Twocubdad

At the time we do FOS, we have about 70 or 80 active Scouts. Off the top of my head, I don't know how many families that represents, but I do know that about 30 families contributed to FOS this year. Our unit's total contribution this year was about $1000 higher than last and represented about 15% of our district's Family FOS goal. I don't know how we compare to other units locally or nationally, but my impression is that we do our share or better. We also sell over $20k in popcorn, so that's another $6k or so supporting the council. Why do you ask?

Thanks for adding the reference, Bob. I thought that was the case but don't have my leader book handy to verify.

And I agree with you, Bob. I don't begrudge the council their 15% vig. But here, I don't feel like we get our money's worth. Printing and postage comes from our side, and we lick the stamps, too. We track the registration, collect the fees (we make one deposit at the council) and answer the phone calls. But that's okay, because we know about the 15% upfront. Those are the rules we agreed to. But now, with council revenues down, they're looking at day camp (and other programs, I'm sure) to help make up the difference by cutting expenses and leaving more than the required 15% on the table. As you pointed out, Bob, any money we save goes to the council. My question is, and I apologize if I wasn't clear, is this a usual practice in other councils?

Personally, I think meeting ideas from the Bear Book are terrific. They are all age-appropriate and connect with the program's core values. Not all requirements are suitable for den programs but many are. And you don't have to complete every single element of a requirement to make a den meeting of it. The boys can finish it up at home. Of course you don't want to make "checking off the requirements" the focus or seem like a chore, but if the kids are having fun, who care!?! Examples: Law Enforcement (7a&d)-- den outing to police dept. to do fingerprints. The Past is Exciting (8a) -- someone with a Scout patch collection can talk about Scouting when they were a kid (and the patches create a great opportunity to talk about what lies ahead in Boy Scouts.) Ride It Right (14) -- have a den Bike Rodeo. We have a local police officer who does a great job with this. Games & Muscles (15 & 16) -- Every den meeting needs a game. Shavings & Chips (19) -- earning the whitlin' chip is probably the highlight of the year. I've got a great program for teaching knife safety which covers two den meetings. Sawdust (20) -- you can't have too many birdhouses and tool boxes. Tying it up (22) -- knots make a great gathering activity, especially if you have a den chief who can teach them for you. And that doesn't even cover the Electives. My greatest administrative hint for any den leader is to get e-mail addresses for all the parents. Trying to contact 10 families by phone was the bane of my existance as a den leader. The other thing is to make the boys responsible for tracking their own advancement. Either get one of the big wall charts from the scout shop, or do what I did and make an advancement notebook with one page for every boy. Because "extra" Bear requirements can be counted toward arrow points, tracking them is a bit of a chore. Plus, it's a good exercise to make the boys be sure both their handbook and the advancement notebook is up to date.

Oh, and a question for the Man of Steele on a slightly different topic: What percentage of camp and activity fees does your council keep to cover overhead? Is there any thought of increasing it? Does your council provide anything back to the event (other than basic staff and administrative services) in return for their cut? Do the rest of you know what I'm talking about?

One would hope, Mark, that there are enough business-minded people involved in running your camp to realize that the way to improve its finances is by improving its quality. We've got the same problem with our Scout Shop. A neighboring council opened a new shop near us which is managed by the National Supply Division. Whatever you may think about the quality and prices of BSA gear, I can tell you National does a really great job of running it's retail stores. Notably, they have in stock virturally everything in the catalog and they are open Saturdays. Of course our council's shop saw a drop in sales when the new store opened. The response was to have all the DEs lay a guilt trip on anyone who shops at the other store and, secondly, to prohibit units from purchasing advancement materials from anywhere other than the Council service center shop. The biggest thing that accomplished was to tick-off a bunch of volunteers. Wouldn't it have been much better had they responded by redoubling their efforts to make sure the local shop is well stocked and to better serve their customers by opening Saturdays?

Hate the beret. Ditto to Wallace's problems with it. We were required to wear themt at the '73 Jambo, but no one in our unit ever wore it afterwards.

Glad to have you back in communion, Rooster. I agree with you 100 percent. I said in my first post on this subject that I could hardly imagine a "serious" conversation with a Scout which I would keep in perfect confidence, sharing it with neither the parents nor properly equipped professionals. But I still maintain that possibility. You said it well, "I reserve the right to make my own moral decisions...."

Bob, I'm glad we are in such agreement. But I have to ask if you agree with the point I was making, or do you only agree with sentences you quoted, stripped of the context of the rest of my post? While we're all savoring that rhetorical nugget, those of you who feel this is a black and white issue, help me understand how you deal with it on a practical level. How do you decide what merits a phone call home? If you take the position that only a parent can know what information is important, aren't transcripts of all our conversations the logical conclusion? Otherwise aren't you making a judgement as to what you do and don't tell a parent? A kid tells you his socks don't match. Is the boy just daffy or is there something else going on? Maybe he and his mom argue over what he wears and mis-matched socks are his way of defying her. Or maybe he's joining a gang and odd socks are the gang colors? How do you know. Do you take the time for a conference with the boy about his socks? Do you really call his parents over it? By the way, Sctmom, I think that's exactly the way to handle the conversation. But there is a difference between "I can't promise to keep your secret" and "I have an obligation to tell your parents." The first suggests that you may keep the confidence under certain circumstances. If you believe your obligation is to tell the parents, you need to make that clear.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

As usual, Bob, you couch things in the most draconian terms possible. No one has suggested hanging out a shingle saying "You can tell me anything and I won't tell your parents." Just the opposite, in fact. I think everyone agrees that keeping such a confidence would be a fairly rare and serious decision. Why does listening to a boy necessarily mean you are interferring with parental descretion? Can you not lend someone an ear without passing judgement or trying to influence their actions? If it's simply an out of bounds topic (and not a matter real danger), why not just reflect the problem back to the boy? "Bobby, this really isn't a Scoutmaster kind-of thing. Even though you don't want to, I really think you need to discuss this with your folks, or maybe you guidance counselor or minister." How does that interfere with the parents' authority? Where's the requirement that we report everything to the parents? Granted, Eagledad makes a valid point. You never know what may come back to bite you. Fortunately in his situation, he made the right call. There could also be a situation where involving yourself by going to the parents could make the situation worse. Omnipotence isn't a job requirement here, just good judgement

I realize hypotheticals are the meat and potatoes of this board, but I think this topic defies being defined in terms of fictional situations. Sitting here I cannot think of a situation in which I would not ultimately either inform the parents or involve professionals. Certaily, the best avenue is to convince the boy to talk to his parents on his own. Failing that, I would almost certainly have the conversation with the parents myself, with or without the Scout. If I felt the circumstance required keeping the information from the parents, with equal certainty I would involve other professionals. All that said, I do leave open the possibility there may be a rare instance where the best interest of the boy is to keep the confidence. I know of nothing which requires me to hang up my judgement or humanity when I put on my Scout uniform. If faced with a drastic situation where protecting a child required that keep his confidence and face the sanctions, I hope I would have the judgement and courage to do the right thing. More to the point, I would do my best to avoid that kind of delima in the first place. Fourunately, those situations are more "Movie of the Week" plots than reality. We have a better chance of winning Powerball than being faced with something like that.

I've got a lemon squeezer but find myself wearing it less and less. Both my uniform shirts have all five of the knots to which I'm entitled, a jambo patch, OA flap and any one of a number of activity patches I rotate through, depending on the occasion. I like to wear my Philmont arrowhead for special occasions. I also wear a set of four service stars representing the years in different levels of the program. Oh, and a palm on my Eagle knot. I suppose that's the full monty -- at least it's everything I'm entitled to wear. I like wearing all the fruit salad because it frequently becomes a topic of conversation with the boys and gives me the opportunity to talk about different parts of the program. Working with Cubs, many of them have never heard of Philmont or the OA, so it becomes a good marketing tool to sell them on aspects of the program they can look forward to. Plus, I think it just looks snazzy. I think it's usually just other adults who sometimes look down on an overdecorated uniform, but I really don't worry about it. On the other hand we have an ADC in the district who is one knot short of the maximum 15 and I'll have to admit that strikes me as a little over the top. If I were going to pick and choose what I wore, I'd definitely wear the stuff more closely related to the boys -- Eagle, AOL, religious emblem, training knots related to their program, etc.

Bob I think you and I are in violent agreement on the core issue that we should evaluate boys on their own level, at least as it related to activity in the troop, leadership and scout spirit. We seem to just be arguing around the edges on the other issues, so I'll leave it lay.

Mark, I really do understand your point. What would you do with a boy -- regardless of age -- who say he has no income? But in my humble opinion, you're essentially adding a requirement to the merit badge which says a boy has to have a certain level of income. I think there are a couple of practical solutions, though. First, you could counsel the boy to sit down with his parents and work out a salary or allowance for the chores he's doing at home. I think most parents would think this reasonable, but you're still not going to get $50 or $100 a week like a 16-year-old with a parttime job. The other approach would be to have the boy make his budget based on what he THINKS his income will be. Maybe instead of $10 per week, he only ends up with $5. Isn't making that adjustment to his budget part of the purpose of the requirement? By the way, what do you consider an adequate income to complete the requirement? Sure, a 17-year-old making a couple hundred bucks a week at a real job is going to learn much more than he would have as a 12-year-old with a $10 allowance. He'll learn more yet when he's 25 making $30k a year. But my larger point is that we need to work with the boy in front of us. Sure, a good Scoutmaster will steer a boy toward merit badges and activites which are appropriate for him. But that's not always possible. Regarding the idea that the Scoutmaster conference or BOR needs to be the stop-gap for boys who may or may not have completed certain requirements. While that may be true in the extremes, one point I don't think has been brought out in the discussion is the Scoutmaster(s!) responsibility for quality control of the advancement process throughout the year. The time and place to address this problem is counselling the older scouts to make sure they are adequately teaching and testing the requirements. PS to Bob: Is it really a "gross generalizaion" to say there is a difference in leadership, maturitity and emotional development between 12- and 17-year olds? Ture, it's a generalization, but I'd say it a fairly accurate one.

I don't want to disagree with the Man of Steele, but I'd double-check the exemption from day camp standards based on the short duration of your camp. I'm looking at two, three-inch binders of stuff from camp school and don't see anything about an exemption. Talk to your DE or SE. If you get the green light from them, at least you've covered you assets, so to speak. My I speak frankly, Joni? Honey, you need help. I'm no doctor, but it's pretty easy to figure that July isn't going to be a good time for you to be running a day camp. Cub Scout Day Camp is a DISTRICT function and needs to be supported by the DISTRICT. I'd be at roundtable and district committee meetings standing on my head, demanding help. If the district isn't willing to support you, then the district doesn't need a day camp. The standard is to have one adult volunteer for every five boys. My camp (excuse me, the camp at which I serve) is more like 1:2 or 1:3, which is more realistic when you include both den leaders and camp staff. Unless you're only expecting 10-15 boys, you need a whole bunch more folks to help. You do have a little wiggle room with the issue of registered leaders. The standard is that "full-time" camp staff must be registered. Of course with a two-day camp, almost everyone will be full-time. Our camp is held over two sessions, so we count full time as anyone working both sessions. As DS points out, you can register someone as a district volunteer if they aren't affiliated with a specific unit. I can tell you that you do need to use trained range officers for archery and BBs. I'm no expert in BSA shooting sport policy, but I believe law enforcement officers qualify as a BB instructor without the BSA training. I would certainly think active-duty military would count too. We've always neededd BSA-qualified people to run the archery range. But again, get in the back pocket of your DE, district chairman or activity chairman. Not only are they the ones who can give you the local answer to all these questions, but they need to be helping you out, too.

It's probably unfair to debate training issues using the worst course in the BSA arsenal -- Youth Protection -- as an example. In the case of YP training I don't see a huge loss if a Scouter is given the YP tape and told to report back when they've viewed it. I assume that whether or not they actually watch the tape isn't an issue, a Scout being trustworthy and all. Frankly, Steeleman, I'll probably shoot myself well before watching Cordelia et. al. 50 times. But in the 6-8 times I have seen it, I have yet to see a meaningful discussion take place in the three minutes allotted in the video. While I recognize that an uncontrolled, open-ended discussion can turn an 80-minute session into a two-and-a-half hour slugfest, the "good" discussion sessions I've seen all took place with the VCR off and answered questions not covered or left unclear by the video. Unfortunately, there are a lot of them. But as I said, YP, as currently presented, is probably a poor example. That topic does lend itself to self-study as evidenced by the online version, which I think is vastly superior to the video. Generally, though, I'm not suggesting that all training become self-study -- just the opposite. My questions to Bob were largely rhetorical. I think live trainers (not just presenters) are very important to the overall training experience. (And with the exception of New Leaders' Essentials, I disagree that the courses are now primarily video and PowerPoint presentations.) But Bob, you said it best when you wrote that "a live presenter can be more responsive to the needs of the trainees." I simply think that responsiveness should be one of the more important attributes of a good trainer. I believe this whole argument has become one of semantics; that is, what does it mean to "stick to the syllabus?" I think a good trainer should be able to adapt the course to his audience and still stick to the syllabus. It is not a black and white issue. The syllabus is, after all, an outline, not a script. Adapting doesn't mean arbitrarily adding or deleting material. It doesn't mean inserting your personal opinion. (And there is a difference between personal opinion and personal experience or observation. "Monthly themes in 'Program Helps' are stupid and we never use them" is personal opinion. "Although some Packs don't use the monthly themes, there is still a lot of good resource info in 'Program Helps,'" is an accurate, valid observation.) Look at it this way: a typical course syllabus contains maybe 10 subject headings. As written, they all carry equal weight. Obviously, common sense and experience tells me that some things like YP and health and safety should always be emphasized. But what's wrong with a trainer placing more or less emphasis on a given subject, depending on the needs of the class? Say you're teaching Cubmaster position specific. Your class consists of five impeccably uniformed Scouters. Through the short introductions and the number of training knots visible to you, you realize that any one of these folks are just as qualified to teach the class as you are. Do you still spend 10 minutes playing the uniform game? Or do you ask a few quick questions about uniforming and move on. Perhaps you move up a level take that time and talk about conducting a pack uniform inspection. Or setting up a uniform closet for the pack. Or maybe you just move on and use that time for a topic of more interest to the class. And, no, I don't use the time to carp about how cheap the pants are. (And because I'm sure you will point this out, Bob, if someone in the course is a complete rookie, I would stick to the original outline covering the basics, even if the others in the class know the material.) Have I followed the absolute letter of the syllabus? No. Did I add things not in the book? Yes. Did my student benefit from it? I sure think so.

Bob, if ability to communicate clearly and adherance to the syllabus are the two key traits of a trainer, why doesn't National present most training via video tape? Videos could use professional presenters and tightly control content. The few local items you mentioned could be easily covered in handouts, the way local reporting information is handled during Youth Protection. What is the purpose of having live presenters?

Bob, you missed the point of my admittedly silly hypothetical. The Scout had "improved" from having been arrested to only two detentions at school. I can't believe you really believe not having been arrested lately is measurable evidence of having lived by the Scout Oath and Law. But let's forget the hypotheticals. My point is this: if it is appropriate to judge a Scout's attendance relative to his other activities and his self-defined goals, why isn't it appropriate to judge Scout spirit and leadership by the same criteria? A few weeks ago in another thread regarding young Eagles, the conversation was hot and heavy that 12 & 13 year olds don't have the maturity and leadership skills to meet the standards of an Eagle Scout (I'm heavily paraphrasing the thread). Specifically, someone said they would have difficulty signing off on the Personal Finance budgeting requirements for a 12-year-old who only had a few dollars allowance coming in and out. My point then was that we should judge a boy on his own merits, not some abstract standard which is not in the requirements. Certainly a 12-year-old doesn't have the leadership, maturity, or emotional faculties of a 17-year-old. But like "active in your troop or patrol," living in Scout Oath and Promise and serving your troop are requirements which are relative to the Scout's ability. (By the way Bob, I'm trying to agree with you.)

Actually, I cited two requirements, one of which I included specifically because it does not include a measureable standard.

Since Ed has come clean on his role as Devil's Advocate, let me pick up the charge.... What I'm hearing as the concensus here is that "active in your patrol or troop" is relative to the attendance goals the boy sets for himself and the legitimacy of his reasons for not attending Scout functions. Does this relativity apply to other requirements? Maybe I can't swim 100 yards, but relative to my swimming ability and the goals I set for myself, is 75 yards okay? I've been in detention at school twice this semester, but relative to my prior arrests, I'm living by the Scout Oath and Promise? How can you justify the flexibility with one requirement but not the others? Just stokin' the fire.....

The CSA National flag or the Confederate battle flag? (Sorry, wrong bulletin board.) Actually, quite a few councils used the Confederat battle flag. East Carolina Council's early CSPs were basically Confederate battle flags with the council name superimposed. Lee, Jackson and (I think) one or two Mississippi councils used CSA flags in their patches. There are collectors who specialize in Confederate-themed Scout patches. To my knowledge, all these designs have now been retired.

A note of historical accuracy: Lee graduated second in his class from West Point (apologies if your comment was tounge-in-cheek). Grant, by the way graduated in the bottom third of his class. Jefferson Davis died and was originally buried in New Orleans, later removed to Richmond. He was captured in Georgia within weeks of Appomattox and held in a federal military prison for two years. He was released on bail (Horace "Go west, young man" Greely posted much of the bond), and spent several years traveling abroad (including a year-and-a-half living in Canada). If you want to say he was exiled, it was certainly self-imposed. Eventually the charges of treason against him were dropped, largely for political reasons.

I would say it was inevitable. Eventually, all of American history and culture will be reduced to the Disney version.

Is this a brand-new camp or are you taking over from someone else? Developing a whole new program is a much different question than taking over an existing one. Technically, Day Camp Program Director is a position which requires National Camp School certification. Camp school teaches you how to go about setting up a camp program. The "final exam" is to develop a plan for a hypothetical day camp including programs, staffing, health and safety, facilities, administration and finance. Unfortunately, I think most of the Camp Schools are over for this year. It's very difficult to try and tell you what kind of programs to offer at your camp. What you can do depends greatly on the facilities, staff and budget you have. I can tell you that our camp runs on a "round robin" format with the boys organized into dens which rotate through different stations. Our stations include crafts, games, nature trail, fishing, BB range, archery, canoeing and sports. BBs, archery and canoeing are the most difficult to pull off since they require specially trained staff, facilities and equipment. If you can provide more information on what resources you have, I'll be glad to help with some suggestions. But you really need to be working closely with the camp director and your DE. BSA requirements for running a day camp are very detailed. Hopefully the camp director is trained and experienced in running the camp and can help you out.

You may be confusing bylaws with procedures. Maybe what you need is a policy manual. Yes, there needs to be a standard method to handle pack expenses, checking out pack-owned equipment, etc. We are constantly tweaking how we handle advancement reports, popcorn sales and things like that. There needs to be some minimum expectations of accountability, but as CC I expect the people in charge of those areas to run them as they see fit. To my mind, a set of bylaws for an organization covers big-picture, constitutional issues like purpose, organizational structure, who can vote, who can be a member of the committee, etc. All that's covered in the Cub Scout Leader Book, including the job descriptions you seem to be looking for. You can develop a set of bylaws if you like, but as Bob White noted above, I think the time could be better spent. Another problem with written bylaws the that someone is always going to want to play the "campfire lawyer" and challenge everything based on what the bylaws do or don't say. Are your bylaws really going to get to the level of detail of setting standards for issues like the one with the service project? Something like that you just have to rely on the integrity of the adult running it. Advancement is the same way. Some parents will sign off on anything, but in Cubs, you have to accept it. Are you going to try and cover the whole advancement program in your bylaws? The way a well-functioning pack committee runs is a subtle thing. It's not a democratic legislative body, but a group of people with individual responsibilities assigned to help the Pack function. They meet as a committee only to coordinate and report on their individual activities. Ultimately all the "power" in a units rests with the Committee Chairman and the Chartered Organization Rep who appointed him or her. People don't like the sound of that because they think everyone should have a vote on everything. But a committee runs like a corporation with the CO being the shareholders and the chairman being the CEO. Everyone else works for him or her. With that said, in two years as a committee chairman, I can't recall doing anything which wasn't generally supported by the rest of the committee. If a CC is dictating iron-fisted decisions which no one in the unit supports, he's doing a lousy job and needs to be replaced. It sounds to me as though most of your unit's problems stemmed from having a turkey of a committee chair, not from a problems in how the committee is organized. A good CC runs the unit through concensus building and teamwork. If you're doing that right, bylaws, motions and ballots are unnecessary.