Jameson76

6 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:

Yes, but then the Webelos Den should supply such. It is their requirement to have one, not yours.

 

 

I would have said yes on that, but it is technically not a "Den" event.  We invite Webelos from the two feeder packs at the CO, and from other packs that may be interested in our troop or are looking to complete the requirements for AOL.  Sort of a grey area, as the Webelos have to bring a parent (or adult partner) with them, they tent with that person and they are responsible for transportation.

The visitors do participate in activities with the troop, so likely by rules of G2SS we may in fact need to have a female, or not allow girls to come unless they bring their own registered female leader.  A requirement not needed for the boys, so again we the front line units are sort of left holding the bag so to speak and possibly being the bad guy.

On 8/20/2018 at 9:14 AM, Eagledad said:

What is a "conditional scouter"?

Barry

A new term trotted out (must have been included in some talking points as I heard the term from or local SE when he and I discussed the October announcement) that in my opinion is aimed at marginalizing any type of unhappiness with the changes.  In essence they are saying you are only a "conditional" scouter if your continued membership and support is there only if conditions do not change from when you joined or got involved in scouting.

That is a very poor term and assignment, because essentially everything we do in life is "conditional".  My company has hired me to do a job, I continue to work within my experience and that I can bring value.  If my employer changes those conditions, I may leave.  My wife and I got married, the assumed condition was monogamy (what being protestant and all), I am fairly certain if one of us changed that "condition" then the we might rightfully leave the marriage.

BSA has changed the conditions of the specific program I volunteer for and support.  I am free to make my decisions with regard to ongoing support.

So...question on this topic - 

We have the Webelos come for a campout each year.  Also they visit a meeting during the year.  While we are a large troop (40 +/- on campouts / 90 +/- registered) there are no female leaders that regularly camp nor attend the meetings.  We do have female committee members who work on a large number of items, they are registered and YPT compliant.

When we have the Webelos campout, and if a Female Webelos were to attend (or multiple) would we need to have a registered YPT female leader present to be in compliance?  Note that for the Webelos attending this is not an official Pack event, and while they are guests of the troop on a visit they tent with their parent (or adult partner), do not ride to or from with the troop, and while we do ask for their approximate time they will be in attendance, we as a troop do not assume responsibility.  They are their visiting with their parent who has that responsibility.

Same for the meeting visitation.  Parents bring the Webelos, they shadow during the meeting, we have a parents session.  Will we need a trained YPT female there in case we get some female Webelos?

Just curious what say the New World Order YPT internet lawyers?

1 hour ago, qwazse said:

Is "linked troops" a buzzword for coed? 

And the answer to that is yes....

Most telling is that the "linked troop" model was not part of the October announcement.  That was added later..... "Oh what a tangled web we weave / When first we practice to deceive."

Good article, I found the groups they highlighted were not all the same.

From what I could read the BOLD and GOLD seemed to be ongoing programs, not unlike the Boy Scouts program.  Likely a stable membership group.  That group saw value in the single gender as the groups did activities.  Let them be more open within that group

The Outward Bound and the Lasting Adventures, the Yosemite-based guiding service for young adults may have a different perspective in that they are more single event groups.  The Outward Bound acknowledged that both are good, the Lasting Adventures may be looking at a more commercial focus, the butts in seats need for revenue.  Not saying that their input is not valid, just they are coming at it from different perspectives.

That is going to be the challenge moving forward, (speaking only for the Boy Scouts 11 -17 program) how to balance those that may want single gender and those that want for all intents and purposes coed.  Let's be honest, the linked troop is a coed unit.

For many units they have little to no interaction with other units so the impact will be very minimal.  Our troop does 13 - 15 outdoor activities each year.  The high adventure, Seabase or Philmont is crew based and from a functional perspective will go on as currently operating.  For our troop campouts no changes.  Over the years we have not attended any district or council camporees.  Not that we work against those, just not a high attendance event for the troop.  Not we have 90 +/- Scouts in the unit.  We are patrol based, youth led, and will continue that way.  Not moving to family camping in any way.  The summer camps, we attend 2 each summer, and we wonder what the impact may be.  Likely minimal, but who knows.

I trust the BSA will respect and support the troops / units that desire to remain single gender.  That is what works for them, many have been and continue to be successful.  There is value in both approaches.

4 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

I am dealing with a Scout in a Similar situation. He has exactly 12 months 2 weeks to earn both Life and Eagle. He knew about this all along. And has had multiple opportunities to advance. He knows it is HIS RESPONSIBILITY to meet the  requirements and deadlines, not the adults.

I am working with a Scout that joined when he was 15 or so.  Had been in Cubs, had friends in the troop they told him it was fun, so he joined (we felt good about that)  Also he wanted to do some High Adventure.  Last summer he went to HA, also 2 summer camps.  We sat down at camp and he said he hoped to be a Life Scout.  We did some math, looked at dates, and worked out a table of when he had to (last possible date) achieve ranks and he could earn Eagle.  

He has been diligent and is ahead of the curve, just wrapped up Life.  Went to HA this summer and also a summer camp.  Nice to have an older youth in camp to serve as a JASM and backstop the camp SPL.  Has the POR and has just over 9 months to complete his Eagle requirements.  With the leaders we laid out his path, but it is his path.  He has to take the initiative.  As adults we advise, possibly remind, but at the end of the day, it is the SCOUT who needs to manage his timelines. 

At the Star BOR's we work into the conversation the 6 months, and not to procrastinate as the calendar is a cruel mistress and the sands of time march along.

When the Scout in the article completed Life HE should have looked at the calendar and been aware of the requirements.

Got a couple of others that are in the process, but I get radio silence sometimes when I speak with them, get the "yeah I am working on it".  Remind them as straight forward as possible that 18th birthday is the deadline

33 minutes ago, qwazse said:

But, some pro's should grow a pair, and speak plainly with a sentence like, "He didn't meet the requirements for Eagle, but he's a fine Life scout." No passing the buck to National. Call a spade a spade and then give the reporter your FOS speech and a pledge card.

That is so true...Mr Stockton likely has compensation in the $200k (or better range) and he punts when there is a hard decision to make.  The requirements are very straightforward and clear.  The appeal should have been denied at the local council with the advice that if they wanted to, feel free to pursue with National.

What some may call a Technicality, others will agree that the reason is not being able to fulfill the requirements..."Technically" 2 requirements of the 7

1 - Be active in your troop, team, crew, or ship for a period of at least six months after you have achieved the rank of Life Scout.

4 - While a Life Scout, serve actively in your unit for a period of six months in one or more of the following positions of responsibility. List only those positions served after your Life board of review date. ***

• Boy Scout troop. Patrol leader, assistant senior patrol leader, senior patrol leader, Venture patrol leader, troop guide, Order of the Arrow troop representative, den chief, scribe, librarian, historian, quartermaster, junior assistant Scoutmaster, chaplain aide, instructor, webmaster, or Leave No Trace trainer.

Details in the article

https://amp.lohud.com/amp/975027002

2 hours ago, CherokeeScouter said:

How many districts or councils require these versus districts and councils that don't require them but instead do their own checks with the contact info provided on the Eagle App. 

The reason I ask is that the App doesn't say specifically to provide references. It just says to provide names and info of people who would be willing to talk about the Scouts.

And then an Eagle board member brought up some Scout regulation/provision that says references should be transmitted only via snail mail and not electronically.

Snail mail would be an insane way to do references. No way to track them, ensure they were sent, etc. 

Is he right? Snail mail only? 

Actually the application does call out that the candidate does need to 

- List the names of individuals who know you personally and would be willing to provide a recommendation on your behalf.

And from the G2A

Must list all six (five if not employed). If not affiliated with an organized religion, then the parent or guardian provides this reference. There are no restrictions on who the Scout may list for his two other references. He can list anyone he chooses, including parents or guardians not previously listed, other relatives, Scout leaders including those from his unit, or other Scouts and friends. There is no requirement that any of the references be 21 years of age or older.

2 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

I understand that some adults desire sheltered, unadventurous lives for their kids where they never need to swim, tie a bowline,  hike uphill, camp in the rain, do CPR, secure a tourniquet, etc and will want a pass on learning such never-needed skills. That is not what the Scouting program is about.

Correct, as the point many (oh so many) miss, it is not the destination, but the journey that makes the Scouting program valuable.  Just looking at swimming; there is the practical side and then the growth side.

On the practical side, if you look at deaths among teenagers, about 50% are unintentional injuries.  Of those about 73% are vehicle, but drownings are 5% of those.  There is a real value in knowing how to swim, you may not drown.  Also in swimming MB and sessions a youth may actually get some knowledge on how to swim safely, maybe help a friend at some point

On the growth side, swimming may take some youth out of their comfort zone, actually challenge them to accomplish a hard personal goal.  Again, part of the journey

On 8/9/2018 at 1:32 PM, RememberSchiff said:

That was what I thought  but then I heard this Iowa interview  starting around  minute 2:55

Sometime in 2019, we (Iowa) will have our first female Eagle Scout.

We have groups currently waiting for young women to start...so in 2019 we will have the inaugural  class of girl Eagle scouts.

There will be a big announcement...

Confused? So am I.

Good Lord this guy is all over the board.  Not sure he really understands what is actually going on at the unit level.  Sad that a "professional for 23 years" is as clueless as this dude is.

Not much conversation in our district.  One of our two packs at the CO may be adding girls, but I believe they determined to hold off on Lions (comment was Holy Mother of God...6 years of Cubs!!!!)

For the troop we are continuing business as usual.  Determination is that we will not be part of any linked troop.  If the CO and some currently unnamed folks want to start a Girls troop, we wish them well.  We would be glad to have a conversation on what has worked for us and best practices.

4 minutes ago, VolcanoDunker said:

That's a bit rude and uncalled for, qwazse, smiley face or not.  

As an Eagle Scout, I can tell you from my experience we did this kind of thing all the time without these types of requirements when I was active in Scouting.  Unfortunately, because of outlier incidents in which kids have been hurt, and by the emergence of a highly litigious culture,  we have become a society that is trying to safety proof everything.  This is one more example of it. 

But thanks anyways for the info.
 

Do not shy away from an activity just for fear of litigation.  With that mindset, you may never leave the house.

Anyway, for the activity:

1. Take the Safe Swim Defense and Safety Afloat courses
2. Follow them as detailed and enjoy the activity. 

Put in some basic guidelines and mainly maintain discipline.  If canoeing the big issue is familiarity with actually canoeing.  Getting in and out is where you get injuries.  Orient and train them, practice holding the paddles, etc.  If swimming make sure you have the swim tests, and if in a lake, lots of kids these days do not have experience in the lake, scares them.  I have boys that are literally state swim meet competitors that freak out in the lake.

We setup a swim area on our aquatics outing and one rule we have is they have to wear footwear as there may be hooks, small debris, etc that is not evident initially when sweeping the area.  Saves trouble.  Also we have lookouts and typically a kayak hanging out watching.

If you are near a lake make sure you stress that the swimming area is the ONLY area for swimming.  Yes they can walk along, skip rocks, fish, etc but only swim with leaders around and only in designated area.  Same for the boats and canoes.  We do boating and tubing, always let them jump off the boats as long as they have PFD's on.  We set the expectation upfront that we will have fun, they can enjoy the activities, but no variance on safety expectations.

As long as we are rooting out cultural appropriation in the BSA, will National and the Woodbadge Junta do away with kilts?  As someone who has Scottish background, maybe I'm offended....

4 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Update.

SM had two conversations with the family. First meeting appeared to have ended with an understanding. But minutes after getting home, SM gets a message Mom wants another meeting on the matter. Long story short, they will be looking at other units. I do not think any other units in the district will allow Scout to camp with mom and dad instead of his patrol. 

 

Sometimes folks need to go their own way on a different path.

44 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

So at the risk of being called a capitalist  imperialist, anybody want to buy a big drum? 

Quickly? 

Gonna be a glut on the market...better sell quick and take the first offer

8 hours ago, Oldscout448 said:

In the opening ceremony at NOAC  today, all four principles wore black robes.    No native american regalia at all.

A nod to our beginnings on Treasure Island, or a harbinger of things to come?

The whole black robe thing will be a hard story to sell.  Many will think it's some sort of nod to Star Wars

11 minutes ago, robhixkg said:

Good afternoon all,

I am processing our troop summer camp advancements and I have some questions.

First let me state, I am aware the guide to advancement state that once a requirement is signed off we cannot take it back.  I am guessing this goes for merit badges as well as rank requirements.  

Second, let me say I absolutely loathe the fact that BSA speaks out of both sides of their mouth on some things.  They state that the requirements must be done as written then do not require the camps to abide by this requirement.  I know some things cannot be done at camp.  That should be documented in the camp materials, the merit badge completed as a partial and then move on.  The scout should have to finish that up away from camp.

This leave me wondering what to do in situations where I know a requirement could not have been completed at camp. 

First case, the camping merit badge, requirement 4b states:

I cannot see this being done at camp, yet I have a camp saying that scouts have completed it. What can I do in situations like this?

Second question, the scouts in our troop that were doing the camping merit badge had to have the Scoutmaster verify their camping nights for requirement 9a.  Since our Scoutmaster did not have access to their camping records, he would not sign this, promising to follow-up after getting back from camp.  Yay scoutmaster and camp on this one.  One of our scouts, not getting a scoutmaster signature for completion, went to his dad and got him to sign for the requirement.  Dad was at summer camp.  Dad is not a registered merit badge counselor for anything!  However, the scouts records come back from camp showing that he completed the camping merit badge.  On this one, I think I can deny it simply on the fact that the camping night verification did not have a valid signature on it.  Can I deny him completion on this?  If not, what are my options, if any?

Thanks for any help you can give.

The camping records couple of points - 

The "leader" is not the MB counselor but nor is he signing off on the requirements, he is merely stating that 20 nights were fulfilled.  Whether or not he should have done that is anther questions

On the camping records, odd the SM has to "access" the camping records.  He has the Scout in front of him and hopefully the SM can remember what outings the troop attends.  Hopefully the Scout can recall which of these he attened. 

We get this each year at camp.  Typically we have the conversation with the Scout.  You went to summer camp two years ago, 6 nights.  Tell me some campouts, then they tally them up.  Takes about 5 minutes, send them on their way.  Some (but not many) may actually have used the log in their handbooks (I know...shocked face)

On 10/18/2013 at 10:06 PM, berliner said:

There is no such thing as "overtrained".

Oh if only that were true.  Though I have not seen many, and I have been at this rodeo for a while, I have run across a few leaders that felt if a little training was good, then more was better.  They spend more time in training, attending training, running training, finding courses, etc etc than actually you know, being out and about with a unit, in the woods, in the mud, maybe huddled under a tarp in a downpour chatting with young scout on his first outing and not happy about all the rain.

That's where Scouting happens, out with Scouts having fun on adventures.  Yes the training is good and WB can be OK, but never ever forget the why, as an adult, you are involved in the program.  Lose that focus and you are just an older person in a khaki uniform.

Well another BSA tradition is tossed onto the altar of political correctness.  This directed and influenced by people not involved in the program nor interested in the why.  Also those supposedly offended by the usage who are in many cases supportive of the usage and tradition were not consulted.

Is Akela still mentioned in Cubs or is that verboten now?

Cue the "There's Always Summit" (or The Summit / or The Bechtel Summit / or the named for someone zip line adventure) e-mail and that availability

Let him choose his path.  We have some that are very fired up about advancement.  We have some that enjoy the adventure and challenge of the outings.  Sometimes as leaders we ask those that have not advanced a rack in a while if they have any questions, but that's about it.

Don't worry, unless he is 17 and 7 months, wants to attain Eagle and still has some required MB to earn.  (and a project)  He may be a might stressed then

20 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

After 90 days, there needs to be a petition to national explaining why the BOR could not have been held prior to the 90 days. If that post 90 day paperwork was not completed and approved by national prior to the EBOR, IT IS NOT A VALID EBOR! That may be the issue. Someone screwed up, did the EBOR after the 90n day deadline and did not have approval.

 

Had that happen to one of my Eagles. If the OP is lurking, please PM. I have some experience in this type of matter.

Yep - We had one with the same situation.  Completed Eagle paperwork and application just after HS graduation.  They were gone for the summer (working out of state) then college orientation and college (yep out of state), so we coordinated the district BOR for their Fall Break on a Tuesday night.  There was a petition / form / document that we worked through.  As it was past 3 months but less than 6 months was not a huge issue, but we did have to make sure the i's were crossed and the t's were dotted.

There is more going on here that we may know

These are some of key notes from the poster:

• It had been 9 months since becoming eagle.  When he didn’t know what was going on he contacted his SM and when he did his SM wanted to meet with him. 
• At that meeting he was told that he was denied a court of honor and would not give the reasons why.  
• This may be some form of discrimination and if so there is going to be hell to pay.
• He was just notified last night that they are denying the COH for reasons they will not say.
• With that said, they talked at the library last night.  Basically no reason was given for the Denial of the COH. The SM said he did pull for him as well as a top official. He gave him his medal and pins and certificate (in a plastic bag) and that was it.

As has been advised, the COH for Eagle is typically the family.  Not required, though there should be one if the Scout is desires the ceremony.  In our unit we offer advice, have a box of decorations that can be used, etc. and support as needed.  Favorite was one at the Scout's house, then we all watched college football after the ceremony.

Interesting that the poster went quickly to discrimination, mentioned this multiple times, but offered no firm details (even vague ones).  Not sure why one would jump to that conclusion so quickly.  Must be some back story here not being disclosed.  Also the implied issue with some member on the committee/troop on the timeline.  Maybe some history there also.

Sound like the Scout is an Eagle. (That can be confirmed with local council / NESA if it has been 9 months)  Possibly move forward with that accomplishment in his life and put the COH issue astern.

54 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

It reminds me of BLAZIN' SADDLES. It was a movie to fight racism and racial stereotypes. Today it is viewed as racist.

When my son was in HS he and some friends were watching Blazing Saddles one night, we had a long discussion on timeframe it was made, (1974) and what is was actually trying to convey.  To your point is what highlighting the absurdity of many racial stereotypes and at it's core it is a satire.  Also pokes a great deal of fun at Hollywood.

Great movie.