Twocubdad

Ummm, no. I gotta think making the pitch to the kids would tick off a lot of people too. The best presentations are from the heart from folks who believe in the program and ask others to help deliver the program.

Hmmmmmm.... This thread has certainly taken an interesting course.... Having been gone most of the day and reading the whole thread to catch up (okay, I admit skipping all the psychology stuff) I'm struck by the couple of "correct" answers posted earlier and glossed over. The first from RichardB -- "could it have just been based on knowledge of orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) development and it's relationship to risk taking behaviour......" Well, yes. It is interesting to me that recent developments in neurology supports the age-old wisdom of 21 as the age of majority. The old timers may not have had MRI technology, but the understood at the age most folks developed the ability to forsee consequences around 21. Reducing the age of majority to 18 was a Vietnam-era political decision which has partially been rolled back as a result of all drunk 18-year-olds killing themselves and other. Yet we wonder why giving an 18-year-old a high-balance credit card turns into a car wreck too. The second from Beavah -- "Generalizations are useful only when applied to general groups.... Now, yeh might say that da cost of doin individual evaluations in some cases is too high, eh? So when da negative consequences are low and the cost of doin a better job is too high, we settle on applying a general rule to individuals. We set da age of majority to 18 and so on (and then allow for exceptions). " Which is exactly what national is doing in setting the age for SM and committee members at 21. Beav goes on to make the point that because individual units are making individual evaluations of SM candidates, that those individual decisions should be allowed over generalized national policy. But that's beside the point. For the folks in Irving making the policy THEY aren't making the individual evaluations, so setting general policy requirements is a perfectly rational approach, from their point of view. Some of the tangent's y'all have wandered down today bear that our. 16-y-o SM? Really? You're really arguing the low corners of the bell curve aren't you? National is, of course, dealing with the fat part of he curve. A million-and-a-half volunteers is a large enough population to begin making some generalizations.

A little different persepctive here. I took over the troop from a very young Scoutmaster. The boys loved him. He was like an older brother coming home from college who taught you how to drive his stick and let you borrow his Old Spice and gave you pointers for dates. But any resembalance to a Boy Scout program was purely coincidental. No troop programs. If you had the ambition, you could attend a MB class run by a mom, otherwise it was either dodgeball or British Bulldog every week. PLC never met. Rarely camped. Oh, they did a lot of fun activities, but everyone -- Scoutmaster included -- had dates Saturday night and wanted to be home at the end of the day. Very frankly, if I were a COR and had a choice, I would be very hesitant to accept a Scoutmaster younger than even 25 or so. It would have to be a very special young man and a very particular set of circumstances. (And MIB, if you're reading this, please don't take offense. You may be that young man but your troop most definitely would not meet my criteria.) There needs to be a very strong support network behind a young SM. Unfortunately, the typical situation where a very young SM is appointed is in a struggling unit with little other options. Bad idea. Scoutmaster is more than Executive Senior Patrol Leader. Clearly, dealing with the adults is the big problem. I would not want to throw a 19-y.o. into some of the toe-to-toe conversations I've had with parents. The committee would need to have the SM's back to a degree which, I think, would distort the SM's role as unit leader. In a way, that would almost set up the SM as Exec. SPL. If that works, it works, but I wouldn't want to get into that arrangement if I had another choice. But if the unit is strong enough to support a young SM, why don't you have a succession plan such that you don't need a 19-y.o. SM? But let's consider it another way -- Crew advisors out there, how would your crews function if you disappeared? Have you ever had to pick up a ball the crew president dropped? Ever stepped in to avoid a trainwreck or avert something which could have become a health/safety issue? Could you turn your crew over to the 18-20-year-olds to run without your input? Let's be realistic. You wouldn't do that with a lot of 50 year olds. And that's why we have ASMs and committees. Which brings us back to my point about support. A very young SM will have enough challenges, but for heaven's sake don't put them in charge of a train that's already off the track.

BS-87 -- you seem to have a unique point of view in all this, especially relating to FOS. Just curious, do you mind sharing your primary role in Scouting with the group?

I think Oak Tree covered it pretty well. My biggest concern is with the proposal process. Here it's nuts. One of my ASMs is s Six-Sigma instructor and he looks at Eagle proposals and shakes his head. Thirty page proposals aren't uncommon. We have a required, 40+ point check list which must be submitted with proposals. My Scouts routinely put as many hours in planning a project as they do implementing it. Why? Where in the program to we teach boys to plan projects like this? Our council has a real slant toward construction projects. With the demise of shop classes, where do any of the boys learn the woodworking skills to build a lot of these projects? In variably, there's an adult somewhere in the process directing the construction. I will add that I like challenging projects. The more you put into one the more you get out of it. Scouts with project over 200 manhours sooner or later have to really roll up their sleeves and LEAD to get through the project. 100-hour projects don't seem to be pretty predictable and don't enough twists and turns to require a Scout to "analyze, adapt and overcome."

Beav, buddy, relax. Sorry to get your tail all curled up. Here's a nice willow limb to chew on. My intent wasn't to get all legalistic, rather to point out when you agree to something that's against the rules, you don't have much of a case when they other guy breaks the agreements. Could have used the story about the dog and snake crossing the river, but the Statute of Frauds seemed more on point. I won't let that happen again. MIB & teacher/scout -- welcome. First, understand when you adopt a 25-character username, it's going to get shortened, nothing personal. Unfortunately, what you're experiencing is not uncommon in the adult side of Scouting. Yeah, it can suck. People can be very childish and territorial. For some reason this program tends to attract tin-horn dictators (my apologies to all the tin-horn dictators out there -- no offense intended.) Read the still-active thread, "Friends of Scouting and out of Touch District." Basementdweller busts his chops putting on a great program for his pack and tries to extend that to others and gets his "nose" slammed in the door. My experiences in Scouting at the district and council level have been very similar. You probably shouldn't read about the stuff that goes on in Abel Magwitch's council -- holy smokes! There are all sorts of reasons why folks get treated the way they do. In your case it seems your COR either doesn't understand her job or doesn't have the cajones to do it. Instead of making a decision and living with the consequences, she's play games with membership rules and voting. You can find a unit more appreciative of your services (although I understand your loyalty to your old troop) or you can grit your teeth and grin with the knowledge that one day you'll dance on these bozo's graves. I for one give you two a lot of credit for your willingness to take on additional responsibilities in the pack and troop beyond what the R&Rs permit. After all, is there really a big difference between a 20-year-old ASM/Outings and a 21-year-old Outings Chairman? It's unfortunate the COR has chosen to play politics. Hang in there. Regardless of the outcome I would be proud to serve along side either of you.

Perhaps your should get Beavah or NJ to review the statute of fraud for you. Illegal contracts are unenforceable. Moose and FianceMoose were hosed when they agreed to do jobs they couldn't legally register for. A word on tactics. Threatening to quit as pack CC, troop outings chair and ASM only works if you make the others aware of the threat. Threatening to quit but not telling anyone is just pouting. Call the COR and tell her plainly that if Moose and MooseFiance don't get votes, they will loose the three volunteers who seem to be olding both units together. Whether or not that's smart/proper/ethical/legal/Scoutlike is another questions. Last, I don't have a problem with MooseDad sticking up for his 19-y-o son and future daughter-in-law. The idea that parents should stand back and let the boy learn to handle things himself is a Boy Scout program element, based in part on the idea that everyone involved has the best interest of the boy at heart. This is spilling over into the real-world arena. If your son had a business, legal or personal issue and his father had the ability and/or resources to help, I would expect him to do so.

The final solution to the outdoor question? The hyperbole meter on my computer is smoking. Did you throw that in just because today is Passover? I think Beav has a point. Unfortunately a solution would run counter to huge demographic currents. BSA has never had a tradition of 25-year-old Rovers running the program. And if we wanted them, I don't think there here. Of the 15 or 20 Eagles the troop has produced in my time as SM, I don't think a single one lives nearby. Our cultural tradition is to ship off all the young adults to distant colleges just as they would move into adult leadership roles. I had this conversations with one of my mates at World Jamboree. In the UK the Rover program works as most college kids tend to stay closer to home for college. Whereas here, my son absolutely refused to apply for any school in our area code. Kids who do attend local colleges tend to still stay on campus and pretend they are away from home. (As an aside, my UK buddy also noted that the UK Scouts are always cash-strapped since most leaders are under age 30. We old farts may not be much on the trail, but there is something to be said for involving adults during their prime income-producing years.) I don't know about the early years of the program, but in my lifetime BSA has always run with the model of parent-volunteers. I don't know that we've ever looked to the 20-somethings for leadership. Now, in our troop, I'm guessing the average age of parents of our incoming Scouts is somewhere in the early-to-mid 40s. A huge demographic shift in the country is the age at which educated, middle class couples start families. Few folks start traditional families in their early 20s anymore. Of course, children born to teenage and unwed parents skew the overall statistics, but let's be realistic about where Scouting core market. Looking at the potential ASMs among our new crop of parents, they all seem rather "comfortable." They still have some miles left in them, but I know that at 50-something and after more than a decade in the program my excitement at the prospect of another cold-weather campout isn't what it was. It would be interesting to see some national research on the age of Scout leaders. Changing gears, for those of you who question national's commitment to the ourdoor program, how do you explain the nine-figure commitment to The Summit? A case can be made that The Summit is a response to troops with "comfortable" Scout leaders. Within a day's drive of a majority of BSA members, troops will be able to take advantage of some pretty serious HA programs those troops' may not otherwise be able or willing to provide. We're a big troop with a lot of resources. But it's still a struggle to put on HA programs for the older Scouts, especially in areas like climbing and shooting where BSA requires near-professional level certifications. But even an old, fat Scoutmaster can drive a group of boys to West B'God for a week of climbing or white water. I'll be at the Greenbriar. Let me know when you're ready to go home.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

This isn't something which keeps me up nights. The whole thing seems to me to be a Ninth Amendment issue -- like the whole concept has gone away from lack of use. So from someone with little detailed knowledge of the issue, or at least less than what the rest of you seem to have, a question: Why doesn't Obama just post his birth certificate and be done with it? And if he doesn't have one, why not? Universal vital statistics has been around since the '20s.

Old, obscure Jimmy Buffet songs are my torture tunes of choice. "So who's gonna steal the peanut butter, I'll get the can of sardines. Runnin' up and down the aisle of the MiniMart, stickin' food in our jeans...." Actually perdi, if camp policy were to have been followed, the DL should have approached the man, asked if he had a visitor badge and escorted him to HQ if he did not. The lady who reported the incident was in the paired den and far enough away that she really didn't know what she was watching. The autistic boy's actual DL was in the man's pack and knew he was well equipped to deal with him.

HA! One year at day camp we had a den leader in and report that just before closing ceremony, some man showed up and started tagging along with her paired den. At there was a boy in that den who had been a handful all week. The DL said the man grabbed the boy by both shoulders, got down in his face and started yelling at him. Break Glass, Pull Lever. We called the SE and were told to handle the situation ourselves! What? No investigation? No call to Social Services? No cops? Years of YP training and all we get is Boss Hogg telling us to "hannel it, hannel it, hannel it." The rest of the story -- from the beginning we knew "the man" was a local CM and one of our senior camp staff members. He happened to have taken that day off from camp due to a job conflict but showed up at the end of the day to pick up his boys. The Scout he "grabbed" was in the man's home pack and mildly autistic. The boy had been in this fellow's pack and den for years, and was a close friend of the family prior to that. When we spoke with the boy's parents, they told us what the CM had done was precisely what he should have done, and what the parents had taught him to do. When the boy was veering off into the ditch, you got his attention by taking him by the shoulders, looking him in the eye and speaking to him forcefully. "Grabbing" and "yelling" was the spin from a DL from 50 feet away. Besides, the mom told us the CM knew the boy as well as anyone and had the parents' blessing to handle any situation with the boy as he saw fit. Two points -- One, in response to KC9DDI, the response from the SE was a joke. He could have at least feined a little interest. Secondly, Scouting doesn't happen in a vacuum. We deal with real kids with real parents, real problems, in real time. The rules cannot possibly anticipate every situation. We MUST use our judgment to do what we believe to be in the best interest of the boys. Should the CM have let the boy melt down, disrupt the program and possibly hurt himself or someone else out of fear he may get reported? Or because the tactics prescribed by the parents violate the rules? Frankly, as camp director, I'm thankful he was there to handle he situation as he did. To runintherain, several folks have given you good advice to ask the SM in a very friendly, non-confrontational way to "help you understand the rules." There are dozens of reasonable explainations for what happened which would satisfy me personally. Or you can follow the letter of the law and call the SE. To ScoutFish -- are you kidding me? HE'S YOUR NEPHEW! And his father ASKED YOU TO DRIVE HIM! Now that you are his Cubmaster, do BSA rules now take precedence over all your dealings with your nephew? Holidays? Family vacations? Oh for Pete's sake. My nephew is in a pack about two hours from here. Because of his dad's work schedule and his mom's health, he never gets to go camping with the pack. So last spring I volunteered to take him. We even tented together. For that reason, I had my brother call the CM. As a courtesy, I called too, mainly to let her know I am a trained SM and not some wack-job uncle. (I know some of you may want to debate that, but please spin-off another thread.) Fish, if you or anyone else feels the need to report me the the SE, please let me know and I'll provide a phone number.

Again, the TwoCub Doctrine: Pride and Enthusiasm trump uniform rules and guidelines. This is why we don't participate in the district camporee. The whole event is based on stupid rules like this.

Same here. A few ideas: Moisture control is a big one. Make sure you're dry. I tell the boys to change all their clothes including underwear into the clean dry clothes they'll wear the next day. If you're sweaty when you get in the tent, take a minute to towel=off or lay there a minute to dry before putting on the clean clothes. You know not to do stuff like pulling the bag up over your head and breathing into the bag, right? That dumps a ton of water into the bag and you'll be cold. No one likes sleeping on the wet spot. And leave the tent vents open part-way to let the moisture escape? I'd be suspicious of putting a poncho over me, just from a moisture standpoint. Maybe something breathable. I always wear socks. If my feet are cold, I'm miserable. And I usually sleep with a knit cap, too, although I often wake up and find it's fallen off. I've tried a balacava, but can't stand all that bulk around my throat. Ditto for the idea of sleeping with a sweater or sweat shirt around my neck. (Although I made that suggestion to one of the dads on last month's campout and he said it was the warmest he'd ever been camping.) I've never heard Calico's info about wearing heavy clothes, although I've found I'm just as warm but overall more comfortable wearing thin poly longjohns than something like a sweat suit. I tend to roll from side to front to side during the night and hate it when a shirt gets all twisted up. Like Calico, I use cheap, acrylic stadium blankets to layer up. It's really effective to wrap one arount my head and shoulders like a shawl. That plugs the top of non-mummy bags and help keep the warm in. If I have one extra blanket, it always goes under not over. Have you tried a bag liner? I have an acrylic one that's really a little bulky for use inside the main bag, but it's sure warm. Last summer I discovered synthetic micro-fiber sheets for jamboree and summer camp. I want to try making a micro-fiber bag liner and seeing how it works inside a bag. They're $75 at REI, but you can buy an entire twin set at WalMart for $11 and sew it into your own bag liner. Beyond that, extra-large handwarmers are great. I'll throw one down by my feet (did I mention I hate having cold feet?) and keep one in my hands and sort of snuggle up with it. Probably more psychological than anything. And I think I figured out on my first campout as an 11 year old to keep tomrrow's clothes in the bottom of the bag and get dressed in the sleeping bag. Have we discussed before why they make square Nalgene bottles?

People constantly make up rediculous rules for others to follow in order to make their own jobs easier. It is one of them. A few more from the scrap of rules out district tried to implement: -- Instead of distributing training cards at the completion of a course, training cards will be distributed at the following month's Roundtable meeting. Result: without the gold-standard record -- the training card -- and since the council records were maybe 10% accurate, we suffered through years of incomplete training records. -- This from the days prior to merit badge counselors being required to complete full adult applications, to encourage troops to submit the names of merit badge counselors to the district, the advancement committee adopted a policy that Eagle applications would be required to include the names of all MBC and would be rejected if a counselor was not on the approved list. Result: the district advancement chairman narrowly escaped the meeting with his life. -- From the council training committee: 100% of all leaders will be trained to position or their membership dropped. Result: About a month later the policy was amended to be a "goal". (I understand we're headed in this direction nationally, but this was about 10 years ago. No online training, no exemption for non-contact leaders, no ability to track training records....) And it always seems these rules are made by folks with absolutely no authority to implement them. Yeah, call the chapter or lodge advisor. Sounds like the Chapter Chief may be a little too far out ahead on this one.

Yeah, Beav, I go along with Moose. Sure, jet's getting his info second hand, but we're getting it third. And he has the benefit of not only having a face-to-face conversation with the folks on the ground, but has an on-going relationship with them. Consequently, if jet's smelling a rat, I'm willing to go with his reading of the situation. Jet, you've already alluded to the real problem. Seems to me you have the wrong ASM working with this patrol. Perhaps a mom of one of the boys, hmmmm? Unless this is a special need patrol and this lady has special skills which the patrol needs, maybe reshuffling ASM assignments is needed. If nothing else, the ASM needs a bit of reeducation regarding her decision to hold the boys over to help with clean up while leaving the parents hanging. Depending on how late they were, it may or may not be a big deal. Our troop rule is if we're more than 30 minutes late, we start calling to let folks know. You do, however, need to separate the sins of the fathers from the sins of the sons. The ASM changing plans and returning late is not an issue with the boys and I wouldn't bring it up with them. But I do like the idea of having a meeting with the boys. This may not be Watergate or Enron, but it is a teaching moment. The lessons to be learned are subtle. If I'm understanding you correctly, they got credit for games in which they did not participate inorder to practice a flag ceremony (which I assume was one of the factors in the sprit award) and managed to parlay that into yet another benefit of having extra time for the dessert competition. There are a lot of ways to look at that and many folks who see nothing wrong with it. Somehow you need to get them to empathize with the other patrols who strictly followed the rules. The parable of the Prodigal Son comes to mind. (And be sure to use the whole parable - too many folks end the story with the party.) You know these boys, their maturity level and what they are accustomed to. You'll have to craft a message which will hit home with them. If their expectation is to receive special treatment and/or having their mom/ASM out front clearing the path of sticks and pebbles, you may need to reset those expectations. In the process, you may beaccused of making a mountain out of a molehill. RIGHT! and thanks for noticing. I prefer to learn from the molehills rather than waiting for the mountains. Would it be preferable to wait until the boys are throwing rocks at someone's car? Or until they're caught "enhancing their competitive advantage" on an exam?(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

No. At the time, Cubs typically did not apply for camperships. They were for Boy Scout camp. The couple times there was a need, the camp was expected to asorb the reduced fee into our budget. I will note that may have changed since I was CD. The council promotes day camp camperships and I assume there is some mechanism for money from the campership fund being allocated to the day camp budget.

The TwoCub Doctrine: Pride and Enthusiasm trump uniform rules and guidelines.

Call this an academic exercise. Pretend, for the moment, that you have no other option but to stick it out with this guy -- no replacing him, no changing troops. What would it take to make him successful? On the plus side, you say he has a good bit of program knowledge. But he's disorganized and seems to be in it mainly for his own sons. Maybe not the most mature guy around.... How do you build a troop around this guy which will enable the troop to succeed? Sounds like you need to recruit some ASMs who are able to carry the troop through football season. There needs to be a method of keeping all the leaders up-to-speed on plans so others can fill in at the last minute if needed. Maybe send some folks through training so they have the knowledge base and credibility to steer this fellow to a more appropriate use and selection method for a SPL. You need some pretty tight scheduling systems and perhaps automated email reminders. Sure, most other adults are going to bring more organizational skills than this guy, so you're going to have to do more for him in that area. Besides, the troop committee's job is to support the program side. We all have our faults and defficiencies we need help with. I'm not much for being organized either. And I don't delegate very well. But my troop committee fills in by knowing they have to keep paperwork at a minimum (or at least away from me) and my CC knows if he needs to anticipate what needs to be done otherwise I'll get involved and take over. And besides, with a brand-new unit, you really don't want to go to war over this. Just a thought.

During World Jamboree a couple year ago not only did they sell them in the Scout Shop there, they literally couldn't keep them on the shelf. There were a group of ladies making the beads out of wood from the trees at Gilwell as fast as they could go. As soon as the lacquer dried they had a runner bringing them to the shop and handing them to folks waiting in line for them.

My pet peeve were the FOS presenters who would come to the pack with the pitch that contributions helped pay for summer camp for the boys. At the time I was the district day camp director and was responsible for the day camp budget. It is an absolute fact that the council didn't pay one dime toward the day camp. (Don't tell me the council paid the power bill or the salaries of the folks in the office handling registration. No they didn't. We were 100% self supporting). Fact was, the camp was a profit center for the council. I made it clear with our DE that unless he wanted me to correct the error publicly, he better make sure the presenter did't try to sell FOS as supporting summer camp for the cubs. AvidSM is on the right track. The bottom line is FOS goes directly to the general fund. And in most councils the general fund is mostly salaries and support for the paid staff. Program tends to be supported largely with program fees. Absolutely, there are exceptions, like maintain camps, paying rangers and professional program directors, the portion of their time DE spend on program, and folks like the council registrar who directly support the membership. You can make a case that councils raise most of their money to pay people to raise money. Fire the fundraisers and you eliminate much of the need for fundraising. That's just the way it is for most non-profits. Our DE (a really great guy) spends 60% of his time raising money to pay his own salary so he can spend another 30% of his time recruiting new units and members and the other 10% on program. That's just the Faustian deal we have. If you don't like it, get involved at the council level and try to make changes, or just don't contribute.

"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville, "Democracy in America" "We have met the enemy and he is us!" -- Pogo

A cumulative total of 21 including 12 required and 9 elective. Of course, as a Life Scout he must already have at least seven required and four other elective MBs. But where's the fire? Unless he's already earn a bunch of the 10 MBs he needs for Eagle, or is hard against his 18th birthday, that's a pretty big bite. What's he doing for fun at camp?

Talk with the Course Director for the course you're interested in taking. Unless someone here is currently staffing a course, no one really know's what is in this year's syllabus unless they've been through staff development. The Wood Badge syllabus gets tweaked every year. And the thing which seems to change most is exactly this issue regarding registered positions and ticket focus. When I was a participant I had one foot in the pack and one foot in the troop and served on district committee. I was allowed to write my ticket with different goals for each. There was some abuse to that so a year later the rules were changed. For folks with multiple registrations you had to "declare" under which position you were taking Wood Badge. All five parts of your ticket had to relate to that goal. My understanding that was relaxed a bit the following year.

What he said about the professional training award. Technically, I believe the DE's can receive the DAM, but I believe it requires special approval and seems to be really, REALLY frowned upon. I get the feeling the idea is thought of so poorly your DE would probably rather you didn't. Look at the requirements for the Gold (adult) Hornaday. It's basically a conservation lifetime achievement award and only a few are given out nationally every year. Your DE would have to have made incredibly distinguished contributions in the area of conservation, far beyond the scope of his job. Have you thought about a James E. West Fellowship?

That's true, but.... There are some bigger-picture issues involved (and maybe a little bit of politics). With 11 boys in your pack over four dens, do you really need den chiefs? It it a huge commitment for the Boy Scout and his parents -- basically doubles their time commitment to Scouting. The other thing to know about DCs is if it works right, the Cubs build a relationship with the DC and tend to follow him into his troop. That's a good thing. There dozens of threads here where folks ask advice on recruiting boys into troops and the first bit of advice we give them is to build a relationship with a pack by sending them Den Chiefs. If you CO's troop is struggling, they may not be able to afford the loss of a class of Webelos who follow their den chief to another troop. OBVIOUSLY, that shouldn't be your only considerations. But if you're interested in building a full Scouting program at your church, it is something to consider. As to what DC's do. Our troop includes DC training as part of our troop leader training in the fall. (The council runs the training in January, when the year's half over.) We "strongly encourage" (as in, do you really want a den chief?) Den Leaders to attend the training so they know what to expect of the DCs.