Jameson76

14 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

You may want to double check on that. My understanding from all the stuff I am seeing regarding YPT2 is that a registered female Scouter over 21 must camp when girls camp, parents do not count.

Not disagreeing, but as they are not registered with the troop and are there as guests???  It is not a Pack outing.  Lord who knows.....

Short answer to your question, if you want to start a Girl Troop (Girl Boy Scout Troop??) ((Actual name to be determined))   My understanding is if you get the CO approval, 5 committee leaders, and 5 participants you can do that.  Basically starting a new troop, it does not have to be Linked.  A CO can have multiple units and they do not have to share committees.

Our troop is not planning on changing our current objective, which is to work with young men and help them become better prepared for life as leaders, by using character development, citizenship training, and personal fitness to achieve those goals.   Our adult leader group and committee is not exploring nor entertaining expanding that objective to a linked troop.

At the CO we have 2 Cub packs, one is potentially expanding to add girls to the pack, one is not sure

For the troop while we are not looking at the linked troop option, we are also not working against anyone (though to our knowledge there is not anyone) starting a girls only troop.  If they want to start a troop for girls at our CO, we wish them success and if they need input or advice, we can be a resource on best practices.  

Our program plate is pretty full at this time

We have had the discussion on the packs and possibly girls visiting as part of WEB II and AOL requirements.  That would not be an issue as for camping they would be with parents and meeting are just meetings.  Our discussion would be with those families is that our troop is just boys and no specific linked troop.  If the CO has a girls troop, then they could of course visit there.

9 minutes ago, Tampa Turtle said:

Legally yes. The Court of Public Opinion no. BSA will fold on the Linked Troop concept at the first mumble of law suit. Somebody will complain that having to start a completely new unit when their is a perfectly functional unit at the same CO is an unreasonable standard. It does not have to be right. As long as YPT is covered National won't stand the negative PR. 

My CO wanted to stay all boy but fears the PR as well so will wait and see. 

But we do not have to argue. It will be resolved in less than 18 months. Surely I am not the only one who sees this?

Over under is much sooner.  I would say that as the first girls could go into Scouts late summer and/or fall of 2019, then the current Webelos Den 2 girls (and as "thousands are flocking" there are likely some) will want to visit troops in about 6 months.  That is when the initial uproar will happen.  "What do you mean this really active troop that my daughter want to join is boy only??" and  "we had separate dens in the pack, why not separate patrols??"  Likely not everywhere or in every council but I bet enough to be a trend

BSA National will roll over like a mobile home in a tornado...a survey will be done...boom COED

33 minutes ago, qwazse said:

As far as linked troops being a "botch up", I'm keeping an open mind.

Concern is that the "Linked Troops" is (was) a new term maybe 60 days ago.  It speaks to the evolving and somewhat confusing rollout for the Girls into Scouts.

National and professionals are digging their own holes on this.  At an annual program rollout for local council the presenting teams discussed name change (yes / no / maybe / not sure); how will summer camps handle girls (Oh we've had Co-Ed Venture groups at camp so we have great experience) which is not really true and over the last 5 years maybe 2% of the total campers and only in later less filled weeks; and that adding girls in general will have no impact and everyone (I mean everyone) is supportive of this.

When the first announcement was made it was to be a parallel program (not a great term - separate but equal) then that has morphed to Linked troops.  Which are NOT (hear me) CoEd even though they meet at the same CO, share a committee, meet at the same time, go on the same outing, have the same unit number, but they are separate...right???

As a unit our goal (hope) is to stay as we are and provide the program and outdoor experience to the young men in our community.  The concern is whether we will be allowed to maintain that course.  Current input is yes we will, but the track record from National speaks differently as what is good today, may not be tomorrow.  While within uncertainty there is always opportunity, there is also unease.

On 4/28/2018 at 4:12 PM, Bobbys_mommy said:

He was recently dual registered in a 2nd pack that is more geared towards special needs. Upon finding out, his cub master at his original pack started telling us this was a problem and it was not allowed.

Not to diminish all the other items going on with the pack.

I thought that the rule was clear. "A Scout may not multiple register in two troops." Registration Procedures Manual.

There appears to be a lot going on with that pack....

Seems to be a good bit of blending with the Pack / Troop / Committee (s??) / etc as the terms seem to be used interchangebly

On 4/23/2018 at 4:14 PM, ItsBrian said:

I would quit your troop within a week if I had to sit through that. I would rather be taught and have actually someone making eye contact with me instead of everyone falling asleep, just like in school.

What if someone read it in a funny accent?  Maybe used puppets to act out what they read?  Maybe a culture night with Kabuki and stylized dance.

On the flip side the returning of the Totin' Chit by the SPL in the Honors of War ceremony is very moving

That ceremony always brings a tear to my eye, especially when the Queen stops by...she is a stickler for Totin' Chip regulations.  She has not commented as much on the Firem'n Chit, but rumour has it she may address that in her next missive

1 hour ago, Tampa Turtle said:

That is why I prefer just cutting the corner, to spare the scout the indignity of the march up to the Scoutmaster in front of the Troop, the long drum roll, and the slapping of the cheeks three times with the confiscated card. 

Don't get me started on the traditional OA punishments for flaming arrow abuse.

Especially effective if you snap their knives in half and sing

Branded! 
Marked with a coward's shame. 
What do you do when you're branded, 
Will you fight for your name? 

 

6 hours ago, qwazse said:

I had no idea BALOO insisted on a wholesale confiscation of a cub's card. No merciful clips. No warnings. No temporary suspensions. Just cruel zero tolerance.

OH THE HUMANITY

I believe there is also waterboarding involved to fully drive home the error of their ways, though I may have misread that part

2 minutes ago, Saltface said:

 

 

A joke, but a lame joke. I've seen just about everything used as a patrol patch (and a patrol flag): military insignia, biker patches, and even one patrol that wanted to use the Eagle Scout patch. They wanted to be the Eagle Scout Patrol (they weren't all Eagles, the Eagle Scout was their critter). That plan was abandoned when they realized how much grief they would get for having an Eagle Scout patch in the wrong location on their uniforms (among other considerations).

I think trademark infringement is the last thing on a boy's mind when he's looking for patch for his patrol.

There was a short lived Playboy Patrol in Atlanta in the 70's, they had even scheduled bunnies to come present the patrol patches.  Then the angry fist of BSA sensibilities came down on the young scouts

10 minutes ago, cocomax said:

The girl is pulling the trigger. . .     the part that the adult is holding has no  on off control.

Sort of could go either way

37 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

Based on the what I have heard I would be careful of holding any joint meetings/events without GSUSA local council approval.  We had discussed this has a Pack but now I do not plan to pursue.  I have no desire to have our school GSUSA leaders grilled by council (parent only meetings, treasurer record review, etc.).  

39 minutes ago, cocomax said:

So they have mixed boys with girls in the same den,  breaking the rules.

 

From the article:

In Durham, for example, den leader Tuck Pescosolido recently led a group of four girls and four boys as they built wooden toolboxes. As the project got underway, the girls raised their hands and waited to be called on, while the boys were somewhat silly, cracking jokes about flying airplanes when asked about drilling pilot holes. But once they settled into the activity, things leveled out.

"I didn't want to stereotype. But yes, I did expect perhaps the girls would be a little bit calmer, would be a little bit perhaps easier to manage in my role as the den leader, and to a certain extent that has played out," Pescosolido said. "But it's done so in a great way. It's not that the girls are sitting still. It's that they are very highly engaged in the task and they're less, perhaps, distracted by other things than the boys are."

------

 

And BSA sent me a newsletter just now with a link to the article, so BSA must be okay them breaking the rules and mixing boys and girls in the same den.

 

Wow - and they said it would not happen, they literally assured us it would not happen with letters form the key 3 and everything...

Oh...

1 hour ago, RememberSchiff said:

Saying that it was already going on and there is little National did (or could do) about it is different from "National has made it quite clear doing whatever you want (re: letting girls be part of the pack and giving them advancement under the table) is acceptable to them".  I have not seen nor read the latter.

 

Would agree.  But as BSA National really did not engage and do anything, were they not implicitly allowing it?  Not taking proactive actions in and of itself is in fact an action.

" NUTS! " US General Anthony McAuliffe- acting division commander of the 101st Airborne Division, Bastogne, Belgium 12/22/1944

8 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

I cannot think of a surer sign that the troop is adult led and run than the Instructors and SPL being forbidden to sign anything  off .

The canary isn't looking sick, it's dead.  

 

Agree - we have Life / Eagle youth scouts sign off on advancement.  Gets the younger scouts to have conversations with the older scouts.

46 minutes ago, Tampa Turtle said:

If Cubs carry their own water then they will use it to fill verboten water pistols! 

NOOO...Not water pistols!!!  Oh the humanity.  Next you will tell me they may have engaged in things like water balloon fights, noodle wars at the pools, or even "shudder" dodgeball.  Rumor has it some unit actually had (hope you are sitting down) cubs that picked up sticks and ran around pointing them at each other going "bang" "bang".  Luckily they were put into intense therapy to curb such foolishness.

16 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

Let's have less hearsay. I know of no instances where National allowed official membership contrary to policy at the time. If units had enrolled "unqualified" members, Council dropped their membership.

 

Pretty sure the under the table girls participating and the "Aahh shucks" well units already have girls was a big talking point.  Valid observation they were never officially registered but it was one of the reasons cited for the changes.  Heck...we're doing it anyway

16 minutes ago, Eagle1993 said:

There have been some Packs that actually generated recruiting material that showed a Girl Scout and a Girl Cub Scout on the same flyer emphasizing you can be both.  

2 hours ago, scoutldr said:

So, we can't say "Girl Scout"???

Only in the cone of silence

3 hours ago, Gwaihir said:

Can't.  He says "manhood", which is verboten. 

Curse you New World Order!!!

34 minutes ago, Tampa Turtle said:

If weight is a problem here is the solution we teach all our newbie backpackers*

*may be considered hazing.

I prefer the brand that has to boiled (and thus purified) prior to use.  Sort of kills two birds with one stone; lightweight and convenient and also safe to drink.

The 2017 course material still speaks of the the six essentials:

As a quick reminder, the Cub Scout Six Essentials for hiking are a first-aid kit, a filled water bottle, a flashlight, trail food, sun protection, and a whistle.