acco40

I found insulated bib-overalls work well (Carhartt for example). Also, hunting stores have a good, albeit sometimes expensive, selection. We give the following to our new Scouts - Cold Weather Tips 1. The boys must stay warm to have fun. Staying dry is critical! Camp outings are NOT canceled due to rain, snow, etc. 2. As little cotton as possible. Cotton retains moisture. 3. Dress in Layers. A Windproof/Waterproof outer layer is important. 4. Nylon is not good for pants on horses or through the bush (easily rips). 5. Multiple pairs of wick dry wool or similar synthetic socks. It is especially important to keep your feet dry and warm. 6. A good sleeping bag is a must. If the bag says it is good to 20 degrees expect it to only be good to 30 degrees at best. Mummy bags are warmer than rectangular. A good barrier between the cold ground and the sleeping bag is VERY important. Cots, mattress pads, or simply a blanket under the sleeping bag will suffice. Sleeping bags can be doubled up if necessary. 7. Polypropylene long underwear shirt and pants are important. One set is for day wear and one for sleeping in is a good idea. It is important to change clothes including underwear, before getting into your sleeping bag. Clothes worn during the day retain our body moisture and can cause heat loss at night. 8. Two pairs of footwear is a good idea. Hiking boots and maybe winter boots depending on conditions. Footwear should be water resistant. 9. Fleece is good. Fleece is not cotton, it is a made of an artificial fabric such as polyester. 10. Two knit hats. One for sleeping, one for day wear. 11. At least two pair of gloves. One heavy and one light works best. 12. Hand warmers. They are chemical and last about 8 hours. They get VERY hot. It is important that the boys know they MUST be wrapped in something (like a sock) not next to skin. Jerry's suggestion was wrap one in a sock and throw it into the bottom of your sleeping bag before getting in. 13. Dress in layers, layers, layers.

All of you gave subjective definitions but doesn't the BSA have an objective definition? After all, isn't their a minimum age requirement for high adventure?

Once you are a Arrowman, you are always an Arrowman. Only if your dues are current!

I attend a monthly Boy Scout roundtable and the vast majority of SMs and SAs who attend are large and it is apparent they do not wear a bra (embarassingly, this includes me!). If she does not bath(sic) maybe she showers?

Becoming a registered Scout or Scouter does not instantly make one a better person (I know that is hard for some to believe!). The poster states that the kids were Cub Scouts and then later uses the term "boy scouts." I would expect different behavior between Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts. Third, this is a sign of the times. A group is too loud. Instead of asking in a civilized manner for them to be quieter, they sit and stew about the noise. Why? Fear of retribution? Now, I'm not saying the Scouts and leaders were not behaving in an obnoxious manner and are Innocent but don't just sit by and play the passive victim.

We had two families visit our troop last week. One mother asked me if her son could join the troop now. He had completed all of the joining requirements (according to her). Her Pack normally holds a crossover ceremony the first week in April. My reply was that yes, technically he could join now. But, I am sensitive to the appearance of "stealing" boys from the Pack so I relayed to her that her son was more than welcome to participate in any or all of our troop meetings and outings from now until April. Once April hits, he would participate in his pack's crossover ceremony/Blue and Gold and then formally join our Troop. Of course, I would allow him to join now but why the rush? I think it makes more sense to join when other boys his age join in the spring.

Ed & FScouter, it is not his court of honor alone. The original post stated that another Scout is being honored too so I would make sure both Scouts are okay with the idea. Second, regardless of what the handbooks show, just like adults do, the boy may choose to ignore it. That doesn't make it right, just an observance. As a Scoutmaster, I would try the following tactic: "So Johnny, I hear you plan on wearing a kilt for your Eagle COH. I thought that is so cool that I'll wear one too. You don't have a problem with that do you? In fact, I'm going to have all of our SAs wear one also." My guess is that Johnny won't feel that is such a good idea. I'd ask him why not and then later ask him why he feels that having him wear one is a good idea. Maybe he'd have good reasons, maybe not. But, I would not make a giant issue out of it.

Not only Eagle Palms but Star, Life and Eagle. Bluegrass Eagle is correct, technically the SPL and ASPL(s) are not members of a patrol. As he stated, if the SPL hung around with a patrol he would over-shadow the PL. In our troop we have the SPL and ASPL eat with the adult patrol (who technically are not a patrol either). This gives the SM and SAs time to communicate with the youth leadership and is kind of a perk (we eat much better due to our superior planning and cooking skills ;-) At camporees, we have them participate with the patrol they came from. The National Jamboree model was to have four patrols of eight (32 boys) and four adults (SM, 1st, 2nd and 3rd SA) and four youth leaders (SPL, ASPL, Scribe and Quartermaster). At each meal, one adult and one youth leader would be invited to each patrol making group of 10 for each meal.(This message has been edited by acco40)

A little off topic but .... I don't like to be admonished. Using Merriam-Webster's definition it has a very bad connotation. admonition 1 : gentle or friendly reproof 2 : counsel or warning against fault or oversight (reproof: an often public or formal expression of disapproval) So any way one looks at it, admonition is a strange choice of words - especially when one knows the meaning of the OA admonition!

Maybe we need to agree that Active has to be what the Scout and the SM or better yet what the PLC decide it should be, hopefully on an individual basis? I really don't want to force the PLC to meet and review to see if this requirement has been met. Say a hypothetical troop has 50 Scouts, 20 of which are 1st Class or above, each requiring this review at least once a calendar year - that would mean 20 PLC meetings to review and decide, on an individual basis, if this requirement has been met. All though an anathema to some, I feel it would be better to state general requirements for all, which may be decided by the PLC and agreed upon by the SM, and then have the Scout under review be responsible for either meeting that requirement or communicating to the SM reasons why he feels he may need an altered requirement. Therefore, having an attendance goal if you will and then tailor that to the Scout and his particular circumstances would not be such a bad thing. I currently have a Scout, who has not requested a SM conference but his mother has numerous times in the past three months. He has attended less than: a third of the troop meetings, one fifth of the outings, one quarter of the service projects, no fundraisers, etc. and has not come to me or the SPL once to explain his circumstances. Oh, his parents constantly email me what I consider to be "excuses" but not the Scout himself. My reply to his parents is to have their son contact me when he is ready to resume active participation. So far, he has not. Now, let's say I'm giving him a SM conference and he states that he feels he has met the "active participation" req because "he has been busy." What would you do? I know what I will do.(This message has been edited by acco40)

If you follow cubmaster3947s earlier link, you can order the patch (much more coveted than the certificate). That is what I did for my Webelos who earned it. It was (and still is) one of their favorite patches still.

There's the rub. The requirement states active participation in troop and patrol. Some troops use a participation level (attendance) as the metric. Some don't like that (you and BW come to mind I think). I think what is important is that the Scout should know what is expected of him regardless of the metric used. Now in our troop, we do insist on some level of participation - an ACTIVE level. I give the boys my guidelines (verbally and in written form) on what I construe to be active with the reminder that they need to discuss with me their individual circumstances (i.e. I'm flexible).

What do you consider the start and end time for a BOR? In our troop, a Scout is called in (we try to have the younger ones escorted in by the SPL who "presents" the Scout to the board). The Scout is interviewed, excused, deliberations take place, Scout is invited back in and is either passed or if not, given specific written instructions on what he needsto do to pass. The interview process itself rarely goes over 15 minutes but the overall BOR may take up to an hour (rarely). After the first episode, I complained to the CC. And after I yelled at the advancement chair at a troop committee meeting, he responded with a long email about how he was the best judge of how long a board should take, and he wasn't going to let the clock decide how long it would take the board to make a decision. Maybe yelling at teh Advancement Chair isn't the best approach? Also, before I would ask the Scout how the BOR went, if I had serious concerns, I'd politely ask the AC how the BOR went - in a non-threatening manner. As SM, you don't pick and choose Committee members. If you have a beef with a MC individual, talk to the CC. If it can't be resolved there, bring in the UC and possibly the COR.(This message has been edited by acco40)

Yes, young and old may have a very active or a very (in our eyes) inactive lifestyle. However, Eamonn, I'm not sure what you mean by the statement, I do think at times we the adults in Scouting do need to take a step back and look at how busy the youth in our programs really are and try and be a little more understanding. I have one son in the HS Marching Band, Track Team and Hockey Team. He is also active in the OA and currently just finished being the troop SPL. I understand his "activeness" but I also understand that he needs to make choices. I understand that during the fall with daily band practices at 6:00 AM and again in the evenings that he will miss the weekly troop meetings and may miss some outings. But he understands that he should not hold a POR during this time too. Parents have to understand that when their sons decide to play sports, act, march or whatever instead of attend and actively participate in Scouts that they don't "get credit" for actively participating in Scouts. I don't make a judgment call on what the boys should choose and I really do try to support their decisions, whatever they are, and to accommodate the Scouting program to the extent possible to allow them to continue to benefit from it. I guess I'm just a little hypersensitive to the issue because I get a few parents who badger me about how busy their son is but still want me to sign-off on requirements that their son has not met in my eyes. All of these other Scouting activities are great and may also contribute to character building, leadership skills, physical fitness, etc. but when a boy is not active in his troop and patrol he hasn't met that requirement regardless of his schedule task load.

No, as a "survivor" of sexual abuse you must deal with it on your own terms. An individual educated in such areas may be able to help you much more than I can if indeed you need help. (Boy does that sound condescending - not my intent.) As for approaching those who tell jokes that you find offensive you must learn to deal with that too. You may choose to be confrontational, educational, dismissive, break-down, jocular or whatever. That is your choice. You may be sensitive about sexual/child abuse jokes but freely throw out "lawyer" jokes. What is the difference? A popular visual "joke" that is floating around the vast electronic ether these days is a doctored photo of Bush I and Bush two in a boat showing the younger Bush's prize fish that he caught - in the flood waters of New Orleans. For some, it is hilarious. For others, disrespectful to the President. To others, make light of the tragedy of the victims of Katrina. C'est la vie.

Cheerful? I don't think the values of Scouting have anything to do with the exact age a boy may join Cub Scouts. Therefore, the BSA can change the joining requirement age and claim not to have changed their values. Likewise, I can either like or dislike that change and express my opinion about that change and still hold the same values. I think the crux that Bob and other may have alluded to is that there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to express that opinion. Now for my biggest beef - what the heck does "traditional values" really mean? And another thing (now that I found my soapbox) - This debate reminds me about the label of "unpatriotic" that gets applied to those who "don't support the war effort" albeit Vietnam, Gulf War, Operation Iraqi Freedom or whatever. If you don't like what the country is doing why don't you just leave! That mentality truly does mystify me.(This message has been edited by acco40) (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

Well, talk about karma. After my post of yesterday, I go home and watch the rerun of Seinfeld and they show the "anti-dentite" episode. That episode has a dentist, who recently converted to Judaism, tell Jerry and others "Jew jokes." His defense, now that he is one of them, he has the liberty to tell the jokes. The show, not only is very humorous, but enlightening too.

What about the same child three times? Some people make jokes without to much deep thought. Some do it as an ice breaker. Some, because the truth is that reality is sometimes very hard to deal with. Who has not heard jokes about Catholic priests and child abuse? To those that take offense, the best way to deal with those comments is to plainly state you see no humor. However, I for one don't feel that they necessarily make light of the seriousness of such issues as child abuse. Humor serves many purposes - one is to bring to light topics many don't ever discuss. Child abuse used to be a topic that was swept under the rug and never discussed. Jokes, regardless of how insensitive nad crass one may view them, helps bring such issues to the general public. Take one of my favorite jokes - Did you hear about the dyslexic, insomniac agnostic? He stayed up all night long wondering if there really was a dog. Does anyone really feel that this joke makes fun of mental illness? Physical maladies? Religion? Some really do need to get a life.

I agree with FScouter on this one. The boys need to take ownership with respect to finances in SOME capacity. We used to have weekly dues in our troop. However, it became frustrating because the record keeping was laborious, too many sqabbles, etc. So, while aware of the benefits of weekly dues (as pointed out by FScouter) and also the "ease" which annual dues has on record keeping we compromised with quarterly dues. Still not to big a chunk of money that the Scouts could not prepare for ($25) but also not such an administrative burden that it took up 10 minutes of patrol corners every meeting.

I'm somewhat confused by your post but ... A minor is treated much different than an adult in the eyes of the law. A minor's criminal record is usually held is more confidence that an adult's.

The SM is the "face" of many troops. Most don't really understand their role. Some SMs get in the habit, because they are seen as the face of the troop, of doing too much. For example, I just got done gathering up permission slips, making calls, collecting fees, and registering our troop for the fall camporee. Should the SM be doing these tasks? No. But the deadline for the early-bird fee was today so it was either do it myself or add another $150 to the cost. I wonder, I may have saved the troop $150 but in the process reinforced the idea that "the SM will take of it" that permeates many troops. Yes, many parents incorrectly assume that whatever the majority of parents in the troop decide on how the trooop should be run is the way it should be run (does that make sense?). While I, the SM, like to keep the boundaries that the BSA program places on us.(This message has been edited by acco40)

I beg to differ. I believe the program states that Troop Guides do not leave their "home" patrol - they are not members of the NSP. They are a member of the PLC. Now, Nlscouter - is not the PL part of the PLC and part of a patrol? So why do you infer that because the TG is part of the PLC he is not in a patrol? All - the "senior patrol" is a misnomer, jsut like Class A and Class B. Very often used but strictly speaking, the SPL and ASPL(s) are NOT part of a patrol.

Bob, don't want to get into a pissing contest with you but let me address your statements (in italics). 1 This been discussed frequently on this board. There are as usual two schools of thought. One where leaders feel the need to impose quotas, one where it is believed leaders should communicate with individual scouts and help them to make and achieve personal goals. Fair enough. But what to do if after communicating and formulating with individual Scout his personal goals - and then he doesn't meet them - he doesn't meet the requirement. It isn't the end of the world. Scouts should be allowed to fail and to try again. In a controlled and safe environment, failure can be a wonderful tool. Let me digress a bit. A few years ago our troop did some "rock" wall climbing at a local REI store. Two brothers did not show up for the meeting. Later, their mother told me she (not them) did not want them to participate because she felt they may not be able to climb to the top and didn't want them to experience that "failure." (Not all Scouts who participated climbed to the top). Now, I ask, is it better to experience failure at 14 or experience for the first time at 22 or 23 years of age? Boys need to learn how to deal with failure. Unfortunately, many do not until they are way past 18. #2 NOWHERE does the BSA program say that this is determined by the scoutmaster IN FACT the Boy Scout Handbook says that the BEST person to judge this is the boy himself. Yes, but NOWHERE does it say that the Scout signs off his own reqs. The SM Handbook states that his LEADER determines if a req is met (it doesn't define leader as SM or PL or SA or ASPL or Troop Guide or Instructor or ...). The boy himself may be the judge but the leader formalizes the judgment. #5 The adult leaders job is to TRAIN junior leaders and help them to learn and practice leadership skills not remove them from office. I partially agree. The adult leaders' job is to train the youth leaders. But, IMO, part of the training is instilling respect for the position and assuming the responsibility that if the position is not being filled in a satisfactory way, corrections, up to and including removal may be employed. #6 If the scout has a SM conference then he has completed that requirement. If it is determined that another requirement was not completed then THAT is the one he is recycled on, not the requirement that is done. I agree 100%. #7 This is not out of the SM hands. The SM simply isn't a participant DURING the BOR that doesn't mean he or she cannot inform the board of compliments or concerns regarding the scouts development prior to the bor beginning. We are in agreement but expressing it differently. We both agree that formally, the SM does not participate in a BOR. Yes, the SM (or anyone else) may inform the board in any way they see fit.

I agree with BW that "boring meetings" are a big, if not the biggest reason. The real question is why are meetings boring? Exciting meetings take effort! Who supplies the effort? Who SHOULD supply the effort? What I struggle with is how to get the boys to take ownership of THEIR meetings! I don't just leave them on their own. I've tried many things but too many boys seem to just want to come, sit idly by and wait to be "entertained." Boys in this day and age are used to having things - all things - arranged for them. This includes sports, clubs, even "play dates" arranged by parents for some! In my youth, we organized our own pick-up games, board games, clubs, and such. Now, boys will sit next to each other with ear buds, gameboys and have very little interaction with each other except for one word phrases - "sweet", "cool", etc. So what do we do? We (adults) try and figure out what would be fun for them. Many times we hit the nail on the head and the boys have a great time but alas, THEY didn't plan it. The BSA program is not for them to be entertained! At our last PLC meeting, the week before a backpacking outing - the boys suggested that all those participating bring in their fully loaded backpacks and show the others what they were bringing. I asked them if they thought that would be a "fun" meeting. They just shrugged and said, "Yea." I suggested possibly having one boy from each patrol show what he packed and the rest of the troop could critique what he brought - was it necessary, did he forget something, etc. Again, they just shrugged. I asked how to communicate to the boys that they were requesting them to bring in their backpacks. They stated that they would call their patrol mates. Well, a week later only two boys bring in their backpacks and the boys really didn't pay much attention. I don't give up but the fine line between doing it for them and trying to get them to do it themselves is a delicate one.

I'll act as the court supplied defense attorney for the SM. I think he needs one after being so beat up so far. Let's look at some of the requirements for Life: 1) Be active in your troop or patrol for at least 6 months as a Star Scout. 2) Demonstrate Scout spirit by living the Scout Oath (Promise) and Scout Law in your everyday life. 3)Earn five more merit badges (so that you have 11 in all), including any three more from the required list for Eagle. The required list for Eagle has 15 merit badges in 12 categories. Any of the 15 may be used for this requirement. 4) While a Star Scout, take part in service projects totaling at least 6 hours of work. These projects must be approved by your Scoutmaster. 5) While a Star Scout, serve actively for 6 months in one or more of the troop positions of responsibility listed in requirement 5 for Star Scout (or carry out a Scoutmaster-assigned leadership project to help the troop). 6) Take part in a Scoutmaster conference. 7) Complete your board of review. Let's look at these reqs one by one. For number one, remember, "active" relates to his patrol or troop. (As an aside, I'd like the national council to amend this req to patrol AND troop). The Jamboree QM position has no influence on his completion of a rank requirement. Neither should a position or involvement in OA. These are not troop or patrol activities. The state of his "activeness" (a much discussed topic on this forum) should not be a surprise to the Scout - the SM determines active but should communicate this to the Scout on a timely basis. The problem I've had as a SM is it is much harder to communicate to Scouts who don't show up to meetings and outings! Requirement #2 is determined by the SM too. But, I'll add the following caveat (which applies to #1 too) that some Scouts are very honest and will tell you that they feel that they have not met #1 or #2 themselves. The problems I've had is when the Scout will say to me during a conference that he really doesn't feel he has met one of these reqs but then after talking with his parents, changes his mind! Reqs #3 & #4 should be self explanatory. Req #5 is what the SM in question should have addressed more clearly. If the boy was not providing proper leadership then the boy should have been removed from his POR. Better yet, he should have been mentored & coached and given detailed expectations and metrics with which to measure his performance in his POR. As a den chief, the SPL, ASPL, SM, Den Leader and Cubmaster should all have been involved in this process. Now, about req#6, what is in question here? BW is correct about he SM conference - it is not pass fail, it is "take part." However, I've had boys request a SM conference and I'll give them one. During the course of the conference, it was mutually decided by the Scout and by me (the SM) that some other requirement for that rank was not met. If so, I don't sign off on the SM conference requirement in the Scout's book. I could and maybe I should but right now I don't. I could easily be persuaded to sign-off but even if I did, I would request another SM conference after the boys completes his remaining req(s) and before the boys went to his board of review. By not signing off, it is a reminder to the Scout that he should have another conference before his BOR. Req. #7 is out of the SM's hands.