-
Posts
736 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Store
Everything posted by DeanRx
-
If this is a Cub Family Campout (I assume if its not council sponsored)... About $15 per person over the age of 4 to cover the food for a Friday night, 3 squares Saturday, and continental B-fast on Sunday AM. Have volunteers bring the smore's fixin's... you'll always have more than you need. Get 2 to 3 people max to organize the food buy and be the main camp cooks, otherwise it'll be chaos (OK, more chaos than normal anyways...) Then set up a kitchen roster that the rest of the campers (adults and scouts) rotate through to help with meal prep and clean-up. The camp cooks coordinate - the roster folks do the grunt work. Finally - a couple posters have mentioned BALOO training... make sure you have at least ONE and better TWO trained adults. Additionally, you need to have at least ONE adult that has severe weather training (online), at least TWO leaders with current YPG, and preferably someone with Safe Swim Defense and CPR if you are camping anywhere remotely close to water. Most of those trainings (except BALOO and some CPR courses) can be done online. Don't forget the local tour permit (LTP) and make sure the YPG trained leaders listed on it are current within the past TWO years... some councils are really getting serious about double checking that credential before approving the LTP.
-
Maybe they can use the heli-parents as the targets (just kidding... well sort of....) I could see it being a fun activity if there were pop cans to knock off of fence posts, etc. Slingshot, now there's a fun "first weapon" right of passage that I'd LOVE to see offered in a controlled environment. I think someone in those councils are on to something. Don't ban the activity, instead TEACH the boys how to be safe and still have fun. Same could be said for paintballing, but national, the lawyers, and G2SS have already nailed the coffin shut on that one. We had slingshots in our tents at scout camp when I was a scout (early 80's). Then again, it was Boy Scouts, not cubbies - and we were even allowed (if not encouraged) to bring sheath knives to camp in addition to pocket knives. Things have changed alot in the past 30 years... I wonder if the incidence of serious injury at BSA camps has actually gone down with the over-regulation / safety nazi mentality, or if the retained lawyers just got rich while the insurance companies charged higher premiuims for "perceived" dangers that are not really supported by sound data? I say, Let them throw rocks.
-
Amy... After reading 3 pages of posts, I decided to add my 2-cents (OK well more like $2 worth). I have been a DL and I am currently a CM in a pack with 57 scouts. We have dens with as little as 4 scouts and one with as many as 14. I have asked (even suggested) that the den of 14 split, but they don't want to and they have at least 3 assist DL's and they make it work and provide good program. The short answer is - NO - the CM, the committee or even the Chartered Organization cannot "force" you to take on additional scouts. But - I would like to ask a few questions based on previous posts... (you don't have to answer them to me or the forum, but please answer them to yourself before making a final decision on the size of the den) 1) Is it the quantity of scouts, or the behavoir of the additional two scouts that is really in play? Do one or two more REALLY impact behavoir that much? You state you are an educator. I know class size does impact learning, but if the school board bumps your class up by a couple students, do you throw up your hands and stop trying? Afterall - the class is TOO big now. You say your den broke away from two other dens and formed a cohesive, productive den. That is great and good for the boys in that den. So long as you didn't just pick the low hanging fruit from the other two dens and left the "problem" children in the other dens... I am not saying that is the case, just making an observation. 2) You are running a successful program, being asked to do more is the "reward" for being successful... take the request to add scouts as the compliment that it is! 3) The wallet issue should be a non-issue. Either have Den dues or bring it up to the committee and have a couple of small fundraisers and split the proceeds between all dens for den activities... You're already volunteering your time, you should not have to volunteer your pocketbook as well. 4) You state that in your estimation, "men always want to include everyone, the women want to set limits".... calling it "quality control". Sorry to be blunt on this one and please feel free to disagree, BUT my take is: "Men like a big group and don't mind unruliness, women (in general) are cliquey". Please search your heart to make sure your desire to keep the group at 8 isn't because of the clique factor. I agree that its easier to hang out with other kids / parents that you are comfortable with, but the program (and the kids) really do grow by being challenged sometimes outside of their personal "comfort" zone. 5) You refer to the Den many times as "my" or "mine". A sense of ownership is fine. A sense of possesion is not. Yes, you are the DL - but you are merly a steward of the den. I go to great lengths to refrain from using a possesive inference when talking about our pack. Its not mine, it belongs to the families it serves (even if technically it is OWNED by the CO) What do other parents in the den (other than you and the assist DL) think of adding one or two more boys? Have you asked them? Would you be more open to it IF you were to have 2 assist DL's instead of just one? Overall, I believe the choice to expand the den lies with the members of the den (with appropriate input from the Den Leader - but not a trump card veto). The reasons I ask these questions... I get the sense from the previous posts that YOU and your helper like it the way it is and don't want the hassle of distrupting what you have going, especially when other parents are not willing to step-up. I can respect that. However, I also get the feeling that the scouts in "YOUR" den are all good buddies, play on outside sports teams together, and frankly are somewhat cliquish and closed to the idea of making new friends. That runs contrary to scouting spirit and you would be doing yourself and your son a favor to get outside the comfort zone a little on that issue. It will help ALL the kids grow. It doesn't matter HOW long the den has been together, there should always be room for more friends and more scouts. If you are reluctant to add to the den because you are truely concerned about program quality, then I understand. However, what if your son came home from school tomorrow and said, "Mom, I got this new guy in my class... he's really cool and he wants to join scouts.... can he be in our den with us?" If your answer is the same, that no he'd need to join another den because 8 is the max we can do well, then I support you in your decision. But if the answer changes based on WHO it is and what their history is (i.e. discipline issues or non-parent involvement), then you need to seriuosly reconsider your motives as a DL. Can a CM 'force' a DL to take additional scouts into their den? = NO Should a DL be reluctant to take additional scouts into their den? = hopefully not Should a scout be made to quit, change packs, or feel left-out because their DL quit on them and noone wants to take them in? = God, I should hope not. Search your heart - you'll make the right choice. I know you already do a lot, but we that 'do' can always 'do' more than we think is our max. I've proven that to myself more times than I can recall. Its also where the greatest rewards of being a volunteer is found. Yes, burnout is a risk, but without risk - there can be no reward. Honestly, as a CM, I'd respect your choice either way. A scout's quality expirience (especially in cubs) is directly related to their parent's level of involvement - and you are already doing more than 90% of parents will ever raise their hand to help with. I'd feel good about your choice if I had assurances that it was being made for the right reasons. As a CM, I would hope that I and the pack committee would be doing everything in our power to reduce any obstacles (i.e. financial burden / adult leader helpers / etc...) to a den accepting more members. Best of luck on this one... the fact that you have lost sleep over it shows that it is not a decision you take lightly.
-
The "misfits" are the reason for scouting, are they not? While I agree it would be much easiler for all involved (especially adult leaders) if everyone bonded quickly and all worked together really well. But, if that happened perfectly, then what does the boy NEED scouting for? All kids (given the chance) are lazy and will try to avoid work. Those that do welcome work have been TAUGHT that hard work is the path to long term rewards... teamwork is the path to successful groups, and that when everyone does their part, the benefit to the "whole" is that everyone feels needed, feels pride, and can get to the "fun" faster. Your "misfits" just haven't been taught those lessons yet. If you are bottom heavy in young scouts, then you likely have more "pupils" than "teachers" for these lessons. Thats a challenge. If you have seasoned scouts that have yet to learn these lessons, then I would suggest taking a strong look at how the BSA methods are or are not being applied in the unit, maybe some program tweeking is in order. If its a majority of the scouts with this type of attitude, best to let them fall on their face a few times. Nothing makes a person willing to listen than a big serving on humble pie. BUT, you must have adult leaders willing to ALLOW failure. If they jump in to pick up the pieces, the scouts will never learn. As a 2nd Class Scout, I vividly remember a campout in which my patrol planned our meals for the weekend as Beef Jerky, Smore's, and canned sardines. We failed miserably at our preparation because we forgot to pack a can opener (so no sardines) and someone forgot to buy the marshmallows. So the patrol was stuck eating beef jerky, chocolate bars and graham crackers all weekend. Plus, we failed to procure any powdered drink mix or Kool-Aid, so it was washed down with nothing but water for the 3-day camp. Now, I'm sure in hindsight that some of the adult leaders SAW this fiasco coming a mile away, BUT they allowed it to happen. It was amazing how well organized and planned our next campout went for our patrol. If a parent or adult leader had stepped in and "righted" the situation in the planning phase, the lesson would not have been retained as well by us scouts. I guess my point is - a LOT can be learned from misfit's failure's, and I'd be willing to bet most Eagles were misfits at one point in their scouting careers.
-
A couple of points (some of which was already touched upon)... 1) Leadership needs to get their ducks in a row. Can't blame a bunch of scouts if they are told its "optional". Most 12-17 y/o I know (including scouts) will take the option to sleep in than get out of bed for anything on a holiday weekend given the choice. If these two events are requested by the CO, then the unit leaders need to do a much BETTER job of planning the events and making sure the date / time / place info is put out far enough in advance for scouts to make plans to participate (forget about the implications of boy-led vs/ adult led)... why was the info so last minute if this is a standing event for the unit? If the e-mail for time / location to meet was still being batted around on Friday, then this event was doomed to failure even if you HAD a bunch of scouts ready to participate. How many families didn't even read the e-mail until AFTER the event took place? 2) This is a teaching opportunity. One about what it means to be a scout. The idea that these two linked events are not about THEM, but about service to others. About being respectful and taking a very small amount of time out of their own life to reflect on those who have provided them with freedoms that the majority in our country take SO for granted that this holiday has become more about BBQ, summer kickoff, a car race, and home improvement projects than what the day was actually set aside to honor. Its a teaching opportunity to have the scouts realize that even if it WAS optional, that choosing to not participate not only let the unit down, it in fact let the CO down and the community at large down. This is especially true given the unit's history of participation - to have a poor showing tells the community that "The VFW Boy Scouts don't care about honoring vets, why should we?" If they were embarrased, then you have even MORE of a teaching opportunity. Maybe, you don't have a scout troop. Maybe if all they want is to hang out and do the "fun" stuff, what you really have is a camping club disguised as a scout troop? I'm not saying this is the case, but if a majority of your youth (even in a small unit) are embarrassed to be seen in uniform for a Memorial Day parade, then you probably have some serious soul searching to do as a unit. Best of luck - I wouldn't want to be at the meeting next Monday.
-
Twocubdad... I'm right on with what you have stated. I strongly agree that boys in single parent homes, those of minority race and those of low income could probably gain more from scouting than anyone. However, I think national needs to re-think their marketing approach. Kids in the afore mentioned groups have parents (or other guardians that raise them) that have very little of two things scouting traditionally requires for success: 1) Time to give and 2) Money to give. Being that I live in a border town area, the issue and the charged debate is almost a daily occurance in my community. The outreach to hispanics will not only require a retooling of the core program (i.e. no hispanic family will drop their son off to camp w/ strangers), but rethinking what is a traditional scouting activity. Even if you get past the funding and time volunteering issues with families of 1st or 2nd generation immigrants, you will have to adapt the program to their needs. Those needs may or may not align with your core constituents. BSA must be careful not to alienate their core supporters while recruiting in new demographics. The core supporters are the ones that fund FOS. Marginalize them and the $$ dry up quickly. Case in point - DE asked our unit to do TWO FOS presentations... I went to round table and found out the DE is doing an "after school" cub scout pilot program to launch a new "hispanic" unit, and didn't I think that was a great outreach project... well I'm not sure what to make of it to be honest. I think its great to get exposure to a group of kids that would otherwise not know scouting. But, I question whether they are actually running a "program", or just a fun time after school. DE said they had over 60 kids sign-up the 1st time... that's a ready made pack, now all they need are the adult volunteers with enough spare time to devote to the unit... best of luck on that one. We have a hard time getting enough volunteers and I'd say our neighborhood is closer to 85% Cleaver families, with a good number having stay-at-home mothers. Now, where does the funding come from to run the after school pilot? Our (collectively speaking of the other district units') FOS donations? Plus, I have a hard time getting past the fact that they are actually calling it a "hispanic" unit. They had several reps / volunteers at the last round table and it was made known that it will be a spanish speaking unit. Wonder how the pledge sounds at their meeting done en Espanol? I am struggling internally to figure out if I should be proud or disgusted at the thought of the Pledge of Alliegance being said in a language other than English? I certainly hope they recite it at least. Never mind that - I wonder if BSA would take issue with our unit rechartering as a "white" unit? Nope, that would probably be deemed a racist label, but I digress. Then again, we have 1st generation French, Phillipino, English (yes UK), Indian, Russian and Scottish in our unit. Its a veritible United Nations unit. But we've never had any other language than english spoken, no special pilot program aimed at a given ethnic group... hey we could use it. We have a LOT of German decendants and not ANY from the Czech Republic that I know of.... Hmmm - I have the perfect recruiting tool "Come Czech Out Scouting !!". Our unit should probably change all our popcorn money to Euros, so the majority of our families will feel more comfortable in the unit and it'll make them feel like they're back home. A couple of examples that lend themselves to TwoCubsDad "scociographics" definition (if I may be so bold)- 1) BSA has always been about being a good citizen and being patriotic. Many of the families targetted under this new initiative are living in a torn condition of national association. Why else do you see people matching in the streets with Mexican flags, celebrating Mexican holidays and signing the Mexican national anthem at baseball games (i.e. SD Padres hispanic heritage night last year...) The immigrant families often struggle internally with who and whom their allegience and loyalties lie. You can overcome language barriers, you can subsidize to fund the unit(s), and you can bring in outside volunteers to run the unit. But, if the parents of the boys enrolled do not associate themselves as "American" citizens (some of which may or may not be naturalized), then do you honestly think they will participate in an organization that bills citizenship and patriotism as core values? 2) The outdoor activities may or may not lend itself to the targetted audience. I was talking today with a coworker who happens to be a 1st generation immigrant from Mexico (came to the states as a Boy Scout aged boy). We were discussing a weekend campout that I am helping plan for our unit and telling him about some of the things we would be doing on the trip. His comment to me, "See that's the difference... you think its all fun and call it camping.... my people, we call it how we got to this country. I came for a better life, I want my family to live in a house and go on vacation to Disneyland, not sleep in a tent in the desert. I could have stayed poor in Mexico if I wanted them to do that." My coworker was stating it half in gest, but I also heard some sincerity in his words. How much would the program need to change so that one of the core activities (camping) was out of the picture, b/c people who have lived in tents as a means of a roof over their heads are less likely to want to go relive the activity as "fun". If the program was to change, to accomodate these types of cultural variances - what dose that say about it still being relevant and meeting the needs of the middle class? Whats it say about the program adapting to one culture's needs, but not another. We have plenty of Asians and Pacific Islanders in our town as well. Why is there not a directive from national to go after these ethnic sub-sets as well? Guess maybe BSA only plays to the BIG minority groups (i.e. inner city blacks in the 70's and 1st generation Mexican-Americans in the new millinium). I say the program is the program - it has been for almost 100 years. There was never a concerted effort to change program or recruitment methods to woo the German vs. the French vs. the Polish kids that immigrated to the U.S. in the early 20th century. They all adapted just fine. Then again, back then there wasn't an expectation on the part of some in the immigrant population to change the U.S. to meet their needs and expectations of their ex-pat country. One could argue there has been a definite shift towards an attitude of, "I want the opportunities of the U.S., but I want it to be like the 'old country' too. Speak my language, print your materials in my native toungue. Understand MY culture instead of me assimilating your yours." Why is BSA whitebread "middle class"? Mostly because that is the demographic in the LDS that saved BSA from the ACLU and the gay/atheist agendas in the late 1980's and 1990's. Its also the demographic that continues to support BSA as the fight continues over land use. I don't think the prgram needs to change. If BSA has solid programming, then boys will be drawn in by the excitement of the program, not because it was changed to accomodate their ethnicity. I hope the pilot program is successful, I really truely do, because I see it as a smart investment by BSA in our local community. The more boys they get, the more likely they are to influence the future by teaching boys to be responsible citizens later in life and thats a very good thing. I still have a hard time wrapping my mind around how a unit can be "hispanic". Then again, there are LDS units, they have a common link in all members with their religion. I'd be interested to know if a hispanic kid could join an LDS unit and if an LDS scout could join the "hispanic" unit? Thats a thought for another topic all together. Leave the program as is - let the indivual units mold it to support the needs of their local neighborhood demographics... its worked that way for nearly 100 years, why fix what ain't broke?
-
I'm a "Life" for Life, for what its worth. While I look back now and wish I had finished, I don't think it deters from my scouting skills that I learned. I most definately learned more than most scouts that drop after Tenderfoot, or don't bridge into Boy Scouts from Cubs at all. I think Eagle is a GREAT honor and I don't wish to belittle it. However, it does seem that the rank is put on a pedistal and the other ranks just fade into one group. That is, of course, until you go to a round-up night and the 1st thing they ask parents (i.e. prospective new Den Leaders) is, "Who was active in scouting as a youth?" They really don't care what rank you made, but if you have any expirience what-so-ever you are a prime target to "volunteer". So life for life does mean something when the unit is looking for new leaders.
-
Dad & Lad, Mom & Me - and the single sex parent(s)
DeanRx replied to CalicoPenn's topic in Cub Scouts
#1 - Call the Damn Campout a "Fun w/ Son" and get over it. The cub can bring a parent or guardian... either sex and concentrate on the camping, not the semantics. #2 - WHY is it only when its a homosexual / lesbian couple or a non-1st degree relative wants to camp w/ a cub does this banter about the legal definition of "Guardian" come up? If the cub is sent with an adult over 18 to the campout, that adult is the cub's guardian for the weekend. No need to be checking who is tenting with whom, other than making sure no scouts sleep in a tent w/ an adult over 18 that is not their guardian. You want to have a youth tent w/ no adults in it.... fine. We do it and post an adult on a cot outside the "scout's Only" tent, or in a small single tent right outside the door from the other tent in case a cub needs assistance for some reason. Let me ask this... If "johnny" signs up to pack camp with his biological father who is divorced from his mother, and you KNOW he lives full time with his mother... does anyone from the pack question the 'dad' and ask for verification that he is indeed a legal "guardian"? The mother likely has sole custody of the boy, but sees the benefit of him camping w/ his dad. Does this mean as unit leaders we should require some type of "proof of custody" for ALL scouts before the adult accompanying them can stay in the same tent ?~?~? No, that would be crazy, yet if its a same-sex household, or an uncle, or a Grandpa, or a boyfriend of mom's, then all of a sudden everyone wants to force the two to sleep in seperate tents. WTF? If a boy comes to a pack campout with an adult over 18, then that adult is their GUARDIAN for the campout. That should suffice. We already fill out enough dang forms just to be able to GO camping, you get into proof of guardianship / custody and it will KILL cub camping all together (not that G2SS and YPG isn't already trying to accomplish the death of the campout). Let the kid sleep with the adult they came with. Its safer for the kid and it won't force their 1st campout to be an unpleasant expierience and thus, chase them away from future events and likely from scouting all together. Contrary to popular belief, G2SS and YPG does NOT trump common sense and acting in the scout's best interest as an adult leader. No matter how much someone wants to rely on the policy to absolve them from responsibility, it can not be done. If you're the adult leader, then you are responsible and should LEAD. If you aren't capable / willing to make this type of determination, I would suggest you strongly consider recusing yourself from being listed as an adult leader on the local tour permit. As you don't have enough common sense to be trusted to act in the scout's best interest and keep them safe via reasonable interpretation of the GUIDELINES. -
I'd say get someting that breathes / dries rather fast and is not too expensive. I went to N'Tier as a scout and while some portages can be muddy, most were not (guess it depends on the time of year you go). Most portages you will make are going to be 0.5 (min) to 1.5 miles (max), so you don't really have to worry about a heavy stability hiking boot as most of your miles will be logged sitting on your butt paddling a canoe, not hiking over land. Get something that you take off once in camp for the evening and have a reasonable expectation that they will be dried out by the morning. Then an old pair of tennis shoes for around camp works pretty well. You want dry footwear in camp and to put on every morning, otherwise you risk getting foot rot by the end of a 7 to 10 day trip. Also, I tend to get more blisters walking in wet / damp socks and boots than dry footwear. First action when we hit the stopping point every day was to change into a clean / dry pair of socks and tennis shoes. I made my 50-miler in a pair of canvas mid-ankle Timerlands with no discomfort. Probably paid $40-$50 bucks for them at the time (now would be about $75 price range). Like I said, you're not hiking a ton of miles, so you want comfort (quick dry). Have Fun !! - I admit I'm jealous of anyone that gets to go the N'Tier (or any other high adventure spot) this summer. You'll never forget it, it was a highlight of my youth.
-
Merlyn... BSA is biogoted... really? OK, I guess so. I do take issue with the idea that there are gays and atheists that truely want to JOIN scouting. If they did, why wouldn't they just keep their beliefs to themselves, join and abide by the policies set by the organization? Seems to me, the gay and atheist AGENDAS only seek to destroy an organization that they disagree with. See here's a couple "beliefs" I hold true. I see no reason why I shouldn't be able to enjoy a beer around the campfire. I'm of legal drinking age and so long as I don't harm myself and others, is BSA not infringing on my rights as an adult citizen of the USA from having a beer at a scouting function? I believe that I should be able to CHOOSE if I wear a PFD when riding in a boat or a canoe. I'm an excellent swimmer and think I'm of sound enough mind to determine if / when water conditions would make it the prudent thing to do. However, BSA policy states that if I want to boat at a scouting event, I (and everyone else) will wear a PFD, no exceptions. Again, BSA policy runs afoul of my personal belief system. Finally, I believe there is no reason that a cub scout can't safely be taught about and safely shoot a .22-cal rifle. BSA policy states that scouts must be in Boy Scouts before they can shoot such a rifle, cubbies only can do recurve archery and BB-gun air rifle. This runs contrary to my personal beliefs as well. It is legal for scouts of cub age to fire a .22-cal rifle, so BSA must be trappling my (and the scout's) civil rights... shame on BSA. The point I am trying to make is if gays and atheists were really THAT set on participating in scouting, they could and would. They would just have to choose to abide by some rules and policies that they don't personally believe to be true. All of us do that to some degree or another, because not doing so would mean we would be asked to leave scouting and we acknowledge that the benefits from participation outwieghs the "damage" done by a policy in which we are not in agreement. The gays and atheists have to make that decision for themsleves. There is no policy that states gays and atheists are banned from joining. They are just disallowed from promoting THEIR agenda over the policy of BSA (whether the BSA policy is correct or not). Much the same that I am not allowed to promote drinking by adults at BSA sponsored campouts. I don't agree with all of BSA's policies - but I respect that if I want to "play" in their organization, then I must "play" by their policy rules. Somewhere along the way, the gays and atheists have decided that THEIR agenda trumps the organization's right to set policy (even if it is misguided). So they choose to attack the organization by labelling it as biogoted / racist or some other derogatory label - at the same time they profess to not want to be labelled themselves. Its a do as I say, not as I do mentality. Gays and atheists don't want to join and be scouters. They see an organization that runs contrary to THEIR personal belief system and decide that it must be destroyed / eliminated. One of the easiest ways to accomplish this task is to resort to labelling the organization as being prejudiced and smearing its reputation and credibility. So you think those in BSA are bigots because we don't think like you do... well OK, I guess that is the term you choose to use. I personally think that a person that CHOOSES to live their life without a faith in a higher power or as a non-hetrosexual person is living an amoral life. Doesn't mean I hate or dislike folks that choose to live that way. But, I certainly don't go out of my way to surround myself with folks living those lifestyles. If that makes me a bigot - then sign me up, where do I get my patch and membership card? They're not after EQUALITY - they're after SPECIAL CONSIDERATION or PROTECTED STATUS in society... sorry - I'll happily give you equality, but your beliefs are NOT more important than mine. I don't show up at an athiest support group (or whatever organization they have) or a gay rights organization and state, "Hey, I'm straight and belive in God, but I want to join your group... If you don't let me in and change your policy to what I believe, then your organization is bigoted...." "If you don't let me in and allow me to promote MY agenda within your organization, then I'll go on the national stage and call out your organization as prejudiced and discriminatory" or "I'll go to court and try to bar your organization from using public lands on the grounds that you are not 'all inclusive' because you won't let straight, religious people into your organization and let them talk about how being hetrosexual and having faith is the same as being gay / atheist and that we should all be respected..." Yet - its perfectly fine for gays and atheists to do these things to the BSA, under the guise that they just want to "join" and be accepted on equal terms?
-
Sorry - think you got your facts a little wrong... BSA policy does not require one to believe in "their" God. BSA does require a belief in a "higher being" or the idea that in order to become the best person and reach your full potential, that one must have a faith in a "higher power" than oneself. In our pack alone, we have families that are many denominations of Christain, we have Jews, we have at least two families of Hindus. I'm pretty sure one of the other families are Muslim - I haven't asked, they haven't offered their religious affiliation. So, I'm sorry sir - you are quoting policy that you don't understand. That's OK, its often misinterpreted that way. You do have one part correct. As an avowed atheist, you would not be offered membership in BSA. Its not that you don't believe in the "right" God. Its the fact that you choose to not acknowledge that there is a "higher power" than yourself. That's your choice. Its BSA's choice not to include those that do not share this belief. Its that simple. Its funny to me how tolerance of ones views / beliefs is such a one way street in the U.S. today... You have a right to your belief / view and BSA has a right to theirs. Neither one is going to change the other's mind, so best to just agree to disagree and move on with life. You can think that the BSA is "totally bigoted" (to use your words), thats fine. Just don't expect that the BSA is going to alter its core values to your liking because you disagree with their policy. News flash for you - the majority of BSA members and even the majority of the populace of the USA believe as the BSA policy believes. Same goes for being homosexual. Will that one day change? Maybe. I certainly hope not, but it could. However, at that point I think our nation will have far larger concerns about its future than the policy of one youth organization. See here's the real rub - we live in a land in which we tolerate all. This doesn't mean we must embrace all, celebrate all or admit all into every club / organization / group. However, we also live in a land where the "majority rules". Even with all our problems, the majority in this country think that to believe in a "higher power", to show faith (whatever faith that is), and to practice your religion as you see fit makes you a better person than to have no religion at all.
-
Its also good for anytime at camp that you have down time and need to keep the boys (especially cubbies) occuppied... Like when at day camp / resident camp and you show up with your group at the assigned time for the range and the rangemaster is running 30 minutes late with the group in front of you. Gotta kill some time without letting them run all over the range area... The cub deck comes in really handy.
-
Scratch and sniff for the scat bandana... NO Scratch and sniff for the Fluer-de-lis thongs... YES ** There Vicki - just driving the thread closer to the gutter for you... decorum be damned !!
-
That's what I mean... always someone looking for a reason to get their panties in a wad about something... SE states - "add that to the list of thins we can no longer do.... Hmmm, why can't we seem to recruit and retain more boys and volunteers ?!?!?" Maybe because alot of the "fun" is missing because too many people in places of authority had their sense of humor sucked out along the way (I think this happens the 2nd weekend of Wood Badge), and it gets replaced by hyper-vigilante policital correctness B.S. meters.
-
Amen Brother Calico.... "I swear to defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic, to bear true faith and allegience to the same, and do so without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, SO HELP ME GOD." Nothing in my oath as an ROTC graduate about a flag. Servicemembers swear an oath to the Consitution, not to the flag, not to the congress, and thank God not to the President. That being said - I do understand why folks get so testy about flag protocol. The moving of the flag was probably meant in no mean manner, however, taken with the showing up late to the meeting... I can see how it ruffled someone's feathers. Hindsight, it would have been better to ask after the meeting, but like a LOT of leaders I know... you saw a problem and applied a solution, case closed. At least you didn't brow beat the guy for not having correct protocol presented. It could have been more tactful, but it could have been much worse. Better than the time I had to physically restrain my 80+ year old grandfather (former Marine Raider) at a baseball game because some retard flat out refused (after my grandfather requested) that he remove his hat during the National Anthem. While I would have liked to kick the punk in the butt myself, I was too busy restraining my grandfather from physically assulting the guy. Grandpa was right - he just wasn't going about it the right way...
-
Eagle 92 - " Some DEs got into some trouble with the Owa Tago Siam Skit. Is all I really remember. " Funny, son and I were at a council-wide Fun w/ Son this past weekend and the council staffer who was MC'ing the campfire program opened the night with that one.... things that make you go Hmmmmmm ? (This message has been edited by DeanRx)
-
NIke - For the ladies.... How about Fluer-de-lies thongs
-
To me (as I've never been a DE or "pro" scouter) - it seems there are two opposing forces in most districts / councils... 1) The Council and District leadership that focus on expansion and numbers... (i.e. how many new scouts, new units, etc...) are brought into the council each year. 2) The volunteers of the existing units that want resources and time spent on providing better program to the existing units. Seems to many of the volunteers, its a no-brainer that QUALITY over quantity should win out. However, the "pro's" base their evals, retainment and pay-increase (or moving up the ladder) by the NUMBERS they bring in. Hence, you have councils with "paper" units... if you're in your last year of tenure before moving on as a DE, why not sign 'em all up, get the national registration, count 'em on the roster... who cares if the new unit ever has a meeting? (let alone teaches the kids anything) You can put down that you started a new unit on your evaluation. Metrics over substance... unfortunately this is the same crap that a good number of U.S. businesses are dealing with right now in the world economy... too much focus on the numbers, too little focus on the overall outcome of the organization. Its almost the mentality of, "Who cares if the company (BSA) fails, I've made my numbers and driven the metrics the direction my boss wanted, so I've done a good job." That mentality sure as hell has put our country in a pickle and can do the same to good volunteers when a non-profit fails to realize that its not just about the numbers and metrics... its about the quality you put into the metrics. A DE's performance should be rated on how "active" each unit is in their district. What does scouting DO in their immediate community? How many public events / service projects does each unit participate in annually? What is the retention and advancement percentage in each unit? What percentage of units participate in district and council events, camps, daycamps, camp-o-rees, etc...? These are all measures of what scouting DOES for the boys and for the community. The DE has no more control over these types of metrics than they do over who gives and how much $$ they give. But at least these types of metrics would measure WHAT a unit does for the community and for the individual scouts in the unit. Right now, its all about head counts and dollars raised...
-
Is there a smaller version of Cub - Leave No Trace patch
DeanRx replied to johnnylaw101's topic in Uniforms
Not that I know of. Most of the cubs in our unit that earn LNT, wear it on their red "brag" vest, or on a scouting jacket / windbreaker that they put all there other "temporary" patches on. (i.e. Fun w/ Son, popcorn, PWD participation patch, etc....) Just got back today from a spring Fun w/ Son - saw a few cubs with the LNT on a vest or jacket.... can't say I remember any of them with it sewn on the right pocket. Good luck with that one, sorry I haven't a better answer for you. Dean -
Why make the training mandatory? Why have it expire (especially after just 2 years)... did YPG really change that much? The only thing I see training holding up is the tour permit. Am I expected to believe that a council office that can't keep its SCOUTNET records straight actaully researches to see if the unit member you put down as "BALOO" trained for the pack overnighter acutally has the training and its up to date BEFORE they rubber stamp the LTP? National better rethink this one... unless they are ready to do away with a majority of units come recharter. This will be a big dose of, "its hard to mandate what a VOLUNTEER has to do". Training shoud be encouraged, it has value, it helps units run a safer program and helps mitigate litigation. Its a win-win. But you can only stick the volunteer's head in the trough so much... they have to be willing to drink the Kool-aid. Besides - the majority of the training isn't about quality program - its about CYA for council and national and to keep the youth safe. Doesn't make it any less important (maybe its even more important), but lets not kid ourselves into thinking that having a current YPG and safety afloat helps me present a better unit program to the cubs... it does help me make sure no one drowns and no one goes into the shower with a scout... and it gives council someone to blame (because I should have known better - after all I was trained), if God forbid either event occurs on a unit outing that has my name on the tour permit. I suspect any move for mandatory training is the illogical next step in appeasing an ever skiddish insurance underwriter who wants to continue to jack up premiums unless national continues to add-on to the list of "things you are doing to mitigate risk". Its a catch-22 for council and national... they don't own the unit and the unit leaders are volunteers (even if they did own it). They can push this issue and loose volunteers and watch their units fold and thus see a decrease in $ influx to the council. Or they can "recommend" training and then give a wavier for those not in compliance, and continue to badger them into submission. Either way the unit leaders are not paid and they do not work for the council - really hard to make a unit leader DO anything they don't want to do, unless they are placing youth at risk. You can argue that untrained leaders is a risk to youth, but then again.... you're back to the arguement of "What do you do about it?" Either deny recharter or deny membership to the non-trained leaders... either way as a DE or council person, you are sliting your own throat with regards to salary and monies into the council because you took a hardline stace. Bottom line - council / national has very little (if any) leverage in this situation. They can mandate and the unit can tell them to pound sand.
-
From what I've read online about this your man... he's alive because he didn't follow up one fateful mistake (trying the 17 mile hike in one day without a buddy) by making another one once he knew he was in trouble. He got lucky with some favorable weather so he didn't freeze to death. He was smart enough to realize he was in trouble and formulate a plan. Finally, he was EXTRA smart enough to re-evaluate that plan once it was in motion. If he had attempted to cross one of the melt-off swollen creeks, he could have drowned. Had he panicked, he could have lost his bearings. Had he not had some basic shelter building / survival techniques and used them, he could have succumbed to the elements. Instead - he keep calm, assessed and reassessed his plan, and hiked towards a known area where people were. I guess one could argue he should have "hugged a tree", but I suspect he also had a good idea if he could or could not be spotted easily from the air. As I've never been in that part of the country, I can't speak to if staying put and making a large signal (if possible) was a good option. Sometimes the best option is to save oneself - and he accomplished that. It takes a strong person to not overcorrect with another bad decission, trying to overcome a first bad choice. He should be commended for that. That being said - I agree he likely now knows his limits and takes a buddy next time (at least he'll have someone to talk to if they get stranded together). I think its a great testiment to his knowledge, his resoursefulness, and his determination to live that he got out of the situation without much harm.
-
I don't know about hype - but best to be concerned....not paniced, but concerned... lots of "what if's" being planned out right now. A friend of mine in the pack just e-mailed tonight. He won't be at the pack meeting tomorrow b/c he is due in to Atlanta at the CDC (he's a biochem guy that works of a biotech - did part of the human genome project here in San Diego). So, at least the right organizations are mobilizing the right people. My big quesiton is when is the POLITICS gonna get out of the way of the SCIENCE? The border between the US and Mexico should have been closed since last weekend! The fact that the poor infant who died in the Houston CAME from Mexico City and did so AFTER the WHO alert came out over the weekend scares the crap out of me. But we wouldn't want to offend our neighbors to the south - even if it puts our own populace's life at risk. Never mind that Cuba, Peru and a good number of Central American countries (not to mention some countries in Europe) have already banned travel in and out of Mexico until the WHO, CDC and others have a better understanding and handle on this thing. CLOSE THE BORDER - it'll likely save lives on both sides. I'm calling my elected officals in the morning to ask that they push Homeland Security to act on this. I'd ask that others consider doing it too. Its not racist and its not un-PC, its as preventative as good handwashing. Now is not the time to panic, but its also not the time to take unessesary risks. An open boarder with the "hotbed" country is an unessesary risk right now.
-
Anyone get hit up by their DE for a second FOS presentation this year?
DeanRx replied to DeanRx's topic in Council Relations
Well the "preacher" must still think there's money to be tapped... The Pack meeting is tomorrow night and guess who called me today on my lunch hour? DE wanted to know if the pack meeting was still tomorrow... I told him yes. He asked about either him doing (or having me do) another FOS pitch. I told him as nicely as I could that I didn't think it was a good idea. We had an FOS pitch at the B&G, and while we netted less than last year, our unit still gave a good turn out. Additioanlly, I mentioned that 3 families that I know of in the unit had lost jobs in the past month (one family both mom and dad got laid-off within 1 mo of each other). I also reminded our DE that our unit popcorn sales grossed over 20K last fall and a full 1/3 of that was already given to the council as their cut. I relayed to him that a few parents had expressed concerns to me (3 have, which is the truth) that our unit has already given a good chunk to council via their cut of popcorn funds and WHY should we need to contribute more when we already did so much w/ popcorn. Hard to argue with that. I've had at least one parent tell me if they get hit up again - they will leave scouting! I told DE this as well. He asked if he could at least drop off some FOS flyers and pledge cards at my house and would I make sure people knew the campaign was still ongoing if they hadn't had a chance to give yet. I told him O.K. thinking it would get the issue over with.... I get home tonight, he didn't frop off the flyers. Now I'm very nervous that he'll make a showing at the pack meeting tomorrow night. I've spoken with the CC (I'm the CM) and both of us agree that if he shows, we'll take the pledge cards, but he doesn't get a time slot in our program. I'm not looking forward to that conversation and I hope he doesn't decide to "drop in". I understand these folks are under a LOT of pressure to get pledges and this is a down year, but they must understand that I can't go asking for money TWICE to people who have lost their jobs in the past 2-3 months. I really feel like we're being strong armed, but I don't know if making the issue known to council will do anything about it, help the situation, or inflame the situation. Any thoughts? -
1) Something tanglible that you can see / touch / use.... (i.e. improvements at a council camp, added equipment, a new fire ring, something) that has a plague that states, your contributions to FOS made this possible for all scouts to use and enjoy. 2) Actual SERVICE from the council / district office. This year, there was a 4 month delay in recharter processing, my son just now got 3 months back-issues of BL and I got 2 editions of Scouting because they finally processed the unit. The money and records were sent to council in Januarary! In business, I bill the federal government for MediCare reimbursement and we don't float that long before we receive payment. Sheeesh. If there was a problem, let us know... no announcements at RT about it, no e-mail to CC's to let them know there will be a delay. Only after ASKING were we told that there was some processing issues... and that was after multiple calls to council. Service in the records keeping. BSA is worse than being in the Army. This first lesson is ALWAYS make a copy and never turn in the orginal, b/c council will loose whatever you send them at least once. Doesn't matter if its a scout's rank, or adult's training cert... the gremlins always seem to eat the first copy. They can sure process those camp payments online with your credit card, but can't seem to keep track of a scout's rank advancement worth a chit. I had a boy getting Bear this year that council tried to tell us hadn't yet earned his Bobcat. That's funny, b/c he was awarded his Tiger and Wolf the two previous years? Go figure. Service from the pros- two beef's here. One- I have never been able to get ahold of my DE on the first try and in most instances it has required multiple e-mails and phone calls before I get a call back. More often than not, I get ahold of him b/c I keep on trying, not because he ever calls back. Then when you do ask for information, half the time you get directed to someone else (OK fine, I'll talk to someone at the council office), but many times the person I am directed to is not the correct person to speak with !! Two- roundtables and most training is a joke. Most are 90% BS and an ever growing laundry list of things you can't do, can't say, can't sing, or can't play because either G2SS has decided its too dangerous, or the possible implied meaning of the skit, lyrics, etc... might offend someone. 10% is actually stuff that I haven't heard before and is above common sense leadership and that can actually be used to enhance or improve the program at the unit level. The only reason I even go to RT is so I can check the block to be eligible for the adult leader's knot for my given position after 2 years in service. Otherwise, I probably would save my time. Fix those things, plus give me assurances that a portion of my donation is NOT going into the never ending coffer that feeds the lawyers (no offense Beavah) who have to continually defend BSA ad nauseum against claims by the gays and the atheists and I'd give more - even in a down economy. I'm just not sure I get much bang for the buck back to the local scouts with my FOS dollars. I give anyways, because I figure if I'm part of the organization- one should support it and try to fix the things one doesn't agree with internally. Kind of like the GWOT, you don't have to like everything that our country does with it, but at the same time you do not fail to support those who are charged with running it, just because you disagree with some of the decissions and policies that have been made. At the end of the day - the good to come out of scouting will always outweigh the negatives, so I choose to support it. However, if BSA would be willing to fix some of those negatives, I'd be much more willing to part with a larger chunk of my hard earned cash.
-
I still say go w/ the SE's and CO's recommendations.... However, if it were up to me... 1) Ask him to resign. If he refuses, then tell him he is being relieved of all leadership duties within the unit. If he is a man of honest means that had one terrible slip up... he'll take the former and it speaks well of his overall character save this one event. If he insists on staying in leadership w/ the unit, then you KNOW you are making the right choice by kicking him out. Either way - this should be handled as privately as possible. No public humiliation (as tempting as it seems, especially for those who have had the terrors of drunk drivers strike their loved ones). A pound of flesh does nobody any good at this point - thats the court's job, so let them do it. At the same time - invite the family to remain with the unit. The boys can remain and so can mom. I'd be very surprised if she stays, but let that be her choice to make. 2) Make an extremely brief announcement at the next unit function (after the resignation) that so-and-so has stepped down for personal reasons. Make it short, but make it clear that no further discussion / explaination will be make by the unit leadership. Then put the issue to bed. If the family chooses to stay - great. The boys can have their friends in a tough time in their lives. Mom might find some support within the unit families as well. Dad can rejoin activities after he has paid his debt to society, just never as a leader again. Realistically, I'd bet the family is gone from the unit within 3 months. Maybe they'll go find another unit that there is not so much "history" with. If this happens - get with council so that if "dad" tries to reregister as a leader, they at least get a ping on the background check. That's how I'd handle it - if a was omnipotent over the situation.... for what its worth. Again - best of luck... this is a bad situation all the way around. Dean