Jump to content

Recommended Posts


So I will assume that a "one or two wheeled cart" is a wheel barrow.

This is silly. By this standard a 12 year old can't pull a red rider wagon.





OK for Scouts age 14 and older

The guidelines recommend that Scouts be14 or older to use the following during service projects(with proper safety gear):




Post-hole digger

Wheel cart (1, 2-, or 4-wheeled)

Paint roller with extension pole

Screwdriver (electric)

Handheld sander (small)

Cutting tools (such as a Dremel, small)

Paint sprayer (small, less than 50 psi)

Small, handheld power drills (electric)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yeah, everyone here liked RichardB up until the wheelbarrow/wagon age limit notice, and all RichardB did was explain it, he did not say he authored it, or was the person from on high who demanded it to be created.. Yet all of a sudden, everyone now is ready to lynch him.. I am not happy with that at all.


I should perhaps clairify my comment about RichardB. From his discussion on the new policies, as well as his discussions about some of the existing G2SS material, I've gotten the impression that his philosophy about saftey is one that I believe is counterproductive. I'm not blaming him for the head-scratcher policies, but I am blaming him for the responses he had in the discussions. Perhaps I am misreading him, but I formed the idea that he


a) favors centralized decisions from National about what is and isn't safe instead of expectations of responsible behavior and common sense. A Scout fell off a trailer using a hand cart I believe was the justification for what's become "The Wheel barrow Ban." As best I can tell, this is the result of attempting to respond to a poorly supervised activity where a careless or inexperienced young man got hurt doing something thousands of people do each day without incident. Instead of providing guidance about training and supervision, the attempt to simply disallow the activity became a farce, not just because centralized decisionmaking is prone to such stupidity, but also because the focus on banning the activity apparently so captured the thought-process of the people invovled that no one realized they were banning wheelbarrows on flat ground with the language. They were so focused on the one incident, they lost sight of what they were actually doing. Either that or it's even worse than we thought.


b) isn't willing to share information about the decision making process, instead resorting to petty bureaucratic maneuvers. Specifically I'm referring to his invitation that I write up a proprosal for how alcohol stoves could be used safely intead of providing me/us the write-ups done to determine that they were unsafe. In theory, someone at National has information on the risks of using alcohol stoves, including documented injuries from it, which formed the basis of the ban. All of us would be better served if that information was provided. The snarky offer to fill out a form struck me as unhelpful and not the attitude of someone who is dedicated to helping volunteers. And again, from what we're able to piece together, the restrictions on alcohol stoves appears to be the result of an accident that did not involve stoves at all. The lack of transparency about what is going on is detrimental to our ability to provide effective supervision of activities, as well as to our ability to retain respect for the rules being created. If a Scout(er) is going to be Obedient to your rules, then you owe him a great deal of respect when you are making the rules. That respect should include giving him an honest explanation when he asks for one. After all, the second part of "A Scout is Obedient" is that he seeks to change rules he disagrees with in an orderly manner, and how can he do that if the people who made the rule won't tell him why they made it?


If I have misread Richard, then I apologize, and - were I King - I'd give him an opportuntity to keep his job, providing he could demonstrate a commitment to safety through knowledge, preparation, and personal responsibility.


But the G2SS would get the ground-up rewirte regardless.



Link to post
Share on other sites



I do like your theory of uniforms costs. I do wonder if it would really make a different in getting everyone uniformed.


It might, but really, that bullet point is about something else. It's about BSA National being clear about what it is.


BSA has a mission - to deliver a certain program to youth in America. But how should they do that? They could deliver that program as a business - the way that Apple delivers iPhones to customers for example. Nothing wrong with that, many for-profit businesses have done a great deal of good while engaged in business. Or, BSA could deliver the program as a charitable organization, relying on donations of time and money from people who support their mission rather than profits on goods and services. But I think it's important to make a choice between the two and not muddy the water. As it stands now, BSA tries to be a little of both. They seek donations of money (FOS) and time (us), but also try to make a profit on uniforms, books, etc. That undermines the program and sullies things a bit.


Same thing sort of happens with training in a lot of districts. Training is an essential part of delivering the program, but some councils expect training to turn a profit. Bad idea, dillutes the message, undermines the mission.


A restaurant can try to make money selling soup. A Soup Kitchen that takes charitable donations should not. BSA takes charitable donations, so we shouldn't be marking up the soup.


This one [Youth Protection] sort of happens now, but a lot of room to expand its reach.


I think BSA's work here is very good, and something we/they should be proud of. The understanding that, as a youth-serving organzation, we are going to be targetted by predators and need to be prepared, is very important and commendable. Other organizations have tried to turn a blind eye and hope it doesn't happen, but given the situation, that's a doomed strategy. My objective with this bullet point is two-fold: one, to help spread the information and ideas BSA has developed to other youth-serving organizations in an effort to improve knowledge throughout society, and two, to help calm fears that people have about the potential for abuse. Certainly the potential is real, and no parent (or legislator) should ignore it, but it's also important to keep it in perspective and to know the people your son is being associated with are actively working to prevent abuse.


Tiger Cubs


Yeah, I think something has to happen with the Cub Scout program, there's too much burnout by Webelos. I don't know if it's starting them as Tigers or what, but something should change. I just don't know what.


Learning for Life


Does BSA still spend money on this? Yikes. Agreed, cut.



online applications


Yes, would be part of #6 for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

About Learning for Life - this is where the old explorer program went. And in rural areas, at least, Explorers is still alive and well. There are several fire- and police- related posts in my neck of the woods. I suppose these could become crews, but at present they are not, and they're working just fine as is. So for that reason only, I'd be sorry to see the LFL go away entirely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting when they officially add it to the G2SS if this section will be in bold or not.. (a true Guide or a policy/rule).. I also found it interesting that the comment about the G2SS marking bold as what is real policy/rule was removed from the book, and now just resides on the Website in Scouting.org that has the link to it..


That RichardB defended the decision with the flimsy reasoning as to why the policy was there, came as no surprise to me.. Everyone knows he is the spokesperson for National BSA policies especially regarding Safety.. It would be like the spokesperson for the police during a crime investigation getting up to announce they had caught a suspect, the community can now breath.. then add in "Personally I don't believe for a minute this guy did it."


The comment on the alcohale stove, I don't really have any idea over, except maybe to recommend he back of an take a breather as the angry mob is starting to get to him.. All I know is I wouldn't fire him over it, I would more send him on a nice Long restful vacation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Yeah, I think something has to happen with the Cub Scout program, there's too much burnout by Webelos. I don't know if it's starting them as Tigers or what, but something should change. I just don't know what."


One thing that would help tremendously would be to have more activity advancement with rank advancement.


What I mean is trhis: as a Tiger Cub, the only shooting you can do as a scout (officially) is a bb gun at a council or district event. Usually they are Red Ryder spring/air bb guns with heavy emphasis on spring. By the time you are a second year Webelos, you can still only use that same little weak spring/air Red Ryder bb gun.


Same with archery, canoeing, etc.....



The only thing a Webelos scout can do differently from any other cub scout rank is go camping as a den. Sure, they can go as a guset to a boy scout camporee, but are limited to those same bb guns and smaller bows and arrows.


Mind you, I am not saying they should be handed shotguns just because they are at camporee, but there should be a transition in place.


Wolves should use that same bb gun. Next year as Bears, why not have a lower powered pump up air powered bb gun.


As first year Webelos , shoot those break barrle bb guns that are even higher powered.


As a second year Webelos, .22 bb guns.


Each year, it gets a bit more exciting.


Same thing with canoes or even aluminum jon boats/row boats.


It's like being treated like a preschooler all through elementry school until the day you actually enter middle school.


There needs to be levels and advancement among the fun activities too.


Look at camps too. You have parent son wekends that are mostly gears towards Tigers. Sure, Bears can get stuff out of it too, but it is Tiger gearded.


Resident camps are better, but they are mostly geared towards Webelos. Bears can go as Webelos( in my council) but it is still a gap in rank to activity relationships.


It's akin to having your 5th grade child wear a Barney shirt and scooby doo shoes until une day, you get him a pair of BK's and hand him whatever is cool right now( I won't claim to know since I am 41 years old and clearly have one foot in the grave based on todays 6th graders point of view!).


There needs to be a transition that keeps scouts interested and works for their age.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your reasoning Scoutfish, but with the bb gun example I also see cost and confusion. The cost of all those different types of guns, the confusion of all those different ranks at the bb range at one time, getting the right gun to the right rank, different instruction for different ranks..


I'm thinking the Chuckwagon where a team is put together specifically with the mixing of different ranks, 1 or 2 tigers, 1 or 2 wolfs etc.. The team shoots as a team together. Summer camp possibly could change to have rather then Packs come as a unit, have different ranks at different times.. But that is still confusion, as to trying to get the wolfs to the bb range while the rest of the Pack goes swimming, or over to Pirates cove.


Boating I think is all Council activities to for CS.. You might loosen it up by allowing some boating at the Dan level for Webelos, otherwise the different boats for different ranks again would be confusing in a program aimed at working with the whole pack during the time period, rather then having the same rank of multi-packs meeting for a time period. Possibly costly too if the idea is for different types of boats, rather then allowing for more challenging tasks within the boat.


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cost isn't really a factor as it would be a one time thing. Or at least only once every 6 or 7 years to replace as needed. BB guns are not that expensive and the cost between a Red Ryder and the break away gun is around $30 in difference. The .22 caliber bb guns cost about $100 or so, but would only be used by older kids who are inherently more careful in the handling on them.


As far as safety, it's trhe same wether a bb gun or shotgun. Wouldn't have to be seperate safety instruction there. A far as rank, it's no different than scout summer camp where you are expected to be a 2nd year, 3rd year or have met specific other requirements before working an "X" activity.

Once the intial purchade has been made, you would have the different bb guns there on hand.


At our camp at least, there are two b gun rabges being run at a time. In that situation, you could have Tiger and Wolf at one range, and Bears and Webelos at the other rabnge which happens to be 20 away. Not a huge seperation as far as families or unit leadership is concerened.


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't add Cub Scout Day Camp and resident for 2 reasons. #1 My experience was based upon Boy Scout summer camp, so that is what immediately came to mind, and #2 because of the way each district and council can set up CSDC, I don't think that would be a good option as is. I would use some requirements like 7-8 hours/day and 5 consectutive days as qualifiers.


CS Res camp on the other hand would be good.


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes Tigers so difficult is they are toddlers, the rest of the pack is not. They can't read or write and they haven't had the discipline of a year of 1st grade to develop the patience of listening. Thus that age requires as many adults as all the other age groups added together.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure that I'd ever want to be king of anything.

Me being me still allows me the opportunity to tell someone what I really think, something I'd lose were I to become king.

Like many others I'm guilty of having pet peeves. - In my case a fair number of them.

Of course because I claim ownership of them , I tend to think that they are right, because I don't like being wrong.

As some forum members might have noticed, I'm not a great fan of Venturing as it is set up at present. I do firmly believe that there is a need for a program for older youth, but what we have now is just a mess.

I never have had any time for LFL this in my book is just a drain on Council resources and only serves to make membership numbers look good. I'm not even sure if the youth that receive the program get that much out of it. I have presented career talks to large groups of school students as part of our Council LFL program and I really don't see it being worth the schools buy in amount.

I'd dearly love to see Councils make the finical statements follow some kind of reporting standard that could be understood by people outside of the BSA.

What we have in place now looks like something is being hidden and when there is mismanagement makes it hard to find, even for people who work in this finance area.

Think it's time we took a real hard and honest look at the age grouping.

I think they could be better if they were changed, but what do I know?

I'd love to see an end to the colored loops.

There are no ranks of adult leadership in the BSA, these silly loops make it seem like there is. I don't care where you serve, I'm just thankful that you do.

While we are at it, lets keep Wood Badge beads down to just two (Yes I know that I wear four. -But only to keep my pals off my back!)

Much as I don't want to be king.

I think if I were I'd want to try and make everyone see that this Scouting game isn't rocket science. More and more I can't help but think we are making something that is not that hard really complicated.

Take a Lad, Look for ways of having fun remember why we are doing what we do and then do it.

Sure having some skills helps, but if a 12 year old can master them, I'd hope that most adults ought to be able.

It can't be that hard.


(And give Ireland back the six Counties!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

JM has some great ideas...


I'd settle for just 4:


1) Rework of G2SS. We have become the organization of "don't" in fear of litigation, instead of providing training, reasonable risk and responsibilty.


2) Par down the pro-staff. De's making over 100K and SE's making over 200K in a non-profit organization is crazy!! You can raise funds but put the $$ into the program, not the staff!


3) Local Choice policy on membership for the CO's to include coed units. BSA already allows for the bending of program to bow before the mighty LDS units, so why can't other CO's have the same latitude? Your CO is OK with gays, then fine, you want coed, then fine, your CO OK with atheists, then fine... put the power at the local level. The local vols know what's best for their area anyway. This solves the impase between those who fall on oposite sides of the major membership issues and likely saves hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal battles over equality issues, while respecting and preserving members rights to belong to a unit that fits their personal belief system. Heck, it would probably go a LONG way towards re-openning land use for many councils that have been blocked out in the past decade over BSA nationals perceived prejudical policies.


4) Don't know about Mike Rowe as Chief Scout, but a marketing campaign featuring well known and respected celebs and other public figures that were / are scouters would go a LONG way to combat the "scouting isn't cool" image and help both retention and fundraising.


I'd go so far as to say in Irving could pull off #1, #3 and #4 - I'd be fine with them keeping their overpaid pro's. The program would be so dynamic and grow so fast they'd have wait lists to get kids on board, instead of making up ghost roster units to pad their membership numbers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

EagleDad Wrote:

What makes Tigers so difficult is they are toddlers, the rest of the pack is not. They can't read or write and they haven't had the discipline of a year of 1st grade to develop the patience of listening. Thus that age requires as many adults as all the other age groups added together.


This is probably why in many other nations with scouting for that age group, they have them in their won separate unit. For example, in Canada, they're a Beaver Colony. Down Under they're Joeys.


By the way, the Canadian Beavers are the oldest such group and most other programs for this age group are based on their program.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Eagledad,



Personally I consider Tiger Cubs the easiest and best of the Cub Scout program, mainly because the emphasis is mainly on having fun.


No one is easier to please than Tiger Cubs. They can be happy doing almost anything for five minutes, ten minutes tops. After that you need to be ready to go on to the next activity.


The only reason to have difficulty with Tiger Cubs is that most of the parents are new to Scouting and don't understand the program. There are ways to deal with that issue, but many packs have difficulty getting Tiger Cub Dens started each year.


Those are my experiences, anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...