Twocubdad

Of all the things you choose to get lathered up about, Kudu, I really don't understand why EDGE is such a problem for you. That it came from the "corporate" guys? Is it the fact that someone gave it a cheesy acronym? If we changed it to "Describe, Do, Help, Watch" and skipped the acronym, would you feel better about it? How is this different from teaching tautline hitches with "two for the tree and one for me", or "left over right, right over left" for square knots?

Thanks for the clarification, hadulzo. I didn't really understand what the deal was with the electronic records, although I watched the MB midway staff folks enter the data real time as the boys finished the merit badge. The staff advisor would be the professional person at council who supervised the council jamboree committee. Here it was our council Program Director. I also know the jamboree registrar (a volunteer) had access to the national records. Call the office and ask.

I'm probably more confused now than before, but I think it safe to say that this topic is absolutely out of bounds for the Eagle Board. What the hell would you ask? "So, son, your parents have suggested to us, well not actually to us, we're getting this second hand, that you falsely accused you mother of abusing you. How does that relate to the Scout Law?" Let's just say for argument's sake that the parents are pure as the driven snow and the boy is such a master of evil manipulation he managed to get the Boy Scouts to call DCF on his mother. And the step-father's response is to make an off-the-cuff comment to the Scoutmaster that this ought to be fodder for a Board of Review!?!??! I'm sorry if this guys a pal of yours, but that just doesn't say "straight shooter" to me. I know the dad really didn't give you an opportunity to respond, but if he had, the message should have been that if the mother was abusing the boy, they really need some heavy-duty family therapy. And if the boy falsely accused the mother, then they really need some heavy-duty family therapy. And if the truth is somewhere in between, the to straighten it all out, they really need some heavy-duty family therapy. Sure, all the dads in our troop play off each other to tag team each other's sons. Frankly, I love the look on a kid's face when I tell him exactly what his dad told him to do the day before. You'd think they would figure out what we're up to. But that's always stuff like being more responsible, getting started on an Eagle project, spending more time on school work, etc. The potential of abuse and/or falsely accusing you MOTHER of abuse is many orders of magnitude beyond that. And as a practical matter, you as Scoutmaster, don't have a voice on an Eagle Board. So you're going to have to hand this off to the board members. Is the family really okay with you bringing another three to five people on board with the details? Are the board members okay with this responsibility? Are they equipped, by training or temperament, to deal with this? What are you going to do with the District Advancement Committee representative when he or she strokes out? I can't think of any possible scenario under which this would be appropriate for a board of review.

The dad thinks the boy lied about the abuse and his way of dealing with it is to dump it on you? He thinks an "appropriate consequence" would be for you to deny him his Eagle? Sheesh! What does that tell you about what's going on in the family? I see no purpose served by sharing this whole thing with the Eagle board. If anything, keep doing what you've been doing. During his conference with you, keep the door open by asking how things are going at home. Let him take it from there, if he wants. Let him know he's always welcome to talk with you and that turning 18 doesn't change that.

Welcome back to the campfire, Jon. Most importantly, and while I appreciate your position, recruiting a new den leader isn't you responsibility. It is the responsibility of the pack leadership. You need to be looking to the Committee chairman and Cubmaster for help in organizing the new dens. So far, they've done half the job -- they recruited you. Now they need to recruit the other leader. But since you asked, I know of no magic words you can lay on the other parents to recruit another leader. Maybe, "how do you all want to decide which six boys aren't going to have a den?" will work. More practically, I would agree with bbenders approach -- lay out all the resources available to them and make sure they understand the program. For one, make sure they understand that as the TDL, they are responsible for coordinating the den program among the other parents. Each of the other parents are responsible for planning the den meetings on a rotating basis. Truthfully, TDL doesn't have to be a huge burden. It's less of a commitment than teaching Sunday School or coaching a team. And there's lots more help and resources available.

Whitehair -- you misunderstood my point and/or perhaps I wasn't too clear. I don't get too wound out about the fine points about what I should and should not report to the because my DE and I frequently talk about all sorts of stuff. I would have given him a heads' up on SMB's irate parent whether or not I thought it was a youth protection violation. Without question, anything that comes up which could be marginally construed as a real youth protection violations will result in a phone call.

I don't get too wound up over the actual reporting criteria. I have a relationship with my district executive -- and to a lesser extent the scout executive -- that I could call up and say, "I know this is probably not a big deal, but I have an issue in the troop I need to run by you." If nothing else those guys appreciate the heads' up so when the irate parent calls them, they're not blind-sided. And if they know both sides of the story, they're much more likely to be in a position to give good advice (usually to the benefit of the unit) instead of having to say to the parent, "I'll look into it and get back with you." It's more than erring on the side of caution, which we should all do. It's about a good working relationship and good lines of communication.

And adding to ed's comment, likely the biggest problem with den chiefs are those who are DCs strictly for the convenience of their parent, the den leader. I've had boys almost drop Scouting entirely because their parent hauled them to every Cub event. And I've seen boys who were den chiefs of their parent's den sit and do homework or play video games the entire meeting. While Scoutnut is correct that the den assignment is up to the Cub Master, I would certainly hope the Cub Master and Scoutmaster have a working relationship such that they understand the needs of both units and make mutually-beneficial den cheif assignments. It needs to be a two-way street -- make that a three-way street, including the needs/wishes of the den chief. A Cub Master would be a fool to shoe-horn a Den Chief into a den against the advise of the Scoutmaster, regardless of the reasons. I suppose I'm lucky in that the fellow who cordinates the den chief program is the immediate past Cub Master and still has a foot in both programs. He is the one who really makes the den assignments. Absent any other compelling issues, our priority is to assign den chiefs starting with the Webelos II dens and working our way back. Of course we look at the den meeting schedule and make sure the DC and make the meetings. We also consider the DC's age. I wouldn't put a 12-year-old DC in a Webelos II den. There needs to be more age separation between the Cubs and the den chief than that. WebIIs aren't going to give a 12-year-old DC the same automatic respect they would give to a 15- or 16-year-old.

Maybe it's not a Youth Protection issue, but I would consider it a youth protection issue. Big YP or little yp, it is our number one responsibility to protect the youth in our charge. Exactly how would depend on what 'Buster means by "berating the Patrol Leader." Did the dad calmly and rationally explain to the PL why he disagreed with what had happned or was the guy in the PL's face, scream, spitting, flailing about and trying to intimidate the PL? Big difference, although both reactions would have been inappropriate for a parent. At the end of the day, I'd say removing the family from the troop was the proper action. If a Scout refuses to follow troop/BSA policies and the parent fails to back up the unit leaders -- and especially if they actively working against the unit -- they need to go.

No. Scouts were given hard copies of their merit badge completion at jamboree. They should have turned them in to their home troop. Jamboree staff also entered the merit badges into the Scout's Scoutnet records in real time. You should be able to pull the records from there. We don't use e-advancement so I'm not familiar with how to access Scoutnet. Maybe someone at your council office can help you with that

Back in '07 when the program began, I was the point person on it for the district committee, along with the district commissioner. One of the selling points was the "upgraded" patches which would culminate in a really great patch for units which made quality unit all four years. Anyone know if there is something special planned? Have you seen the 2010 patches?

None of the books seem to hold up well. Problem with the spiral bound books is that the boys leave them folded open so the regular pages take the abuse, not the covers. Of course they usually leave them folded open to the sign-off pages so they're the first to fall-out -- not good when those sign-offs are supposed to be the permanent record of your advancement. The binder sounds like a good idea, but another thing that works are the nylon/velcro covers BSA sells. Yes, it's another $14 to BSA but they help. Our pack gave them as crossing gifts to the Webelos one year. That group is the only one with intact books. Maybe you suggest to parent they put them on their son's Christmas list.

Differences -- you guys figure out what's a pro and what's a con: Scouting is much more standardized program. Sure, there are weak units and weak leaders, but if you move cross-country and walk into a new pack, their Bear program is going to be pretty much like the one you left (keep in mind that most of us are so close to the program we could probably spot the differences much better than the average bear.) Sports, other than the rules of the game, vary wildly depending on the coaches. I would be comfortable dropping my sons off at any troop meeting anywhere. I can't say that about sports teams. Scouting has much broader appeal. All sorts of boys can find a niche in Scouting. In Scouting a boy is not limited by physical ability or skill. Thoroughly midocre Scout can and do stick with Scouting until they 18 just because they're having fun. Sports are much more qualitative even to just be on the team. You're going to have to be pretty good to play on even rec teams at 16 or 17. My son tried out for his middle school football team along with 110 other kids. Only 17 made the team. Everyone makes the team in Scouts. The teaching of values is much more overt in Scouting, more directly taught and taught better. Values are a by product of most sports. Values -- honesty, fairness, sportsmanship -- tend to be revealed by sports, not honed. Certain sports -- golf, tennis, etc. -- can become life-long interests, while Scouting, per se, ends at 18. Yeah, I know most of us are still involved way past 18, but not in the same way -- you know what I mean. Most sports teach hard work -- really hard, physical work -- and discipline better and in a more focused way than Scouting. Yeah, we teach personal fitness, but when was the last time you saw a Scout tie lashings until he puked? I think that was the biggest lesson I learned from 8 years of playing football: that I really can push myself to the point of absolute and utter physical exhaustion and it won't kill me. I don't think there is any question the injury rate is a plus for Scouts and negative for sports. In 10 years, I can remember three trips to the ER for Scouts: one concussion, one for stitches and two x-rays (both negative). So far THIS YEAR my son's football team has had two broken arms, one broken thumb, one dislocated shoulder, two concussions (one serious), and one kid who totally destroyed his knee (he's waiting for tibia fracture to heal before he can have surgery for mutiple-ligament reconstruction.)

As Patriots Point is in Charleston, South Carolina, not Massachussetts, I'm assuming you've not been there. First of all, there's not much activity there. The only thing on the shore is a parking lot, gift shop and a mock Vietnam-era operations base which probably won't survive the next hurricane. The ship itself is a couple hundred yards out into what is already one of the busiest shipping channels on the east coast, Charleston harbor and the Cooper River. It's a big, static hunk of steel that doesn't even float. An adjacent marina gets more traffic. Secondly, around here pre-existing uses hold rather large sway. It's unlikely the town (Patriots Point is actually across the harbor from Charleston in the Town of Mt. Plesant) would re-zone the museum to a non-conforming use. As long as the museum conforms to it's zoning, any new neighbors can go pound sand. I don't know if the proceeds from development would benefit the Yorktown itself, but it sure needs the money. They are currently looking as having to spend BIG BUCKS to install sprinklers in the bunk rooms or be forced to end the overnight camping on board which the Scouts enjoy so much. And last, follow the money. Development may be big bucks, but in Charleston, tourism -- especially historical tourism -- is the largest industry by far. You're about as likely to get a McDonald's on the Battery as you are to get rid of the Yorktown.

Come on, now. No one is going to loose their charter over a unit money- raising application. I rank the whole thing a little less serious than not filing a tour permit. And if it is the chartered organization doing the fundraiser not the unit, the CO isn't bound to file an application.

Gotta be fair with you, boomer, that your chartered organizations is doing the soliciting makes a difference. If our CO, a church, goes out and makes direct solicitations with the proceeds benefitting the troop, BSA guidelines don't apply to the CO, as long as they don't mention the Scouts. For that matter, the CO can sell fireworks or hold a raffle if they like. That said, the First Self Righteous Church can solicit donations without mentioning the Boy Scouts, even if that's where the proceeds wind up. It's going to be tough for the Friends of Pack 1 do maintain that same level of separation.

The Yorktown is only a fraction of Patriots Point, most of which is totally undeveloped. Part of the land is a golf course and softball fields. They're talking about developing the vacant land, not scrapping the Yorktown. http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2010/sep/22/new-image-new-value/

Pay a fair price for the merchandise. Is cost fair? Wholesale? Retail? $1? I can't tell you what "fair" means. But what's fair isn't the point. It's the solicitation that violates the guideline. That your unit wants to ask local businesses for contribution neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. Heck, I don't particularly agree with the policy anyway. But as we say at camp school, this is the national policy, whether or not you want to follow it is up to you and your Scout Executive.

Yeah, that was my point. If the day camp folks are running the event and have a proper RSO on the range, I'm not going to be too receptive of some muckety-muck from the council or district creating rules and trying to tell my RSO how to run his range.

I'm not trying to beat up on you, boomer, but read what you wrote. At best you're plying on the good will of troop parents or you're guilting business owners in supporting the program. Either way, it's a direct solicitation of a donation, not a fair exchange of goods and services, which is the BSA criteria. Sure, every sports team in town does the same thing. My wife has boxes of cheap plaques with ball team in jerseys with her name. But she usually sponsors team either because our boys played, someone she know made the ask or it was just plain chairity. I doubt she's ever gotten any business off team sponsorships. But the local rec league isn't the BSA and BSA has policies which prohibit that sort of solicitation. (This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

I suppose the district could implement it's own policies, but until they do, the RSO on duty -- the guy there, boots on the ground, running the range -- who decides who he wants to help him. Maybe I'm getting old and cranky, but if I'm the National Camp School certified camp director and have a certified RSO running my shooting program and we're meeting all national accreditation and shooting sports standards, then I'm going to have a hard time with someone from the district coming in and telling us who we can and can't have assisting on the range. But maybe I'm getting old and cranky.

My copy of the shooting sports book is packed away with the other camp school stuff, but I can tell you there is nothing in there about Boy Scout assistants. There are requrement for certified range safety officers, however it is the RSO's call as to who they want helping them.

I would have called back the next night at 3:15 to ask how their son was doing and if he enjoyed he campout. I'm glad you got a chuckle out of the whole thing. I don't think I would have responded as well. And I sure as heck would not have turned around and made the call to the leaders on the campout.

Um, no. Here's what the guidelines say. "7. Will the fund-raising project avoid soliciting money or gifts? "The BSA Rules and Regulations state, Youth members shall not be ermitted to serve as solicitors of money for their chartered organizations, for the local council, or in support of other organizations. Adult and youth members shall not be permitted to serve as solicitors of money in support of personal or unit participation in local, national, or international events. For example: Boy Scouts/Cub Scouts and leaders should not identify themselves as Boy Scouts/Cub Scouts or as a troop/pack participate in The Salvation Armys Christmas Bell Ringing program. This would be raising money for another organization. At no time are units permitted to solicit contributions for unit programs." That last sentence, by the way, is in bold. So put as much lipstick on this pig as you like, a unit going door to door, business to business asking for merchandise for the silent auction is a violation of the guidelines. Sell lightbulbs, Christmas trees or popcorn all you like, but you can't ask for direct contributions. Whether or not it is cash or merchandise doesn't matter. I dealt with this professionally for a long time. I ran marketing and communications for a company for several years and was a full time consultant for several more. What you're describing is not advertising. We made decisions to support various community groups based on very specific target markets and analyzed the value of their programs the same way we analyzed any advertising buys in newspapers, magazines and billboards. I would pay big bucks to get my CEO in a golf tournament or charity dinner if I knew he would be hob-nobbing with commercial bankers and other money launderes -- um, I mean lenders. We bought a lot of ads in symphony, ballet and opera programs. On the other hand, I wouldn't pay squat to get us in front of your Boy Scout troop. Sorry, your weren't my demograhic. That was another budget and another set of rules. Basically, if someone in the company had a reasonable business relationship with you, and you asked for a contribution to a group you supported, we would make it JUST TO KEEP YOUR GOODWILL. We even had set contribution levels based on the employees' pay grade -- everyone got one $25 contribution a year, VPs got a couple $50 contributions, Exec. VPs had a real budget and the CEO got to do whatever he wanted to. But the key there was we simply wanted to stay in your good graces. We didn't care a wit about what the organization was, it was all about the business relationship we had with the individual. And that's what the fundraising guidelines are seeking to prevent -- units going out and trading on the goodwill of the BSA to solicit contributions. Frankly, they want to save that for the council FOS campaign and don't want units working their side of the street. (This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

The only event I've ever seen described as a silent auction is what SSS just outlined. Like someone else said, a silent auction is just like a live auction, except you submit you bid in writing over a longer period of time instead of bidding in real time with an auctioneer. I don't see how that could possibly be considered gambling. On the other hand, I would question how a silent auction meets BSA standards in terms of how merchandise is collected. The real donation is by the people and businesses who contribute the merchandise. What of value are they getting in return for their donation?