SR540Beaver

le V, But wouldn't that risk getting your Palm Pilot and cell phone wet?

Dan, Good list! I'd add a decent poncho for a kid. I've got a good backpacking poncho, but the only thing I've been able to find in the stores for a kid my son's size is the little plastic cheapies. I have not looked on the internet for anything more durable yet.

ahhh, my soon to be 11 year old Webelos 2 son who will cross over next February has aleady requested his own tent for Christmas. Of course, that is in addition to the electronics on his list! Santa is already looking at new sleeping bags and a backpack. My own list includes a leather BSA belt, a Wood Badge belt buckle and the red Jac-Shirt. Possibly an ordered pair of high rise scount pants to replace the hiphuggers stocked in the local Council Scout Shop. A new Ford F-150 extended cab would be sweet too, but I'm not holding my breath. A guy can dream, can't he?

I used to be a kwc57 and a good ol kwc57 too... Since SR540, I used to be a Beaver!

Pow Wow Plus was yesterday and it was a great success. 276 participants and 84 staffers. Not a bad attendance number when you consider it was the same day that our two largest colleges (OU and OSU) play their grudge match. Our Pow Wow Plus covered Cubs, Boy Scouts, Venturing and Sea Scouts.

OK, I let my heart lead me and signed my son and I up for Jambo. The signing up part was easy, the paying part will be a little harder at $2,000 per head. But there is a little less than 2 years to save and raise funds. Wish us luck.

In all fairness, it should be pointed out that part of the original post in another thread stated that the dad of this cub has the most Scouting experience of anyone in the unit. He above all other parents should be ensuring that his son wears his uniform properly. From my experience, I've seen a number of scouters (cub and boy) who take the attitude of, "it's JUST cub scouts" like it should not matter. The problem with that approach is that a bad habit will be reinforced for 4 or 5 years before a boy makes it to boy scouts and his willingness to change will be very low. In these parts, many of the high school baseball coaches put on summer clinics for the little league boys. Know why? To teach them correct techniques and fundamentals before they get them 5 to 10 years down the road. If the kid has spent his young career trying to make grandstand plays or swinging for the fence, he won't want to change his style when he hits high school. It is not "JUST" cub scouts, it is scouting! Teach them the right way now.

foto, Am I understanding you correctly? Are you saying that you want to humiliate and shame a boy into proper uniforming? Perhaps a discussion concerning the BSA method of the uniform could be worked into a den meeting activity. You could discuss sport team, civil servant, military, etc. uniforms and how it proudly identifies the person, who they are and what they are. Trying to make a grade school child look foolish is.......well, foolish.

Take it outside boys!

hops, A scout must have reached the age of 12 prior to the Jamboree starting and attained a rank of 1st class.

Our council is taking applications for the 2005 Jamboree and will have an information meeting next week. Our Cub Master and I (Committee Chairman) both have sons who are Webelos II's who will be crossing over next February and will be eligible to go to Jamboree in 2005. My Cub Master has already paid he and his son's deposit and turned in their applications. He is trying to talk me into going as well. I'd love to and my son is interested too. One factor is the cost estimated at $2000, vacation time and my son's age. What concerns me is that he will "only" be 12 at the time and I wonder how meaningful it will be to him and how many memories he will retain from it years down the road? My family took a number of big vacations when I was a kid and I have snippets of memories, but not detailed memories. Of course the older I get, the worse my rememberer works. I think it would be more meaningful to him when he is older, but since he will be 16 by the next Jamboree, I have this concern that he might not be as interested in scouts by then. I've heard a rumor that the next Jamboree after 2005 will actually be 5 years instead of 4 years so it will coincide with the 100 year anniversary in 2010. Anyone know if that is true? That concerns me even more with him being 17 instead of 16. So my question is, what has been some of your experiences as either scouts or parents of scouts attending Jamboree at the ripe old age of 12? Is it worth it or is it better to wait until the scout is older?

FOG, I'll have to assume that all the bad things people say about public education is true from their perspective. My experience has been far different. My son's school system seems to be a rarity. His school has a terrific staff of teachers due to the principal. He has a waiting list of teachers who want to work for him. That obviously means that the teachers he currently has are the cream of the crop. They all know their "stuff" and I wouldn't hesitate to ask any of them a question with fear that they would steer me wrong. The shame is that in our state, teachers barely make enough to live off of. They apparently do it out of a love for kids and a dedication to education. Please keep in mind that the majority of memos you get from school are written by underpaid school secretaries without a formal education. All they care about is geting the information passed along to you, not provide a nail biting, page turning novel.

I'm sure people here get tired of me saying, "back when my son played baseball"....but here I go again. Hey, it's been a while since I used the line. I know that the uniform is a method of scouting and that it is not "required". We want the boys to wear it out of choice, pride and a sense of belonging. That being said, the same thing applies to a sports uniform. The only difference is that the coach can and does require it or you sit on the bench. Even at 7 years old, our boys knew they had better not show up without a belt or hat if they wanted to play. They also knew that they didn't have their shirttail hanging out or their hat on backwards. We never had a problem with anyone abusing our uniform policy......at 7 years old! Uniforming starts at the top down. Adult leadership and boy leadership. Peer pressure can be a wonderful thing sometimes. The boys will rise to the expectations of the crowd. When you are the only one or two or three out of uniform and see everyone else wearing it with pride, it usually gets you in gear and uniform. Hey, it is a lot harder to be spotted as a geek when you are surrounded by a bunch of other geeks! There is power in numbers.

le Voyageur, For something that ambitious, you'd better add a second person dedicated strictly to fund raising! While your recommendations are worthy, they don't come cheap to councils that are already streched thin on funds. Pack, Amen to the accurate records. That seems to be a univeral problem with council offices.

Let me clarify my statement. A guardian can be an adult designated by an absent parent. We've had a number of parentless Webelos go on campouts as long as there was an adult on the trip willing to be responsible for them. The boy can not sleep in the same tent with an adult who is not a parent or "legal" guardian. At least, that is the way it is done in our neck of the woods.

ka6bsa, Could you clarify what you mean by having to ask several groups of parents and boys to leave the event because they could not meet the rules? Two deep does not always mean there must be two adults present. While that it preferable, it can also be met simply by not having a single adult alone with a single child. In other words, as long as there are several boys present you can have one adult alone with them. If you had "parents" and "boys", you had enough people around to cover the YP concerns and not have to send kids away in tears and parents with empty wallets. Keep in mind that Webelos can camp without the pack (as a den) and without a parent present. They can not sleep in another adults tent however. Am I missing something?(This message has been edited by SR540Beaver)

NJ, With rare exceptions that never lasted, homosexuality has been viewed by most religions, cultures and societies throughout history as an immoral act just as premarital sex, sex with animals, children, the dead and other people's spouses has been considered immoral. The norm is to be attracted to the other gender, not to the same gender. That is abnormal. In my late teens, I had a trusted leader (not scouts) who tried to fondle me. While shaken, I was not intimidated and was old enough to stop him. I later found that he had done this to many other young men. Now, my best friend is gay and to my knowledge, he has never tried to put the moves on young men in all the years I've known him. But the risk is too great to put homosexual men living what has been historically and traditionally considered an immoral lifestyle in charge of strapping young boys. Call me old fashioned!

If a boy has to be moved to make the two kids happy, how about moving the cousin to the den with the CM's son. The boys are together and the dad sees his son.

BW, I respectfully disagree with you. Whether something is the right thing to do or not, we do need a clear concise rule spelling it out. That is the whole purpose of the G2SS. Without it, there would be some SM somewhere who wouldn't think twice about taking an 11 year old poor swimmer on a white water rafting trip and throw him in a raft with a bunch of other 11 year olds. Obviously the right thing to do would be to consider the boy's physical capabilities and the safty concerns. Without the rules though, some rocket scientist out there would do it. Without rules, it is left to the individuals discretion. If the BSA wants to prohibit smoking for any reason, they need to use a word that is understood the same way by everyone.....PROHIBIT. Until they do, the controversy and waffling will remain.

For those of you who are not country music fans, please bear with me. George Strait is about as traditional country as they come. It is what he likes and it is what he sings. When producers have tried to talk him into singing more contemporary songs that will appeal to a greater market segment, he politely declines. He loves traditional country music. He says that is what he will sing, regardless of whether he fills a stadium to capacity or a tiny crowd in a roadside honky tonk. BSA is a private organization that can set it's own membership policy. Will the gay/atheist issue dwindle it's ranks someday? Possibly. But scouting is what it is and it's methods, policies and values are what they are. Change it to appeal to a broader market and it ceases to be the Boy Scouts. Those of us who have chosen to lead, have done so with full knowledge and acceptance of the policies. We will do it whether we have a billion scouts or a thousand.

Overtrained, Our council is doing a Pow Wow Plus on November 1st. This covers all levels of scouting. There will be 65 different classes. The last I heard, we have around 200 participants signed up. They have created a very nice web page for it and the url is http://www.lastfrontiercouncil.org/powwowplus/

zakly!

NJ, I believe you stated my point in a more articulate way. You talked about "proper English". How many of you out there use proper English or hear it spoken very often? I keep stating that the BSA needs to reword their policy in the G2SS in a manner that leaves no loopholes. If their intent is to prohibit smoking, say it that way. Do not write it in a way that while correct, is not understood by many Americans. The debate would end with changing the words "may not allow" with "prohibit". Simple and easy. We can then find a new bone to chew on.

Bob, I understand how YOU understand the policy and how it is crystal clear and black and white for You. I'll concede that to you. In fact, I myself have no problem with the BSA prohibiting smoking in front of the scouts. Can you not understand and concede that other people find the wording confusing? Given that this seems to be a reoccuring question, would you not agree that it would be a good idea for the BSA to revisit their wording and precisely and concisely spell out their intention in language that people could not find a loophole in? A simple change of "may not allow" to the word of "prohibit" leaves no wiggle room for people looking for a loophole or for those of us who simply find the current wording lacking. One simple change clears the whole thing up. Like I said earlier, the fact that it does raise so many questions and the BSA has chosen to ignore clearing it up tends to make me think that they might be vague on purpose. Until the BSA changes the wording, it appears that smoking at local events will continue to be at the local leadership's discretion.

Pack ole buddy, I'm one of those that questions the wording on this smoking issue. I can see both sides of the coin. Just a nasty habit I have that tends to get me in trouble with everyone at some point. I can see where Bob gets his strict interpretation. On the other hand, I see where others have a problem with the words "may not" instead of "can not". I'm one of those people. My feeling is that this is such a big issue and seems to have so many people confused, that the BSA needs to address it and make it clear as day to even a person with an IQ of 40. If their intention is to prohibit smoking, they need to say so in clear and precise language. It would not be all that hard to say, "the BSA PROHIBITS the use of ANY tobacco products by ANY person at ANY event where scouts are present." Wording to that effect leaves little room for personal interpretation. One small change will make a world of difference. It makes one wonder why the BSA has never seen fit to change it? Could it be that what they actually meant by "may not allow" is that they leave it at the discretion of the local leadership? We'll never know until the BSA clears it up for those who question the language.