Hawkwin

1 hour ago, mrkstvns said:

I disagree.

I've seen camps that restrict shooting activities, but when I've asked about the reasoning behind it, it's usually that the class is too popular and they don't have the resources to accommodate every kid who wants to do it. So an age restriction might be effective. 

There's certainly no valid excuse otherwise for restricting Rifle Shooting.

???

If you want to argue the validity of their rule, that is fine, you are welcome to take it up with them. That doesn't keep them from having the rule despite what your opposing opinion.

You asked what they should sign up for at camp. I replied that some STATES (as in state law) councils and camps restricted shooting based on age at their facilities so for first year scouts, there might be better alternatives.

1 hour ago, mrkstvns said:

 

Also, the general rule of thumb in BSA is that any registered scout is eligible to earn any merit badge.  Rifle Shooting is not something that requires exceptional strength, agility or skills beyond what an 11-year old typically has. A .22 caliber rifle has virtually no kick and is easily handled by even the smallest Tenderfoot. On the other hand, a 20-gauge shotgun does have some kick, so a conservative instructor might want kids to put off doing Shotgun Shooting for a year or two. 

I didn't comment on eligibility. I commented on what may be allowed at summer camp. You seem to infer that I am personally opposed to shooting for 11 year olds when in fact, I am simply trying to inform you and others of the obstacles one might face.

For example, take this thread from this very site:

Lastly, there may be an assumed maturity issue at play that has nothing to do with physical ability. A .22 is still a deadly weapon and some states, councils, and camps might find that their insurance rates are better if they restrict such activity to older youth.

16 hours ago, mrkstvns said:

Every year, parents of first year scouts ask, "What merit badges should my son sign up for at summer camp?"
Every year, I hear different responses from the SM and from the different ASMs. Some of the responses make sense. Some don't. 

What I usually recommend is a 3-point approach:

...

- Rifle Shooting

 

Note that some states, councils and specific summer camps restrict shooting activities by age. Rifle and other shooting sports might be better suited as a recommendation for second or third year scouts.

As an alternative, water craft MBs would be a good fit for summer camp as they not only require large(r) bodies of water, they also require otherwise expensive craft that scouts and scouters may not have access to otherwise.

My other recommendation would be to take those that are very difficult to complete within your troop or council due to required expertise and/or lack of MBCs. Scuba immediately comes to mind.

You might find this of interest as well:

https://scoutingwire.org/these-5-women-made-scouting-history/

Yes. Both at District and of course Nationals.

Edit: Could not remember her name so had to go look her up. Not sure if you consider this position "executive" or not:

https://www.scoutingnewsroom.org/about-the-bsa/national-leadership/national-commissioner-volunteer/

21 hours ago, qwazse said:

My take: people of various affiliations who gathered together on a national plaza expressed their dislike for one another's associations. Nobody was shoved, punched, stabbed, blugeoned, or shot. It was a good day for freedom of expression in America.

If only it would end there. I have seen information copied from social media where the contact information for the school, the principal, the superintendent, and the diocese has been posted to allow people to share their "opinion" about just how wrong the students were.

With the rush to judgment comes for some the rush to respond - usually in less than helpful ways.

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2019 at 9:40 PM, David CO said:

His so-called "smirk" might have simply been his attempt to smile (as instructed) while being faced with a very uncomfortable situation.

Agreed.

Considering his age, who are we (or who is anyone) to attack him based on an inference of what his likely nervous smile should mean? Heck, my wife "smirked" at me last week, good thing no cameras were there.

I agree it does few a little odd to advance from one term with a qualifier (cub) to a term without one, and then potentially to another term that adds the qualifier back on.

That being stated, there has been a long history of the military doing something very similar (and I always thought that was odd too).

This is most apparent in the Navy where you have LT Junior Grade, followed by just LT, followed by LT Commander, followed by just Commander. Also, Vice Admiral, Admiral, Fleet Admiral.

I don't have a good recommended solution. Perhaps in keeping with some of the other formats of naming conventions, one should move from cub to scouts, to scouts "something" or just "Venturer" (which is rather awkward to enunciate.)  I'd call for Venturing and Venturers to be renamed Pathfinders but that would probably face its own copyright challenges from the Seventh-day Adventist. Great name for a youth org.

12 hours ago, Treflienne said:

The more I learn about BSA it seems to me that the single-grade small girl scout troops are to the service unit a little like dens are to the pack.

I wish that was the case but at least locally, my daughter has no interaction with any other troop/"den" that would be part of the service unit. All troops operate in silos even more insular that BSA troops. I WISH that they could meet with other GS troops on a regular basis. Think of the things they (and we) could learn from one another.

I have a success story in the making!

A female Webelos - the only one in her pack, recently visited my son's troop to satisfy one of her AOL requirements. She visited us from the next council and county over. As the den leader for my daughter's AOL den (in yet another council and county over in the other direction), we invited her join us at our den meetings. She earned her Looking Back Looking Forward elective with us at our last meeting and will be joining us tomorrow to satisfy Build a Better World #4 - when we are visiting with yet another local pack who has invited the local school board president.

We are finding ways to make things work.

It is a great feeling to know that our little act of kindness to her has made her feel a greater part of scouting. We are hopeful that if we start a troop in February that she will be one of our founding members.

Me: "Valkyries Approach!"

Den: "Lead the Way!" (Patrol Yell)

4 minutes ago, Terasec said:

girl scouts bsa will be coming from other groups

In my pack, the vast majority of girls came from "no where." They were not members of any other scout-based youth organization. In my den, two girls are CURRENT GSUSA members (so dual membership) and the other is a girl that quit GSUSA two years ago.

So, no "acquisition" from any other competing organization. No other organization can claim "dibs" on them.

2 hours ago, 69RoadRunner said:

The Cub Scout model is terrible now. Cub Scouts was one of the few non-sports activities for just boys.  There are many more for girls.  Now that's gone.

The pack sees my den of girls about once a month for 90 minutes or less. Hardly a terrible experience.

21 minutes ago, Terasec said:

it is poaching,

only reason not mentioned in lawsuit is poaching is not illegal, 

 

?!?! Poaching, by definition, is an illegal act.

2 minutes ago, Eaglein87 said:

Nobody said owned. That is a ridiculous comment.

Poach: illegally hunt or catch (game or fish) on land that is not one's own.

3 minutes ago, Eaglein87 said:

GSUSA sure feels like BSA is trying to take their membership.

No, girls are not their membership (there again you convey ownership).

Additionally, GSUSA made no such claim. To quote, "[GSUSA] claim the move by the Boy Scouts will “marginalize” the female organization and “erode its core brand identity.”

Further, "Since BSA’s announcement that it would admit girls to its core programs, GSUSA’s fears about the damage that would be caused to its trademarks and the mission those trademarks symbolize have been realized."

No claim of "poaching" members otherwise belonging to GSUSA.

10 minutes ago, Eaglein87 said:

 Also the idea to replace the LDS numbers with girls poaching girls scout membership resulting in additional litigation.

The litigation from GSUSA is really rather trivial at this point and I don't imagine that such could come anywhere close to pushing BSA into chapter 11.

And "poaching?" Really? As if GSUSA owns girls?

3 hours ago, Eaglein87 said:

So somebody tell me how Bankruptcy is a sign that we have competent leadership at the top that are making decisions in the best interest of the Boy Scouts.

The leadership we currently have is not necessarily responsible for the failings of past leadership that resulted in so many sexual abuse cases. There may simply be nothing any competent leadership team can do to overcome that potential financial burden.

17 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Even though I failed to teach my kids Arabic,

Ha! My daughter said to me last night, "Yalla yalla!" for the first time.

I can't get her to do much of anything I ask her to do but my little bit of slang Arabic apparently sticks with little effort. I guess it worked on my too as the only Arabic words I remember from my military days are Imshi, Yalla, Ma salama, and of course As-salamu alaykum and Wa-Alaikum-Salaam (though no one every seemed to say the "a" of alaykum or the Wa")

2 hours ago, Treflienne said:

Hi @Hawkwin

Selective quoting there.  You missed the part where I said

It is a different picture if the new family is willing to always have an adult available to help out.

GSUSA troops have nothing like a committee chair or a committee to help recruit additional adult leaders or to handle paperwork.  

We are way off in tangent land but "paperwork" sounds like an excuse. If you have adults already willing to volunteer their time and resources, then ask those same adults to help with the paperwork. I was an active and registered leader as well and I don't recall paperwork being a big impediment to me being a volunteer.

And, as it pertains to the other troops after my daughter's troop folded, I was always willing to help, was simply told "we are full" if I ever even received a response.

I am not trying to say the GSUSA model is easy, it isn't. Frankly, I think it is terrible from both the perspective of a registered volunteer for two years and from the perspective of an active parent, and from the perspective of a parent that wanted to be active. They throw new leaders to the proverbial wolves and hope you can make it up as you go. Additionally, GSUSA simply doesn't make it easy for anyone to join after troops are already up and running. You either join as a Daisy or HOPE you can find a troop willing to take you when you are older.

The two organizations have very different perspectives on how to grow (or maintain) their various franchises as well as how to grow and retain institutional knowledge across those franchise platforms.

2 hours ago, ParkMan said:

But where it's different is imagine you're having this conversation with a den leader - not a Cubmaster.  In the GSUSA system, there's no Cubmaster, no Pack Committee, no treasurer.

Nah. For a den, you can have Assistant Den Leaders. My son's den had 23 boys at one point and the DL has 2 or 3 ADLs. Nothing keeps the GSUSA, and their lack of official positions, from having a very similar solution - and I think it would be even easier for GSUSA since the volunteers would not have the expense of an ADL uniform.

2 hours ago, ParkMan said:

  You've got a den leader and assistant who has agreed to lead his/her kid's den.  The den has 12 scouts today.  You come along and say "I'd like to add my child and have it be 13".  You're probably the fifth or sixth person (if not more) who has asked.  The den leaders knows - if they don't say no, they are going to be leading a den of 20 kids.

I use the den leader analogy because that's really what it is.  These folks are generally not Cubmasters or CC's who are signing up build a bigger troop with multiple groups doing things.  They are the GSUSA equivalent of den leaders who want to lead their child's scout group.

In my daughter's first GSUSA troop, I was an active and registered leader. No official title but I ran two meetings a semester at the request of the troop leader. Again, nothing kept those other troops from asking me to do the same or something similar to make adding my daughter less of a burden.

12 hours ago, Treflienne said:

There are (sadly) some circumstances when that is a quite rational response, actually.  Let's say you have a Brownie troop with exactly 12 girls.  You only need two adults  for going on a field trip.  (Two adults can supervise up to 12 Brownies on an outing,  and you can fit 12 girls into two minivans.)   Add one more girl, and you will need a third adult any time you leave your regular meeting place. 

 

Very easy solution. You ask the new parent to take on an active role in the troop so their daughter can be a member. My daughter was turned away more than once and not once did the rejecting troop even ask me  if I (or my wife) was willing to be a volunteer. I literally had to beg to find her a troop.

And really, how is this any different than BSA? Have too many scouts to fit into two cars, then someone else will have to volunteer to drive the third vehicle.

When my daughter wanted to join cub scouts, the CC asked me if I wanted to lead the den. I didn't really want to but I accepted the job so my daughter could have this experience. I don't see why GSUSA should approach growth in such a different and more exclusive manner.

Doesn't seem like a rational response.

Unless I missed it, I didn't see anywhere in that link that said what to call the actual girls that are in Scouts BSA.

As far at troop numbers our council (or maybe just our district) appears to have decided to not allow any duplications within the district. Any other troop number is fair game. I like that they will get to pick their own troop number just like they (well, just my daughter at the time) got to pick their own den number.

2 hours ago, Treflienne said:

If you really want to go back to the early days, pre BSA,  go back as far as the Crystal Palace Rally of 1909.   A number of girls showed up there calling themselves "Girl Scouts".   One of those girls was Marguerite de Beaumont who later wrote a biography of Baden-Powell, which my daughter really enjoyed reading.  The book is The Wolf That Never Sleeps and it was published by the Girl Guide Association in England in 1944 (with some later reprints.)  I was able to find it through alibris.com.

Thanks, I was going to cover the rally but I didn't know about the book. Good stuff!

I am working with my AOL den on LB, LF soon and I am trying to nail down the history of girls in scouting. I am seeing conflicting information online as it pertains to when girls were allowed to join Scouts BSA. One reference has it listed as early as 1935 while others have it listed as 1969 or 1971 ("full membership" - which suggests some early version of partial membership). Anyone have something definitive? I even called the national HQ and they could not give me an answer over the phone, said they would have to get back with me. They even acted a bit suspicious and wanted to know why I was asking?!?

2 hours ago, scoutldr said:

they just imposed their interpretation of "morally straight" expected of an Eagle Scout.

But then would they also ask other Eagle candidates about their pre-marital sexual relationships? Seems like this was only an issue because it was so obviously public. If it had been a private sin of the same nature (on-going physical relationship with another person), would they have even asked or much cared? Does the SM discuss pre-marital activity with all their scouts as part of their SMC?

I don't have an issue with it as long as it is consistently applied. One might even suggest that the adult leaders follow the same example.

I heard just this week a scouter proudly tell my scout that he occasionally asked a scout to tie a specific knot while during their Eagle BOR. It was all I could do to not comment in light of the recent Scouting Magazine article.