Twocubdad

Personally, it's a piece of 1/4-inch plywood that goes between the mattress and springs of my camp cot. Number two would be a square of carpet for the tent. For the troop, we do a lot of things to make camp fun and homey for the down time spent hanging around the campsite. To me, one of the best parts of summer camp is hanging out with your mates. We make sure we have plenty of lanterns so the guys can play cards and games at night. We have a variety of tools and materials for guys who are interested in working on things like carving, basketry or leatherwork projects. Citronella candles keep be mosquito back. One night we'll have watermellon, a cobbler the next.

We may have plowed this ground before, but can someone explain to me why this isn't being argued on breech of contract grounds? It would seem to me that the Federal/constitutional grounds would be a much more difficult case on both sides, both from the standpoint of being much less certain and the out-of-court PR problems it raises.

If you're trying to find out where YOUR $25 went, I think you're tilting at windmills. The answer is going to be that it's going where ever you wanted it to go. You want your money to go to the camp scholarship fund? No problem. $25 of the scholarship budget will have your name on it. But don't expect that the scholarship budget will be increased by your donation. It will just have your name on it. United Way has been playing this game for years with their "designation" program. Unless you have the money to designate that your contribution goes to something specific -- "the shotguns at summer camp are junk, here's $2,500 to replace them" -- you should consider that your money is going to the general operation of the council. Yes, that includes professional salaries and benefits. Yes, that includes rent and maintenance on office space. Yes, that includes the lease payment on the SE's new car. But it also inclues the power bill at camp. Chemicals and maintenance for the pool. Gas for the camp lawnmower. Salaries for the folks who run the Scout Shop and process membership applications and advancements. Unless you just want to frustrate yourself, you need to look at the overall operation of your council and consider that your money is going toward that operation, good, bad and ugly. A long time ago BSA decided that professionals would run the administrative, organizational and financial stuff and that volunteers would generally run the program. So when you look at part of the BSA program, let's say Cub Scout day camp, generally speaking it is not being subsidized by the council's general fund. Hopefully, it is run by volunteers and should show a small profit for the council. Not a dime of your FOS contribution paid for day camp. What your contribution went toward is the overall Scouting organization which makes it possible for there to be Cub Scouting in general and day camp in particular. If you're not okay with that arrangement, give your money directly to the program you want to support. Ask your camp ranger what he needs that isn't in the budget, buy it and donate it to the camp. Give the money to the neighborhood troop or pack with instructions to help pay for a boy to go to camp. Then you'll know exactly where your money is going.

Makes you wonder if the recent spate of training mandates will be rolled back if BSA gets with a big judgment in a carpal tunnel syndrome lawsuit.

Looking on Campmor.com, they have a variety of nylon and poly-cotton sheets and bag liners. They also have them in silk in the $40-$50 range. Sounds expensive, but I'm looking at more than three weeks on a camp cot this summer..... Anyone have any experience with this?

Does anyone have a suggestion for camp sheets and blankets for the summer? During the hot months I usually sleep with sheets and a light acrylic blanket, especially at summer camp where we sleep on cots. This past weekend was in the upper 90s with similar humidity. Cotton sheets were like sleeping under a wet kleenex. Anyone have a better suggestion?

We're in the process of examining the whole First Year/First Class theory in our troop. The push to First Class breeds a lot of problems, not the least of which is lack of time to adequately master T-2-1 skills. In the past we've always had a mad scramble for everyone to serve as patrol cook for the First Class cooking requirement. The way it worked meant that when you met the requirement was likely the only time you served as patrol cook. Our challenge to the boys now is for it to be the BEST time you served as patrol cook. So we're going at a little more slowly. Maybe we emphasize First Class/First 18-to-24 months. The other negative effect of First Year/First Class is setting the expectation to blow through Boy Scout ranks like Webelos activity pins. Scout, Tenderfoot, Second Class and First Class in one year, but you want me to do Star, Life and Eagle over SIX YEARS?? There's a disconnect. Except for stretching T-2-1 over more like two year, the progression artjrk laid out seems about right. Probably less than a year to Star, about a year to Life and another 18-24 months to Eagle. That generally put a Scout at Eagle sometime around 16 and maybe in the 10th grade -- all greatly plus and minus. I think we owe our Scouts their best opportunity to learn ethical decision making, citizenship, character development, fitness, leadership and all the stuff Scouting promises. That best opportnity comes over a four or five years and at different levels of maturity. A 12- or 13-year-old Eagle has not been given the best opportunity Scouting has to offer. When I do conferences with young boys for Tenderfoot, I always ask if there is a point of the Scout Law they don't understand. It's ALWAYS either Thrifty or Reverent. So I have them pick up their handbook and read the book definition. I explain that as a Tenderfoot Scout, I want them to understand the dictionary definition of the words. But part of growing as a Scout is taking the time to think about what the Oath and Law means to them. I tell them by the time they are sitting down with me for a Life or Eagle conference, I want them to tell me what they believe it means, even if that may disagree with what the book says. A 12- or 13-year-old Eagle has not had the time for that sort of growth.

No blue cards are needed. Boys will be given multi-part forms to bring home showing what the completed. Like you, BS, I believe there is a purpose in requiring the Scoutmaster to sign a merit badge card BEFORE a boy begins work on a merit badge. I won't necessarily authorize just anything. For example, I discourage with extreme prejudice our guys from working on Communications, Family Life, Personal Management or the citizenships at summer camp. There's not good reason to get these MBs at camp (except that it's much easier); the instruction from our troop counselors is much better; and sitting through a class at camp the boys miss the part of the merit badge program which requires them to make and keep appointments, prepare for a meeting, work with a real expert in a field and develop a relationship with an adult counselor. But for the special opportunities jamboree affords I'm willing to look the other way. I would hate for one of my guys to miss an opportunity to earn a merit badge with someone really significant just because they don't think I would approve. I've told my guys going to jamboree to please not take those MBs just because they're available. But if they get a really significant opportunity -- Communications with Tom Brokaw? Citizenship in the Nation with David Souter? (I'm making those up, it that's the kind of possibilities out there) -- GO FOR IT! But if they do, to be fair to the guys not going to jamboree, I asked the boys to please bring the materials home from jamboree, get a troop blue card and go over the merit badge with one of our local counselors. The Scouts are old enough to understand the situation and reasoning and I trust their judgement.

Really, wizzing in the woods is now a YP issue? Seeing someone's fully-clothed back while they pee in the other direction is a violation of privacy? Used a urinal lately? Okay, pretty clearly this guy has some wrong ideas of what is appropriate with 7 and 8 year olds. My biggest concern would be with the unwanted flirting with ladies in the pack. The Barbie song is over the line, too. But could it be that you got miffed with the CM over his lack of attention regarding the schedule, then saw the rest of the campout through that filter? I'm not certainly not saying what this guy did was okay, but your laundry list of issues seems a bit over the top. I also consider five of seven leaders on the trip were apparently okay with the guy's behavior. You attribute this to them being buddies with CM. Could it be that they didn't see the problems as being as serious as you? Still, as a parent of a boy in the pack, your perception of the pack leadership is valid. If you have an issue with it, you should address your concerns with the pack leadership, be that the Cubmaster, committee chairman or chartered organization. Perhaps that will result in a change in direction or even a change in leadership. But if the rest of the pack is okay with the behavior, you and your son need to find a unit which better fits your family's values. Of course, if you believe violations of youth protection standards have occured, you're obligated to report them to the Scout Executive. But I think problems like this are best handled on the ground in real time by the people there. The moms in the group needed to let the lout know that his flirtations were making them uncomfortable -- or at least talk to someone who could intercede on their behalf if a direct conversation would have been uncomfortable. A similar conversation about the Barbie song was in order. The wizzing in the woods was handled properly, up to a point. When the CM grinned and blew off the den leader who asked the boys to go to the latrine, they needed to have a conversation about the leaders supporting one another and the example the adult were setting for the boy. If someone wanted to press the point, they could have taught the boys proper back country sanitation of going 200 feet off-trail and digging a cat hole. That much work sorta takes the fun out of peeing in the bushes. One of the things that struck me about your posts is that this guy is an Eagle Scout. Eagles can be the best or worst adult leaders. Sometimes old Eagles want to relive their days as Scouts. Maybe this guy's best memories of Scouting were building too-big bonfires and peeing in the woods. What he doesn't remember is that he was a Scout prior to the era of Leave No Trace, youth protection and and female adult leaders. Some old Eagles have a hard time making the transition from Scout to Scout Leader, no matter how old they are. Based on your post, sounds to me like this guy lacks the maturity I, personally, would want to see in a Cubmaster. But he sure has the enthusiasm. If a couple thoughtful, sincere conversations with some sage Scouters could get this fellow to see his proper role, he could be a great leader for your boys. I would give him the chance.

More editing that substance: For sake of simplicity, my senior guys refer to the "six parts of the uniform": hat, necker, shirt, belt, pants, and socks. As in, "remember all six parts of your uniform for dinner tonight." Recently they've started calling the handbook the "seventh" part of the uniform. This is more personal preference/pet peeve, but I try not to use Class A and Class B as they arent't really part of the BSA lexicon. I always use Field Uniform and Activity Uniform, but usually define what I mean, and most of the time have to follow up with , "you know, class B." Similarly, I would label the section Uniform Expectations instead of policy or guideline. That better fits the philosophy of what you're saying.(This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

Although you didn't say so directly, may I assume the new troop will be registered to the pack's chartered organization? This depends on your relationship with the DE, but if you are the new District Commissioner, I assume you have some juice in the district. Creating a new troop at an existing chartered organization to serve the boys graduating from an existing pack is of greater significance than if this guy just wanted to go off and start a troop all by himself. There are several important relationships which need to be nurtured and several important bridges in danger of being burned. Suppose the CM/SM starts the new troop and it crashes and burns. The chances of the CO and the pack parents wanting to start another troop in the near future are greatly dimished. And that's a great shame. The synergy between related packs and troops greatly improves the Webelos-to-Scout transition and increases the retention rate from Cubs to Scouts. Now is the time the new Commissioner (you) sits down with the district executive and, if necessary, the field director (his boss) and explains why this troop is a bad idea. Not only are you the guy who has to sweep up after this little circus parade-- the commissioner -- but you also have pertinent insider information on the potential leadership of the new troop they need to know. If the DE is worth his silver shoulder tabs, he will go slow with the new troop. While he may be hot to trot to register a new unit, he should realize burning a committed CO with a troop with a low chance of survival is very short-sighted. I also think you need to try talking (again?) to the CM/SM and let him know why you think this is a bad idea. He's running on empty running as WDL and CM and he wants to add the responsibility of adding a poorly-staffed troop? This is a bad idea on so many levels someone in the pack or district needs to pull the plug.

Our rule is that not all the leaders can be P.O.'d at the same kid all at the same time. Someone has to keep cool. Generally, and as others have said, the way we avoid friction between any two people in the troop -- youth, adults, brothers, fathers and sons -- is to keep them separated. We try to do that structurally, when possible, by not assigning dads to work with their sons and keeping brothers in different patrols,etc. When an unforseen problem arises, we reassign folks to keep sufficient distance. As Scoutmaster, it's my responsibility to keep an eye out for that. But that's also one of those things where it's good if mutiple see it as their joint and several responsibility to solve problems. Mabe a little different twist from what you are asking about, but as the Scoutmaster, my view is I'm the one guy who can't walk away. ASMs can be given different roles, BOR members can recuse themselves, different merit badge counselors can be found. But the Scoutmaster is always the Scoutmaster. In nearly seven years in the troop, I've had one Scout with whom I just could not work and another when I was around I really had to bite my lip and swallow hard. But I tried really hard to treat those boys as fairly as any other Scout. That's really tough, especially when one of the boys spent a great deal of time and effort tormenting my own son. That Papa Bear reflex is a tough one to overcome. But I don't get to be Scoutmaster for part of the troop. Neither are with the troop any longer. In both cases the boys clearly were not interested in Scouting but were involved at their parent's insistence. That was reflected in their attitude and behavior. Ultimately their behavior did them in. One was dismissed from the troop outright. The other was suspended for a time and chose not to return. Fortunately, I have enough bench strength in the troop leadership that others can help. When it came to dealing with the behavior of these two, we would have mutiple adults sit in on the conferences with the boys and their parents. While I, the Scoutmaster, was still there and involved, I said very little and let the others take the lead.

For a long time I thought everything we needed was in the Oath and Law, too. But over the past few years, the troop policy book has grown. It originally began as a new Scout/parent orientation book, but has grown to include some other stuff, too. The bulk of it is the orientation material. Basically a distillation of what you would get from basic SM training, but for really targeting the parents. We do include a four-page "Expectations for Scout Behavior" which is long on what we expect Scout to DO, not just what not to do. We have one list of minimum expectations, another list of expectations for Scouts wishing to advance or in Positions of Responsibility and another list of expectations of parents and adult leaders. There is one section of Thou Shall Nots lifted from the council summer camp policy and is the same obvious stuff you see everywhere. There is a section on consequences which outlines the progression of responses from PLC to Scoutmaster to Committee. It is very clearly spelled out that the leadership will do what is appropriate each individual situation and DOES NOT try to create a standard list of punishments and infractions. One of our neighboring troops has something which resembles the Federal Uniform Sentencing Guidelines. They have a point system based on the seriousness and of the infraction. Good grief! We do include an attendance policy based on old, no numerical standards approach, not the current registered=active approach. And no, I'm not going to discuss it, but thanks for asking! There is a short section on uniforms (wear them), handbooks (bring them) and camp stoves (don't let them blow up) which was left over from the days when we had leaky liquid fuel stoves. Obviously, I think our policy is pretty reasonable. Mostly because it really isn't a policy book as much as it is a Standard Operations Manual. It's more an attempt to capture some of the institutional knowledge we've gained. I frequently tell our Scouts not to pay tuitition for the same lessons twice. I think one of the reasons for wanting a policy manual is that parent's expect one, especially when the metal meets the meat. How can you weasel your kid out of trouble if there's not loop to find a whole in? From that regard, our policy book is really a non-policy book. It very strongly says that the troop has the flexibility to do what it thinks best in any given situation.

ASM1 with a troop. Are we going to have a Scouter.com reunion somewhere or what?

I'd say it's too big when it is clear that the project is beyond the scope of the Scout to provide leadership. I don't want to disparage your Scout, Frank, or get into a debate since I don't know the boy and you do. But I've never met a 16-year-old capable of REALLY raising $80k and running the construction of a house. Maybe this guy is the one in a million, but most mega-scale project (in Scouting and out) almost always have a parent or two behind the curtain, pulling the levers. I would rather see a boy build a few picnic tables for the local park and truely manage every aspect of the project.

We have probably 100+ ribbons on the troop flag some going back 30 years. Doesn't bother anyone here. If you really want to do it right, buy an archive-quality scrapbook from University Products (Google it). I know they sell scrapbooks sized for full-sized newspaper pages. They used to be in the $50-60 range.

I'll try that at work. "Gee, boss, I know I'm supposed to improve sales and I sold the same this month as last, but it was a lot easier for me this month. That's an improvement, right?"

Unfortunately, I've had some recent experience with this sort of behavior. First and formost, do not fall into the aggressor scout parents' idea their son is any sort of victim here. Don't let them sidetrack you with what others may have done or gotten away with, or what other Scouts or leaders should or should not have done. The only reason you're in this situation now is because of the inappropriate behavior of their son. That needs to be the focus. He intentionally hurt someone, apparently more seriously than he intended, but he hit the boy with the purpose of embarassing and causing him pain. That's serious. Beavah's use of the term "sexual assault" is not inappropriate. That the boy has apologized and tried to make amends is to his credit. But the bully and his parents don't get to dictate when it is over and done with. The troop and still has a role in the matter. The Scoutmaster's solution for the boy to make a presentation to the troop is a reasonable one. That the parents have declined is one of the most troubling aspect of the situation. They clearly aren't on board with correcting their son's behavior, so the troop must deal with it. If suspension or expulsion is on the table, so be it. BSA insurance is set us specifically to cover deductibles and other non-covered expenses in a situation like this. I have a little different take on the insurance compared to Beavah, Esq.'s more detached, professional approach. Frankly, that the insurance will protect the bully and his parents from any real consequences bothers me. They should be paying full hospital bill, IMO. But I know the world doesn't work that way anymore. As to the crew's involvement, first, I don't know enough about the Venturing program to have an opinion about the Gold Award. I understood you to say the two units are attached to the same chartered organization. In absolute terms, the troop and crew are separate units and one shouldn't have anything to do with the other. But neither would I allow the boy to play Bonnie and Clyde with the state line. I think you need to get the Chartered Organization Representative on board with you. If I were the COR for the troop and crew, I would want to make sure that consequences from one unit follow through to the other. This is especially true given that the boy has displayed similar behaviors in both units. Just because he's playing for two teams doesn't mean he should get six strikes. (This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

Three years ago our troop went to a totally fee-based model. We have always charged annual dues to cover registration and general operating expenses. Currently we charge $90 per year which is below average for the troops in our area. A few years back we needed to make some serious upgrades to our troop camping gear but our main fundraiser was making less and less every year and had gotten to the point that it just wasn't worth the effort which went into it. At a court of honor, where we had a good crowd of parents, we threw the problem to the floor. With one exception, every family in the troop says, "how much do we write the check for?" Since then we have charged a one-time equipment fee to new scouts of $125. Given the size of our brother Cub Scout Pack, we are in heavy growth mode and add one or two entire patrols every year. That's a lot of camping gear to buy. We do allow the new guys to pay the $125 over a two-year period if the want/need to. And from time to time we've waived the fee in certain cases. Rarely do we charge a fee for a camping trip. Last year we did a shooting sports weekend and charged $10 per scout for ammo. Food, however, is handled by the patrols and the grub master is responsible for collecting food from everyone who goes on a campout. Usually runs about $12-15, depending the number of meals and the menu. Although we don't really do troop fund raisers anymore, we are allowing our Scouts to participate in a discount book sale the council is conducting. We are in a fairly affluent area, but with the economy, we are seeing more families struggling (mine included). This is purely an individual thing and 100% of what the troop would earn goes to help pay dues, summer camp or other fees. But we're trying very, very hard not to turn it into Scout Accounts. We will probably do the same thing with popcorn in the fall.

Somehow I knew you guys would focus on shot glasses.... This is indicative to the level of management we have. YP training has been around, for what, nearly 20 years? So why the fire drill now? Lisa is right, requiring YP training isn't a big deal and could have been implemented quickly. But retroactively? How much more rational would it have been to set September 1 as the effective date? New adult applications could be printed reflecting the requriement. eTraining could be set up to give you a confirmation number for completing the course which include on the application which would tie back in to your Scoutnet record when it is created. There are 100 things which could be done to make the policy change smoother and more effective. The way it is being handled, they're going to tick off a bunch of brand-new volunteers by handing them their applications back, they're going to throw the council registrars in to a tizzy, they're disrupting rechartering for the next two months. And for what? To stroke someone s ego because they can slam their hand on the desk and say "I want it done now." This will probably all shake out and settle down in a couple months either way. But in a couple months, they could have implemented a rational rolled out. But what fun is that? Break out the Cub Scout shot glasses! (This message has been edited by Twocubdad)

This is what make scouting such a great program. Through scouting you have been given a perfect opportunity to show your son a very important life lesson: if you want something enough, work hard for it. Adults often try to teach those lessons in what is glacial time frames for kids. In the sixth grade we tell them to study hard so they can get in a good college and later get a good job. Means nothing to a boy. But one of the advantages of this activity pin requirement is the quick turnaround. I'm sure in a few weeks of working out, your son can not only achieve his goal, but gets the fairly immediate recognition of receiving the pin. Yeah, you can probably parse the language of the requirements and find or create a loophole. Or you could advise him to start the requirement over, this time sand-bagging on the initial, benchmark tests. He would learn something from that, too.

... or the lack thereof. So in the parent thread we read that BSA has announced -- well not really announced, more like let it slip, sorta told a few people, but you kinda have to know the right people and where to look, if you know the right questions to ask -- that youth protection training is now required BEFORE an adult may register as a leader. This is effective YESTERDAY. It seems clear to me at either, 1) this really wasn't effective yesterday and there will be some leeway in implemention, or, 2) there will be a whole bunch of ticked off people showing up at councils for the forseeable future. My question is, why is it so dad-gummed difficult for BSA to figure out how to launch a new program and communicate that to it's members? If I can get an email from ScoutStuff.com letting me know that BSA fly paper and Cub Scout shot glasses are on sale, why the hell can't they communicate something substantive to us? Twice now we've received emails from national about jamboree staff registration that was later recinded because they used the wrong distribution list? How about the whole debacle surrounding the roll out of the historical merit badges this winter? Did anyone else just get the online survey from scoutingmagazine.org about what you would like to see in the magazine and on their web site? How about fewer breathless articles about the Tiger Den climbing Everest and more meat-and-potatoes articles about the program.

Interesting. As an old CSDC director, I'm curious to see if/how they integrate the programs. Is it possible they are running separate Cub Scout and Girl Scout programs at the same location? A number of years ago our day camp numbers were through the roof, including about 100 adult volunteers with 75 "tag-a-longs" of various ages. Among the tag-a-longs there were enough Girl Scout-aged girls that we put the girls into a den and run it as a Girl Scout program for the week. A couple of moms who had volunteered to help with the day camp were also Girl Scout leaders. We had them put together a program for the girls utilizing the day camp activities with some of the Girl Scout program elements. Generally, the girls did much the same thing the boys were doing, but I think once or twice during the day they would pull out of the den rotation to do Girl Scout-specific stuff. My recollection from that experience was that it really didn't work out as a Girl Scout program. The girls had a blast -- Cub Scout camp was a whole lot better than Girls Scout camp -- but they didn't really get much Girl Scouting out of the week. I would hate to see that happen at a cub day camp. Cub Scout day camps are programmed to deliver the Cub Scout program. There is more to it than hanging out in the woods, canoeing, shooting BBs, and making crafts. It may look that way to the casual observer, but if the camp program director is doing his/her job, there is a much greater depth to the program. Honestly, I don't know enough about the Girl Scout program to understand how the programs would mesh. But if combining the programs requires turning them in to generic Camp Runnamuk camp program, I would not support it.

LOUISIANA! I thought you meant south Los Angeles. A whole different set of problems.

Hopefully your just passing entire dens on to the next level, not holding up boys' rank advancement so you can give them out in mass. We did this at the year end picnic about this time of year. The pack paid for and gave each boy his den neckercheif for the next year as well as a service star. For the rising Webelos IIs, who would be wearing the same necker in the fall, we gave them name BSA name plates. They were generic enough for the Webelos to continuing wearing as Boy Scouts and became a real source of pride for the older guys.