Twocubdad

Fair enough, Bob. Thank you.

Strange thing, Acco, is that I'm agreeing with Bob, too. Bob, I notice that you replied to my post pretty quickly. Maybe if you take a little more time to read and understand what others are saying you won't be so quick to post these snide, condescending replies. I feel sure you don't intend to come off as rudely as you do.

But, Bob, if you told your kids that on their actual birthday they would only get a small cake and a card so that come June you could all go to Disney World (or Philmont as the case may be) for their big birthday celebration, I think most would go for it. And I said that I understood Eagle's position, not that I agreed with him. While immediate recognition is important, recognize that many units have elaborate advancement ceremonies that are an important and memorable part of the packs' traditions. Performing these big "production numbers" on a monthly basis would diminish their value (and not to mention be a lot of work of the leaders). There is a line at which you can balance the needs of the individual and the unit. Our AoL ceremony is as close to that line as I'm willing to walk. If a Scout somehow earned his AoL considerably earlier than the January-February time frame, I would make some arrangement for him to be recognized at the time he earned it. The Boy Scout model is a good example. Boys are recognized immediately for their advancement, again a week later when they receive their badge and yet again weeks or maybe months later at a formal Court of Honor.

I have two problems with this program that no one has touched upon. I've haven't (and probably won't) take the time to read the entire report, but from what I've read here it seems to me that the Scouters involved crossed the line of honesty in accepting this grant. They're using the grant money to make presentations to boys about joining Scouts. The presentations are being made to everyone without regard to race, creed, color, national origin or sex. If you are gay or athiest you can't actually join, but (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) because since the grant only covers recruitment, not actual Scouting, it isn't covered by the grant. I'm I the only one who thinks this is a little smarmy? Agree or disagree with the membership policies, but at least have the guts (trustworthy and brave anyone?) to live with the consequence of those policies. Scouts should be more concerned with maintaining their integrity rather that just bellying up to the federal trough with the rest of the hogs. And secondly, with all the conservatives out there no on is botherd by the feds dolling out this money in the first place? Please don't tell me everyone is doing it and that if the scouts don't take it someone else will. (Please re-read the above line regarding hogs.)

I think I understand what EagleInKY is saying. It's not that the boys are treated differently depending on when they earn the award, it's that the pack performs one elaborate ceremony at the end of the year. The boy whose parents complained received the award shortly after he earned it, and I will assume was welcome to participate in the larger ceremony later. Our pack awards Arrow of Lights somewhat that way. We do a big, fancy AoL ceremony during crossover in February. Admittedly, because of the six-month requirement for AoL, the earliest a Scout could earn his AoL is in January. So if it came up, a boy would only be delayed a month in receiving the award. In the past three years, I can't recall that it's been an issue. I will say that we award Tiger, Wolf and Bear awards as soon as they are earned, usually from December through the end of the year.

Here's an interesting twist: In the new edition of the Webelos book one of the requirements for the Webelos Badge is to "Be an active member of your Webelos den for three months." It further defines "active" as "having good attendance, paying your den dues and working on den projects." While "good" isn't much of a qualifier, this is the first time I've seen a requirement give further explaination of what active means. We are still left to guess what good means, but I'd say it is certainly above 50%. Neither does it suggest that good attendence is a matter of expectations or negotiation. I'll agree with FOG on that point. Just because a Scout tells me in advance baseball practice conflicts with Scout meetings and therefore he will be at Scouts only when it is raining, doesn't make his limited attendance acceptable. In that case the Scout's three months of activity begins once the ball season is over.

I see no reason not to guide boys toward certain badges. At its most basic level isn't that the purpose of having required badges? My son's troop encourages all new Scouts to take First Aid and Swimming at their first summer camp. The thinking is that in addition to earning two Eagle-required bagdes, that cover two big sections of the First and Second Class requirement. Sounds logical to me. I will add, however that the logic is based on our council camp having a rather lousey First-Year-First-Class program. But since the troop is going out of council this year, that thinking may not hold up.

Back to the swimming thing: Isn't one of the primary purposes of the merit badges for the Scouts to learn about a particular area or interest? What's wrong with a non-swimmer or beginner wanting to take Swimming MB in order to learn to swim. There should be more to a merit badge than simply demonstrating that you can already meet the requirements. That philosophy is certainly applied to the career/hobby exploration MBs, why not one like swimming? Besides that, don't Scouts teach kids how to swim anymore? Can you not learn something unrelated to an acheivement?

Sounds like this guy should get along well with you Field Director. Maybe you should let him handle the problem. The fee for a parent/son weekend had got to be, what, 30-40 bucks? I'd be tempted to tell the guy that since he felt so strongly about the matter that I would chip in half the amount if he would pay the other half. Or better yet, that we could start a fund for such camperships and I would match any amount he contributed.

I'm glad things are working out well for you, Laurie. But it seems to me -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- but the key factor in the turnaround seems to be when your CO found an experienced Scouter to serve as COR. The guy had the experience and understanding of the program to realize that you are running a sound program and to leave you alone. He correctly took it as his job to run interferrence for the unit between the CO and the council. The complaints expressed in a number of other threads is that many CORs don't understand the program and aren't functioning in their position as they should. There seems to be many chartered organizations out there who don't understand that they own and are responsible for their unit. They believe that all they are responsible for is providing a meeting space. How many of them think in terms of "the Scout troop that meets here?" At best, that leads to a situation of benign neglect or at worst the meddling we've heard about in other threads in otherwise generally healthy units. Another think that I don't see being mentioned in any of these problem scenarios is the annual meeting between the institutional head and the DE which is supposed to be required for Quality District status. How many COs are civic groups or PTAs where the president changes annually? Or worse yet how many have been around awhile and simply never really understood their role? An annual QC check with the IH could go a long way toward solving these problems and moving the CO's along the learning curve.

Not only is it all right, but is you responsibility to do so.

I've been told by our Field Director that the technical language is "promotable" to the first grade, which generally occurs sometime around mid-May. (I wouldn't tell any of the boys that, no one will go to school the last three weeks.) When I was district roundup chairman awhile back, we toyed around with the idea of a district-wide Tiger Roundup in late-May. Two main problems: 1) day camp doesn't include a program for new Tigers and with less than a month from the Tiger roundup to the start of day camp, it would be pretty tough to add. 2) most packs have a fairly spotty record for summertime programs. The worst thing we could do would be to register a bunch of kids in May and then tell them, see you in September (hey, there's a song in that somewhere.)

More that most things, uniforming is a matter of setting expectations. Our previous Cubmaster is a great guy and good friend, but he had a real thing about Scout pants. Apparently his kid blew the knees out of a brand new pair of pants (more of a problem with the kid than the pants, but that's another story). Whenever talking about uniforms, he would always add that the official pants are cheap and it's okay with him if you don't wear them. Knowing that he would be crossing over during the year, we intentionally cut him out of the uniforming discussion during last fall's round up. I asked another den leader who, like me, is a stickler for uniforms to do the talk. Lo and behold, half-way through the talk the old Cubmaster comes sprinting from the far side of the church yard to add his two cents regarding pants. Hopefully, as most were Tiger families, we'll get a second shot at them when the buy their blues this fall. I also take every opportunity to remind the boys that they need uniform pants. "Now that you are going to be a Webelos...." "Since you'll be crossing over next year...." etc. Unfortunately, the old CM set a low/no expectation, it's an uphill battle to break a bad habit.

On the other hand... A couple months back the troop held a yard sale. There was a box full of kitchen knives that had been donated -- the thin serated blades with cheap handles, Ginzu or whatever. Just having crossed over with #1 son, I asked one of the ASMs if instead of selling the knives, wouldn't we bet better off keeping them for the patrol mess boxes. "Heavens no! We can have fixed-bladed knives, someone will get killed!" But don't we teach kids how to use knives, I asked? "Not knives like that, they're too dangerous." Frankly, I thought it was a pretty stupid attitude. In their daily life a person is much more likely to use a kitchen knife to prepare a meal than a pocket knife to whittle a stick or perform some chore. What do most of you do more often with a knife, carve a kneckerchief slide of make a sandwich? I'm fairly picky about my kitchen knives. I have a commercial-quality set that I keep very sharp. Not only do my sons know how to use the different knives, but they know the difference between a paring knife, a carving knife and a chef's knife (for some reason, this same knowledge has evaded Mrs. Twocubdad.) I see no reason for Scouts not to learn these same skills. I agree it's silly for a four-foot-tall kid to be dragging around a 12-inch Bowie knife that hangs below his knees, but there's no reason he can't use a similarly-sized chef's knife from the mess box to make dinner. By the way, I bought the whole box of knives from the yard sale for $3.00 and donated them to the Cub Scout Pack's camp kitchen.

I belive it was James Carville who said that anyone believes that the best government is local government has never seen the Louisiana State Legislature in session.

BSA policies are supposed to be minimums, right? G2SS says lifeguards must be "capable swimmers" but if our unit decides our lifeguards must be certified, that's just fine. Quality Unit standards require 50% of leaders to be trained, but if our unit requires 100%, that's fine too. We all need to use our judgement to decide if a particular activity is appropriate for our unit -- both for the Scouts and leaders. If an activity is beyond the capability of our Scouts and the leaders, we would be foolish to press ahead with it just because BSA policy says it is okay. If the first aid instructor is in a position to know the latest standard of care, why in the world would you not teach it to the boys? Two caveats, however: there is a difference between a profession who truely knows the latest standard of care and just some old coot who thinks he knows better. You also need to consider what BW said about the abilities of the Scouts involved. Adding a tight dressing to a snake bite to lessen blood flow doesn't sound like a big deal. On the other hand it is easy to envision treatments which would be beyond the capabilities of an 11-year-old regardless of training. But that goes back to the judgement thing. If another Scout is teaching the class, or an old goat who always wants to do things his way, right or wrong, then as a unit leader you need to insist they stick to the book. On the other hand, it the guy teaching first aid is an well-trained first aid instructor who understands the limitations of what lay people can do, then why not give the Scouts the benefit of his/her knowledge?

My understanding is that the beads are awarded one for every four achievements completed, regardless of the catagory. I don't have anything in writing in front of me, but that's the way we've always done it. As long as you are providing the boys the interim recognition, I don't suppose it really makes any difference, as long as you are consistent.

Eamonn's advice is still on target. The Chartered Organization Representative or the head of the CO is the one to solve the problem. It is a good idea to give your Scout professional a heads up as to what is going on as it will likely come across his or her desk at some point. I don't really understand why under these circumstances they would remove someone as Cubmaster but let them become Webelos leader. This guy doesn't sound fit for any leadership role. The current problem should have been fairly predictable.

I've never heard of anything except stoles for academic achievement. You're telling me the captain of the football team gets a stole for that? Sheesh! Sounds like anything goes so why not an Eagle stole. I've never heard of one, but why not? You'd probably have to make it, though. How about a red, white and blue ribbon with silver eagles embrodered on both sides, or even just attach two Eagle Scout patches? Realistically PE is probably on track and you're going to catch flack over it. In the dark ages an asst. principal conducted strip searches just before we crossed the stage. If that's the case, why don't you just wear your uniform under your gown?

Our dues vary from year to year, based on the cost of the advancement materials and the other stuff the boys receive. Tigers are cheap as are Webelos IIs due to only being around 6 months. Webelos Is, with all the activity pins they earn are the most expensive. But the average is about $50 per year. Registration, Boys Life and insurance is nearly half that. Through the year each boy gets a PWD and regatta kit and next year's neckerchief. That's another $12 or $15, leaving us only 10 or 12 bucks for advancement and every thing else. We have a strong popcorn program that pays for all the program costs. Each den leader is budgeted $20 per scout for den materials. At the B&G and spring picnic we pay for the entrees, drinks and incidentals (families only bring side dishes). We pick up the full cost of a summertime pool party (including a meal). We pay all the expenses for pack campouts, usually including food, but will sometimes ask for $3-4 per person if the food cost is getting up there. We don't pay fees for anything like summer camp or district camporees. Bottom line is at $50 for a 12-month program, our pack dues are the best deal going. You're walking away with nearly half that amount in merchandise. And if you come to many outings at all, you'll easily eat the other half. Compare that to our local sports leagues that charge $75 for a 10-12 week season. You do however, get a "uniform" consisting of a t-shirt and cap which cost maybe $15.

I agree with the posters who have said that competition can cut either way, but I think that merits some detail. It's like the saying that, "a rising tide lifts all boats -- except the ones with holes." A Scout leader using competition as a teaching tool needs to make sure all the boats are seaworthy. Example: Tiger Cub gets his first PWD kit. He rounds off the corners, shoots it with a little spray paint and pounds the wheels on. He then shows up for the race and gets totally creamed. But he and his dad vow that next year they will have the best car in the district. The research PWDs on the net, they buy the little performance kit at the hobby shop and they polish those nails like surgical instruments. Of course he wins the race, brings home a huge trophy and has his photo in the paper. All is right with the world. He's tasted the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat. But consider the kid who doesn't have the means or opportunity to improve. Every year he does his best, but it just isn't good enough and he gets pounded. What has he learned? That regardless what he does he isn't going to win, so why bother trying? That "Do Your Best" is baloney? That Scouting isn't much fun? I understand that in the "real world" (I used to hate it when adults used that phrase) competition is competitive. There are real winners and real losers and sometimes the difference means eating or not. Buy too often adults turn kids' competitions into adult competitions. I'm not suggesting that everything be turned into a wimpy don't-keep-score-everybody-gets-a-ribbon PC event. Protecting and building a boy's self confidence (I can't stand the phrase "self esteem") doesn't need to be our number one focus, but it is something to consider. All boys need an equal opportunity to learn the lessons of winning AND losing. Not only do we need to fairly apply the rules of the games, but we need to make sure that the games we pick are fair too. If one week we have the boys run a 100-yard dash, next week long jump, hurdles the week after that, and a mile run the following week, the tall, thin, athletic kid is at a distinct advantage. Scouting provides the perfect opportunity to add competitions relating to first aid or knot tying or other mental activities that balance the competition for all the boys. That's why I really like Raingutter Regattas and am less and less fond of Pinewood Derbies. There's only so much you can do to that boat to make it go faster (save the catamarans and multi-sails). But there is a good bit a boy can learn about how to blow boat to make it sail better. On the other hand, there is a huge difference between PWD cars built by savvy dads -- er, I mean Scouts -- versus the ones build by novices. And once the race starts the cars are literally out of the hands of the boys.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

Beaver, you are correct that the old Webelos requirements required that a boy complete and turn in a Boy Scout application during his Scoutmaster's conference. The book says that the application won't be processed until the boy is ready to join the troop and that the requirement was only intended to encourage the boy to continue with Scouting. I think it was generally accepted (at least around here) that the was no requirement to join a troop. While I don't have a book in front of me to quote, the new requirements clarifies this by plainly saying that joining a troop is not a AoL requirement.

Thumper: The particular rules that govern LDS units flow from the teachings of the LDS church, right? BSA has allowed them (and really all COs) the perogative to apply those teachings to their Scout units. But personally I neither agree with nor particulary understand those rules. That goes a long way toward explaining why I not a member of the LDS church or one of their units. As to the problems caused by moms camping with your unit, were the problems caused by the mere fact of their gender or did the problems relate to their behavior, lack of training, and/or meddling in the program? Could those problems have been solved other than through an outright ban on all females? How do you handle the problem of meddlesome, doting fathers? In SMRon's case, the mom/ASM was an experienced, Wood Badge-trained Scouter. There was no suggestion that she was causing a problem, only that the CC didn't trust that male and female leaders can behave themselves on a campout. Perhaps the solution there is to recruit leaders of higher moral character (I'd start with the committee chairman). If I can't trust you in the woods with my wife, I for dang sure don't trust you with my children.

Except for the unit Proud Eagle mentioned, I don't think anyone is suggesting that all a boy has to do is flash his AoL card and be handed a Scout or certainly not a Tenderfoot badge. The point is that a boy who knows the AoL material has the ability to complete the Scout and Tenderfoot requirements in short order. The requirements for Scout can be covered in a short Scoutmaster conference (which itself is part of the requirements.) With the exception of the 30-day fitness test, a campout and meal, an AoL Scout should be able to similarly complete all the other Tenderfoot requirements. What's important here is that the troop needs to be prepared to receive the new Scouts and get them on the advancement trail ASAP. If the pack has done its job, the new Scouts should be ready and excited to join the troop. I can't think of any bigger wet blanket a troop could drop on a new Scout than to shovel him a bunch of bureaucratic gobbledygook about showing one guy the square knot, describing the Scout badge to someone else and then signing up for a SM conference three weeks from now.

The point I was trying to highlight, E., is that the silliness and abuse of the rules cuts both ways. It sounds to me that the CC has her own personal agenda and used to CO to endorse it. I suppose I am assuming that the CO just rubber stamped the CC's rule and didn't fully consider it. Manufacturing a rule and using it to hammer one of the assistant leaders is no better than one of the assistant's using similarly underhanded tactics to subvert a legitimate rule.