FScouter

If you're talking about girls, they're hardly a minority. If you mean avowed homosexuals, I've never met an avowed homosexual boy. Maybe one pondering what his sexuality is all about, but never a boy whose membership application was turned down. Never heard of any application refused for a boy's physical characteristics, nor for his emotional characteristics. You'll have to be more specific about the minorities that are refused membership.

If there are difficulties in a troop, taking some kind of action to make things better would be in order. Before proceeding with any particular action, you might look forward and ask: Will the older boys now start cleaning latrines? Will the older boys now like to hang with the younger boys? Will the NYLT boys now stop sitting around? In our troop, mixing up patrols solved no problems and actually led to patrol instability. I found that boys will hang with who they want to hang with and the patrol patch on their sleeve doesnt change that. We had better success with older boys as Instructors or Troop Guides. Boys that are bored will still be bored. Boys react to excitement in the program, and re-membering the patrols didnt create any excitement.

It would be very interesting to read the study that lays blame for a declining impact of a training course on the name used to refer to it.

Of course "Pack & Paddle" means nothing in these parts. Sounds like some kind of 50 miler thing. Isn't there another topic about customized names for national training courses?

Maybe it's time to ditch the merit badge class theme and adopt a summer camp fun theme. There's got to be more to camp than class vs. hang out.

? I did not get from Neil's posts that he does not use the book, nor that he doesn't care. Indeed, what he suggests IS in the book.

Neil didn't suggest any methods. He said the boy leaders need to be trained.

The stuff in BSA resources is the distilled wisdom of hundreds of units from all over the country. Certainly wisdom offered by individual posters on an internet forum has some value. What's not clear at all is why the collective wisdom provided by BSA is so frequently dismissed.

"Because they are trying to increase revenue..." Really now. Think what you're saying! Here's another one for you: The purpose of recruiting new boys into the program is to increase revenue $10 a head, and the purpose of retention is to keep that 10 bucks coming in year after year! Ka-ching! Ka-ching!

There was a ton of posts full of experience, wisdom, and helpful perspective, (along with some other posts too). I see no point in leaving out the BSA perspective.

That's a very cynical view of training. I paid a lot more $$$ than that for 5 years of Scoutmastering "just" to "buy" a knot.

"I do however disagree the new Philmont knot, that is just a knot you buy." Oviously you haven't read the requirements.

I'm sure you didn't mean it to sound like it came out. The Silver Beaver is presented based on a recommendation from one's peers. It has no specific requirements and requirement options similar to some other awards. But because there is no checklist of requirments, it's not fair to say it was not earned. One does a lot more for the Silver Beaver award than many of the others.

Who exactly are you referring to when you say "Council"? Do you mean the volunteer training committee, the Scout exec, the girl behind the counter, the volunteer president? Who is "Council" ?

It is so uplifting and heartwarming, watching folks "reveal their character". Ahh, free speech, you gotta love it.

There is one adult leader and his sons ready to present a specific outing to the Scoutmaster. I'd rather see the patrol leaders' council first decide they want a week-long trip, then get 3-4 destination ideas, ONE of which is Grand Canyon, then discuss the proposals at the PLC meetings, THEN bring it to the troop. From the opening post, it sounds like the adult and his sons are looking to the SM to approve a trip THEY are planning, one they have already done and are personally excited about. Maybe the assistant Scoutmaster is simply not enthusiastic about the manner in which the trip is being proposed, not so much opposed to the trip itself. If the annual planning conference has already taken place and a calendar set and approved, I'd be opposed too. If the planning conference is upcoming, this Grand Canyon trip should be one more idea in the hopper.

An Eagle candidate submits a project proposal to pick up trash. One could toss him out - beat it kid, you need a real project, or take 10 minutes to read the proposal. Heres a project proposal: The candidate proposes to remove trash and debris along both sides of a 1/2 mile section of a 2-lane county road. He contacted the county road department and found out the road right of way is 80 wide. The pavement is 30 wide. The private property line is 25 from the edge of the pavement. The clean-up area will be this 25 unpaved shoulder. He will secure written permission from the road department for the project. The clean up will be done in teams of 2, with each team assigned a section of road. Each team will carry 2 bags; one for recyclable plastic, aluminum, and glass, the other bag for un-recyclable trash. They will also carry a supply of stakes and flagging tape to mark spots with trash too big to fit in a bag, or a spot with a problem. The work teams will be issued gloves, an orange vest, and a bottle of water. Warning signs/flags will be posted at both end of the project advising drivers Road crew ahead or such. There will be a short training for the teams to tell them about what to pick up, what to leave, what to stake, and how to keep safe. He will secure a volunteer with pickup truck to pick up the bags of recyclables and trash as they are filled. Another team with a truck will be assigned to collect large items staked by the teams. He has a plan to deal with surprises which might include a dead animal carcass, a 36 Plymouth half buried in the ditch, a 55 gallon drum with a skull & crossbones label and something sloshing around inside. The plan might include phone numbers for animal control, hazmat, or someone with a winch or small tractor. His plan is to clean up and remove ALL trash. He has a plan to communicate with the teams as they work their section of road, perhaps with 2-way radios. He has an estimate of the amount of trash that will be collected. The bags of recyclables will be opened and the contents sorted, either on-site or at another location. He has arranged with a recycler to accept them. He has a plan for the recycling cash proceeds. He has arranged for the trash to be delivered to the dump and knows what the dump fee will be, if any. The candidate will arrange to procure all the supplies needed: bags, gloves, vests, food, water, stakes,etc. He will conduct a hot dog BBQ in advance to raise funds for their purchase if he cannot arrange for them to be donated. He has a contingency plan in case someone gets injured or snake bit. He has a first aid kit, and if there is an EMT amongst his volunteers, he knows that in advance. He has a plan to feed his volunteers, and to thank them for their participation. It could be that pick up trash is not an Eagle project, and a blood drive or trail work may not be Eagle projects either. But one doesnt know until one reads the written proposal.

Required position? Individual units will have the position filled if it is required, whether there is a person or not. Just like units today have committee members, assistant SM, COR, CC, Cubmaster etc. Some of these folks aren't even aware somebody put their name on the charter renewal. Some charters have names the unit doesn't even know anymore yet they get renewed year after year. Making a position "required" doesn't mean the unit will have a functioning person.

I also wonder that if the local folks that take a proprietary interest in the name and customize it for their own purposes, will they also extend that customization to the training material by adding/deleting topics to fit their "local needs", likes, and dislikes?

Please. Bob White is not "wrong". The unit can certainly go to the district or council and lay out the problem. The council may not offer much help at all. Or they may offer all kinds of wise counsel and sage advice as to how to proceed. You have nothing to lose by asking. But they will NOT make the decision for the unit. They will NOT step in on behalf of the unit and tell the SM he is fired. The decision to remove a unit leader and to carry it out is solely the responsibility of the COR/CO.

I'm confused. Who would go after the council, and for what?

How about picking up trash along the roadside? Would that qualify?

I think the important thing to learn from this discussion is that the council is a resource the unit can use to help them choose the best course of action. It wouldn't be correct for the unit to expect that "council" will step in and remove a leader or otherwise take care of the problem. It would not be fair to accuse the council of never doing anything for the unit if what they offer is guidance, ideas, and wise counsel instead of stepping in and taking over.

The BSA book The District Committee #33070 will answer most of your questions about the structure of the various district subcommittes. You can also refer the the Camping Committee Guide and the Activities and Civis Service Guide. The Camping chair may be sitting on his hands, but so is the rest of the committee. A Camporee is an "activity", even though it involves an overnight. It could be he does understand the structure, has read his respective book and found "Camporee" not mentioned at all. If the problem is staffing the Activities committee, the answer is not to move the camporee to the Camping committee. Why not ask the district chairman if he would assist the Activities committee recruit some members?

"As a Commissioner it is important to set the example." What is the example that is being set?