Twocubdad

I've had the conversation with a number of boys over the years that the Scouting program is comprised of a number of things. There's just some stuff we do as Scouts. There is more to it that the sum of the activies How we do things is as important as what we do. Working together in patrols is one of them. Maybe you should help these families reexamine their interest in the program.

They were both snarky, but didn't stop walking, so I figure they just wanted to get their dig in, feel good about their opinion, and move on with life. In other words, both cowards. As I said before, this doesn't have anything to do with philosophy, politics or orientation. Making a comment like that to an 11y.o. and walking away is just being an ass, an a coward. Frankly, I would prefer someone who would engage the scout in a thoughtful conversation on the topic, if they could do it appropriately. Not that I would necessarily welcome or encourage it, but a real conversation would be better that a cheap shot.

I've had a couple different versions of this problem. Underlying it all is selfishness -- boys who are simply self-centered, don't really care about anyone else and are in the program only for their own benefit. I've gone the route of allowing the boys to form their own patrol. When the Scouts' are just good friends and want to hang together with their friends, but otherwise are engaged, active in troop leadership and working with the other Scouts, it works. Otherwise you put a bunch of selfish, self-centered kids together in a patrol and you wind up with a selfish, self-centered parol. Unfortunately, I don't have too many suggestions for the latter. Maybe putting them in one patrol becomes part of rewards/consequences plan. Sit down with the Scouts AND PARENTS and tell them you will let them form their own patrol, but they have to meet certain criteria. Give them specific, measurable goals for uniforming, attendance, troop leadership, PLC attendance, etc. Use lots of verbs. Then stick to it. The alternative is they are put in separate patrols and anytime they're not where they are supposed to be or otherwise causing problems, they'll be sent home.

I'm keying in on the part of the OP which says the leaders intentionally withheld information from the parents. Correct me if I'm wrong, Beav, but that sounds like malice aforethought, to borrow a phrase from the area of law I have studied. Seems like it would get you in a heap more trouble. Yeah, stuff happens. Plans change. I think reasonableness is the key. Climbing is climbing. In the construction industry the joke is you'd rather fall 60 feet than 6. From 60 feet it's over quick. From 6 feet you have someone else feeding you and wiping your butt the rest of your life. We don't do separate permission slips. Our opinion, backed up by real legal advice, is the risk is in participating in "Scouting." There are all sorts of risky things we do as Scouts, the worst being driving to a campout. We tell parents it is there responsibility to understand the program and the risks associated with it. We're not in any better position to assess those risks they they are -- and I can make a strong point that because the parent knows their son's abilities better that we do, the parent is in a better position. The program is wide open to parent observation for a reason. So if we say we're going "climbing" we expect the parent to educate themselves as to what BSA climbing entails, including going on the trip if they feel it necessary. On the other hand, I don't think if you go from a day hike to climbing or shooting sports,

As long as everyone returned safe, sound and happy, I doubt we would hear anything. But if something goes wrong, at minimum I can't help but think intentionally deceiving parents about risk would look good to a jury and, depending on local statutes, may open you up to stuff like punitive damages. Actual, licensed lawyers may have different thoughts.

We gotta get together for a drink sometime!

Teach your son to respond in his sweetest, most cherubic voice, "Thanks anyway, %@#& head" Or as we say here in the south, "Do Tell!" Why do we say "do tell"? Because it's much more polite than "@$&% You!" Seriously, all you do is cheerfully say "okay!" or "Thank You!" and keep going. Another lesson for your Scout is there are people of all orientations and political views with bad manners.

Apologies, Tom. Since I -- and I assume most regulars here -- don't know you or your experience level that well, we tend to approach issues starting from ground zero. I would be concerned about the Scout meeting with the IH, too. Do you think the mom is capable of dealing with the guy either? Sounds like time to start talking Plan B's. Both for the Scout and the Troop. I would get my district advancement chair or the Eagle project committee involved as appropriate. If you involve them early and this project goes down in the trees, they'll be in a better position to help make a quick decision a substitute project or to help the Scout file for an extension, if necessary. I also think it would be smart to start making mental notes on new chartered organizations. Maybe the current IH comes and goes before too much damage is done. Maybe some of the other suggestions made in the other thread pay off. Maybe the more reasonable members of the CO help you out. But maybe not. I would at least be looking around and would give my DE a heads up on the issues your having. Speaking of which, has your DE had his REQUIRED meeting with the IH? Maybe good for a non-unit person to take the guy to lunch. That may put him in a little better "listen and learn" state of mind.

I think the difference was that day camp was run by an ad hoc group of unit volunteers who came together for a few months to run a program which they could not do alone. I understand that's how some would describe the district committee generally, but to me the key difference is the ad hoc nature of the day camp staff. For the majority of our camp staff their commitment was a day of training plus the five days of camp. The middle-manager level added a few planning meetings, a day or two of setup to that. Only the senior staff -- maybe 6 or 8 people were involved longer than that. But almost all went back to their units in July and didn't worry about camp again until the early spring. I still think my Congressional analogy is a good one. And I hear what you're saying about needing some new blood on the committee. But instead of doing a "ya'll come" and/or trying to guilt the CORs into it, go out and find folks who are proficient and have a desire to fill a specific need. Maybe you find a DL who is fluent in Spanish, or a Cub Master who really has an enthusiasm and talent for recruiting boys to help with membership. I'm not saying you should never recruit from units -- the good guys I described above were very good unit volunteers. But my concern with your COR idea is it just feeds the Good Ol' Boy beast by bringing in committee meeting attendees not Scouters.

Agreed. I think you need to read Thomas's other thread on the overall meeting with the IH first. I did not. Sounds like the IH is looking for someone to bully and blame his problems on. I'd be hesitant about sending a Scout into a solo meeting with this guy.

Someone should have taken the bullet and burned the files. Didn't anyone pay attention during Watergate? I really wonder what's the point? Are there people who should be prosecuted? If so, let's bring on the indictments. Is there any light here or just smoke? Are there CURRENT policies and procedures which need to be changed? If so, let's hear them. I have to say the fatigue factor is really starting to set in with me on all these political issues.

SP -- I don't want you to take this personally because I know of the work you are doing on membership recruitment and that your service in your pack came as a result of being involved in the district level and trying to jump in a save a struggling unit. So I understand you are one of the good guys and have a sincere interest in delivering the program to boys at the unit level. And neither do I mean this as an indictment of district volunteers in general. I was our district's CSDC director for five year, so I've done my time. But I think your proposal is the first step in the wrong direction. Underlying it is an assumption that the unit leaders need to support the district. That's exactly backwards. Districts should exist to support the units. If every unit were well staffed and had a full, well-rounded program, there would be no need for districts at all. Districts are there to provide program support for those units who maybe don't have the resouces to plan big time campouts or who don't have the volunteers with the expertise or training in areas such as climbing, shooting sports or aquatics. The problem I have with your proposal is it is pulling volunteers away from the unit programs. I don't have one handy, but is attending district committee meetings even in the COR's job description? If a COR has an extra meeting night a month he/she should be attending the committee meetings of their units. If they still have spare time, they should drop in on troop and pack meetings and even den meetings, to see how their unit is functioning and get to know the parents and leaders. And this is the part I really don't want you to take personally because it's purely part of my bias based on my experience moving up through and eventually back down and out of district operations: I think too many people serve at the district and council levels for the wrong reasons. They look at the typical org chart and naturally assume that being on the district committee is a "promotion", that they are somehow working at a higher level and that district committee is a stepping stone to a council appointment -- all of which will look great on their "Scouting resume" and eventually on their Silver Beaver citation. Others see it as a way of extending their influence and building their empires. Their Scouting Genius is just too much for one troop; their brilliance needs to be shared with the world, whether the world wants it or not. I know some really great folks on our district committee, too. Our advancement guy is terrific, a really well-grounded Scouter who understands the responsibility to both the program and individuals. Our program chairman is a good friend and has tried to steer the district programming toward supporting all units, but just can't do it with the career and empire builders pushing their own agendas. I think he has stepped down. Interestingly, both of these guys remained Scoutmasters during their committee tenure with their primary focus at serving their units. The district committee should be like service in Congress: get elected, serve the folks from your district, keep your day job, and after a few years go back home to your usual pursuits. But instead we get career politicians .... well, you all know. SP, my very sincere advice is to stick with what you are doing. Your work with Hispanic recruitment is great. Seems like your service to the pack is winding down, so maybe you want to take a break from that but pick up another pack to help out somewhere down the road. But I've been down the committee road and don't recommend it.

When I took over as pack CC (seem like it must have been in the Truman administration by now) all this was a disaster. We collected program dues in September and then recharter fees in January for in advance of a February recharter date. Our treasurer hated me and the parents thought we were nickel-and-diming them. We changed it to collect dues once -- in September -- and banked the recharter fee until it was due in Feb. A side benefit was that we solved a problem of what to do with the Web2s. Since they had already paid the pack back in September, we rechartered them in Feb, knowing they would be crossing over later that month. But the troop then counted them as transfers, and paid the $1 fee so it all worked out. As to the inequity between years, we also did a cost analysis by year. We always charged for campouts and such ala carte, so the big variable was bling. We found that Tigers and Webelos2s cost us less than Wolves, Bears and Webelos1 and varied the dues accordingly. I believe our dues were $45 or $50 for Tigers and Webelos2s and $65 for the rest.

Our council did one of these a while back. The guys did a nice job. My impression, however, was it was a financial turkey. Maybe they covered all their costs on it, but I know there were PILES of them around the scout shop for several years. Seems like they were down to like five bucks each. SPECIAL! Council history book FREE with any purchase! Take one! PLEASE! Seriously, no one really gives a crap about the history. They want to see their picture in the book. If you want people to buy the books, give units the opportunity to submit a history of their unit. Sell the unit hisory pages like ad.

First, you guys should have politely told the IH he really needed to have had that conversation with the Scout. I know often non-Scouters don't understand the importance we place on youth leadership and think we're just being PIAs, but when it got down to substantive negotiations regarding the project, you needed to involve the Scout. That said, had the Scout come to me having had the conversation with the IH, or had he asked for my input after I sat quietly through the meeting, my advice would depend on where he is in the process. If the proposal has been signed by the CO and approved by the council, he needs to respectfully remind the IH they already have in signed "contract." (Me, I'd make a joke about our usual change order fee.) Ultimately, the Scout needs to understand he needs to do what the property owner wants. Having built a number of shelters like this (not to mention being a contractor for 20 years) I don't see the 4' addition as a big deal. You're probably close with the $250 bump in materials but there's not going to be a big differnce in labor -- two mors trusses to set, three sheets of OSB and a half square of roofing. I think a strong negotiating position for the Scout would be to make the addition but to ask the IH if they would contribute the $250. With the Scout already making a $1000 contribution to the CO, I don't think that's an unreasonable request. Failing that, I think it reasonable for all the hammer-handy dads to maybe kick in a little extra green when the Scout is doing his fundraising. But seriously, don't use this as an excuse to jump in and "rescue" the young man. If he asks you advice and help, give it. Coach him on how to negotiate with the IH. Help him understand the importance of the troop's relationship with the CO and help him to see the big picture. Run through a few possible scenarios the coversation may take. You know -- do that Scoutmaster stuff. But then let him handle it.

Yeah, Beav, that is, I think, one of BSA's greatest short comings. When they need money or folks for a work day, they're OUR camps right up until the day the sale is announced. Just like we are "stakeholders" during FOS season but "customers" when someone wants to make substantive program decisions. We're "members" when they need someone for some thankless district job but just part of the red-jacketed rabble when there's an opening on the executive board. Generally though, I see this from UCEagle's perspective. I don't know much about the camps in other parts of the country, but my understanding is in some areas there are just too many camps. Seems there was a report a year or two ago from the NE Region related to this which came with a long string of recommendations for minimum camp sizes, endowments, maintenance budgets, etc. Around here, most councils seem to have one big summer camp, often outside the council, and another, smaller camp which serves the Cubbies, training, and other functions where tacking a two-hour drive to the event would be a problem. That seems to work well. Through the council's history I think we've had two other camps, both which were sold to buy the two current camps. While I love the history and tradition of old camps, I can only imagine the financial burden if we still had the two old camps. Not to mention that without the capital from their sale, it's unlikely we would have the to great camps we do. It's kinda like family homes. You really hate to sell the little intown bungalow where you lived as a young couple, but the extra space, big back and better schools is what your family needs. Seems like a lot of councils are on the back end of that curve -- empty nesters who need to downsize, cut costs and eliminate maintenance. From working at National Camp School, I know a lot of folks on the regional camping committee. When you can cut them away from the heard, they'll tell you there are some councils which don't have any business running camps. The don't have the program staff or maintenance budgets. Consequently, they'll run two weeks of camp at 40% capacity and do a half-assed job of that. I'll grant you the solution there should be to kick some butts, not sell the camps, but after years and years of kicking, it may be time for a new strategy. And I'm not discounting the fact that some councils have been mismanaged and run into the ground financially and the sale of property is the quick or easy way out of the hole. (See paragraph 1, above.)

Flew out of and back to Charlotte over Labor Day (returning the same day the Democratic National Cluster was coming to town! Airport motto for the week: "Come early, come naked!"). And yeah, the guy in front of me had to take off his web/plastic belt. Security in Charlotte leaving on Friday was actually a breeze. They were ramped up for the circus and the place was empty when we went through. I went through the nudie scanner and it buzzed so I had to step out while they recalibrated. They had me go through older scanner instead of waiting. While I was gathering my stuff on the other side, the TSA guy said I was lucky the nudie scanner blinked. He said I had change in my pocket and they would have normally pulled me off for the full monty. I had emptied my pockets and I knew I didn't have any change. Yeah, you do, I heard it, the guy said. I stuck my hand back in the pocket and, sure nuff, the pocket was folded under and there were a few coins in there. I pulled them out, held them in my hand and asked the guy, "How much?" He just grinned. He was nice enough, but my question is if they knew I had change in my pocket (and probably COULD have told me how much) then why was I just before getting groped?

Cross-arguing hypotheticals again. In the little assumed world on my side of the computer screen, those responses to the Scout were just the ones in which I try to redirect him from his 5 month First Class obsession. In my assumed world, there were probably more times when the boy charged ahead on his advancement quest. I want to slow him down, not shut him down. And if you read closely, I did say yes in about half the cases. Yes to playing with the fly rod, yes to going on the hike, yes to building the survival shelter, etc. There are more things to say yes to than just burning through another requirement. But you're smack-on that the problem here is often the adult/parents. Our troop doesn't think earning First Class in 5 months is a reasonable goal. At some level I would expect the parents to get on board with our program and help us guide their son to a more reasonable approach to advancement or help him find a troop which better fits their expectations. As to the Webelos program, you're right about that, too, in that the troo needs to take the approach that they need to do all they can to accommodate the Scouts. But in the final analysis, when you step back and look at how the overall program is being implemented, you have to look hard at the WDL. A Web program like that could be great if the WDL is working closely with the troop. I still say it is irresponsible if all the WDL does is send the boys off into different troops not knowing what their programs.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

Thanks, Beav, but I've thought about it and I really don't want the process of everyone arguing past each other named after me. But as to this thread, I'm still not sure if we're supposed to be talking about one kid or a whole group. Thread 1.1 The issue with the uber-Webelos is an adult problem. As great as it may have been, as much fun as it was, that Webelos leader wasn't running a Webelos program. I'm not going to say he should have scaled back, but he dang-well should have been looking ahead. Isn't that why we all take New Leaders Essentials and get an overview of the total program? The loss of those Scouts to boredom, Barry, was more the fault of the Webelos program than the troop. Sure, it would have been nice if the troop could have been nimble enough to accommodate them, (and if you were involved I'm sure you did), but that's a pretty big pig for the snake to swallow. I imagine many troops could accommodate such a Webelos class IF they know what's coming. Over the years, we've developed a first-year program which we feel really works for most new Scouts. But we don't TOUCH Tenderfoot requirements for the first two months. We spend those first 6 or 7 weeks getting the boys ready for their first two campouts. A group of new Scouts who are all two years ahead of the curve will require a major adaptations in our program. Thread 1.2 How do you tell a individual kid no? "Yeah, you could stay behind and work on lashings, but I really think you should go on the hike with your patrol." "Who wants work on that stuff. Come over here and let me show you my new fly rod." "If your PL already has the duty roster set for this weekend, I don't think it's fair to ask the other guys to dump their plans just so you can do your First Class cooking." "Do you ever watch Survivor Man? I'll bet a bowl of cobbler than no one in this patrol can build a survival shelter and spend the night in it." "Sunday morning is a bad time for your Scoutmaster conference, I have other plans. How about during the campout week after next." "I think the rest of the guys are headed down to the waterfront. Why don't you go with them?" "This is patrol time. You need to be helping your patrol, not working on advancements" "While a patrol campout is a GREAT idea, sleeping in you backyard and cooking for one other guy doesn't really count. The requirement is to serve as PATROL cook. There is more to it than just making burgers. There's the teamwork and leadership and spending time time with your buddies over a great meal. You just won't get that experience with you and Tommy out by the trampoline." "I'm sorry, but your leaf collection from the 5th grade doesn't count. Part of the idea behind the requirement is getting out in the woods, enjoying the outdoors and seeing the plants in their native environment. Besides, most of the leaves in your collection are non-native landscape plants. Yep, doing it in the winter will be more difficult." "In Boy Scouts your patrol leader, one of the senior guys or a scoutmaster has to watch you do it and sign it off. You mom's note doesn't really count. I don't think Webelos worked that way either." "SQUIRREL!" "You know Danny, I really want the best for you. I want you to be interested in Scouting for a very long time and get a whole lot out of the program and have all sorts of great, fun experiences. I've been doing this a long time and watched a lot of Scouts. My experience is the boys who rush through the requirements don't tend to stay around. Sure, everyone has a goal of making Eagle, but the guys who make Eagle at 13 or 14 mostly don't stay around much longer after that. And the guys who get to Life very early tend to drift away for several years even if they finally decide to come back at 17 and finish Eagle. "I don't want that for you. I want you to be here, having fun, learning things and being a leader in the troop right up 'til your 18th birthday. Then you get to be an ASM. You and I need to figure a way you can do that without focusing so much on advancement. We need to find some things in which you can excel. So tell me about the things in Scouting you really enjoy and are good at....." I don't think I actually used the "N" word.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

Yeah, maybe. And maybe I've hiked this trail before. Thought it would be courteous to give TD a heads up on the topography.

So we're honoring people who were members of the program as children, went on to live their live and be successful, but haven't necessarily done anything for the program since aging out. "Hey, did you know Dr. Gotrocks is an Eagle Scout?" "Really? I wonder how we can bait him to contribute to the council?" "Why don't we have another Eagle Court of Honor for him? His last one was 20 years ago." "No, better idea: Let's make him an Outstanding Eagle Scout and have a Court of Honor for THAT! Should be good for a Silver-level contribution at least!" But probably not. I'm sure I'm just being cynical.

Welcome to the forums, TD. Unfortunately you've wandered into one of the topics where some of the backpacking snobs feel they have the opportunity to exercise their prejudice -- troop trailers. I've found it best to just give them their delusions of superiority and run your program as you see fit. While the moss idea may have a certain Scout-chic appeal, it probably doesn't do much the the life of the trailer. Many trailers have wood structrues. Wood and moss isn't a good mix. You really need someone with a little bit of knowledge to maintain the trailer. Leaks need to be sealed and the bearings occasionally repacked. It may look like a big aluminum box, but they do require a modest amount of maintenance. I do like the idea of checking with the local schools to see if any have auto classes which may help. If you can make sure the sealing and prep-work are done properly, turn the Scouts loose with a couple dozen cans of spray paint. Yeah, up close it will probably look like crap, but rolling down the road it will probably look okay. Do sign painters still exist? I though everything has gone computer designed vinyl. One option to save money may be to find a vinyl sign shop which will cut the lettering for you and then let you do the installation. It's really not that difficult. The sign guy can show you what to do in about five minutes. The big thing is to position the lettering with masking tape and get it right before you remove the backing. Once it's stuck, it's stuck. I used to to all my own job signs for new homes (remember when folks used to build new homes?) and it's a very short learning curve.

Is there a rule, law or phrase which describes an Internet debate in which the participants are all arguing based on different assumed hypothetical facts? If not, do I get to name it? I suppose there is a case to be made that all Internet debates are made on such a basis.

Having written one of those comments, let me explain they are in the context of a discussion of a Scout earning First Class in five months. The hypothesis was that a Scout with exceptional outdoor skills could conceivably make FC in five months. My point was precisely in agreement with the question you are asking. If a Scout has already mastered the T-2-1 skills and is being allowed to blow the program, WHEN is he engaging in those other aims of the program? Developing character, citizenship and the ability to make ethical decisions takes time. It's not a five hour merit badge class. It's lying in your warm sleeping bag on a cold rainy morning and deciding to crawl out and make breakfast for your patrol because it's your turn -- or because you are patrol leader and the guy whose turn it is won't get up. And it's figuring out how to deal with that other guy. Those little chacter lessons are unpredicatable and inconsistent. They're unlikely to occur in a five month window. You will, however experience many of them over a seven-year Scouting career. And that is my underlying point in all these advancement debates. The kid who blows through FC in five months, and will presumably continue on the trajectory through the upper ranks, is -- in my experience -- less likely to stay with the program once he has completed the advancement program.

Anyone ever heard of a ticket?