work at the district and council level. They are highly respected. Their son is a good kid, but he is the poster child for ADHD and tends to drive most people nuts. We felt that he was saying what he said for attention as it fit his character. Regardless, it had to be reported. Luckily, our Jambo SM took over, cut us out of the loop because of our relationship and called back home to report it to the council SE. I have no idea what happened after that. The boy and his parents are still deeply involved in scouting, so I have a feeling that any investigation turned up nothing. Even when there is doubt, REPORT! It is your obligation as a scouter.

Avid, Let's say you have 8 Webelos crossover and form a NSP and you decide to keep them together as they age. By the end of the first year, you have 2 quit and 1 that shows up occasionally. You now have 5 in your patrol. Another year passes and you have 1 that quits, leaving you with 4 in your patrol. These boys are probably at least Star by now and possibly 14 or close to it. Given another year, how many will you still have? Do you maintain their patrol at 2 or 3 members? Do you merge them with another patrol of the same age? What if they were the only NSP when they joined and there are no more boys their age. Eventually you will end up with mixed patrols out of necessity or have a multitude of patrols with 2 or 3 members in them. By keeping the patrols age specific, you set up a division where older boys want nothing to do with younger boys. We left the troop we crossed over to for this specific reason. The older boys and some of their parents resented having all of these little kids mess up their plans for higher adventur trips and having to teach new boys. They have since rethought their approach when they FINALLY realized that their troop would shortly die with no new scouts. Where you have a troop with mixed patrols, the culture is one where the older boys were not treated in a hands off fashion as new scouts and know that it is their turn to give back what they got. What I mean by mixed patrols "working" for us is this. Hazing and harrasment by older scouts is virtually no-existant because the older scouts have learned by example that they have an obligation to new scouts. The new boys are eventually adopted out of their NSP to an existing patrol with open arms by the boys ranging in age from 11 or 12 up to 17. The younger scouts are able to grow and contribute up to their ability while the older scouts encourage and teach along the way. I know that many troops do not function this way, but ours honestly does. We have created the culture because we believe it is the best way to operate. We could take the approach that we should keep them separate because they don't want to mix and everyone will be happier. But the you just have boys filling POR offices rather than actually providing leadership in one on one situations. Word gets around. We run about 40 boys at troop meetings. We always recruit at least one NSP per year. This year we have crossed over 16 boys. We had 5 prospects visit our troop last night. We are quickly approaching our gear limit and I could see where we may put a limit on new boys based on equipment only. What is the attraction? Boy led and mixed age patrols.

Uz, I believe Eamonn's comments were tongue in cheek and not an endorsement for doing away with a merit badge.

Nah, I just picked it off of one of the conservative website I read daily. In this case, the Drudge Report where anti-Hillary articles are posted on an almost daily basis. I held this up as a quick and dirty example. I could go hunting and find you articles where Republican leadership have said some pretty nasty things about Democrats and vice versa, but I really don't have time. As I said, I'm somewhat neutral to the political party games and recognize the rhetoric from both sides. I'd dare say that there are far more conservative books, radio and TV shows out there calling liberals anti-American, troop hating, terrorist loving traitors than there is on the flipside. Both side have dirty hands. Arguing which one's hands are dirtier is kind of beside the point.

We have mixed age patrols and they work well for us. We do however use NSP's for the first 6 to 8 months that boys crossover into the troop. In the past week or two we have crossed over 16 Webelos and will make two patrols out of them. Myself and two other ASM's will work with these boys. I say we will work with them, actually we have four troop guides who will be split two per patrol that will work with them under our oversight. By using this manner, the boys have the comfort of being with other new scouts their age, get to learn the troop and other boys and learn their skills from older (and willing) scouts. Around October, we will integrate them into existing patrols. Just taking new boys and throwing them into a sink or swim situation with older boys that want nothing to do with them will eventually run them off. Find older boys willing to do a POR of troop guide and utilize them to teach a NSP. Let everyone get to know each other slowly and then mix them in down the road.

Rooster: You are welcome to feel the same way about conservatives, but I would argue that there is much more evidence to support my claim. I consider myself a conservative leaning independent, so I goet to shake my head at both sides of the aisle. I shake my head a lot when people like Ted Kennedy open their mouth. But liberals don't have the market cornered when it comes to opening their mouth and inserting their foot. While I am no Hillary fan, I think this is a good example of the conservative side going over the top. http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/13/D8FODS201.html Likely Challenger Lashes Out at Clinton Feb 13 2:28 PM US/Eastern By MARC HUMBERT AP Political Writer ALBANY, N.Y. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's likely Republican Senate race challenger charged Monday that the New York Democrat's criticism of the Bush administration "aids and abets our enemies" in the battle against terrorism. John Spencer's comments to reporters came after a fiery speech to the state Conservative Party leadership in which, during a defense of the Patriot Act, he also attacked the administration of former President Bill Clinton. "I wish we had it before 9-11," said the former mayor of Yonkers. "And, I wish we had an administration in Washington that wasn't an appeasing, liberal, whining administration in the 90's that allowed the terrorists to build up the way they built up." There was no immediate comment from the former first lady. Polls show Spencer trailing far behind Clinton in her bid for a second Senate term, and she has a huge fundraising advantage as well. She is a potential 2008 Democratic presidential candidate. Asked after his speech about his criticism of Clinton _ who voted to authorize sending troops to Iraq but who has been highly critical of President Bush's conduct of the war _ Spencer said she "puts politics first in our war on terror and our troops second." Spencer said that while there was a way to properly criticize the conduct of a war _ he cited Republican Sen. John McCain _ "You shouldn't do it with such divisive and blame-America-first methodology, and that's what she does, which aids and abets our enemies." Lumping Clinton with Sens. John Kerry and Edward Kennedy, Spencer added, "They seem to salivate at what they hope would be bad news for the Bush administration, and that's divisive for our nation." Meanwhile, the Spencer campaign unveiled a video advertisement that is running on its Web site. The ad attacks Clinton for her criticism of the Bush administration's warrantless domestic surveillance program. "I'm running for Senate because I won't play politics with our security," Spencer says in the ad. The campaign Web site _ http://www.spencerforsenate.com _ encourages viewers to contribute so Spencer can afford to run such spots on regular TV. As of the end of December, Clinton's campaign had $17 million in the bank while Spencer had just $243,000. "We're going against the International Bank of Clinton," Spencer told the Conservative Party leadership. Spencer and his lesser-known rival for the GOP Senate nomination, tax attorney William Brenner, appeared before the Conservative Party leaders where they gave short speeches and took some written questions from the audience. No Republican has won statewide office in New York without Conservative Party support since 1974. On one issue, Spencer agreed with Clinton and most other New York politicians _ that more anti-terrorism money should be coming to the state. "I don't think terrorists are going to go after the potato farm in Idaho," Spencer told the Conservative Party leadership. Spencer said it was "lunacy" to think Clinton could not be beaten and that he would do so with "persistence and tenacity." "We must remove this woman," he told the Conservatives.

Zahnada, Don't kid yourself. My son owns several airsoft guns and yes he has played capture the flag with other neighborhood kids with them. He always wears eye protection. From some distance, I doubt they hurt much. However, one day I picked his up and wondered how powerful they were. Like an idiot, I shot myself in the palm of my hand from a few inches away. Let me assure you that while it didn't break the skin, it left a mark and hurt for quite a while. An airsoft gun could easily put an eye out at close enough range. Toy or not, pointing a "weapon" at another person is a major no-no. Especially after cursing at them and threatening them. I'll go along with the person who said that this is strike one and two and maybe two and a half.....unless the scout has a history. Then it would be strike three. I'm a dedicated scouter, but life is too short to sacrifice the safety of the troop for one problem child.

baden, Are you sure about the Trainer Developement Conference being a requirement to staff WB? I'm serving as a Troop Guide in our Council's fall WB and no one has mentioned this requirement to me.

Congrats and welcome back! Please stay.

"Isn't APL selected by the PL? Or was a new PL elected and he assigned your son as APL?" Yes, after the PL was elected, he appointed my son APL. "I get the impression that APL is considered part of the PLC in the troop. Is that the case? I thought only SPL, ASPL, PL, and Troop Guides for New Scout Patrols were a part of the PLC. Of course, if a PL cannot attend a PLC meeting, then the APL should attend in his place." I didn't mean to give that impression. Our APL's do not attend the PLC except in the absence of the PL. "I didn't think that the SM can assign a leadership project in lieu of a POR for Eagle. Isn't that only for Star and Life?" My son is turning 13 and just earned Star. I have not dealt with Eagle before. I may have spoken out of turn. The bottom line is our SM can and has assigned a project to meet leadership requirments before instead of a boy holding a POR. At what particular point in a boy's advancement, I don't know. Sorry for any confusion. I was just using the situation in my son's patrol of having an APL who chose other activites over scouting and was not present very often. As I stated, if the position "could" be counted for rank like ASPL, he wouldn't not have been signed off. But all of that is discussed with the boy before hand and agreed to.

I find it hard to believe that OSHA found the BSA responsible. Having attended the 2005 Jambo, I can atest to the fact that your plot is marked with stakes and string. It is up to each contingent troop to determine their individual camp layout within that plot. Some plots are square and some are rectangular. We had great difficulty getting our site worked out as the stake was in the middle of a road and it had a row of latrines laying within the plot. We ended up having to short ourselves to get out of the road and really cram our tents into the space. It took half a week, but we finally got the latrines moved across the road where there were no campsites. Bottom line, the scouters and/or tent company should have recognized the danger of setting up a 28 ft tent pole under a power line. While the site was assigned to them, they were not forced to erect the tent in that particular spot.