FScouter

"Cost that would have been there even if the fire truck had never left the fire house." Yeah, that old arguement sounds reasonable at first. Everybody wants to pay marginal costs. But who's gonna pay for the fire truck?

Its up to the boy to raise the funds necessary to pay the costs of his project. If some boys or dads want to contribute, thats fine. If the church wants to help, thats fine. If the troop committee wants to help, thats fine too. Theres no BSA policy against it. There is a difference between the CC saying the troop CANNOT help financially and the troop WILL NOT help financially. They can help if they want to.

It sounds more like trying to include all the troop into the ceremony in some way. Personally, it sounds a little hokey, but I'd surely go along with whatever the boy wants. Showboat the new Eagle? Yeah, that's kinda the idea behind the event. I remember when I was 30-something, and a young punk 20-something passed me on the corporate ladder. It happens.

"There are no rules, regulations, policies of any kind in place from the outgoing leadership." You don't have to learn all this from scratch, or make it up as you go. It's all in the Cub Scout Leader Book. The 2006-2007 Program Helps booklet helps with the program part.

"Short of nuclear holocaust, man can not ruin the earth." Define "ruin the earth". They're doing a pretty good job of it around here.

"As for some of the rest of these responses, folks, this is embarrassing...the oxygen produced by plants does NOT come from CO2. It is produced during photosynthesis when water molecules are split in photosystem II. This is middle school science, folks." The O in CO2 is part of the equation. My recollection of chemistry is that CO2 + H20 react in the presence of sunlight energy through chlorophyll (photosynthesis) to produce CH and 02. From carbon dioxide and water we get food , lumber (stored sun energy) and oxygen. It makes perfect sense that the more active chlorophyll we have on the planet, the more oxygen and less carbon dioxide there will be. Intentionally burning down the worlds forests doesnt help. Accelerated burning of hydrocarbons stored over the millennia doesnt help either. The resulting increase in the CO2 / O2 ratio is decidedly not a natural cycle. That is unless one considers the changes humankind imposes on the planet to be "natural".

Money is one of those necessary evils a troop must deal with. It can also be a learning opportunity for boys and since we must deal with money anyway we may as well make the most of the task. Some thoughts (all supported by the way in the BSA publications): Dues the troop has ongoing expenses for awards, recharter, insurance, Boys Life etc. that dont relate to whether a boy attends a particular meeting. Weekly dues help boys develop a sense of fiscal responsibility. Collecting and recording dues is part of the troop scribe duties. Boy accounts this isnt rocket science but the treasurer must be on top of it. It solves the issue of some boys opting to skip participating in money-earning events and being carried along by the others. (Maybe thats not so bad, seeing as thats what we choose to do as a society.) Open books - It isnt really practical to invite troop adults and parents to look over the books any time they get the notion. Rather, the treasurer should prepare a financial report for each monthly committee meeting to include: income, (where did the money come from), expenses, (what was it used for), a beginning bank balance and an ending bank balance. The bank account should be reconciled with the checkbook monthly. Its a good idea to have an annual informal audit of sorts, where 2 members (or more) review all the troop financial records with the treasurer. The treasurer is a member of troop committee, as it the committee chair. But they should not be the same person. The function of the CC is to see that all the committee functions are being handled; not to do the work. It is not the function of the council office to become involved in unit finances. It would be well for the troop adults to take the New Leader Essentials training, Troop Committee Challenge training, and to get and read the Troop Committee Guidebook.

The quote comes from an essay written by Dr. Forest E. Witcraft (1894-1967), a scholar, teacher, and Boy Scout administrator. It was first published in the October 1950 issue of Scouting magazine (Scouting, October 1950, p. 2). Within My Power I am not a Very Important Man, as importance is commonly rated. I do not have great wealth, control a big business, or occupy a position of great honor or authority. Yet I may someday mold destiny. For it is within my power to become the most important man in the world in the life of a boy. And every boy is a potential atom bomb in human history. A humble citizen like myself might have been the Scoutmaster of a Troop in which an undersized unhappy Austrian lad by the name of Adolph might have found a joyous boyhood, full of the ideals of brotherhood, goodwill, and kindness. And the world would have been different. A humble citizen like myself might have been the organizer of a Scout Troop in which a Russian boy called Joe might have learned the lessons of democratic cooperation. These men would never have known that they had averted world tragedy, yet actually they would have been among the most important men who ever lived. All about me are boys. They are the makers of history, the builders of tomorrow. If I can have some part in guiding them up the trails of Scouting, on to the high road of noble character and constructive citizenship, I may prove to be the most important man in their lives, the most important man in my community. A hundred years from now it will not matter what my bank account was, the sort of house I lived in, or the kind of car I drove. But the world may be different, because I was important in the life of a boy. - Forest E. Witcraft

That's it, they don't trust the adult leaders. If dad cared enough, he would make room in his schedule to attend a campout. (Everybody has control over their schedule.) He may only have to do it once to convince mom everything is OK with the adult leadership.

There's several rank requirments he can earn without going camping. Work on those so he can "get" them signed off. If the troop used the leather recognition totem with beads, he could "get" a green, white, or red bead for every requirement completed. Meanwhile, if the mom knew the adult leaders better, she would feel more comfortable turning over her beloved baby to their care for a weekend. Go out of your way to talk with her and get to know her.

My opinion is that it is grossly unfair leave such a behavior problem for SPL to figure out. If the adult leadership has failed to solve the issue, or at least work with it, how could it be expected the SPL be successful? This is a problem for the SPL and the SM to work with and come up with a plan. Whatever the plan is, the SPL needs to have the support of the SM, and the SM needs to have the support of the committee or the plan is doomed to failure, as this plan failed. Perhaps the SPL has recognized the problems for a long time, and observed that the SM and other adults have failed to find a solution. Maybe he feels his hands have been tied and his ideas rejected. Perhaps with the SM out of town the SPL felt he had a chance to take action. Whatever, he felt empowered enough to take action and has been shot down for exercising his empowerment. Thats a good way to kill his spirit. Once he has acted, properly or not, he needs to be supported in his decision. Deflated as he is feeling right now, it would not be surprising to see him back away from taking leadership actions. So, as to a practical suggestion to empower the SPL, the SM should be talking with the SPL on a very frequent basis as to the direction the troop is headed and difficulties that exist. The SM needs to listen to all of the concerns of the SPL and help him develop a plan to address them. Then back him up. Why was the PLC meeting without the SM?

If a QM has failed to perform his duties, replacing him might be appropriate, or not. The SPL is responsible for seeing that the Scout he selected for the QM job is actually doing it. If the dutch ovens are lost and the trailer is a mess, the SPL should have known that when he queried the QM before the outing, "Is all our equipment set and ready for the campout." If the SPL didn't know what was going on, perhaps he is the one that needs to be replaced. There is a higher level failure if we feel we must resort to firing (removing, replacing) boy leaders. That is clear evidence of failure on our part to develop boy leaders. The directive from our National org is not that a boy holding a position but not performing must be given credit anyway. The directive is that we must train the boy to perform and fulfill the responsibilities of the position. It isnt the fault of a national policy when adult leaders preside over a troop and allow a boy fail to fulfill the responsibilities of his position.

If a boy doesnt want to come to meetings and activities, is making an attendance rule the best solution to fix that? Why doesnt he want to come? Band, baseball, girls, TV, snorkeling, fast cars? If a troop program is going to compete with whatever it is a boy is doing when he skips the troop activity, the troop is going to have to offer a better deal. Develop a more attractive program and those non-attending boys will suddenly chose Scouts over some boring baseball game, band practice, or video game. Another rule in the committee rule book is not a reason for a boy to want to come to Scouts.

As an analogy, if a Scoutmaster is doing a lousy job, the solution is not for the troop committee to write up a list of do's and don'ts to control the SM. The solution is to select a different SM that understands Scouting and how to implement it. If the problem is that the Eagle board made an improper decision, the solution is not for BSA to establish a list of offenses that exclude a Scout from the Eagle rank. The solution is to select adults to serve on boards of review that understand the purpose of the board of review and understand the Scout Oath and Law.

Andy makes a very good point which simply is that no Scout works his way from Tenderfoot to the brink of Eagle, earns 21+ merit badges, and completes an Eagle leadership project without being active. It ought to be clear enough to determine whether a boy is active or not by looking at what he has accomplished. If attendance percentages were the best way to go, would not the publications say so? The best ammunition towards dismantling an attendance percentage policy is the lack of support for it anywhere in the Scouting program.

Its been said several times before, and again today, that "active" or "serve actively" means nothing more than being registered, "per National". Can someone cite a written BSA source for this position?

"You can discuss with him the need to display Scout Spirit and state that if he attends no campouts and few meetings, it is difficult for him to show Scout Spirit in a way that the Troop can notice. " Just a wandering thought - Is a Scout only required to show Scout spirit at meetings and campouts, and how many are needed so the troop can take adequate notice? Or do we assume he is also showing Scout spirit at non-Scout times as well? Or is it possible for a Scout to have great Scout spirit at non-Scout times but poor Scout spirit at meetings and campouts?

See, now you've got yourself in a pickle. You have a boy who has a Boy Scout Handbook and an Eagle rank application which tell him the requirement is be active for 6 months. Then you have a troop policy that no doubt conflicts with the the requirements the boy has. (Elsewise why would the troop write a policy unless it was different from the book.) So now the dilemna is how to tell the boy the book and application requirements don't apply, or how to tell the troop their policy is not allowed.

Well, as I said, actual practices vary wildly from the standard, and as you said 99% of Scouts dont pass inspection. Any individual or unit is free to deal with the uniform in whatever manner they choose with repercussion no more severe than a member of the dreaded uniform police pointing out a deviation from standard. The uniform from top to bottom is spelled out in a straight forward manner in the inspection sheet, which by the way has been recently revised for 2007. And by golly, the headgear standard has indeed been changed from visored cap or campaign hat, to all troop members must wear the headgear chosen by vote of the troop/team. One could only hope that wouldnt be a propeller beanie with mouse ears. So, as of 2007 Ill agree that official headgear is not required, and that whatever headgear the troop chooses is an acceptable part of the uniform. The First Class pin however is reserved for wear by boys, per the Insignia Guide. Unless someone can point to some other reference that says adults may wear it too? Regarding the wearing of headgear indoors, its a common courteous practice when wearing street clothes to remove ones hat indoors. Uniform headgear is treated differently. From the Insignia Guide, Official headgear may be worn while the unit or individual is participating in an indoor formal ceremony or service duty, except in religious institutions where custom forbids. Typical indoor activities of this type are flag ceremonies, inspections, orderly duty, or ushering service. Absent participating in a formal ceremony, the hat should come off indoors. Its also interesting to note from the updated uniform inspection sheet that the standard for pants now has a clarification note which says Units have no option to change. Somehow I doubt that will reduce the practice of blue jeans and green walmart pants.

Official uniform police follow the current official uniform rules, which may be found in the current official Boy Scout Handbook, and current official Insignia Guide. Its not fair to blame the official uniform police for technically incorrect uniform practices one might hear about or read on an internet discussion forum. A few factoids (ref the Insignia Guide or Uniform Inspection Sheet): The only official uniform headgear is the BSA red visor cap or the BSA campaign hat. The expedition hat is not a uniform piece. Custom troop hats are not official headgear. The first class pin may be worn only by youth. The universal pin and the first class pin are the only pins that may be worn on official headgear. Headgear (official) does not need to be removed during an indoor flag ceremony. Headgear is optional, by vote of the troop. All members of the troop abide by the troop decision. Of course individuals and troops deviate wildly from the standard.

One way is to hold the pants with the waist open just below the water surface. Then splash your hand down into the water in front of the opening. The bubbles will rise up into the pants inflating them. Up until a couple of years ago this was a first class rank requirement. If you can find an older Scout Handbook, there's a good description, with pictures.

How would the boy know that the troop adults expect him to arrange for a BOR? The boy's Handbook tells him "your Scoutmaster will arrange a board of review for you" (for Tenderfoot) and is silent for the other ranks.

"So in this individual case, the boys will be freed from any menu planning, shopping, meal prep or KP so they can ..." Are you acknowledging that in this case they are departing from the patrol method?

The PLC does not have the prerogative to dismantle the patrol method, regardless of how sound they think the logic may be. One reason the Scoutmaster attends PLC meetings is to help keep them on track and within the bounds of Scouting. The patrol method is more difficult than the troop method. But we're not in this Scouting thing to figure out the most convenient or most efficient methodologies to go camping and feed a big group.

A raffle is a gambling scheme to make money for somebody at the expense of others that pay to take a chance. Gambling doesn't mesh well with the values of Scouting. The back page of the money-earning application is one place that talks about this.