gumbymaster

I admit that I have not looked up references or sources on this in a long time ...

I have understood that for the last several decades at least, circuses and the like with live animals, the animals have generally been bred in captivity.  And while I understand that there have always been some horrific actions on the part of specific shows, the industry, in general, would treat the animals well and did not overtly abuse them.  Generally state level inspections would check on the welfare of the animals.

Now, I also understand that treated well, even if generally leading to much longer lifespans than those animals would have had in the wild, does not excuse that they are being treated well but in a way inconsistent with their natural instincts.  (i.e. cannot roam free, predators generally got prepared meat instead of hunting, etc.).  In this regard, even zoos are not much better.

I viewed one of the the biggest values in circus and zoos is that they exposed millions(?) of people to animals they realistically would never have been able to see in their lifetimes.  They also became ambassadors for the wild members of their species, allowing for those who did see the animals to personalize the need to preserve some of their natural habitat.  More so than zoos, the circus allowed people to really understand the intelligence that these animals were capable of; and of ways man and beast could co-exist.

I don't think I've seen RBB&B in 40+ years, although our family did tour the winter home site in Sarasota one summer.  I did take the family to see Cole brothers maybe 5 years ago.  I'm glad that they got to see how amazing these animals can be; but like many others here, I'm not sure how I feel about this in the end.  I am conflicted.  I've never been a fan of politically correct, just to be politically correct; but there is more at play here than that.

Imagine the hypothetical world where some animal communication was possible and then animals could choose domestication/labor/acting vs. the challenges of the wild.  I expect that, like the difference in people, the differences in the animals would have some choosing each path - then what would the these activists be left to complain about?

Going back to their Sarasota home, it is just amazing to me to think of the pre 1950's logistics that were involved in getting all the train cars, setting up the tents, homes, animal pens, local labor, advertising, etc. and turning that around to be set up in another town shortly afterwards.  It was literally like having Disneyland come to your town, set up in a day, stick around for two more, and then disappear for a year or two before they returned.

But, let me harp on PoR's a little more. There are no "lesser" positions in a troop. There are some that count for certain rank advancement, and some that don't. There are some that explicitly demand leadership (hint: look for the word "leader", "guide", or maybe "master") on the patch, and some that demand other skills, not necessarily leadership .

Lesser was only intended to reflect less used, not intended to reflect less important.

I generally agree with your points, and would even allow that a person might even be considered a leader simply by picking out a good team to do the job(s); even if much of the implementation was left to others.

I will respect that some on the forum will hold a different view than I do.  I really didn't intend to (re)start an argument, particularly one it seems I may lose (if such things were voted on), I just have a respectful disagreement of the complete separation of management from leadership.

Plan and develop can be done all alone by the scout in the comfort of their rooms, so it comes down to "give leadership to others", this would, in my view, necessitate communicating and/or interacting with the others to be led and/or directed (trained if necessary) in the tasks to be accomplished.  A variety of leadership skills are then practiced in the effort to manage the outcome of the planned task(s).

If one really wanted to play the semantics game "give leadership to others" could also be interpreted in having others lead various aspects of the project.  Which, incidentally, was something that the troop of my youth encouraged ... "A good eagle project could be divided up into task areas of different scopes providing an opportunity for Life and Star candidates to create sub projects" and all that - not really the way things are done today, which is fine.

I will continue to hold the general view that a well managed project was led well and a poorly managed project was poorly led.  I leave open that there are always exceptions.  Just as each boy is different.  Leadership comes in many forms, including those who may not have the extrovert personality of what we commonly call a "natural leader" and replaces that limitation with superior planning and organization skills carried out by a trusted team.

addressing the earlier comment...

As for some of the lessor used positions of responsibility (Historian, Bugler, Librarian, etc.); when I have had a voice in determining such things, it has been a pre-position expectation that the position holder would describe how they saw their role and how it would help the leadership of the group.  At then end of their term, I would judge their success at the PoR by how they held to their own standard for the position.  A bugler for example could be a leadership role if they took responsibility to keeping the unit on the planned schedule.  Did they wake up early to do revile on time, do they do calls for assembly when needed, etc. and are they keeping track of the need, or only doing it when told.  Someone who only plays colors for the flag ceremony, while applying a wonderful skill set, in my view, is not applying leadership to the position.

There's a reason I prefer to use a kayak paddle while taking newer scouts out on the river.

So the question remains....is the boy leading by delegating out the various tasks to boys and adults alike and then doing a "staff" review afterwards to make sure the task is completed?  Sure, that smacks of good management but is it not always good leadership of taking care of his staff and their success with what they were assigned to do?

@@Stosh, you have spoken often on your view of the difference between leadership and management; however, I, personally, view 'management' as I understand it from your use of the term, to be just one of the many styles of leadership.  It can exist together with or independent from other styles such as servant leadership or delegation.  I would still consider the effective management of a project to be a demonstration of leadership.

I also view, terminology aside, the Eagle project to really intend to mean management of a 'large scale' (relative to the Scout's prior experience) project.  This as a way to prepare them to lead/manage efforts in their future.  The Positions of Responsibility are there to let the Scout find their style of leadership (as I understand you to described it) - taking care of their boys, helping them to learn necessary skills and grow into their own leadership roles.  The project really seems intended to apply those skills to achieve a more external goal.

That said, I also would look twice at an Eagle CANDIDATE who delegated the final implementation details of their project to another - in doing this they would lose on all the learning that comes from those 'last minute challenges' that always come up.  While it is true that a 'perfectly' planned project would not have any ... when has anyone seen a perfectly planned project with no need to adapt to circumstances on the fly.

As with most things in Scouting, WB will have its supporters and its detractors. I have yet to see it take a raw Scouter and turn them in to a selfless Scouter. Imagine if the time spent on WB was spent on making a failing unit better, helping a kid who was flailing in rank advancement, developing a true buddy system so that bullying was eliminated in units, etc. Couldn't think of a better use of one's time.

I have my own deep routed issues with Woodbadge, which I have discussed before and will not repeat here.

That said, when my son's troop selected a new Scoutmaster and he came to me for advice for what and how to do the job, I did recommend the Woodbadge course.  He went and recently completed his ticket. 

For him, it was a really good course; while already a division manager or some such in his day job, he found the skills to be useful, and has since done a really good job, in my opinion, as the Scoutmaster.  He likes that the skills fit well with the NYLT training that we send the older scouts to.  He felt that it gave him a really good foundation for what he was supposed to instill upon the scouts as their Scoutmaster.

As for bragging rights; he's been less in your face about it than most woodbadgers I have met.  I'm not sure he wears his beads; but he does wear the neckerchief instead of the troop one.

And having a man involved can't help them to realize that goal?

 

Gee, imagine if the BSA said the goal of making men out of boys meant not having women around to impede that advancement were our narrative. The media and liberals would have a field day.

You and I both know from the I&P forums that there are many here, and in BOY scouting in general, that would subscribe to that philosophy if they could.

I prefer the concept of have an expert teach me so I can also be an expert (gender aside); the Girl scouts seem to prefer the "Proof"/example that women/girls can do it, when they teach the girls.

As  you may have gathered, your problems, while very relevant to you, are common throughout scouting.

One of my first recommendations is to meet with your Unit Commissioner, if you don't know who that is, work with the District Commissioner or District Executive to find out.  This is a person who's job is to mentor you for your roll and challenges.  They are often seasoned Scouters, whom while they may not have dealt with your specific problem before, may have colleagues who have or have other similar experiences to help you.

If nothing else, it will be nice to have at least one person on your side.

It is also probably relevant to ask about your Chartering Organization, if they are active, bring them in.  If you have almost no interaction with them, then you have more freedom.

Find the parents that do care and put them on the committee with you, given specific (small) tasks that each is responsible for.

Once you can start off loading some of the smaller specific and recurring tasks, it will allow you to focus on larger tasks like if a change in leadership is needed.

Best of luck for you

I would rather see experienced Scouters associated with high-functioning unit share their wisdom -- as Roundtable Commissioners, or Unit Commissioners, or New Unit Membership Chairs, or in whatever way they can that can reach the most units/boys -- so that other units can be high-functioning too.  I don't find complaining about some facet of their district or council on the forums to be productive, unless it's done specifically to somehow promote some improvement.  In my limited experience, most faults at the district level seem to be due to a lack of volunteers to staff it, or knowledge how to best serve the units, not due to maliciousness or criminal negligence.

I can understand the sentiment - and I recommend you stay away from the I&P forums then where many of us often forget one or more of the Scout Laws we live by and teach.

That said - airing grievances has a lot of good reasons:

1. It allows others to know they they are not alone and that others have similar issues (kind of like group therapy)

2. While we cannot solve many of the grievances, we feel better for having been heard and acknowledged - which is something that the targets of our grievance often miss.

3. By airing out our grievances here, we are less apt to take them out on or let them boil out into our interactions with our scouts and fellow scouters

4. By airing or grievances, we are less likely to keep them bottled up until we quit - thus this reduces leader burnout and turnover,

and

5. Usually, someone will eventually voice some ideas that may help resolve or deal with the grievance.

Finally, as a RT Commissioner myself, I use the issues raised in these forums to help craft the areas of need that I want to address or discuss at the Roundtable - trying to provide some help before it becomes a problem.  Now admittedly, I haven't really tired to approach issues that are direct confrontations with District or Council professionals or volunteers personally (individually); but we can address the overall need and how to satisfy it.

While I am sure that a suspicion of a predatory aspect - going hand in hand with being male , is part of the unwelcoming position.  I believe that a large part of it is also that part of the point of Girl Scouts is also to teach the Girls that they can do it on their own, to empower them, to know that they do not have to have a man do things for them.

So on the occasions when I have been asked to teach something to my daughter's troop (usually camping or scoutcraft related), I have always tried to be mindful of this aspect.  Particularly in having the girls (or mothers) help each other whenever possible.

This was even prevalent one time when my son was asked to demonstrate setting up a tent for them, one of the girls even said "why do we need boys to show us that", which was true, since I knew that some of the girls have camped and set up tents before.

I think you missed an earlier thread, I can't seem to find it at the moment, where the BSA carefully re-worded their alcohol policy in a way that would permit a private organization renting BSA property to follow their own rules on such matters - without actually saying so.

This is an interesting idea, and could have a lot of potential.

I do not mean to discourage your idea or effort, but there are some real concerns for safety depending on the scale of the effort.  If you are looking for just your troop and/or oa lodge, where you have some way to verify each member, and are willing to moderate or at least review the content you will probably be fine; however, as soon as you start opening this up to Scouts whom you have not met or do not know well, then all the other problems with these types of systems come into play.

For one, if any members are younger than 13, you may be subject to federal guidelines on COPA

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Online_Protection_Act

In addition, have you given thought to how you would validate the scouts applying for membership and making sure that no unauthorized persons become members?

The BSA also has some very strict rules regarding communications between adults and scouts.  If adults are also members of the site, you would need to think about how the rules could be enforced or accommodated; if not, will Scouts turning 18 be kicked off (or restricted from who they could communicate with)?

Another good start would be to review the BSA guidelines on Social Media

  http://www.scouting.org/Home/Marketing/Resources/SocialMedia.aspx

I applaud your initiative.  I hope that you can find a good way to bring your ideas to fruition.  Either way, you will learn a great lesson about how rules (which often have valid reasons) can infringe on the implementation of a good idea.

While it may not be your intention, I can think of at least 3 or 4 merit badges where an effort like this could probably satisfy many of the requirements.

Best of luck.

[ sarcasm on ]

Yes I can clearly see that we would rather not meet at the same time, and risk our scouts being in the same area as those degenerates who are actively working on improving their lives and not drinking.

Maybe we could replace them with a nice book club, where they sit around and drink wine (or other beverages) while discussing their books, and then get in their cars (in the shared parking lot) and go home.

[sarcasm off]

 We had a similar issue once with a training chair. Several units tried to address the issue and she refused to hear our concerns and treated our guys like dung. So the units banded together and simply didn't participate in FOS that year. When asked why we told them. Within two months the council "retired" her, gave her a silver animal of some sort and found someone compassionate to fill her role. 

This may very well be the best use of FoS $ I have ever heard of.  A mechanism for unit(s) to force change at a district or council level when needed.  I guess that means my units would need to have a decent level of giving to make this a credible and effective threat.

Thankfully, I haven't yet encountered these types of horror stories that would require this type of response.

Find another pack that might like to partner with you and go.

My understanding is that the PWD is supposed to be a parent and child working together effort.

For my son's cars ...

He chose the shape and design and draws in on the block

We use the pack's pinewood debry cutting event, most years and adult would cut to the lines and/or use the belt sander.  His Webelos year, he did some of the cutting and most of the sanding.

I operated the tools to cut into what remained of the car for adding weight

He did the painting, although I did help put down tape so the paint went where he wanted it.

We both sanded the axle nails to remove the barbs

I usually applied the graphite (I didn't want that stuff all over my house)

I held the axle nail and wheel spacer while he hammered it in.

He never won his den, but he did have some stiff competition.

Unless the membership form actually has the words "from your Birth certificate" (I haven't checked recently) on it; then it would seem to me, for better or worse to default to at a minimum the legally recognized gender.

I do not know the details of NJ anti-discrimination law, but based on that they apparently allow a person to indicate their gender of affiliation on the legal document of a driver's license; that would imply that at least there, the parents would not by lying, but in compliance with NJ law when completing the form.

If the National had truly cared about this issue, then they should have done a risk assessment, and determined that a change in the wording of the form was necessary.  If they had, than the rights of association would still apply (v. Dale), since they didn't, they are stuck with what they are stuck with.

Just because we all think we know what a boy is, does not make it true.  Changing definitions is what the legal profession lives for.

The National policy change was not one intended to increase membership - no one should really believe that. It was a legal assessment that they determined they would probably lose (since it would now be discrimination of someone who was already a member) or the "cost" of winning (financially or in the public opinion) was not worth it.

It was similar reasoning to the change in adult membership.  The BSA "employs" people (i.e. summer camp staff), and must abide by employment laws; being forced to address it in one space, just made it untenable to fight it in the other.

Just because this fire needs a little more gasoline, the full implication is that, legally speaking, your District DE (or camp staff) could be a gay transgendered atheist, and the BSA could not choose to not employ them for only those reasons - regardless of the program the BSA is trying to promote.  And I will admit, that even 25+ years ago when I was hiring my camp staff, when interviewing non-scout applicants; I never would have even thought to ask these questions - nor would I have been allowed to even then.

We may or may not like the reality of the times, but, for now, that is the reality we must deal with.  We do not do our scouts a service if we hide the realities of the world from them; or spend all our time trying to apologizing to (or gripe at) them that the program they are stuck with is no where near as good as it was when we were boys.

While all the above is correct, and that section need only be filled out when the merit badge is a "partial" ...

1. If the merit badge is not completed in a single meeting, it's a good idea to complete that section and return the card to the scout - so that the scout can move on to a different counselor if something happens.

2. In many areas it seems to be tradition (both what I saw as a youth, what I did with the summer camp staff that worked for me, and what I see on most of my son's merit badge cards now - different councils, different decades) that if all the requirements are completed, the counselor will just write "all requirements completed" or similar across that section so that there is no ambiguity.

When filling out a partial, I know some counselors only fill out the requirement number and initial for the completed requirements - and I can understand why; however, With my summer camp staff I would encourage them to number all the requirements in order (1, 2a, 2b, 3a, ...) , even the ones that were not completed, so that it was easy to see what still needed to be done and what had been completed.

Like you, I wanted to step away from my son's boy scout career as much as possible (although some recent medical issues have necessitated more involvement than I wanted).  I am on the committee to try and make sure the troop stays functional.  I'm trained as an SM and could step in if needed, but only if it was that or the troop folding.

I stayed involved with the pack, because a strong feeder pack is one of the best ways to keep a healthy troop.

And I became a commissioner, to help other units.

Even if you don't want a district committee type position right now, and that is completely understandable, someone with your experience and dedication would make a great unit commissioner or round table staff to help other leaders and units.  Your help in either role, I am sure, would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for all you've done and all you will do in the future.

When my son crossed over to boy scouts, he did not choose the troop I would have chosen.

Before he made his choice, I reminded him of how significant the cub scout pack had become in defining our entire family - from the events and activities we did, to the timing of trips, vacations, etc.  And since I had become a leader, the limitation on skipping events.  I then asked him to think carefully about his choice in troops, because it too, would influence not just his life and development, but that of the entire family.

When he made his choice, I asked him why he chose that unit.  In this case, it was the closest, but also probably one of the weaker units.  Friends were part of the reason, although the majority of his Den went to a different troop (also not one I would have chosen).  But he had good, well thought out (for him) reasons, having to do mostly with the culture, how patient they were when teaching him a skill while at webelos-troop event.  His primary reason against the unit I would have chosen (I tried not to make my thoughts known), was he felt he would be "lost" the the larger troop (even if it was very boy run). 

For me, he had good reasons and that's where we went.  I joined the committee, and have tried to help make the troop "better" (or at least stronger enough that it won't fold).  But I have also had to stay mindful, that If I help the troop to change too much, it will no longer have the culture he liked when he joined it.  So I sit on my hands a lot.  If, when he reaches troop leadership positions, he wants to have a vision for change in the unit, that will be on him.  Not me.

I continue to stay active with the pack, in the hopes that by making sure that bridging cub scouts are well prepared for the boy scouts, they will also help keep the troop strong, and the ones that select that troop as opposed to any of the others in the area, are also doing so because the culture matches what they believe their needs are.

@@Gwaihir,

The nice thing about cub scouts is that in two years, you will be the old guy, no one will remember that you were the new guy.

I feel like all of us who have been suckered into the position are standing around you in a circle chanting "Drink the Coolaid!"

In all seriousness, as long as you are confident that from the start you will not have to do the entire thing yourself (i.e. you have at least some reliable support), then that will give you the time you need to draft additional help and leaders to support your vision.  Sometimes, having this type of change (committee changes after the CM change or vice versa) can be good - if you have a strong vision of what you would like to accomplish.

In my case, I loved doing it, and I was able to bring my vision of some changes I wanted to see, but I was also sometimes intimidated by trying to direct others that had been there and leading the pack (or at least their dens) longer than I had.

Setting up a "typical campsite" and asking the scouts to identify all of the failures to leave no trace (trash, even discarded food waste, dumped water erosion, disturbed grounds, poor fire ring, etc) makes it a little more visual for them; this is often done in conjunction with general instruction on how to set up a campsite, etc.

Then one has to take into consideration, knife control.  It would seem that ISIS has taken on that as a tactic.  I don't know of many knife control laws out there.  Next thing you know we'll all be eating our steaks like a Popsicle on a fork.  

 

http://gizmodo.com/what-knives-you-can-carry-where-in-the-united-states-1697091171

for a general overview

http://www.knifeup.com/

Seems to be a more accurate site for official rules/laws.

lol, wore mine for my son's first B&G... was asked to be the new Cubmaster that same day.  Still debating if I will say yes.  But probably leaning towards it.  

For me, it was a wonderful experience; however, I also had a great pack committee and seasoned (multi-sons) den leaders to support my efforts.

If you can find any remnant of your inner child, and have a desire to improve the scouting experience for your son(s) and the other boys in the unit, then I strongly recommend you accept.