Jump to content

mrkstvns

Members
  • Content Count

    1179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

Posts posted by mrkstvns

  1. 1 minute ago, ItsBrian said:

    I’m on camp staff and my troop WANTS me to stay on staff. I don’t know why your scoutmaster wants him to take a week off. He can literally spend just about the same time with them as if he was a camper.

    Simple.  You have a good scoutmaster and are in a troop that provides challenges and opportunities.  Be glad you have the opportunity to grow. Make the most of it (and have fun!)

  2. 34 minutes ago, TMSM said:

    Well - does the troop need him to have a good summer camp? Being helpful at all times might mean helping the troop first in his mind. I always have an issue with people who accept inferences. Just ask - is this a problem? Being an SM is hard and communication is not always as simple as it seems. As SM I too would like my older scouts to help the troop during summer camp vs being on staff for the big picture but on an individual growth aspect I would do I can to help get them a role on staff that they wanted.

    If you embrace the concept of "servant leadership", then doing what you can to get the scouts into a role like camp staff is exactly what you should be doing. Help challenge the scouts to grow and spread their wings and embrace new challenges. As the scouts get older, camp staff is a great option for them (and it sure beats having them bored to death being forced to do yet more merit badges they don't need). Things like OA Trail Crew are another great way to let older scouts leverage what little time they have left in scouting into meaningful leadership and service.  

    One of the great advantages of *NOT* having your older scouts at summer camp is that it provides an opportunity for the the mid-level scout (maybe a 13-year old Star) to be acting SPL for a week and to get a taste of the kinds of leadership responsibilities that go with the SPL job.  

    This situation can be a real win-win for everyone if you let it be.  

  3. 1 hour ago, 2275 said:

    My son has decided to be on camp staff. His scoutmaster gave it to me that he should spend the week with the troop instead of being on staff.  He essentially was inferring my son was being selfish.  He said that being on staff was not an excuse to miss camp (but said it was ok if the scout had another commitment such as sports camp or studying for the SAT. Thoughts?

    Sounds to me like a new Scoutmaster who hasn't earned his experience yet.

    Most Scoutmasters want to see the boys in their troops mature over the years and grow to take on increasing responsibility. That's exactly what camp staff provides. It's an increased level of responsibility and might well be the first time the scout has been away from home "on his own"....without even the comfort of his friends and scoutmaster to back him up. Most kids will get that when they move on to college, but for the scout working at summer camp, he gets the opportunity to experience it a little earlier.  

    Ignore a scoutmaster who tells you such things. His lack of wisdom will also grow and mature over time...

    • Upvote 2
    • Downvote 2
  4. 1 hour ago, towheadedviking said:

    I would just like to get members opinions on sterling silver eagle scout medals. Would you polish the eagle and scroll now and then, or leave them alone to achieve a dark (sometimes black) patina over time?

    Depends. Are you the kind of guy who will buy Clairol hair colorings as you get older, or the kind who prefers to wear his distinguished looking silver highlights with pride?

    Either answer might be right for different people.

  5. 11 hours ago, Jameson76 said:

    One question will be is how to make this financially viable.  The first thought by many local execs, oh well the ranger can take care of that.  Being a ranger and being a campground host are entirely different.  Also RV's and folks need power, water, sewage, etc.  Not saying it is a bad idea, but it needs to be well thought out.

    Well, if you're not saying it, then I will say it.  This is a BAD idea. 

     

    • Upvote 1
  6. 2 minutes ago, Pale Horse said:

    For the cost of 3 sets of Frogg Toggs, he could get a decent jacket from REI.  Over the course of a summer of teaching Scout skills at summer camp, I would put money on trashing 3+ sets of Frogg Toggs. 

    I see where you're coming from.  Yeah, for a whole summer, it's probably wiser to just bite the bullet on up-front costs and go for a nice REI jacket.

  7. 2 Points
    Just 2 points I'd like to make:

    1. The Board of Review is *not* to re-test a scout.

    2. If a person on the Board of Review is unreasonable, stubborn, or biased against a Scout, the BOR Chair person has an obligation to dismiss that adult from the BOR. (like every adult scouter, Committee members have an over-arching duty to enable scouts to succeed, not to put up obstacles to them).

     

    Why do I say that....

    Point 1:    See Guide to Advancement, section 8.0.1.1:
     

    8.0.1.1 Not a Retest or “Examination”

    Though one reason for a board of review is to help ensure the Scout did what was supposed to have been done to meet the requirements, it shall become neither a retest or “examination,” nor a challenge of the Scout’s knowledge. In most cases it should, instead, be a celebration of accomplishment. Remember, it is more about the journey. A badge recognizes what a Scout has done toward achieving the primary goal of personal growth. See “Personal Growth Is the Primary Goal,” 2.0.0.3. It is thus more about the learning experience than it is about the specific skills learned. See also “Mechanics of Advancement in Scouts BSA,” 4.2.0.0.

    A Scout must not be rejected at a board of review for reasons unrelated to advancement requirements. For example, the Scout must not be rejected for not bringing a Scouts BSA Handbook or being tardy for a board of review, but the reason for the tardiness may certainly be a topic for discussion.

     

    Point 2:    See Guide to Advancement, section 8.0.1.0:

    ...Board members who cannot be fair and impartial should recuse themselves."

     

    • Upvote 1
  8. 1 minute ago, Pale Horse said:

    Frogg Toggs are nice, if you don't mind replacing them after every use.  They'll be fine if you just need to pull it out to use for a half hour, but expect to need a new set (especially the pants) after any extended use.

    I keep a few sets scattered around my gear, in case I get caught without a real rain jacket, but it's no substitute for a real rain jacket. REI brand is decently priced and good quality.

    I think you're a little hard on the Frog Toggs....I've had them hold up well for extended outdoor excursions and they're still willing to be dried up and folded for next time.

    An REI rain jacket is unquestionably more durable, but it's also many times the price of Frog Toggs.

    For the "in case I get caught in the rain" problem, I just pack one of those flimsy plastic Wal-Mart ponchos that have a Rollback price of 97 cents. Now *that* is the solution that's only going to serve your for the half hour downpour!

  9. 1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

    Well, I'm told the reasoning most camps goto mess halls is economical.

    Hmmm.  I'd like to see real data on that because it sounds completely upside down.

    A commissary window should be many times cheaper for the camp than a mess hall. After all, a commissary can be run on a much smaller staff, requires a simpler facility (essentially a small warehouse vs. a fully equipped kitchen), lower energy costs (no stoves or ovens), and less complexity (no need for prep lines, dishwashing areas, or serving facilities/staff).

    It's very hard to imagine a scenario in which even the best-run mess hall is genuinely more economical than the worst-run commissary...

    But if you really have credible info to the contrary, I'm happy to be convinced otherwise.

  10. 1 hour ago, SSScout said:

    While I have your attention, I am reminded of the agnostic, dyslexic insomniac.

    Poor man lay awake all night wondering if there is a dog.... 

    Hmmm.  That makes me lie awake at night wondering, how are we, as scoutmasters, supposed to determine whether the dyslexic scout is fullfilling his Duty to Dog?

    It's a Ruff question!

    • Haha 1
  11. 10 minutes ago, chief027 said:

    I  think this is the majority opinion and that’s why we struggle to find camps that let the scouts cook.

    That's fine if that's really what the BOYS want....but in too many troops, the adults never even presented the option and the boys don't realize they COULD opt to cook. 

  12. 1 hour ago, Liz said:

     I intend to enforce this even if the water is less than knee deep anyway. Like you said, it’s good practice for the boys *and girls*. Not just for Scouts BSA but for life. Everyone of every age and ability should swim with a buddy. 

    Good attitude!  There's no such thing as too much vigilance when it comes to supervising swim activities.  It's good that BSA provides the Safe Swim Defense training, but it's really nothing more than an awareness course and it needs to be taken to heart by all supervising adults.  I think this is an area where unit leadership should be encouraged to improve their "qualified supervision" level:  take the Aquatics Supervision: Swimming and Water Rescue course, take the BSA Lifeguard course (or similar courses from YMCA, Red Cross, or other organizations).  I would also urge adults not to allow themselves to be distracted when they are tasked with supervising kids: that means no cell phones, no texting, no reading magazines, etc. while "on duty". 

    A few points for pause...

    • Most young kids who drown have a distracted/non-observant parent within 200 feet of them.
    • Boys drown 5 times more often than girls.
    • African-American kids are 5 to 10 times more likely to drown than white kids.
    • Even if you do rescue a drowning victim, if he or she has stopped breathing and needs CPR, he or she will likely have permanent brain damage (seconds count)

    More facts about drownings are available at the CDC web site: https://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/water-safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.html 

    • Upvote 1
  13. Ya gotta wonder about the moral depravity of someone who would steal from scouts.

    Sadly, I gotta agree with the folks who recommend the tire boots.   It's cheap insurance....this little guy can be had as cheap as $50 on Amazon or buy it in person at a local tool emporium...

    image.png.b95895ab286c5cccd46725935f9319d8.png

  14. On 6/17/2019 at 7:27 PM, Jameson76 said:

    Actually nope.  I had to look that one up.  Venture Officers Association

    Let's not forget

    • SWAG
    • SNAFU
    • PDQ

     

    These are definitely used, but not always the same way by everyone.  I looked up "SWAG" in the urban dictionary only to be confused by several definitions.

    Knowing what a cultured gentleman you are, I'm sure the definition you intended was:

    "A slang word originating from Shakespeare's use of the word "swaggering" in "A Midsummer Night's Dream."

    "What hempen home-spuns have we swaggering here, / So near the cradle of the fairy queen?"

  15. A scoutmaster and his son were driving in rush hour traffic when an inconsiderate driver cut them off in traffic.  The scoutmaster leaned on the horn with all his might, but not so much as a peep or sigh was heard. The scoutmaster pulled over, popped the hood, and fiddled with the wires for a few minutes.

    "Were you able to fix the horn?" his son asked.

    "Yep," the scoutmaster replied, "Beep repaired."

×
×
  • Create New...