blw2

My guess is that the "baloo only" is maybe a bit more likely to get into the weeds of the rules a bit more, in how they apply to cubs

but

overall the double certification will be much better in the long run.  more versatile.

In my experience IOLS was a little bit fun in that we did it concurrent with the district's scout campout (i'm drawing a blank on the name, but the one where the troops come together for competition), but it wasn't overly useful or teaching of anything I pretty much didn't already know.

baloo was much worse... a complete waste...99.8% of the students could have easily thought the class....but it was a requirement to complete.

ha ha.....yeah, I have in the past thought that one of those travel vests might be useful.... I'm not a person to care too much about fashion or impressing people, preferring the practical over fashion ...in fact sometimes when I look back on old photos throughout my life I regret that sometimes.... although as a shy person I generally lean towards conformity,  I really did look like a doofus sometimes... but I never went so far as something like that...

On 5/21/2018 at 10:32 PM, NealOnWheels said:

Years ago scouts could no longer camp by themselves.  Today it appears they can no longer have meetings or day activities without adults.

"Two registered adult leaders 21 years of age or over are required at all Scouting activities, including meetings."

"Patrol Activities—A Scout patrol may participate in patrol activities. Two-deep adult leadership is required."

well in my experience this is how most all adults thought it was anyway.  Several times in conversations when I had suggested that patrols could have patrol meetings and such on their own, I was regarded as crazy....

On 5/23/2018 at 7:06 AM, qwazse said:

So much for meeting with an MBC, even in a public library, even if one or both non-registered parent(s) stays with the scout.

an example of when rules get too complex they most often get stupid

On 5/23/2018 at 11:18 PM, KYScouter said:

I found this interesting (from section I):

"One-on-one contact between adult leaders and youth members is prohibited both

inside and outside of Scouting."

 

A literal reading of this would mean that I can never again babysit my scout nephew, even if it's not a scouting event.  Yikes.  (Of course an even more literal reading of this means my brother can no longer take his scout son to school while mom takes younger brother to daycare.)

...and another

this sort of thing used to cross my mind when, as an example my son would have sleepovers or even just hanging out at the house with his buddy...who was the den leader...either at their house or mine.....not that we would either of us in any way be having nefarious contact, it could be conceivable that we could be left in the kitchen together for a few moments...  I just pretty much carried on as I would with any kid in my house and be careful to not do anything that could be twisted into making it look like I was doing something bad.

ha ha, yeah...funny concept for a question!

I'll admit there have been a few times I've thought girls have it good sometimes, carrying a purse.  They can haul around extra stuff that can be handy.  I wear cargo pants most of the time, but I still don't carry a lot of stuff that I might if I routinely carried a backpack or "purse", mostly because the weight in the pockets doesn't carry well.

I think most folks have covered it though.... for me the every day carry stuff that I don't carry would include  flashlight, small very basic 1st aid kit, tissues or wipes.  Then as needed I'd throw in things like battery brick, drinking water, snacks,....stuff like that.

Back when I used to carry a brief case for work, I could put things in that I needed for work (or just wanted to have handy), such as small ruler or scale, small tools I might need, little reference materials, magnifiers, cpr mask,...

Other girl stuff that I'm occasionally jealous of...

wearing skirts (essentially shorts and sometimes even better than shorts maybe) when it's inappropriate for me to wear anything except long pants

ditto tank tops and the like, that would be cooler and more comfortable than regular shirts when it wouldn't be appropriate for me to wear a t-shirt

ditto open toe shoes/flip flops, and generally a lot more availability of shoe types and styles

for me it was when it was clear that there was no way of talking son out of quitting.   That's when I told the CC to find another person..... I still worked the job for several months after, but just did a minimum effort job.....

BUT

I'm still logging in here now and then....so it's clear I have an interest

I think that IF I was retired and didn't have 3 young kids and already too much to do, I can imagine being willing to stick around and fill a role if needed.  In fact, even since back in our days with the pack I have been very surprised at the lack of Grandparent involvement

re. the coed thing.... I'm still not sure if that would have run me away or not.....I think probably not.

In hind sight, I wish that in the pack, we would have had a little bit more 'awareness' of the patrol method (boy leaders and all of that)

My scouting experience was too short and too long ago to be any help.  The old guard scouters were heavily involved in a troop with their older sons, so they knew....but never brought it to the pack.

I know the cubs are too young to do it, except I would argue the 2nd year WEBELOS are ready....BUT I think awareness of the target you are aiming at could be useful in lots of ways.

AND I would say that they'll get most of what they need from the training, books, etc...

Sure, there's s one things that would be helpful I think and that they wouldn't get in the 'normal training'....especially since most will not read the books (handbooks, guides, etc..)

and I imagine what Latin Scot sends you would cover things well.

But I think Cubs could be just a little bit better if it were orientation for the patrol method instead of adults leading everything.  Not necessarily the big stuff, but little things here and there.... and it's hard to find those opportunities if you don't know the target. 

(& don't think for a second that if an adult was an Eagle, or even scout, that they know anything at all.  Many could have come from really poorly run troops.  Other things are forgotten, focus is changed when it's your kid, etc...)

yeah, my old pack's committee was mostly the den leaders....and I as cubmaster was basically the defacto committee chair.

    not that I wanted it that way....

The way I feel would work best...in theory (assuming a properly staffed and active committee separate from the 'program' scouters)..... Just as I had posted recently about PLC meetings....I think a great analogy is a stereotypical corporate meeting

the key players, voting members if you will, all have a seat at the table.  It's their meeting.  They can invite others in as guests for various purposes. 

• to listen for awareness
• to answer questions or give input
• to present information
• etc.

these guests might stereo typically be seated in chairs against the wall, not at the table.....   I think if everyone had that in mind....in attitude and in spirit, not in rigid 'seating chart' protocol, then I think things would work nicely.  I agree with David in CO is right that sometimes there could in theory be things where others shouldn't be there for.

Another reason I think they should not be 'required' is that the DL's are the hardest working positions if it's done right..... they are running weekly meetings.  they have enough on their plates.

Personally, I think this 'spirit' would be good to carry through most all scouting 'business' meetings...pack committee's, troop committee's, PLC's....

   basically, it's important I think for everyone to know their place...are they a "voting member" or a visitor.

and that generally DLs would have an open invitation and be 'encouraged' to attend

I just saw this come across my google news feed.... figured it would be a topic here.

Is it just me or is the name somehow....odd.  Almost redundant I guess. Certainly poor english....(not that I would know much about that, being an engineer and not an english major in college.....)

    I don't know....

it goes from

 Boy Scouts of America

    to

 Scouts Boy Scouts of America

Oh well...matters not to me....

well put Fred

16 hours ago, Eagledad said:

It’s really more of an attitude.

I think it boils down to this.

You do what you can in the given geography.  300ft (or whatever it is), in spirit

my son's troop was an open invite

Any scout in a POR

+ any scouter

I attended a couple to observe, and once in an official capacity as Treasurer...but mostly because of how I feel these meetings should be, I was a very quiet fly on the wall in the back of the room....

It was very adult operated, trying to be "boy lead"

In my opinion having observed this troop in operation, and having thought a lot about this.... I think that 

1. PLC meetings should include Assistants....how else are they going to fill in for the Leaders if they aren't privy to the discussions?  Yeah, I know that it could be argued that the leader should sum up the meeting to his assistant right after it, but I think it would be better if they were present...on lots of levels.
2. Other POR's such as QM, Librarian, etc... should also be invited.
3. Assistants and other PORs should probably be considered 2nd row folks.... in a corporate board room, the folks with seats at the table would be front row...it's their discussion, it's their vote..... SPL at the table head, with PL's at the table in the corporate example.  The second row, in chairs along the walls are there mostly to listen and to answer questions from those at the table.  Not necessarily a "keep your mouth shut and only speak if spoken to" thing....like that but just more casual and relaxed in this scouting sense.  They could chime in with input, ask and answer questions, participate....But when it comes to a "vote" it's the PL's voting on behalf of their scouts considering all of their input.
4. adults' involvement should only be the SM and his assistants, and they should not be in the room unless invited.  If invited, they should only stay in there long enough to do what the PLC is requesting them to do (ie listen or answer a question).  then they should leave.  They should be right outside the door and available, but not "in the meeting".  In a large cafeteria or gymnasium type space, I suppose it might be acceptable for adults to be quietly sitting at the other end of the room....but mostly I think they shouldn't be there or even in ear shot....  IMO the SM's (adult's) only really regular involvement should be the coaching session with the SPL before the meeting, then again after it....

this was just my read on it....my opinion

yeah, everything I'm reading here points to a very adult involved situation.  as an example, most likely the CM and other adults should not have been in ear shot for the most part, to hear son asking to borrow flashlight.

It's not for any adult to barge in managing, directing, or correcting about clean before play.... maybe a nudge or coaching a bit but....

small troop, two patrols and one of them is a patrol of new scouts

and that patrol of new scouts is somehow lead by the old cubmaster...... yep 3rd year WEBELOS it sounds to be.

7 hours ago, CalicoPenn said:

I had a hunch someone would try to compare pulling a Totin Chip until it could be re-earned with pulling rank.  There is a major difference - Totin Chip is not a rank.  The policies about once its earned it remains earned does not apply.  Totin Chip confers a privilege - though I like your idea of just coaching them and moving on.   I'd even suggest that Troops treat the Totin Chip like the Cyber Chip - let them expire every year - and have the Scouts re-earn them.  Someone who earns it at 11 could surely use a refresher at 16.  I also think that adults that are going to use knives, axes and saws in camp should earn the Totin Chip.  It shouldn't be all that difficult and the adults will know the same "rules" as the Scouts - I've seen more adults than youth violate the "rules" taught in Totin Chip.

yeah yeah, I know it's not the same thing..... it's an analogy.  It's similar.

And re-earning..... how do you like having to retake regular training...things you already know and have done several times before?  Not fun is it?

6 hours ago, an_old_DC said:

, and told them my expectation is all ASMs camp sometimes...and any ASM who does not camp a minimum of once per school year would be moved to committee member on the next charter.

In my opinion, a person that only camps once or even twice per year should be a committee member....& not necessarily that committee folks should camp routinely.  More that they can and should on rare occasion, in their capacity of "observe and advise".  As I mentioned before, a troop really shouldn't need that many ASM's, so what would be the point?  My gut tells me that a good ratio would be maybe half of the trips.....

19 hours ago, CalicoPenn said:

What about taking the card and holding it until the Scout re-qualifies for the card by doing all the requirements again?  Why does there have to be any form of hazing at all?  

why hold it at all?  It's just petty and silly, and the scouts would see that too, me thinks....   no different that any of the requirements for a rank, in a way.

Let's pick a Scout rank requirement as an example...tie a taught line hitch

I walk up to a scout rank or higher and ask them to help this young new scout work on his Scout badge.  "he needs help with his taught line hitch"

(this was a bad example for me...I keep wanting to write midshipman's hitch)

Anyway, so he forgot..... what to do...rip that patch off his shirt till he relearns the knot?    no way.  That would be silly, right?

Instead you'd just give the guy a bit of help, coaching him to remind him how to do the knot.... or perhaps pointing him to another scout to do it.  Nobody would pull his rank.

So....he 'forgets' some element of proper 'tote n chipmanship'..... coach the guy and move on with the rest of a great day....

yeah, I never bought into the corner cutting thing either.  They earned the card or they didn't.  Don't make up requirements.

the unit would need it's own EIN to open a bank account

which is no big deal to get.

The PTO would be listed as the responsible organization.

no need for either to be non-profit.

I'm not a lawyer, CPA, or any sort of expert, just a person that has done a lot of research on this subject just a couple years ago and basically re-set up the troop after the previous SM passed away and lots of stuff was under his SSN

something on this topic that always troubled me as a unit adult, was the shelter from storm thing.

Ok, yeah, I get it....

On 4/6/2018 at 5:26 PM, ItsBrian said:

If theres a tornado warning, run, if there is a flood warning, run, if there is a thunder storm, get shelter. (Exaggerated)

right on

BUT

let's say the troop is bedded down for the night in tents.  2 AM you are awakened by frog choking rain, thunder booming and lightning flashing.....

So am I seriously supposed to get out of the tent, round up the whole troop, and trudge a half mile through the woods and falling trees in the dark, trying to find the dining hall?

14 hours ago, fred johnson said:

It's the trouble with troop shopping.  One visit and/or one camp-out is just a throw of the dice.

yeah, good point.  Maybe a troop has very weak meetings in the church hall, but somehow have great campouts and lots of them.

On the other hand, I am a firm believer that you can usually get a firm read on people in pretty short order, so there is that....

Personally, I think the OP's model is spot on!

     with one big IF.... and that is if he is able to make all the meeting happen with so few adult heads

Generally, I think that most troops just have way too many adults envolved.

Clarke Greene over on scoutmastercg did some podcasts and writing on this topic a while back.  Since then I did a lot of thinking, soul searching, and observing our troop and others with this 'issue' in mind.

You'll have to read and listen to his points for yourself, since he made the points better than I ever could....but to summarize my thoughts & If I remember correctly (it's been a while) his major point of discussion was around "too many adults".  Actually I think I might be blending a couple discussion points he made....

"too many adults"

+

"what is the ASM's job"

A lot of folks seem to think a lot of adults are needed because those adults are needed for the driving.  That can be an issue.  If the camp site is close enough though parents or committee members can drive and drop off....but if it's far away that makes less sense.  A large van or church bus helps in this area....

Another aspect is that the adults want to be involved with their kids and the troop.  I know that this was definitely my case.  Part of it is our wanting to be a scout.  On top of that many folks who want to be involved also have something strong to offer the troop.... but with so few really key jobs there is a lot of potential out there that just never gets used....that's bad....BUT being intellectual honest with myself & floating back to the point that it's not our journey (adults,) and like it or not I realize that too many adults WILL harm the experience and journey that the scouts are doing.  No question in my mind about that.

On the point of "what is the ASM's job?".... Clarke's point really stuck in my throat for a long time.  I just couldn't swallow it as a parent.  He said more or less that the only adult talking and interacting with the scouts should be the SM.  ASM's should only be doing or saying what the SM wanted them to say.  As I recall, this was all from the perspective of consistent message, consistent program, no mixed-signals or mixed-messages confusing the scouts or the program.  I've chewed on this for a couple years now...& I have to say that if I'm being honest with myself I think he's correct...With that approach, the SM really has to be heavily involved with every PLC and strongly coaching his SPL or PL's himself...but a good SM doing a good job of LEADING his few ASM's I think could do a great job of sharing the load of an active program.

I remember Clarke saying something to the affect of a troop really only needing 1 or 2 ASM's.  They are really there only to fill in for the SM, when he can't make it for some reason, or can't be in two places at once.....or that kind of thing.  One of those ASM's would be the 1st ASM, the guy in training to be SM...part of the exit strategy.... and really there's not much else for the 2nd ASM to even do.  

And having non-ASM adults on the trip....I understand letting a non-registered parent or a committee member come to observe...infrequently.  I really do not think that it's in the scouts' best interest to encourage any more visitors than that.

Honestly, if you think about it....if the scouts have their own strong leadership in place, isn't that true?  They don't need any more ASM's, and there really is no use in having other adults along that are untrained and that are not up to speed to deliver the program that the SM has set up.  The more adults you have at a meeting or on a campout standing around with their hands in their pockets, the more likely they will find ways to jump in and "help" the scouts.

So I think that as long as you have enough ASM's to be able to have a couple adults for every outing...and have a lot of outings going, then I think that's perfect.....and if you can do that with three, all the better.

10 hours ago, fred johnson said:

I'd look to see where your son fits in.  Friendships.  Laughing.  Inspired.  This is really the biggest factor.  Scouts will only stay in the troop if they enjoy it.

personally, i think this is the key point.  What you think, or what we think is of really very little importance.  I recon the one with the commute might be the one point where you need to make sure he understands the burden, that you might not be able to get him to many of the meetings, etc....but those are just variables for him to consider.  If he has friends there, and likes everything else about it, HE might be willing to bum rides with other scouts, etc...

When my son was considering troops, I put a lot of effort and thought into how or if I should encourage or steer.  There are even old threads here about it... but in the end NONE of that mattered.  He was ONLY interested in going where his friends were, which happened to be the same CO as his pack and our church, so it was a familiar location and familiar people.  If there was an otherwise  theoretically perfect troop across the street from our house, it would not have mattered.

Personally, I think it's ok to guide him with pros and cons, but remember it is HIS journey, not yours.

I have no memory really of what my troop did as a scout.

My son's troop.... they would typically 

SM minute (read from a book, never personal or from the heart)

rise

sometimes recite the law

Chaplin would lead a prayer

color guard would retrieve the colors....and 100% of the time they would do it wrong, crossing the flags on their trip to the back of the room.  Drove me nuts!

I recon my old troop as a boy did something along those lines too....not something that burned into memory.

I can't comment about the Nikwax stuff, but I'll add to the discussion with this....

I recently bought a quilt from UGQ. https://ugqoutdoor.com/

Just something to consider before you try treating down.  From their web site re. the down they use....

UltimaDOWN is not a hydrophobic treated down.  Although we have offered hydrophobic treated down in the past, we have weighed the benefits vs. drawbacks carefully, and have recently stopped offering WR down. The benefits, which are marginal at best in real world scenarios, are offset by lower loft, intra laundering clumping, and the need for more down to offset the lower lofting and possible clumping. Effective April 11, 2016, we will no longer use hydrophobic down in our products.

interesting topic to me....

When my son joined as a Tiger and I was not a scouter.... From my perspective the pack meetings were mostly announcements...and mostly talking over the scouts and to the parents in the back of the room.  I could see the scouters trying....there was always an attempt at some program or activity....and an effort for award recognition...but that was mostly just the endless baggie handout.  It got better and worse over the years, but mostly it was that.

Again, from my perspective....Den meetings were sometimes fun, sometimes it was not so fun art/craft stuff, and mostly it was a lot of scouts being 'talked to'.  Once in a while there was some fun activity done in the den meetings...and of course it was a lot of chaos...especially after one of the dads took over as DL when the mom DL left town.  By then I was pitching in trying to help as ADL.

Anyway, My son tolerated the den meetings and hated the pack meetings (his perspective)

When I finally migrated into the cub master role, I really made a hard push to get the scouts out of their chairs and when talking, I tried hard to talk to the scouts and not to their parents.  I really tried hard to minimize announcements and such...but I still found myself doing some of that, but I was proud that I talked 99% to the scouts..  Still, it was a struggle.  I couldn't get more volunteers energized, and the scouts didn't really care about awards and such.  I also tried hard to push for skits, but got very little support form the den leaders in coming prepared for any of that.  Awards too... they often did not come prepared despite a lot of effort on my part to try to help them with it.

I tried to make a point of having some game or activity at every meeting, especially if i couldn't round up a guest speaker.   I led lots of very loud meetings and I know the scouts had fun with casual rain gutter regattas, stomp rockets, water rockets, balloon games and relays, etc...  I arranged a few guest speakers, and pretty much all of them flopped....but the activities were fun and there were lots of loud meetings.

In hind site though.... My son looks back and generally says he enjoyed the den meetings but hated the pack meetings.  He says it was because they would show up and generally would have some sort of fun activity organized and didn't have to do anything.

I don't know, I still feel like I was close to a solution in terms of having fun pack meetings.... minimal announcements and such, talking to the scouts and not to the parents, lots of out of the chair stuff....But somehow I missed the mark.

Yes, Shug has done up some very nice videos...and very entertaining too!

For me.... I signed up for a hammock class at U of Scouting one year, hoping to get a chance to try out a few different types.  I've been curious about hammock camping for a long time, but have been uncertain and unwilling to spend $$$$ not knowing, since I'm a side sleeper.  I was disappointed that the course turned out to be pretty much sit in a classroom and listen to a guy that had hammock camped talk.  As best I could tell he only had real experience in his Eno

He did have an example set up in the classroom with two homemade bipods as stands he could use when there were no trees.... (car camping of course)  but it wasn't staked out in the classroom so it wouldn't support weight.

different kinds of suspension, with hands-on practice

different kinds of fly set-ups

and if possible a bunch of different brands and sizes of hammocks set up to try.

so with good hang angles and some with bad...or a way to adjust so the students could learn the difference, experience calf-ridge, etc....

I don't know if his channel is public again or not, but on youtube KennethKramm has done some nice works on inexpensive homemade hammocks and nets, and some interesting hangs too....and he did a really nice vid on history of hammocks.  he blocked his channel a while back because of some trolls and rude comments.... so I don't know if you can find that one as a resource or not.