eisely

Shifting patterns of trade are driven in large part by cost differences. I do not automatically blame the labor unions. The fact is simply that the US is a high wage country, both in unionized industries and non unionized industries. Much of that wage differential is explained by differences in labor productivity. One reason that American workers get paid more is that they generally are more productive than foreign workers. However, when producing something is more labor intensive, and the skill level required is not very high compared to other industries, and the technology is universally available; the high wage country will be more likely to import the products produced by industries that fit this description. So it is with clothing in general. As long as other opportunities are available for the US workers that are displaced by imports, I for one do not weep at the loss of jobs in industries where we are not competitive.

You will also find that few retailers carry a lot of canoes in stock for you to choose from. I have also found that most manufacturers will not sell direct to consumers. What you need to do is browse the manufacturers' web sites to get some idea of what might fit your needs, talk to someone knowledgable, and then order through the retailer. Both of the canoes I bought in recent years I ordered online off of the REI website at the time of their spring sale. I ordered several weeks in advance of my planned usage, and I ordered for pickup at my local REI store to avoid shipping charges. I also understand that Bass Pro Shops sell canoes although I have never check them out.

There are competing purposes to be served in dealing with this, and from my narrow perspective, the guidance from National is not as helpful as it should be. First of all, credit for rank advancement should not be given for "seat time". Having said that, how one manages the process can get unduly complicated. Having an attendance metric could be a useful part of the ongoing evaluation, but we are prohibited from doing that. I am not keen on removing youth from PORs casually, and adult leaders should seriously engage with the youth leaders to help them in their duties. However, if a youth simply is unable or unwilling to meet some minimum standards that are clearly and openly communicated, and the unit is being hurt, then the best choice may well be removal. If the troop has a good training program and sends its youth to the available leadership training, and youth are screened before election, then these kinds of issues likely will not arise. Every boy deserves a chance to compete for the top leadership positions, but the SM also has an obligation to ensure that boys are elected who have at least a reasonable chance of succeeding. Therefore, I think it is reasonable to have the senior positions (SPL and ASPL) filled in a two step process where the boy expresses interest and meets with the SM who then approves the boy for the ballot. As far as I know, this would not be against any rules or policy of BSA. If I am wrong, please advise. Continued monitoring and mentoring are essential, particularly for the senior positions. Having the senior youth leadership participate in monitoring and mentoring for all the appointive positions is a good idea for two reasons. It provides those senior youth with real experience in this important component of leadership, and it also relieves the SM somewhat from what can be very time consuming when one considers how many positions may be involved. These are not "fail safe" ideas, but hopefully this would avoid major fiascos and help all the boys gain from their tours of duty in leadership positions.

I agree that the scents added to some dryer sheets are annoying, but the yellow jackets are more annoying.

BHunsaker's post is consistent with my understanding. It is up to the SM and the other people in leadership positions to mentor, define "actively serve," set goals and all those things. Then the SM monitors performance. If the youth is not performing then removal is the only real option under the current scheme as I understand it. If removal becomes necessary it needs to be done timely to avoid credit being recorded where credit is not intended. The SM is the "quality control" point on this rank advancement requirement. No one else in the troop is in a position to really do this systematically. If removal is decided upon it needs to be done in as constructive a way as possible to avoid turning the boy off completely. One cannot act like Donald Trump and simply say "You're fired." Actually as I think about it even Trump gives his reasons for his decisions.(This message has been edited by eisely)(This message has been edited by eisely)

I am referring to the little paper sheets, not the bed sheets. We have a constant yellow jacket problem when dining al fresco on our deck. All I can say is the sheets seem to work.

Take along some sheets that you put in your clothes dryer and put them around your table. It seems to work.

There are several questions you need to ask yourself. What is my budget? What is my intended primary use (flat water or moving water)? Who else might be using this canoe? Serious canoe camping? Portages necessary? The suggestion to shop on Craig's list is a good one for a novice. You can also visit web sites of the major manufacturers such as Old Town and learn a lot. Stability also relates to the overall size of the canoe. A larger canoe will be more stable simply because it displaces more water. I would not get anything less than sixteen feet for a tandem canoe. The cheapest canoes are generally made out of fiber glass. I would avoid these for two reasons. Harder to repair and overall weight. Because these canoes are themselves made of dense material they do not have the carrying capacity of similarly sized canoes made of other material. They are also heavier to carry. Aluminum is more expensive than fiberglass, but probably the best option when kids are involved. One disadvantage of aluminum is that it can get very hot on a summer day. You can get a first degree burn off of an aluminum canoe. The second disadvantage of aluminum is that it is noisy. The canoes reverberate like drums. Since aluminum is a dense material flotation tanks are built into the bow and stern of aluminum canoes. When aluminum canoes first came out these were sealed tanks filled with air. More recently manufactured canoes may have had those tanks filled with styrofoam. This foam crumbles with age and comes out of the compartment. I suppose that the compartaments could be refilled but I have never had occasion to try it. Canoes made of Kevlar are the lightest weight. I own and recommend canoes made of mulitiple layers of plastic material. These canoes have small air bubbles entrained in the thickest layer of material and so the density is reduced. There are no flotation tanks to provide support when swamped. Kevlar canoes are not like this and do have flotation compartments. The shape of the hull will affect the canoe's performance in the water and primary and secondary stability. A v shape or round shape will seem less stable initially, but will be less likely to go over in moving water. Another thing to know about any canoe is the rated carrying capacity. I would not consider anything less than a canoe capable of carrying 1,000 lbs.

The one thing I would add to all the above is long underwear. I noticed that one other poster mentioned this. I rougtinely carry lightweight synthetic long johns with me, even in the summer. These are an extra layer if I really need it, but also enable me to carry a lighter weight sleeping bag and make up the difference with the underwear. The advantage to this is that you do not have to deal with an extra blanket layer falling off of you during the night.

The current chair of the National Endowment of the Arts appointed by Pres. Obama, one Rocco Landesman, gave a speech in Brooklyn on October 21. One would expect him to praise Obama and be enthusiastic about his leader, but the quote below displays amazing ignorance: "This is the first president that actually writes his own books since Teddy Roosevelt and arguably the first to write them really well since Lincoln. If you accept the premise, and I do, that the United States is the most powerful country in the world, then Barack Obama is the most powerful writer since Julius Caesar." First point: What is a "powerful writer?" If by this he meant a person with political power who happened to write a book, then you have to include people like Lenin, Mao Tse Tung, Hitler and Stalin. What about Marcus Aurelius, a later emperor of the Roman Empire? Second point: I don't think it is terribly bright to use Julius Caesar as your point of comparison since Caesar was assassinated for his reaching for dictatorial powers overthrowing the constitution of the Roman republic. Third point: I am aware that there is a bona fide question about whether Obama wrote his first book at all, but let's set that aside. How many presidents since Lincoln wrote books? (Note also that Lincoln never wrote a book at all.) Ulysses Grant wrote a memoir that is an American classic of its type. I have actually read this and it repays reading. Theodore Roosevelt wrote over thirty books during a relatively short life, some of which are considered classics. Woodrow Wilson was president of Princeton University and a scholar who wrote at least two books, one of which was a standard reference on US politics for many years. Dwight Eisenhower wrote a history of the European campaign in World War II. John F. Kennedy is credited with two books, one of which won a Pulitzer. If I am not mistaken Nixon wrote a book. I don't know if you can call the collection of letters that Ronald Reagan wrote that was published a "book" that he wrote, but there is no question that he wrote the letters. Bill Clinton wrote at least one book, can't recall for sure. Herbert Hoover wrote more than one book. In collaboration with his wife he apparently translated some greek classic into English. The point of this is that this guy is in charge of a grant giving organization dispensing taxpayer dollars. You would want someone who is really smart, or at least smart enough not to embarrass himself. Is this the best that Obama can do in his appointees?

I am not aware of any successful splits of existing troops, but then I have never seen it tried. A more sensible approach would be to limit the size of existing troops by limiting intake, thus encouraging the formation of new troops. I don't know when a troop is too large. When I first started out in scouting as a lad, the most successful troop in town had over 200 scouts in it. Some patrols had more scouts than other troops.

I agree that OGE is on point. As a general principle, signing off for rank requirements can and should be delegated to youth leadership. For POR requirements, I am not sure that this should be delegated. At a minimum, if the SPL is going to do the signing, clear expectations need to be established and the SPL needs to be trained in how to implement those as part of his performance. Depending in part on the size of the troop, it may not be feasible for the SM to observe and evaluate performance in every nominal POR, so delegation for some of the appointive positions would likely be appropriate. However, the elective positions are another matter. Here's a thought: While the members of a patrol cannot sign the book, how about attempting some kind of upward evaluation?

I grew up in Missouri which was considered a "border state" during the Civil War period, and where slavery was legal until the 13th amendment was passed and ratified by the states. I went to segregated schools but racial attitudes were generally benign where I lived compared to the deep South. We neither thought about it or talked about it very much. The schools were segregated because the law required it, not because there were KKK enforcers lurking behind every bush. As far as I know scouting in that era in that area was not officially segregated. I do recall one troop of black scouts coming to our regular summer camp one year. I am not aware of officially segregated camps anywhere in the state. My sense is that scouting was not that big a deal in the minority communities, not because of overt discrimination, but because of a perception that is was something that white folks did. This legacy continues to hurt the scouting movement.(This message has been edited by eisely)

This can be a very difficult and divisive issue if it is not handled right. Criteria for physical preparedness are both fair and necessary. Rank and age criteria, as pointed out, are essentially proxies for maturity. When I lead canoe outings in the past, I excluded non swimmers, which was in my mind fair and necessary. However you handle this it has to be transparent and clear to all concerned, and free from arbitrary adult decision making. These situations also arise when there are wilderness use permit limitations on sizes of groups. Once criteria have been set our troop operates on a first come first served basis. This is not to say that we haven't had some occasional ugly disputes.(This message has been edited by eisely)

I recently purchased a new shirt and trousers for a complete new uniform. Not that my prior uniform was worn out. Just too much personal growth. But I digress. There is much to like about the new uniforms. Among other things, the breast pocket flaps on the shirt do not button down, but are more or less secured with velcro. However the designers thoughtfully provided a button inside the flap on the right breast pocket for hanging "temporary insignia." That button came off within two hours of my putting the shirt on for the first time. Anybody have other issues with the new uniform regarding workmanship?(This message has been edited by eisely)

You are a jerk scoutldr. Do I get to tie a knot in my neckerchief now?

I agree with the other posts about the rules. Having said that, the young man should move promptly to get these references identified and underway. He should probably coordinate with the District Advancement Chair about where the reference letters should be sent. The rules do not mention use of email but this may be an option for expediting the whole thing. I am the eagle coordinator for our troop. I make it part of my job to be the collector of the reference letters. A couple of years ago I had one scout ask me if he could use a reference who resided in the UK and request that person to send me an email. I said, "Sure, why not?" I got the email in due course, printed it out and included it in the scout's package. The one extra thing that I did on my own authority was to include a written signed statement of my own in the lad's binder affirming that I had received the email and that it was not something that the scout had simply handed to me. I never heard back from anybody about this and he passed his EBOR so I infer that it was OK.

Not enough vaccine? Clearly George Bush's fault. Oh wait, that was last year. I get so confused.

When I have taught "Troop Committee Challenge" to real registered committee members from a variety of troops, I have advised that most committee decisions can be, and typically are made by consensus. I also advise that some tough decisions, particularly around disciplinary matters, probably will require a formal vote. The difficulties that a unit committee can encounter if a vote is called for and if the committee in question is not used to voting were alluded to in an earlier post. Who is eligible to vote? What is a quorum? Simple majority or super majority required for various decisions? It is difficult and dangerous to make up rules on the fly when a major controversy erupts. Bob White was also opposed to troop committees having bylaws. In my teaching I point out the advantages of having at least some bylaws, but they do need to be kept simple.(This message has been edited by eisely)

Well said. One of the authoritative participants in the forum in the past, one Bob White, always insisted that voting was not necessary, and possibly even prohibited. I do agree that electing CC and SM is probably a mistake. But voting on other matters is perfectly permissible.

An update. According to the AP story at the link the Swiss courts decided that Polanski had to remain in jail as he posed a flight risk. Ya think!! http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091020/D9BEPRCO1.html

If one applies the construction general contractor business model to this project, the contractor typically provides insurance and warrants the project for a period of time. This may not be the way we would look at the project, but this is the way public agencies look at these things.

I was in our council office briefly the other day. There is a place where flyers and commonly used forms are available for the taking. I noticed there is now a form for requesting evidence of insurance. I did not pick up a copy to see the content. Aside from the risks involved in having a bunch of scouts scrambling around on a roof, I would be considered about long term liabilities for construction defects. This project, as described, is a step beyond constructing a few park benches.

I don't think so. If the person who is the IH wants to perform some additional function such as a merit badge counselor then he or she would have to do so. Chartered Organization Representatives do fill out the adult volunteer application so far as I know.

I gather that some councils are now imposing a minimum hour requirement with National's consent. Be that as it may, hours that the eagle spent planning and coordinating all count. If he left those hours out then he short changed himself. I suggest that he go back over his calendar and memory and reconstruct his hours as completely and honestly as he can. I also suggest that he contact the district advancement person and the person at the council who turned it down for more specific guidance.