fred8033

Yes and no. Tigers until 2000 was essentially a friend of the pack. ... Started in 1982 as a parent/child activity. Only to attend a few pack meetings a year. No derby car. No uniform. 1986 age lowered when ranks became grade aligned. 1996 more aligned with pack. 2001 was when Tiger became an integrated part of the pack. I remember that one as my oldest son was a wolf. He was the last age to use the orange t-shirts as a uniform. I liked that t-shirt. It was cheap. "enough data"? Again, yes and no. We've seen constant declines for 20+ years. Was it bad press coverage of Dale v BSA, CSA and IVF files? Internet and all kids online all the time? Growth of youth sports? Or, the Tiger & Lion program? Causality is not clean or singular. To be fair, I don't think Lion/Tiger is the biggest cause. ... but that's just a guess.

14/15 year olds just don't care much about resume building. Give them adventure, friendships and fun. They will come. The rest is just decoration.

@nolesrule ... Ugh. Kids can easily tell when their parents are upset about something. Often they hear pieces of conversation and pickup fast. What could have been a torn could have become a stopping point for her. Is there another girl's troop near by to join? Is the other ASM just out-right quitting along with his daughter quitting? Or would they consider another troop? Have you already paid your Jamboree money? At some point ... and I should have said this earlier ... take a look at your scout's overall experience. Is it good or bad with the SM/CC? If neutral to good, this becomes a lesson in working with other people. The specific MB is just not that important. Though I have contempt for what happened, this might not be the war you want to fight. I'd be more concerned with keeping your daughter on the path toward a positive experience and growing as a positive good person. The rest is just not critical. FYI ... Doesn't sound like the COR handled this the best either. There is no need for trials or asking people to leave the room when presenting their views on what happened. IMHO ... that's a sign of already bad things that will end scouting careers. It's no way to resolve a MB. ... This sounds like major personality conflict inside the unit.

1) Volunteers. ... Agree with earlier. Simplify as much as possible. Look for free community events and/or resources. If your city is having a big vehicle day when your city shows off it's big stuff, somehow find a way to get the whole pack to meetup there. Maybe grab an area off to the side for a rally point. Find a city park and have a pack game day. 2) Facility ... Us too. We rented a school space. It was cheap. Dens met at their own choice. 3) Council ... Councils don't do anything for individual packs. Period. Don't expect different. 4) Cost ... Agree with earlier. Reduce the cost. Don't need to buy books until the troop years. Maybe webelos. Uniform? It gets clumsy. Some don't want to spend. Some expect everyone uniformed. It's a really screwed up expectation. ... but you are right, pack scouts reap huge revenue for BSA where troop scouts is less but the big focus. 5) Ages. ... "This is the one easy one. @Armymutt is correct" ... but I also agree with your assertion. There is zero learning K-3 that is useful later. Even 4th and 5th grades are an excuse to start younger boys that want to join their older brother's troops. IMHO, youth could join a troop never having been in a pack and no one would notice a difference after the first week. 6) Indoors/outdoors. ..."Do what's fun for the scouts. Getting them comfortable being outside while having fun is the best preparation for scouts." ... love that answer. 7) Religion. Yep. Focus on scout law. Leave religion for the families.

You are right. If other packs have a Lions den OR if your council advertises Lions, you are basically forced (for the health of your pack) to have a Lions den. Or, those dedicated families will go to other packs and start drawing away from your pack. Fully agree. Even before Lions (and essentially Tigers ... or girls ... or ...), packs often had multiple "family" events per year. There was no need to make Lions and Tigers official ranks or registered members.

Wrong. It has a bad influence. Tigers is similar, but not as extremely evident. ... IMHO ... start'em when you can give them a knife, fire or bow-and-arrow.

Yes. It is NOT the unit leader's job to second guess the MBC or the camp staff. A unit leader after-the-fact second-guessing the camp staff / MBC sucks the life out of the scout. It's an enthusiasm killer. Camp staff often design accommodations to allow doing a MB in a camp setting and with a group. The best example often is when a group is sampled for requirement "discuss" answers instead of requiring each and every scout to answer the question. Other flexibility is done to focus on giving the scout a positive, rewarding experience while still teaching the content of the MB. I'm absolutely okay with partials. BUT, that's the choice of the MBC; not the unit leader. A key point is the MBs are a council / district program. MBs are NOT a unit program. MBCs are council registered; not unit registered. Unit leaders are absolutely NOT there to "monitor the specifics of the verbs" or second guess the MBCs. That's a clear sign of overstepping boundaries. Unit leaders need to focus on unit program quality. If unit leaders don't like the MBC choices, then the unit leader lets their council know. They do NOT take it out on the scout.

Key to finding adults is it's mainly a chat with the scout. Encouraging the scout and collecting casual feedback on how the troop is doing. So, it's really nothing more than a relaxed chat. One experienced adult and two other adults are enough. It's really not "asking for help" as much as having someone just sit in.

@nolesrule ... You will not get an exact procedure. There is none. Scouting is very much a social experiment where kind people with kind hearts work with each other. We try not to apply rules or procedures against each other. The idea is the SM should be talking with those involved and talking with the scout. With thoughtfulness. With a kind heart. With consideration and a listening ear. The idea is to build connection and teach a lesson. If I were SM, I should not fight a battle about an Astronomy MB earned at summer camp using scouting staff and a standard program offered to all troops. It sounds more like a dispute between SM and camp programming. If so, the scout should not be in the middle. GTA 7.0.4.7 is titled "Limited recourse" as it's supposed to be rare and not used like this. GTA 7.0.4.7 is for obvious errors that everyone agrees a mistake happened ... OR .. a liar liar pants on fire situation. This is not your case. Your case is a debate if the MBC (camp staff) correctly interpreted the requirement. ... GTA 7.0.4.7 is not to dispute a camp staff MB program.

Ouch. The bankruptcy process itself is a business killer. It's like hospital fears some of my extended relatives have --> don't go into the hospital because the hospital might kill you. Sadly, there is some basis in fact with that. Bankruptcy legal process is similar. ... Sometimes companies have to invest in loss leaders for strategic reasons.

Our troop too. I don't think it's that unusual in a good sized troop.

#1 ... not only extorting defendants ... it biases juries. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is to convict on a single charge; but situations are rarely clear cut. A jury can feel good about their decision if they feel they proportionately convict. ... Thinking being we're not really sure if the accused is really guilty. So, let's convict on one of five of the charges. That way the decision to not convict on the 4 of 5 reflects the doubt and feels like a fair decision. In addition, juries think he must be guilty of one of these. Let's choose the closest match. ... Even worse, these situations are ugly. It's hard for a jury to see an ugly situation and not convict on any of multiple charges. #2 Fair punishment is always hard to decide. Even harder deciding on fair without having a single fact.

Don't judge. It's not scout like either. ... It's a tragedy. ... We're trying to understand what happened. ... Also be careful, responsible adults are not automatically criminals. ... I suspect real negligence happened here. But, we don't know that yet as the news article has not provided any meaningful details. No matter what, it's a tragedy for all involved.

Me too. Shooting sports rules have always been seriously followed. This incident sounds like negligence. The question is how egregious. We are missing lots on this story. ... Examples ... how many scouts were present? Three adults sounds like minimum to open a shooting range for a troop shoot at the camp. If the troop brought 20 to 30 scouts and the range had 8 to 10 shooting spots, then having 18 guns could be reasonable. Spares. Not sure which are shooting well or which sights were well aligned. privately owned? could be shooting instructor let his personal collection of 22s be used. 23 charges? Were there really 23 different issues or one or two issues and trying to find the right charge? My gut says journalism written to be inflammatory. Sounds like 5 or more against each of three men, somehow totaling 23. Also prosecutors could be charging all even slightly possible crimes. Then, let it resolve thru a trial or plea deals. My gut says the men failed to follow required procedures and failed to secure ammunition. With today's attitude on blame and guns, the death of a youth with a gun will result in a charges whether or not someone could be convicted of a crime.

Well said earlier. This statement is extremely poignant. Some of scouting's worst moments and when we try to force the learning.

This is what I believe 100%. Absolutely.

I've heard about that research, but not seen it. I question reaching the conclusion from the research. We may be losing opportunity with some families that become committed to other programs, but I think we lose far more from burn-out and from a too-early meaningless program. I see lots of families drop out of baseball, soccer and other activities after the first few years. I'd argue that when a child enters 3rd grade, those parents are looking for something new, fresh and the next bigger step. IMHO, that should be scouting with knives, fire, outdoors and shooting sports. Instead of waiting for the youth to be ready for the program, we've dumbed down the program to the point the program loses it's benefit and it's attraction.

That's my biggest fear. It starts to break the scout's commitment to scouting. The scout showed up. The scout did as instructed. The scout fulfilled their end. Now they don't get what was promised. It breaks the scout's commitment and kills their excitement. The specific badge just does not matter that much. The path to get the badge does though. IMHO, it's got to be pretty extreme for troops to say no. A scout or family knowing they did something wrong. A paperwork error the scout agrees with. This though is a MBC doing as planned and the scout fulfilling that. IMHO, in cases like these, the blue card is signed validly and it's a done badge.

IMHO ... I think this is the exact problem killing scouting. Kudos to @5thGenTexan. IMHO, Cubs starting so young is burning out the adults and burning out families. IMHO, the program should start in 3rd grade. 2nd grade is a gray area. K & 1st are just wrong and damages the program and burns out the adults. Scouting should start when the scouts can socialize and be responsible. Until then, let families have their time together. Let them try out soccer and baseball and the other activities. THEN, when they are ready, let them come to scouts. I think the biggest scouting killer is pushing scouting down to such young ages where parents treat scouting more like baby sitting and the benefits at that age are not that significant. By the scouts get to the key ages that make huge differences, the whole family is burnt out on the program.

From what I read so far ... the scout is not in question. The SM/CC is questioning the camp program. And I'm assuming ... you are not overly inserting yourself and that the SM/CC is not also correcting your being involved too much. #1 Using this understanding, I assert ... GTA 7.0.4.7 is about clearly failed situations. GTA 7.0.4.7 is not about differences of opinion where people don't think the camp staff are doing it right. ... Of course, I absolutely prefer scouts and camp staff work to draw while sitting in the dark and watching the sky. There is a special experience gained by doing that. ... But, it would be very arrogant to say I'll send my scout to your camp but not value the camp MB judgement. This battle between adults that know better and scout camps trying to provide meaningful experiences has been going on for decades and will continue to go on. IMHO, it's just not the purpose of GTA 7.0.4.7. I'd really also ask. Will your troop second-guess every MB done by the camp? Will the troop audit and pre-judge the MBs before sending the camp? If your troop doesn't respect the camp MB program, then the troop is doing the scouts a real dis-service sending the scouts there. It's really hypocritical to use a scout camp but not respect their MB program. If it's not good, go somewhere else. If it's your best option, show it some respect. Even further, what is being served ? Focus on the specific scout as we don't fight larger battles using specific scouts. I really question what we are teaching the scout by not awarding the MB. Of course we can argue about teaching some higher level value of doing it right. But then again, we're also teaching resentment and not trusting those who we respect. #2 So ... if the troop really wants to go this way ... please tell me that the SM sat down with the scout to have a nice, extended conversation. Like a unit leader conference. SM sharing their thoughts. Scout sharing their thoughts. ... first SM works with those involved (camp staff, MB counselor, etc) ... "After such a consultation, the unit leader, in a positive environment similar to that of a unit leader conference, discusses with the Scout the circumstances under which a merit badge in question was approved." Did the SM sit down with the scout and have a heart-to-heart about the MB? If that's not done, the troop is not using GTA 7.0.4.7 and is going rogue. #3 ... Most importantly ... how does the scout feel about this? Adults often gear up for battles that are just not that important to the scout. If your scout is willing to re-do the requirement, then maybe that is a good choice. There are lessons there about picking battles and placating those in power. ... OR ... maybe the scout is just willing to ditch the MB. I know some of my scouts would have just said screw it. The MB would not be awarded the scout never looks back. It becomes a grievance only to be brought up in slight snide ways.

Yeah. Sadly, I see this as a key issue. Sometimes people volunteer or step-up because they want to be there for their kids ... BUT it's their kids that are the issue ... and their (parent) behavior becomes then part of the issue too. Scouting is really a simple program. Scouting is about activities and learning to socialize. Bad behavior is not for scouting. ASMs/SM need to be there to stop it. When incidients happen, explicitly state what was wrong and what is expected. If the situation involved a group, do it together so they all know. If you need to call out a single person, do it privately (with another adult). ... old adage .. publicly praise ... privately correct. .... If the behavior continues, then the youth and/or adult needs to find somewhere else to spend their time. ... If the troop problems still continue, the troop will fail. Parents don't want their kids in a program that is not a good example.

Ahhh... Thank you. This was a new way of asking a previous question. Now I'm connecting it with a previous answer. THANK YOU !!!!

BSA should already be paying cash for new expenses. I thought up-front paying of new expenses was common for companies in bankruptcy proceedings. My question had to do with claims failed between the claim deadline and BSA emerging bankruptcy. Is it possible those victims will have less recourse for their damages? I'm hoping the newly established trust allow new victims to submit claims on equal footing with the submitted 80,000+ submitted claims. Otherwise, it feels like there is a gap that removes victim recourse.

Cub scouting is expensive comparatively. Easy $100 for a uniform and book. Add activities that each are priced individually. etc, etc, etc. Floor hockey in the gym is $30 or $40 for several months. Less work too. That itself causes an issue. Our unit did communicate that too (and I was part of it). It's not really a good choice either. Uniforming differences causes judgmental attitudes from all sides to other sides and affects the commitment (from all sides). Scout shop subverts the pack message. Asking parents to make the choice infers they don't have money or are less committed or don't care or etc, etc, etc. All bad choices. Seeing uniforming differences in the unit causes issues of judgement from all sides to all sides. In hindsight, I wish our pack/troop could make our own policy. But there are just too many mixed messages.

Wow. ... That's a massive hit. Sounds like archery could still happen? Slingshot? Really massive.