InquisitiveScouter

I have done that section of the AT! This may not too much for WEBELOS who have never backpacked, if you limit their pack weight by having a good gear shakedown, and limit their weight to about 25% of their body weight. This means others may have to help carry gear. Or, you could let them join you for just one night on the trail! Have them backpack up with you to the first campsite. In the morning, they pack up and go back down to trailhead. This means you'd need two more adults, but they could ferry your cars to Crater Lake, and save you that logistical pain on the first day. There's a million ways to skin that cat. And, are you using this tool with layers? https://nps.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=6298c848ba2a490588b7f6d25453e4e0

Ummm.... where did I say I was offended, or that you were an enemy? Your posts have not offended, just... confused (to use your phrasing) I often find myself reading tone and intent into these posts, and have to check those inclinations. Doing either pushes my own thoughts and biases onto the other person posting. So, I ask a lot of questions to get at the heart of a matter for understanding. I do find people often take offense at the mere asking of questions. This I find puzzling. And it is why I often say if you look for offense, you will find it. And on your discourse on civil discourse, I think advice given by another poster is valid: If you don't like it, you do not have to engage. I ignore lots of people here in that way 😜

Drei Ecken hat mein Hut!

We disagree that that is an answer. The verbiage you cited specifically applies to den coordinated camping, on its face. But since you are the guy who publishes it, would you care to edify us on the thought behind it, given the situation posed? Here's a hypothetical to help view the policy gap more clearly: Twin 11-year-old brothers arrive at our Troop. They are looking for a Troop to join. Their parents asks if their twins may attend a camping trip before deciding on whether to commit to joining. "Sure!" We say, as this is allowed under current policies, and they are covered by BSA insurance as outlined in the G2SS. "Scouts and guests who are being encouraged to become registered Scouts and volunteers are automatically insured while in attendance at a scheduled activity." https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss10/ 1) We ask the parents for an AHMR A&B. We discuss any potential medical constraints... (required by BSA) 2) We get signed permission slips. (Not required by BSA, but by us...) 3) We have two leaders have a discussion on behavior expectations with the youth and parents. 4) The parents agree to pick up the youth from our event if they do not hold to those expectations. We guide them through some gear recommendations, and get them plugged into patrols with their buddies. Before they leave that meeting, the parents say, "We really hope this works out. Jimmy has not had a good experience in his Cub Scout pack. His brother Johnny never joined because of that. We really want them to be in a good unit that is a good fit." Are you telling me we have to tell the parents Johnny can go, but Jimmy cannot, because Jimmy is registered as a Cub Scout?

I do not recall seeing this one in scoutshop.org. Might be a custom job?

And yet, when you point out gaps in BSA policy like this, you get the stink eye. But, we can have an effect! I am convinced @RichardB got hold of people to make this change due to our conversations here! https://www.scouter.com/topic/33455-concerns-for-bsas-future/?tab=comments#comment-549021 And the result generated: "Cub Scout pack unit coordinated camping is limited to no more than two consecutive nights. " https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss03/#a Thanks, @RichardB!! I do wish they recognized and appreciated the brain trust we have here, to bat around policies in a collaborative environment to help provide clear and definitive guidance...

No... he is inactive because the den has not completed AOL, and has no definitive plan to do so. So, he (his parent really) is wanting to ditch Cub Scouts, and they are looking for a Troop. The parent (I guess after their experience with an under-performing den?) wants to make sure they avoid a similar situation, and wants to find a quality program for their son. "Try it before you buy it." The crux of the question is, why would we impose a handicap on a youth who meets the criteria to join Scouts BSA, that he would not otherwise have, simply because he is registered as a Cub Scout?

Yes, our Registrar confirms they are covered by our Accident and Insurance policy, per "Scouts and guests who are being encouraged to become registered Scouts and volunteers are automatically insured while in attendance at a scheduled activity." https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss10/

LOL, thanks. You see the logic trap, therefore avoid answering the question. I will appeal to Caesar, and hold hope that common sense still reigns. @qwazse, you are once again proven correct! Rule #1 (Don’t ask for a rule, you’ll live to regret it.) Not regretting it yet, but getting there 😜

A youth cannot be registered in both programs. They are mutually exclusive. I looked in the Registration Guidebook, but could not find this specific prohibition. But, I do know the electronic systems do not allow this status. So, your Registrar would not do it. In implementation, yes: A youth is unable to earn the AOL once he joins Scouts, BSA.

OK, so what's the difference in that Scout having "joined". Your insurance coverage was exactly the same. And you haven't really done anything to prevent exactly what you have outlined from happening again, have you? Are you saying that, once having "joined", you still do not allow a Scout to camp, until you feel comfortable that the parent has filled out the medical form correctly and sends the Scout with his meds? How do you know when you have reached that point? BTW, we require the medical form, a signed permission slip, and have that conversation with the parents in the presence of a witness. If the parent misrepresents and something happens, then that is on them. P.S. That conversation includes behavior expectations, and that a parent must always be available to come pick them up during the weekend.

Just curious... What do you mean by "too much liability"?? Would you specify, please?

But if he was not already registered, at 11 years old, he would be OK? Can you see the incongruity in your interpretation of that policy? This youth has already met two of the three existing criteria to join. But because he is registered already, you impose only the third criterion? And... to take that to its logical extreme... because he cannot withdraw his membership, on what date would he be relieved of your policy burden, if he chooses not to finish his AOL?

It's not a den coordinated campout. Thanks

Yes. My practice is to get this through an email or text exchange. Others accept a verbal. In person or over the phone.

Yes, that is to send a Scout out of the current unit. Or a "push". The info I gave is for a "pull". You can bring a Scout into your unit with that procedure.

Hmmm... recent changes to my.scouting.org? In-Council Transfer Application not accessible directly from the page... Anywho, you can do an In-Council Transfer through Scoutbook (SB). Look at the bottom of your unit roster in SB and you will see the In-Council Transfer button. This will take you to the my.scouting.org Organization Manager Transfer-In Application. You'll need: - Youth Member ID - Youth Member First Name - Youth Member Last Name - Youth Member Date of Birth We get these info bits from the parents, when we have a conversation to get their verbal permission to transfer them over. (Of course, you'll need to be in a role that gives you access to the Organization Manager tools for your unit.) These electronic transfers make life really easy!! And our Registrar loves that we reduce her paperwork! WARNING: Make sure the AOL is updated before you transfer them. If you neglect this step, you will need Registrar intervention to put the AOL in their record.

You do not need an app. Just transfer through my.scouting

And here is an alternative view... https://raymondsrants.medium.com/the-issue-with-affinity-groups-985b46848796

Understood. We would, and do. Absolutely nothing wrong with having a recruit attend an overnighter. It is well under the umbrella of all things Scouting... they are covered by insurance, have parental permission, and must have a medical form A&B. What a wonderful way for them to get to know us, see what is expected of them, and learn about the youth... The question was really about the Cub Scout-iness of the situation.

So, a parent of a WEBELOS just asked if his son could attend an upcoming Troop camping trip. The WEBELOS is 11 years old. His WEBELOS den is still working on AOL, with no real end goal in sight. The Scout wants to cross over and is thinking about abandoning the AOL program.... The G2SS says Cub Scouts must attend with a parent. (among other restrictions). So, given that, at any moment, this Scout could join the Troop if he wishes, he should be able to make this trip, and without a parent, correct? (nod to @qwazse, I know, I know, Rule #1 (Don’t ask for a rule, you’ll live to regret it.) ) My thinking is that he is fine to come with us if he meets any of the Scouts, BSA joining criteria: 1) 10 years old and fifth grade, after 01 March; 2) 10 years and and completed AOL ; 3) 11 years old. His status as a registered Cub Scout is irrelevant at the 11 year old point. That is, if he was not registered in Cub Scouts, and was walking in off the street, he is welcome to go on a Scout camping trip, and is covered under the auspices of BSA due to "intent to join". "Youth can join Scouts BSA if they are at least 10 years old, currently in the fifth grade and register on or after March 1st; OR have earned the Arrow of Light Award and are at least 10 years old, OR are age 11 but have not reached age 18." https://www.scouting.org/programs/scouts-bsa/faqs/ Thoughts or observations?

I have re-read the entire thread, and find the discourse generally civil. Here is a primer: What is not civil discourse? Being disrespectful is not engaging in civil discourse. Here are some disrespectful behaviors that are typically considered out of bounds: profanity, name-calling*, derogatory terms (stupid, ignorant…), shouting, insulting body language (such as eye-rolling), insulting tone of voice (baby talk, speaking “down” to a person), ridicule, open hostility, biting sarcasm, any other disrespectful acts or ad hominem attacks, threats, or any behavior that could get a person banned from a social media site. A central theme of disrespectful discourse is that it employs tactics designed to dismiss the other person, rather than engage with the other argument. https://www.socialstudies.org/sites/default/files/guide_to_civil_discourse_student_version.pdf Some examples of uncivil discourse in the thread are: 1) implying people are conspiracy theorists, 2) trying to derail the OP by accusing them of engaging in the rhetoric of "culture war", and 3) not answering the OP question, but instead, trying to dismiss him by asking tangential (and sometimes unrelated) questions in order to undermine the supposed premise of why he asked the question in the first place. So, I'll re-post the OP question, and the answer I gave: What answer to the OP question did you offer? And three of you gave him a down arrow for even asking the question...

We have been keeping a list, since 01 Jan, of the different species we have seen in our yard so far this year. We are up to 30. The Tufted Titmouse has been notably missing from our feeding stations this winter. They have been quite plentiful in the past. Our birding neighbors have noticed the same. Their absence is a mystery. Anyone else seeing a decline of these? Post script: Appears West Nile Virus may be one factor: https://www.rappnews.com/wildideas/wild-ideas-disappearing-birds-are-we-once-again-facing-a-silent-spring/article_e5bb42b6-0254-11ea-9624-db770acf0ef4.html

I was responding to @Navybone question: BSA is excluding others, based on religious beliefs. It does have the right to do so... I hold Christian beliefs. I do not accept the beliefs of other religions. But, I tolerate them. All people have a right to believe as their conscience dictates. And I vigorously defend that right. (But it doesn't mean I have to accept it.) BSA should not prohibit membership of atheists. It can still adhere to the Declaration of Religious Principle. It can still ask Scouts to define what they mean by "morally straight" and what the foundations of their moral code are. --------------------------- Creating affinity groups in and of itself is not wrong. But, if a cultural climate exists where a group could not create say a "HMSC" affinity group (Heterosexual, monogamous, sexually chaste), then we have a problem. If a cultural climate exists where a group could not create an affinity group for "Men in Scouting", to celebrate the differences and strengths that men bring to the table, then we have problem. If a cultural climate exists where a group could not create an affinity group for White people, then we have a problem. "Houston, we have a problem." Or should I say "Irving, we have a problem."? (It is still in Texas, so should be OK 😜 ) And yet you do it again 😜

All models are wrong. But some are useful. https://billmoyers.com/episode/how-do-conservatives-and-liberals-see-the-world/