Twocubdad

We've gotten to a point where a couple of our patrols are out of wack. One of which was a patrol in which we had a discipline problem with a couple guys and the rest of the patrol basically mutinied on a campout this summer. One kid just packed up and changed patrols. Two others at least did me the courtesy of stopping by my campsite and letting me know they were changing patrols. Regardless, my new SPL and I have been discussing the idea of going using this system. I'm a bit concerned about how to implement it initially. I fear that if we just say, on the count of three, everyone go stand with your new patrol, there will be a number of kids lost in the chaos. My idea -- and I'd like feedback from you guys who have used this system -- is for the first step be to recruit the new PLs, and perhaps require them to confer briefly with me. The next week, the approved PLs then set up in their respective corners and rest of the troop goes from to the PL whose patrol he wants to join and puts his name on the list. The last step will be for the PLs to get together and trade around for the guys they want and to get the patrols to within the 6-to-10 member limits. One big problem this solves is by setting some standards for being a PL, I avoid the pitfall of having a group of new Scouts being led by one of their own. (Been there, got the patch and scars.) If an older, qualified PL wants to take on leadership of a bunch of newbies, maybe with the help of one of his same-aged friends, that's fine and is really just a traditional NSP with a PL instead of a troop guide. The issue I've not resolved is what happens when one of the cool guys announces he wants to be PL and makes it known that his couple other cool friends will also be in the patrol. We end up with 25 cool guy wannabes lined up for that patrol while the others go begging. That puts that PL in the position of cherry picking the patrol he wants while leaving the other guys out. Thoughts from your experience?

So who's running the show? Who is so attached to the fly?

Actually, NJ, a CFA grilled chicken sandwich with a cup fruit and sugar-free lemonade is a pretty decent fast food lunch for those of us looking out for our figures.

If it's a concern, I would go to the Scout in charge (SPL?) and say, "let me know how I can help. Just tell me what you want me to do." Then do exactly that. Become another worker bee and do just as the youth leaders ask. Better yet, why not start a new tradition through the example of setting up an separate adult dining fly and campsite about 100 yards away?

No problem. I'd use a permanent marker. (REALLY wide grin!) And actually I have a Kindle. I prefer real, tree chomping books, but I do use a Kindle.

Oh, and swear to Pete, if someone accuses me of "adding to the requirements" for this I'm gonna hurl.

Depends on your definition off "required." Is there a policy somewhere which says, "It is a requirement of the Boy Scouts of America that all youth members possess a current edition of the Boy Scout Handbook"? No. But it's going to be really difficult without one. Kinda like a sleeping bag. No, nothing requires you to have a sleeping bag, but winter camping is going to be painful. In our troop, yeah, you're required to get a book. The sign-offs in the back of the book are the proof you've completed the requirements. You come to me asking for a conference for First Class, you gotta bring your book. The Board of Review is going to review you book and make sure you have the signatures. Go to your BOR and tell them you just never go around to getting a book, the next question will be, "So how do we know you completed these requiremsnts?" So on the front end, yeah, you need the book. If you're such a stubborn jackass that you refuse to buy one out or some weird principle, then you've got more problems than not having a Scout book and probably need to start looking for another program anyway ... like a therapy group. But what happens if you have a book and loose it? Happens a lot. Or even more likely, the signature pages fall out of the book you have. Hopefully, you've done as you've been asked and given you book to the TroopMaster person from time to time and the troop has a back up of your sign-offs in the system. I've signed more than one spankin' new BSHB with a TroopMaster report stapled in the back. But if you've got nothing recorded in TroopMaster and loose your book, we're still going to help get you through. You're going to have to go around and collect signatures from the folks who signed them in the first place (which they will be happy to do if they remember working with you). Some requirements are self-evident, like activities, or the swimming and first aid requirements if you have those MBs. But it may get down to having to repeat a few sign-offs if we can't recreate the signatures. Think of that as karma for not taking care of your book in the first place.

E92 -- you're kidding, right? Technically, isn't requiring a application adding to the requirements? I mean, "Complete and Eagle Scout application" isn't listed in the BSHB, right?

No. And I can't tell that we're missing a thing.

Another solution in search of a problem. (Have we really solved everthing else or just given up?) As I sit here in the midst of a really nasty thunderstorm, I am greatly concerned to be agreeing with bnelon and disagreeing with my esteemed flat-tailed friend. I'm cool with blue cards. They've worked just fine for DECADES. I see no substantial difference between the current ones and those in my scrapbook from 1970. It's really just one form that everyone gets a little piece of. MBC signs and keeps his third. Scout gives to SM or Adv. Chm. and gets his third. Adv. Chm. gets his third stamped by the council and files it with the troop records. If there is ever a question, we treat the boys' handbooks and his stack of blue cards as the gold standard. And there is still redundant backup in the event he looses a card or 12. I am down with Beav's thoughts on the real usefulness of tracking Scout advancement on Scoutnet. Yeah, if I move to Beaverland, Beav has access to my records. Is that really an advantage? With the Scouts we've had transfer-in, I've never accessed Scoutnet for his records. His BSHB and blue cards work just fine. And if they were lost in the move I'd probably give the old SM a jingle and work things out. And I do like the element or responsibility this places on the Scout for tracking important documents over a long time frame. Come the revolution (or that next bolt of lightening) and the grid collapses, you guys will wish you had all those hard copies. We enourage our guys to set up a notebook for all their important Scout stuff and keep their blue cards and rank cards in baseball card sleeves. Seems like someone pinned a stack of empty sleeves on the bulletin board in the Scout House - just take what you need. Yeah, sooner or later national IT may start stumblin' across a cowpie or two, so going all eletronic is probably inevitable. But making things easier isn't a method of scouting. Most all these kids have homes with real beds, central0 heat and microwave ovens. Yet we still have them sleeping in tents and cooking over open fires. There are lessons to be learned in doing things the hard way from time to time.

My Scouts don't respond when I call them Mr.______ -- they think I'm speaking to their father. Serously! It's especially true if their dad is active in the troop. I've only one kid in the troop with a real nickname -- Doobie. His mother calls him that be cause he needs to be a "Do Bee" not a "Don' Bee". I can't bring myself to call him that -- I figure it's just a matter of time before he is old enough to learn how most people define a "doobie." Unfortunately, folks tend to live up -- or down -- to their nicknames. I've related the story before of walking out the Scout House to see a group older guys assigning nicknames to all the just-crossed over new Scouts. Just like in Animal House: "um, from now on you're Flounder. Um, you're Pinto....." I called the older guys over and suggested to them they should try to learn the new guys real names before arbitrarily assigning nicknames. "But they all want nicknames," they told me. Well, maybe, I said, but it's really demeaning that you somehow get to decide their names for them. Get to know them a little and if a nickname come up organically, then maybe. But we're just having fun -- the standard excuse for everything. OHHHHH, well you should have said so!, I told them. If nicknames are fun, you three should have nicknames too!. From now on, you (turning to the biggest one) will be "Lardass." You, I said to the next one, are "C.D." -- you know, like your on your report cards. And you, I said to the third will be "Dewey" but we'll spell it "D.U.I." because, well, you remember. Everyone still having fun?

Why dont' we just cut to the chase and adopt the Cub promise for everyone -- of course it will need to be simplified and the "repeat from memory" part of the requirements dropped. That's where the program is headed. http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=362763

Another small brick removed from Scouting's foundation.

Frankly, 2b, based on the info you provided, the responses have been fairly restrained. The bottom line is you have a personal beef with another adult who behaved badly, wasn't Trustworthy, failed to live up to her commitment and put the whims of her daughters ahead of her commitments to your son and the unit. Unfortunately, even Scout leaders have the ability and freedom to be jackasses from time to time. On a personal level, you've learned something about the trustworthyness of this particular person. As a personal matter, you can write her a nasty letter, go whup her butt or leave a burning bag of doggie poo on her front step. My advice is to count it as a lesson learned about this individual and move on. But where it goes from there depends on the type of commitment the leader made to the TROOP. If you make a commitment to help with transportation for an activity and back out on that commitment for ANY reason, it's an issue for the troop. If there is a policy issue (such as the last minute inclusion of siblings on a campout) it warrants discussion by the leadership. Frankly, our list of drivers for any given activity is very fluid. Parents back out of driving all the time, but we always have backups and have never left a Scout behind. But has this mom arrived in camp Saturday morning without your son and an explaination that her daughter's friend decided to come and bumped you son, I -- as a Scoutmaster -- would have been hot. I dont' know how hot your son's SM is about this, but he's on the case. Your best bet is to back off (the responses to your continued involvement will probably look a lot like what you got here) and let the SM do his job.

This whole thing was on its way to being the gaffe du juor until Mayors Dum and Dummer piped up. It would have blown over in about three days -- everyone with a hankering for decent chicken tenders ever wonder what part of a chicken is its nugget?) on a Sunday knows about the Cathey's religious views. Just isn't much of a walk to get to their view on gay marriage. But when Emanuel and especially the twit from Boston started talking about the GOVERNMENT taking retribution against a private business for the personal religious beliefs of its owners, the issue went to a completely different level. That may be skewing your predicted responses, Edad. And I think your observation about the interest level of young people in this is interesting, although I'm not sure I agree with it. I do note, however, I've been surprised at the number of kids I've heard or read saying they're for gay rights, but give up CFA tenders?..... (Personally, I'll go out of my way to get a large diet lemonade from CFA -- or two. Great lemonade without a half-pound of sugar.)

Although it's been discussed in earlier threads, we've not really gotten into the mechanics much here and I think several of you have the wrong idea about this. First, I would only suggest this for the Webelos II dens. Yeah, including the Web1s and turning it into an 18 month program is too much. Start the aligning the Web2 den meetings in September (or whenever the pack cranks up after the summer) and let it run through crossover. Outwardly, the Webs just hold a common openings and closings with the troop and go off for their regular den meeting in between, as BD suggests. But now an again the troop may have a program which is suitable for the Webelos (like preparing for the Troop/Webelos campout) and they stay together for the entire meeting. More realistically, the troop is providing a more intensive "Den Chief" program for the den, shuffling multiple Boy Scouts in and out of the den meeting; helping with the program especially the Scout skill stuff. But the big advantage is the Webelos get to meet the troop adults and leaders. They get to see that these dreaded middle school and high school guys aren't all drug dealers and sex fiens like their mother has been warning them of for years. Who knows, they may make a friend or two. And this may be off topic a bit, but I really don't care if this stiffles the Webelos' ability to shop different troop. Our troop and pack together represent one Scouting program offered by the church. The leaders at least, work together to deliver a good program and the troop especially devotes a lot of time and energy into helping the pack -- everything from providing the den chiefs to organizing our joint food drive in the spring to maintaining the Scout House. As a normal course, we expect the Webelos will join our troop. If there is a compelling reason some go elsewhere, fine. But given the relationship between the troop and pack, for the Webelos do pretend they then have to give every other troop in town an even shot offends my sense of loyalty.

If you will recall, Antelopes come last in "Wood Badge order." Our Antelope Patrol had a slogan, "Antelopes Lead From Behind." The first draft of our cheer was "OUR VIEW SUCKS!" We of course ultimately adopted something else, not nearly a good as that.

A young man who represents himself and the program very well. But what's rediculous is the $2600 bill was basically for covering someone's butt. It would have been bad enough if the Scout had been hurt rescuing the boy, but why an ER trip "just because"? You also have to wonder about a $2000 ambulance bill. How is the ambulance more than three times the ER and physician fee? And who wants to bet the boy received a similar bill, although it sounds like they both rode in the same ambulance. The big health care controversy around here is a suit between BCBS and the state hospital assn. When you have a CT scan, the hospital charges you a prep fee of about $600 for set up, the paper gown, prep time, etc. If they do five different scans (during the same session) they charge you five separate set up fees. According to BCBS, they're billing $16 million a year for this. If I try to bill like that I go to jail for fraud.

Crew Policy on Fraternization Between Members 1) Prior to the commencement of any Crew activity all reproductive organs, including but not limited to external genitalia, belonging to Crew members will be collected by authorized adult leaders and kept under proper refrigeration until the conclusion of said activity. 2) Section 1 of this policy may be waived if crew members conduct themselves as if Section 1 had been enforced.

I've posted on this at length in the past. I've tried for several years to get our Webelos II dens to do exactly this. No takers. The Pack leadership doesn't see the need. A) their looking at it from the Cub Sccout perspective, and B) as long at the WebII leaders are out of their hair, the pack leadership doesn't want to get involved. Whenever I mention this idea to the W2 den leaders, they always get teary-eyed and wax on about this being their little den's last few months together. We get the same reaction when we mention the dens will be mixed up into new patrols in the troop. Makes me wonder if part of our problems with retention are the parents/leaders who think of crossover as losing their child and dont' want to let him move on?

Acco (and I realize your post is several months old); Please look back at the two questions I ask OA candidated -- nothing to do with scout spirit or First Class requirements. Rather, all I'm asking is if they understand the commitment of being and Ordeal member and are willing to give the OA a fair shot by attending a couple of the better events. In otherwords, do you really want to be in the OA or do you just think being voted into something sounds like a good ego boost? Why do you have a problem with that? Seems to me to be a pretty minimalistic approach. I always assume when my approval/signature is required for something, it is asking for my judgement as well. If being a First Class scout automatically equals Scoutmaster approval, then First Class should be the only requirement. If you ask for my approval on something but really only want me to pencil whip a piece of paper for you, you've made a mistake in asking.

As a Son of the South (I display my great-grandfather's Confederate musket and saber with equal pride along side his Oath of Allegiance to the United States), I've often noted that the passion with which the Stars and Bars is displayed is usually in inverse correlation with an actual knowledge of history.

As they should have, Barry. If our goal is to teach young men to be good citizens; that "obedience" includes working to change things you don't like, then this Scout and Bando should be applauded for having well-learned a basic lesson of Scouting. I don't think this is a hollow gesture. Sooner or later BSA will realize this policy is costing them their seed corn. A mini research survey -- I am very proud that among my brothers, sons and cousins, every male over the age of 16 is an Eagle Scout. Three of us are +/- age 50, all the rest are between 17 and 27. We recently gathered to present my cousin's son his Eagle. Duing the weekend this topic came up. Of the eight Eagles, six strongly disagree disagree with the current policy. One favors a local option policy and one agrees with the current policy. I'm sure you can guess the ages of those who oppose the policy. All the younger Eagles, including the one receiving his that day, said they doubted they would support Scouting in the future if they current policy remains in place. It would be interesting to see real research data on the opinion of Scouts (both Eagles and not) graduating from the program. My hunch is we are producing a generation of Scouts who, like my sons and cousins, enjoyed Scouting, appreciate is positive elements, but will not support Scouting as adults as long as the current policy is in place. In a number of ways, this is a generational issue. When the anti-gay marriage amendment was on the ballot here, our Speaker of the House, one of the leading proponents of the amendment admitted such. He predicted the amendment would be overturned in 20 years (which I thought was a good reason to vote against the amendment -- don't tinker with the constitution for transient reasons). He's right. Ultimately BSA either change their policy or become a marginal, anachronistic organization only found is small pockets of the country.

All of the above. But first of all, how old are these guys? If they're 17+ and Eagle I don't see an issue. They're getting ready for college and looking for new adventures and opportunities. The mission of the BSA isn't grow ASM, you know. If these guys are 14, 15 or young 16-y.o.s, that's another matter.... The pat, by-the-book answer is high adventure. Hmmmm..... I think that is more of a response from the marketing department than programming. Seventeen-year-old Eagle Scouts ought to be out camping and backpacking whenever and where ever they like. Why would the wait for a bunch of 11-y.o.s to tag along? HA in the sense of Philmont, Seabase or Northern Tier is far too sporatic -- yeah, it's a big carrot, but on a really long stick. A year-and-a-half of planning for a fairly expensive trip. That may keep them on the roster, but not necessarily "active". And programming HA for a large group is tough for a troop. You almost have to do everything. With our group of 6-8 older Scouts in our troop now, a couple are into backpacking; a couble into SCUBA; a couple biking. It's hard to satisfy the hard core and still attract the other. See Beav's comments on Leadership. Unfortunately, the third leg of the stool has been cut short -- advancement. That these guys are already Eagle you've lost one of your most important tools. Back to my question regarding age, if these Scouts are 14 or 15, THAT'S your problem. You fell for the baloney from national to push the boys through or let them run through to Eagle as fast as the wanted. Unfortunately, if this is the case you've lost one of your greatest motivational tools available. the best use of advancement to keep the interest of older Scout is starting with Tenderfoot, help guide the Scouts' along the flightpath so that the land in the Eagle's nest sometime their junior or senior year of high school. Otherwise, they better be focused on other elements of the program (such as OA)to hold their interests. (And no, not many guys are going to be motivated to work on merit badges just to get a palm. My observation has been the Eagles who ALREADY have a bunch of MBs will put in the minimal effort to complete the palms, but guys aren't likely to go out and earn 5, 10, 15 more MBs just for the palms.) My experience, both as a Scout and as a Scoutmaster, is one of the greatest factors in keeping these guys involved is friendship. If their buddies are in Scouts, they will be too. But that's like capturing a moonbeam. How do you do that? Yeah, you can work to patrol method toward that end. You can give the older guys the opportunities to do things as an older patrol. But either you are good friends with the the guys in the troop and want to go to Scouts to be with them or not. (This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

Does anyone use the Troopmaster function to print advancement/merit badge award cards? Do you have any snazzy graphics for the cards you would be willing to share?