fred8033

I would absolutely not put that in place. A special camp out for those that sold seems wrong. Pack program should be for everyone. Packs have a hard time doing one or two pack camp outs a year. I fear an invite only campout would not be an "addition" but rather a limit that reduces opportunity. Most importantly, those-that-camp may not always be good fundraisers. And, those-that-fundraise may not always want to camp. Incentives are important. Boys (and parents) compete for incentives, but this is a badly matched incentive.

I'm not surprised. Long-term quality is hit and miss with Eagle projects. Often an Eagle project is fixing short comings with an Eagle project from previous years. IMHO, it should have been anticipated that wet, shady areas can cause the boards to get slick. They can become a falling hazard.

A few other key points ... Involving others can trigger things beyond your control. You may or may not need to do this, but be warned. Things can take a life of their own. Does the kid want to be a scout? Parents often push scouts to try to offset other behavior issues. Sometimes youth are interested in exploring the darker side of life (drugs, alcohol, theft, etc). If so, their interests are not compatible with scouting. Period. Suspending does not have to have a time limit. In this case, a time limit serves no purpose. The real need is for the youth to lose the interest in drugs and want to be a scout. I would simply in as friendly a way as possible say ... The path you are choosing is not compatible with scouts. We want to support you as we can, but at this point your interests are not compatible with scouting or our troop. You are welcome to come back if you change your ways. But until then, it is best if you find somewhere else to spend your time. "If it were me" ... if a scout brought pot to a meeting (even if outside) ... and that scout had other dark behaviors too ... then I'd remove the scout. Period. If they want back, I'd consider it through conversation with him and my view if he really was changing his path. Watch out for people saying "if any kid needs scouting, that kid needs scouting". The kid might, but at what cost. Other scouts? More incidents? Killing recruitment for five to ten years. From my experience, our troop has always been worse off going with reasoning of "if any kid needs scouting, that kid needs scouting." If he stays in scouting, you are accepting responsibility to protect others. You know he's a risk and will introduce other bad habits to the troop. Do you really accept that risk? BIGGEST POINT ... You will lose good kids and you will scare away families if you don't handle this and handle it now. You already lost one kid from summer camp. Your troop could earn a label as having troubled scouts and new families will avoid your troop because of it. Bad behavior needs to be dealt with immediately. Especially if it is a pattern of bad behavior.

It can happen and has a special patch that says ... "Proud son of a super mom!"

@Sentinel947 Well done.

I agree and disagree. IMHO, the RSO handled it poorly. ... but we need to separate that from the fundamental of his need to teach the scouts and to keep them safe. A RSO absolutely needs the prerogative to remove scouts who can't listen, can't focus or are screwing around. From the RSO point of view, it doesn't matter if it's just bad behavior or a disability. But the RSO should have handled it better.

Sad that parents or whoever had to escalate this to the broadcast news. Hasn't scouts been dragged through enough already? Doesn't the parent want his kid to stay in scouts? Now, their kid will be eternally known in their troop, in their district and in the local schools as the kid who dragged his own organization into the public opinion space. I trust the adults to treat the kid fairly, but the other scouts might not as much. I assume if a family does this, the family is planning to leave scouts. BSA and scouting and local volunteers bend over backwards to help kids with special needs. And, we've had lots of scouts with all sorts of issues. Now and then adults don't every situation well. Or specific situations get the better of the leaders. If this situation is as it was said, then the guy being paid effectively $ 2.00 per hour did not handle it well. And it's sad because it gives everyone a black eye after all the hard work put in. No scout should ever hear people asking if they are mentally disturbed. ... to be honest though, the rest of the story seems reasonable. ... RSO saying they've had trouble with kids like that is questionable depending on context? statement is ok if referring to screwing around or not sitting still or not listening or ... It's not ok if referring to autism ... even then it should be discussed quietly to the side with other adult leaders or camp staff. Not in front of the scouts. I've run BBGun and Archery ranges. I have asked parents to help kids who need a bit more focus. I've asked kids to step out because of their behavior. The point is I was responsible to keep the range safe. But riffle and shotgun are different than cub camp. And it needs to be the prerogative of the RSO. It's their neck if the range is not kept safe. My issue is I just never seen a scout leader or staffer use those exact words. As such, it seems like a very one sided representation of a bad situation. ... I have seen scouts use those exact words about each other. Usually, it's followed with some adult finding an opportunity to coach the scout. With that said, we've got multiple scouts in our troop on the autism spectrum disorder scale. Two of them ... depending time of day ... depending if they took their medicines ... I could see being kicked off the firing range because they can't sit still and listen. At those times, they will screw around and distract the others. The RSO needs to maintain control of the range and keep things safe. If the scouts are squirrel-ly or not listening or screwing around, they should be kicked off the range. It can be mater of factly handled and bluntly. ... But the issue is not the diagnosis. The issue is the specific timing and whether the scouts can participate safely.

Well said ... here is what I heard ... Older scouts ... have already learned how scouting works, right or wrong. Dual path ... If you want to change how the troop works, create a dual path for new and older scouts. New scout learn the better practices. Older scouts are not pushed out, frustrated and can benefit from the adventures and participation. Adventure ... Younger scouts learn by example. Create situations where they can observe and let them observe and mimic. IMHO, leadership sessions rarely teach good leadership. I remember some high performance team training from years back. It was very much focused on activities and doing things with a follow up short discussion.

The difference is that sports will bench you if you can't make the previous X number of practices. Sports also hold competitions for who can make the team. I've almost never seen a scout denied a campout or activity because they could not make a meeting. Scouting is to use positive encouragement, not negative restrictions.

Scoutmaster "type" sounds like it may play second fiddle to a smooth "transition" ... I've seen many scoutmasters and different styles now. IMHO, the best scoutmaster I've ever seen was the first. He was very laid back and very natural with the kids. The scouts liked him and did not hide things from him. He was open and they were too. He would do very little direction. Almost everything was a relaxed question and it was so relaxed the scouts didn't know he was coaching them. They thought it was just a relaxed conversation. "So what's the plan?" ... or "who's going?" ... or "how did that work out for you?" (his version of pointing out a bad decision). I do think his style was better or the best, but a big factor is he was the first scoutmaster I experienced and he set my expectations for all future scoutmasters. Style ... I prefer a scoutmaster that "looks like" he's never taking control. IMHO, a key point of scoutmaster is NOT promoting yourself or your knowledge of scouting. Instead, it's about minimizing yourself and letting the scouts be up front. I envision Peter Fonda from easy rider mixed with a great baseball coach. Just keep cool. I also prefer a scoutmaster who looks like the number one concern is getting the scouts out doing things. Adventures. Activities. Doing things. In that structure, the scoutmaster has lots of opportunities to coach and make a difference. Transition ... The next scoutmaster always has a problem. The scouts know how the game works. Then the rules change mid-game without their consent or prior notice. It can easily cause issues. Plus it can be worse in many eyes. With "troop shopping", the scouts visited other troops to find the one that fits their personality. Now, they've invested their time and years. Then the SM wants to change the personality of the troop. Scouts and parents can legitimately view it as unfair. I can't criticize a SM for wanting to make a better troop. BUT, there will be pain. Sadly, things often don't really become smooth until the previous scouts age out or leave. For me and my sons ... what I'm looking for in a troop is ... Relaxed leaders ... I want the friendly relaxed set of adult leaders who coach, but let the scouts develop their friendships, have adventures and lead their own program. That means there should be two or three uniformed adult leaders for every 40 scouts. The rest of the adults are away drinking coffee or playing cribbage. Full program ... I want a troop program that gives my son the "OPTION" to camp 35 nights a year. Two nights a month. Plus one week summer camp. Plus one or two optional extended mid-adventures or high-adventures. With that option, my son should easily be able to average 25 nights a year camping. Great friendships ... I want a troop where my son's patrol does things as a patrol. Ski trips. Movies. Game nights. Etc. I want my sons' patrols to be a home-away-from home close knit set of friends.

We use BSA ScoutBook. Plugs into the official BSA records. Provides standard reports and custom tools to report in many different ways. Auto-fills individual reports for purchasing, advancement and EBORs. @RainShine My question to you is why are you asking? Advancement is not a group activity. It's an individual activity. Though PLCs and patrols can create opportunities for advancement, PLCs and patrols should focus on creating an interesting / fun / character building program. The key is to keep PLCs, patrol leaders and adult leaders away from planning advancement as if it was a group activity. Yes, it's interesting to know how scouts are advancing as a reflection on the quality of the troop, the patrol and the program. That feedback can help improve the program.

Glad they are ok. Florida freeways have always scared me. Too fast and too much traffic. And, that's from someone who never worried about driving in NY, CA or Boston.

@The Latin Scot Your comments are well said. I and most everyone I know appreciate a well uniformed scout. Clean and cut looks sharp. Good uniforming helps in many ways. Sadly, my uniforming views are jaded. Burned by the poor poor quality centennial uniform and the hundreds I spent to properly uniform my family (two for me, plus multiple for my jamboree son, plus other kids ...) Tried to follow BSA insignia guide, but my scouts were criticized for putting temporary patches on back of sash ... which is per the insignia guide ... by adults who's own uniforms violated the insignia guide in other ways. Then attending BSA summer camps where camp patch and patch segments are displayed on the shirt as growing uniform wart. And it's suggested and applauded. Or adult leaders who hang each and every possible decoration on their uniform and start looking like a Christmas tree. Too many people trying to one-up each other on uniforming correctness or uniforming bling. Breaking straw was when I finally realized the uniform is more about ceremony and decoration than function. It's the extremely rare scout leader you will see summitting mount baldy in a full uniform. Or spending every day at Sea Base canoeing or deep sea fishing in full scout uniform. Or canoeing in the BWCA in full uniform. Too often the uniform is more about showing bling, bragging or humor than about function or organization. I view the uniform more like a flag ceremony now. There is no bad flag ceremony. We should celebrate and respect each ... even as we look at things we might improve ... while keeping our mouths shut.

@Eagle94-A1 Post a link to Green Bar Bill's ideas on how to start a new troop. One challenge always is for the kids to figure out who would be a good leader and getting to know each other so they can vote on who would be a good PL (or SPL). I'd suggest the first meeting include one or two get to know you games. And, run the games so that the girls start asserting their personality. You will quickly know who would do well standing up in front of others and helping keep things moving. I'd also start PL (SPL) early, but keep it simple. Then continually grow their role as they are ready. Continually though, focus on them having positive experiences as a leader. Otherwise, it can be intimidating and will scare off future scouts from volunteering to do.

First scout meeting? or first adult / parent meeting ? Infrastructure early and continually ... You need to collect and share infrastructure information early and continually. Get contact information of new members (youth, both parents, etc). Give contact information of existing leaders. Communicate initial dates. Build excitement and vision ... for both scouts and parents ... you need to build excitement. convince them to come back and keep coming back. Build friendships and fellowship ... continually Lock down a first moderate sized event. Do NOT start as a Webelos 3. Maybe the first meeting is a meet and greet. Sometime fairly quick, elect your first SPL and build patrols. Or just a PL if you only have 5 to 10 scouts. Maybe run a few games ... or go bowling or ... The scouts will quickly learn who the natural youth leaders are. Then, have the SPL be the SPL to the level of their ability and be careful to not step on their toes as they learn.

Maybe. Maybe not. We all want to do the program so well because our kids and other youth are involved. It happens in volunteer programs over and over again. At some point, our passion for the program starts damaging the program.

I'm really don't care either way. There are bigger fish to fry and of all the uniforming issues, this is a fairly small one. But it does reflect an issue one of my sons recently said. My son said was asked by the EBOR what could be done to improve scouting. He said later to me privately that he though the thing that damaged scouts the most was the adults obsessing about it compulsively. My interpretation is that he thought the adults should gear down their energy so that the scouts can enjoy / drive their own program.

@perdidochasSame with ours. ... I flip-flop on whether BSA uniform is CEREMONIAL or FUNCTIONAL. Sports analogy ... Football players don't wear full uniform to ceremonies. At best, maybe the jersey. Usually, suit and tie. Basketball players don't wear shiny shorts to press conferences. They usually wear street clothes. Coaches (aka adult leaders) rarely wear the team uniform. Maybe baseball. Players just don't suit up for meetings and ceremonies. The uniform is for doing the activity. Military analogy ... Most military branches separate dress and activity uniforms. Dress uniforms are kept sharp. activity uniforms get worn hard. Scouts ... Functionally bad... Shirts with patches everywhere and pins marking years and hanging patches for temporary events. Some sew on huge patch areas on the shirt beyond the uniforming guide. New heavy cloth pants are really not my preferred cloth for hiking. I'd rather have something light weight that breaths. Zip-off pants are really more zip-lost in my house. It's just too hard to track and keep coordinated. As for position patches, position patches are much more often wrong than right. IMHO, the uniform is mainly ceremonial and to create group identity as a group (useful in itself and very useful during travel). Beyond that, it's just not a "functional" uniform. If I could make a uniform change I'd suggest troops have a POR box. At the start of meetings, scouts with a POR retrieve their POR badge and wear it. At the end, it's stored again. It's how our KOC works. Or have velcro on shoulders and the POR patches have the other velcro side. I'd suggest the MB sash be enlarged for decorative patches and other meaningful decorations so that we can keep the uniform as clean cut as possible.

I share many of your opinions in your email. I fully believe emails are for adults / parents. In this day and age, parents expect good communication. Period. Though scouts are responsible, it is expected in any organization to have good parental communication. Mailing lists ... We use SOAR to manage mailing lists. It does a great job and is one of SOAR's best features. Automatically manages mailing lists. Secures who can send and who gets replies. Well formatted. Automatic weekly well formatted news letters. Scout communication ... My experience is we can't control how scouts communicate and we often do a lousy job even helping. We can suggest and coach. Beyond that, different scouts prefer different ways. We totally leave it up to the scouts to figure out how to communicate. Different patrols in our troop use different methods. Some use an app. Others use group chats. IMHO, encourage good communication but it's a losing battle to control it.

Some schools. My sons school did a long distance trip without a bag search. It was tossed on the bus and they left.

I disagree. Scout leaders may have the right to search, but actually doing it is something reserved for the rare occasion and with the scout present. Searching all the scout's stuff without them there because of what the leader saw with one or two scouts is just wrong. If I heard that before my sons joined the troop, I'd look to another troop. It's a flag that the scout leaders and the scouts have an adversarial relationship and don't trust each other. It's just not the scout model we want.

The topics and arguments are very different. The tent policy exists because there is a power difference between a 17 year old scout and an 11 year old scout. It is the perfect setup for abuse. The two year difference in age is a perfectly reasonable precaution and something many troops already had in place.

As a parent, I wouldn't really care that much. I'd be more concerned about the wasting of time and what my son will think about it. Some of my sons would care less. One of my sons would never get past it and it would setup future battles between the SM and him.

I disagree. Just not a good idea. Inspecting for "being prepared" is absolutely fine. Presumptive inspections for contraband are bad. We work by trust and the scout oath and law. We don't create us-versus them, gotcha situations. If you don't trust the scouts, then don't take the scouts with you. Worse of all, you are "challenging" the many scouts. It may deter some, others will look to get around ya. If scouts want to get stuff in, they will. Super max prisons can't block contraband and they have fences, cells, shotguns and handcuffs. If you really want to block contraband, may I suggest patting down the scouts; check all pockets (pants, coats, socks, etc); inspect all car cavities and also control where the scouts walk around so that inspected scouts can't receive contraband from to-be-inspected scouts or to-be-inspected cars. Instead of blocking contraband, work to develop trust so that the scouts will want to not lose your trust.

That's different. That expected inspection has to do with being prepared and having the right gear for the right situation. That inspection is not to prevent violations of scout oath and law.