EagleInKY

That should do the trick! Good luck.

Richmond - I've heard similar stories about gifts being donated to troops via the council. A legitimate option - if your CO is a 501©3 organization - is to have him donate it to them. They can give 100% of the money to the troop.

Our pack and troop both do popcorn sales. The pack uses prizes as an enticement. They earmark a substantial percentage of the profits for prizes. It's amazing what they'll do when properly motivated! An enticement for the parents is that - if we meet our goal - we will not do any other form of fund raising for the year. We've been the top unit (or close to it) in our council for several years. Our troop does not do prizes. The boys get a percentage of the profits back in their individual account, to be used for camp fees, dues, etc. The main motivator for them is that they get excited about the gear we get to buy with the profits. New stoves, tents, and the like, all make them very proud of the work they accomplished. But, it's not as big a motivator as the pack's prizes.

At Roundup, you have to make it very clear. I use the famous line, BSA doesn't stand for "Baby Sitters of America". As BW said, this is a chance to introduce parents to the program. After Tigers, they are free to "dump and run", if you allow them to. But for Tigers, you don't have a choice. If you do, you are breaking a very clear BSA rule (not one of those vague ones we often complain about). Make it clear and the issue becomes theirs, not yours. I've had parents drop out, only to come back the next year and try again. BW - I don't disagree regarding the size. The funny (but sad) thing is that I would estimate that we've had a boy signup and pay for everything at roundup and never make it to the first meeting. I would estimate that this has happened 4 or 5 times over the past 7 years. It's amazing that parents will come, pay dues, buy the books, uniform, etc. and then change their mind within two weeks. Obviously, it's people that have more money than time.

Not parent, but adult partner. An adult sibling, aunt, grandpa, Big Brother, etc. Any of that will suffice. But to answer your question. Nope. Can't. No way. Not for Tigers. They have to have an adult partner. And that doesn't mean sending them with another Tiger's parent. Now, in the case of multiples, such as yours, I believe it is allowed for the siblings to "share" their adult partner.

Bob's right about the size, but it's often hard to get one leader out of every 5 or 6. IMHO, the ideal size is 6-8. We usually start our Tiger's out with 8-10, because you normally lose 1 or 2 in the first month or so. Nothing to do with the quality of the program, just a matter of priorities. I find the reason boils down to one of 3 things (in this order): (1) Mom/Dad find out that they have to attend, not just drop him off, (2) they start thinking about how it's going to conflict with the 14 sports teams they've signed him up for, or (3) they find out that it's not the same as Boy Scouts, and that they don't go camping every month (okay, this is usually dad that comes to this realization). Nevertheless, our group of 8-10 ends up being 6-8 within a few meetings. And that works out just swell.

Valid point Rooster. In fact, our PLC is planning a First Aid theme in a couple of months, and are going to invite our resident First Aid counselor in to help with the planning. They plan to do the same with a guy who has experience planning Whitewater trips. I believe my job is to make sure these adults understand their role (as an SME, not the actual planner) before they step foot into the meeting. Otherwise, the meeting could spin out of control.

The reflective ones can be dangerous. We own one and used it extensively at last year's Klondike. One boy burnt a whole through his winter coat when he got too close to it. We tried to keep an eye on it, but - as they say - things can happen so fast. I'd rather have spent the money on the other style (I'm not sure what they call them), but I don't think they have as hot a surface exposed.

LHC is switching to Campmasters as well. We received several samples. The chocolate tastes the same, but the caramel is pretty tough. Personally, I don't think it is as good as Trail's End. I was told that the reasons were related to delivery and the $7 item. Trails' End requires them to order by the pallet. Campmaster's is much more flexible. Plus, the company behind Campmasters is located right here in our council. We were also told that they were very successful in the Detroit area last year. Does anyone know about that? I am not that worried about this year's sales. I am concerned about next year's, if the quality drops off. We may lose repeat customers because of the switch.

The open meeting rule, as I understand it, is to prevent unscoutlike behavior such as secret societies, hazing and the like. If a parent feels that something inappropriate is happening at a PLC (the SPL is picking on her son, the PL uses bad language, the SM is really running the show, etc.), then they have a legitimate right to attend the meeting. However, that does not mean they have the right to PARTICIPATE in the meeting. If a parent has a concern, invite them to sit in the corner and observe the meeting. Once their concerns are alleviated, they should not return. To clarify my comment about ASMs, I should note that we are a small troop. Currently, we have only two ASMs. Most PLC meetings take place without them. I still see some value in their attendance, in that they get a better understanding of how the program is run by the boys. Like the parents mentioned above, they aren't there to participate, but to observe. Although I wouldn't question an ASM that spoke up when they had value to add to the meeting.

This is the thread about the 13 year old that got lost. http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=69476#id_69476 This was perfect timing for us, as we were just beginning map & compass for our first year scouts. I printed out copies of the story and had them read it and come back with the mistakes that happened, as well as the good things. It was a good teaching tool for this. They did their 5 mile hike with a map & compass this weekend, and they mentioned this story several times.

I agree Bob. I also like for the ASMs to be there, when possible. That way they have a better idea of what is going on. They are not there to participate as much as they are to understand the plans in greater detail. Our ASMs travel a lot, so their attendance is sporadic. The more they can be exposed to the PLC and how they plan things, the better.

Welcome to the virtual roundtable. I look forward to sharing ideas with you.

Welcome Carol. Any friend of Fred's is a friend of ours. Even his wife. ;-)

Aloha. Welcome to our campfire. The scenary is not as beautiful as yours, but the conversation can be quite interesting.

Welcome to the virtual campfire. Pour a cup of java and come by anytime.

I don't harbor any resentment to parental involvement. In fact, I encourage it as much as I can. We're going camping today - 14 boys, 8 parents. I love that kind of ratio. But, do they sometimes get in the way? Sure they do. Do I have to sometimes ask them to back off and let the boys figure it out? You bet. I'd rather have then around, and back them off when I need to, than to have them not involved with the program at all. That said, I still prefer there to be minimal adult participation in the PLC process. This is a great training ground for the boys. If the parents are too involved - or especially if they take over - the boys lose out on one of the most valuable experiences in scouting.

KS - You are certainly right that it is legal to have adults around (the "no closed meetings" rule). But, that doesn't mean it is a good idea to have them around. At troop meetings, about 1/2 of our parents just "hang out", instead of driving back home. They tend to stay out of the way. However, I've noticed that the boys are often more shy about speaking up if they are in the big room where the parents are located. To Barry's point, kids will naturally yield to adults authority or even presence. Barry - You have an interesting approach. I'll share it with our boys. Our next planning session is coming up and the process we plan to use is to first have the PLs meet with their patrols to generate ideas. We'll set their expectations as to the goals the troop has for the coming year. While the patrols are meeting, I'll be meeting with the SPL and ASPL to come up with some ideas that we may want to use to get the ideas going. After that, the PLC will get together and share their ideas to develop the annual program. The PLC meeting is modeled after an approach someone had posted on this forum. It worked pretty well for us last time.

Most I know of are as you remembered them. The only adults at ours are me (SM) and a couple of ASMs. The Committee Chair was there for part of it this year. Because we're a young troop, I end up having to push a lot of the conversation. But I try to do it in a way that - in the end - they make the decision. After they complete their plan, we give it to the activities chair, who does some research to regarding estimated costs, etc. The plan then goes to the committee for review.

Bob is correct, the best solution is to find the leadership and redistribute the membership in the dens. It's difficult to do. It can even cause enough friction to cause a boy to drop out. And we certainly would hate to see that. If you can't do that, there's another similar solution I've seen work. It will only work if you have a place large enough for the whole group to meet and the dens to meet indivually(perhaps your CO's building). You split the den into two dens, each with it's own leader. The current den leader works with both. The groups do den meetings seperately, on the same night, and come together for some type of activity or game. I have seen this work in a situation similar to yours.

Ed - I agree wholeheartedly. However, in the examples I gave, it could be argued that no youth were endangered. I worded it that way intentionally. Bob - Some good advice and examples w/creative ways of dealing with them. Let me play devil's advocate (oops, sorry to offend the atheists). Let's say he didn't drink at the Pack Meeting, isn't driving to or from the event, and is not overly intoxicated or any of the things that come with that (being beligerant, loud, etc.). It's just obvious to those of us who have been around it, that he (or she) has had a few too many. What if the parent says that it's none of our business? Is there a clear policy? Another twist I just thought of... some religious groups are okay with the use of alcohol, while others are not. Does the CO's perspective play into this at all? For example, what if Johnny's dad comes to the Pinewood Derby after attending his church picnic (where beer was flowing freely)? The pack CO is the same church that hosted the picnic. Is there a double standard? Now, if the pack is sponsored by a conservative group that doesn't approve of the use of alcohol, I could see the CO having a real problem with the dad's attendance.

BW makes a good point in that "your resonsibility ends at physical restraint.". However, I have seen/heard of instances of alcohol use where the leaders tend to look the other way. These are some common situations I've seen/heard of: - A parent shows up at a Pack meeting or event after having some drinks. Maybe they just stopped for happy hour or had a few glasses of wine with dinner. Whatever the case, it's obvious they've had a few too many. Hopefully they are riding with someone else (so breaking the law isn't a factor). - An adult leader shows up in the aforementioned condition. - Adults leave summer camp for a "business meeting" and return late. I've heard rumors of this in the past. I think there may have been some of that at this year's summer camp. So, what's our responsilbity as leaders? Let's say you are the SM, CM or CC of a unit where something like this happens. If you "look the other way", you are condoning questionable behavior, and likely allowing violations of G2SS to go on. And, if you noticed it, others likely did too. This could destroy your credibility as well. Looking for thoughts. I know I've been in this situation in the past, and will likely be in it again someday. I'm sure others have as well.

"A Time to Tell" (YP Video for Boy Scouts) is focused on sexual abuse. It teaches the "three Rs" (Recognize, Resist, Report). I have reminded the boys that these principles are appropriate for all situations, including unsafe activities. Whether they could "connect the dots" and associate it to this situation or not is a valid question. If your troop does a drug & alcohol awareness program (which could be used to fulfill a 2nd class requirement), you could incorporate this into that.

There's two aspects of this particular incident. One, was it handled properly at the time of the event? Two, has it properly been handled by the Council and its leadership? Due to confidentiality, we'll probably never know the answer to the latter. However, the first question is the one we should all be more focused on. What is our duty when we see a scout in danger? That's easy, our responsibility is the safety of the youth. Obviously, Dave felt that the Camp Director was going to handle it. In future situations, we should always make sure that the immediate danger to the youth is absolved. If the camp director is not willing to call the police, then we should.

Gee, glad you don't expect too much.