OaklandAndy

While it didn't happen in Scouting, I did suffer from my own abuse while in the military after I was drugged. It took me close to 15 years to deal with it, but the therapy far outweighed the money for me. Not to take anything away of course, but the peace of mind was what I was really after. 

Our Pack will be a part of the 400 cub scouts. We're actually coming out-of-council to attend the event. They forewarned us that there is still damage, but staying in line with the "Dragon Quest" theme, they are using the damage as if the dragon came through and wrecked havoc. Now...the cub scouts must fight to take it back. Loving the creativity!

As a former Camp Director, I can tell you that MB's nowadays is more about "going through the motions" than having any actually....merit. I couldn't stand to see it and also one of the reasons why I left. It isn't uncommon for scouts to leave with 8+ mb's...but like they say...just because you can doesn't mean you should. I miss the days of quality and luckily some MB's can't just be given (shooting sports, swimming, climbing, etc.), at least I hope not. 

My guess is that National always puts the cart before the horse. I've noticed that since I started volunteering in 2017. It happens frequently that now it's the new norm. 

15 hours ago, jcousino said:

wind chills no zero possible on a webelow

this is a Webelos event  I am glad they canceled the overnight.   Look at activity level differences between Webelos and scouts. While temp is not a directly  listed thing, common sense comes in here. I would be questioning taking a new scout out also. One error in clothing , sleeping bag or a list of many things could cause one kid to become hypothermic it's putting kids at risk they are not small marines. 

My issue is that they advertised it as a "winter camping experience"...and while I understand the risk, there is also preparation that goes into it and if a family couldn't prepare for the cold, I would think that common sense would tell them to come for the day and not the overnighter. Either way, for those units/families do did prepare (money spent on gear/food), there wasn't even an option to stay overnight. 

Small marines...that's a stretch. But I understand the exaggeration. 

1 hour ago, skeptic said:

While I agree it should have been no huge issue with proper prep and back up.  But I also know that today, common activities we did with little thought are now preexamined for ANY type of legal problems.  And, knowing it might get really cold could be one of those.  When we still had our camp, and we did Winter camp, prep was stressed, but we also had a fireplace in the dining hall and one of our out buildings and the dining hall was kept with a fire.  So contingent plans were in place, which were sensible and available.  Today we are in constant CYA mode which does considerable harm to simply learning to cope.  I have no solution for over reactions and fear of problems, as too many people refuse to take responsibility for anything that comes up, even if the situation had a way to deal with stuff.  Johnny or Susie came home with a cold and had a miserable time, so here is our medical bill.  And they will no longer participate.  It is sad, and dealing with it is frustrating, but each one that somehow survives such awful experience will mostly smile later and wonder why they did not do more.  We had annual flashlight wars after dark at the winter camps, and some units went to separate campsites and did their own program, but joined with the larger group as well.  

 

That's what I was thinking too...besides outright "laziness", which seems to be more common. I took our 4/5 graders out a couple years ago for a overnight winter campout on a weekend where it was snowing and got below freezing and they had a blast. To be honest though, I thought they were all going to tell their parents that they wanted to leave because of the cold, but they didn't and really accomplished a lot that weekend. 

I was hoping this event would have a similar effect, however, this council disappoints once again. They may have their hands tied, but why offer it in the first place?

1 hour ago, DuctTape said:

The only other consideration would be wind. If it was going to be windy, like 20mph wind, that would make 17degrees feel like 0. 

Also if the camping area is exposed, strong winds could make visibility poor with blowing snow.

So besides temperature, there may have been other weather conditions to consider. 

Btw, I am in NY so 17 degrees is a warm winter day. I recently returned from a trip where the temp was minus 12.

The weather conditions could not have been better for this time of year. No wind, cold yes, but no rain either. I often think about scouting in other areas where it stays predominately "too hot" or "too cold" and wonder if units are striking the whole camping experience just because of the weather conditions. I wouldn't think so, but with @skepticcomment about CYA, are we going to see more of it? 

Our council recently held a winter camping experience for our Webelos/AOLs this past weekend. It's a patrol-led event with "frosty" fun. 2 nights before the event, an email was sent out saying that the overnight portion is cancelled due to the temperature (forecast was a low of 17 degrees).

I wanted to get your thoughts on this as I feel that the overnight portion should not have been cancelled due to weather. 

Units who properly prepared for this should've of been able to handle the cold weather, not to mention the money that was already spent to have the proper gear and meals. I think that the option to camp overnight could've been switched to optional for those units who did not prepare adequately. 

What are your thoughts? What other information did I not consider to justify the decision by the council? 

I finished mine last fall, one of the better trainings that I've been to so far. Volunteering dynamics became a LOT easier once I networked with other leaders and focused in on what I needed to do to be a better leader for our scouts, volunteers, and parents. 

I've got a buddy who is looking for an old Boy Scout axe with the logo on it. Seeing how many of you have been involved way longer than I have. where can I find one for him? I thought it would make a pretty cool Christmas present. Thanks! 

1 hour ago, mrjohns2 said:

Squad?

Patrol, my bad. Dang military slang is still hard to get rid of after all these years. 

On 9/7/2024 at 5:48 AM, BetterWithCheddar said:

The kids like identifying with an animal and color every year, but we lose a little branding polish when we switch to "Webelos" and then "AOL."

Completely agree. It's a big deal for the little ones. We "solved" this issue by letting them pick out their squad patch (dragon, moose, etc.) and come up with a creative name. It seems to be working as we retain most of our older kids who've been in the program for 3+years at that point. 

Well that's just funky. You are correct, only the COR can hold 2 positions within a unit. Being a UC does not automatically make you a committee member by any virtue. They can be an ASM or CommMem, but not both, at least not on paper. If they are wearing multiple hats and fulfilling different roles, that's one thing, but still only 1 position on paper. At least that's my understanding. 

If it becomes an issue, that would be something your CC and COR to discuss. 

What makes an area/community eligible to participate in the ScoutReach program? I'm sure there is some type of income cap for the area, county, or something like that. 

All I find online is brochures about participating, but no set requirements outside leadership requirements and charter stuff. 

100% worth it. I taught Rifle/Shotgun during summer camp for 2 years, with some other events outside of camp, and the look on their faces when it "clicks" is satisfying EVERY.SINGLE.TIME. 

Feed the bureaucracy their paperwork so you, and the scouts, can reap the rewards. 

13 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

where is the cert for Range Safety for BSA leaders

I haven't looked at the SSM in awhile, but I know as of last year, you don't even need an RSO to run a range during summer camps. Outside summer camps, yes. During...no. Hmm. 

20 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

There are some places that are so remote, big telecom does not provide internet services.

We are pretty remote. They paid a couple hundred thousand to run fiber optic under/above ground for about 3 miles. But I guess we're not that remote if we were able to get it. Just expensive! 

16 hours ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Seriously, wifi in the past has been a serious concern.

Our camp upgraded it's wifi to help leaders who need to work. While it's only accessible from "base camp" and not at the campsites, it seems that the password gets leaked to the scouts and they end up sitting all over the place. It turned into an "encampment" and it was disturbing. Resolving one situation created another one. 

1 hour ago, qwazse said:

integrating the local community is the only way forward

Totally agree! We actually work with the local multicultural community center in town. We are starting our first, hopefully not last, pack yard sale with all proceeds going to the center to help support their after-school and summer programs. In turn, hopefully we have enough exposure to recruit some of those youth that go to the center. If not, oh well. That was never the aim anyways. 

1 hour ago, curious_scouter said:

I worry it is progressively becoming a 'country club' activity and that youth who might benefit the most are losing access to it over the increased costs,

I feel this so much where I'm at. This statement right here is 100% true. As a pack, we have done all we can do make the program as "free" as possible. This includes offering sponsorships for families with multiple youth and just can't afford it, paying for all the program fees, reducing the "requirement" for a complete uniform, and doing away with annual unit dues. 

Luckily, we have lots of participation with fundraisers and this is the only way we can keep the program affordable in our rural town. Sometimes, I feel like we are doing what the council should be doing. 

Right now, we're looking into getting a pack neckerchief so they don't have to buy a new one every year. But that'll come down to a pack vote. 

26 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Ok.  So we are raising moderator awareness for something that has not happened as part of silencing those who have different views?  And raising red flags about in-person issues that have not happened?  

This whole discussion has devolved into nonsense.  

No, you are raising moderator awareness for something that has not happened. I never said anything about silencing folks on here or even referenced moderators to begin with. And when asked about silencing them, I gave an example on when I would think they would step in.

In-person issues that have not happened? They are and continue to happen. Do I point them out on here? No, I don't even know who anyone is. I address it as I encounter them IRL. 

Nonsense? No haha. But now I know where you stand. 

13 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

So is the action requested blocking discussion on this forum or blocking people taking actions that I've yet to see people say is happening.  Earlier in this forum there was discussion of whether moderators should silence certain posters on this topic.  

What happens on this forum is not for me to decide nor is it my place to "ask". It's a public forum. I would think the moderators would silence those who become aggressive and threatening. 

14 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

I see no one advocating taking "actionable" steps against youth anywhere in this forum. 

Neither do I and I hope no one ever would. Outside this forum is another story. 

10 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

So you do agree that those who believe that the current membership policies are wrong do have the right to speak up. Then why are you upset when they do so?

Upset, not at all. I just don't understand why people would say they support all youth in scouting then turn around and discuss why they disagree with having those very same youth in the program. 

"Can you show me the results of the membership (emphasis) survey that had the majority support current membership policies, because I have been looking for years."

No, I can't. I assumed National did their due diligence so that's on me for thinking so. 

9 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

This forum debated membership changes for as long as I've been a member. 

I have not been around as long as most, I'm sure. Having these discussions here without the "key players", those who make these kind of decisions at the National level, is not input. Just discussion among concerned members. 

I didn't think I would have to say it but when the actions and decisions made by the organization are just plain wrong, they obviously you have to speak up. It's not "eyes of the beholder" when the majority agrees. We're not talking about purging people who disagree, we're talking about purging those who take actionable steps against the mission of serving youth. 

13 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

As for this forum and other public discussion, it's just wrong to silence people.

Then clearly we're miscommunicating somewhere. 

2 minutes ago, fred8033 said:

Aren't you advocating for a position that would have prevented BSA from ever moving toward including girls and other orientations 10 years ago? 

No, because most of those decisions are made without actual input from it's members. Plus, advocating for others to join, which is an obvious positive, is different from suppressing the change when it would lead to a positive outcome. I'm not saying you have to agree with their identity or lifestyle, but everyone should agree that were here to serve the youth in the world. However, if you don't agree and you can't contain it, then why be that person? 

1 minute ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

But, they cannot exclude the youth from Scouting..

Isn't that what the topic is? It sounds like members have an issue with them in Scouting period, not necessarily in their unit or CO. Which goes back to my original point. 

What the CO decides is correct, however, your CO's decision doesn't speak for the entire organization, which is what is happening here.