Lisabob

skeptic writes: "The problem with these kind of stories, and the slant the press uses, is that a few ultra radical individuals feel the need to verbally, and even occasionally physically attack the youth and that is unacceptable." Well yes, of course attacking children is unacceptable. But I'm not sure why you felt a need to bring this up, as I saw absolutely nothing in the news article that suggests otherwise. Did you read the article? You need to do better than this, to justify why this person shouldn't peacefully and rationally share his concerns on an issue that matters to him, and that has been in the news lately. Also, if the BSA doesn't want these kinds of news stories to continue popping up, then perhaps the BSA should examine what it is about their own policies and choices that cause stories like this to occur, in the first place. Now if the problem is really that you dislike the way the story was covered and felt it was too sympathetic, how about writing an op/ed or a letter to the editor?

Are you suggesting that people whose views you disagree with should not engage in the political process? That they shouldn't use the same tools and approaches that pretty much any other person might use? I am afraid I don't see anything to be skeptical about here, or any reason to cry "conspiracy!" What I see, is somebody modeling this, which I think we might all agree is commendable: "A Scout follows the rules of his family, school, and troop. He obeys the laws of his community and country. If he thinks these rules and laws are unfair, he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobeying them. "

In the original thread, the OP mentioned that her council encourages troops to rotate leaders every 2-3 years to keep things fresh. Some folks in that thread expressed great surprise. My son's former troop tried rotating SMs every 2 years, currently on their 4th SM in 8 years. On the other hand, the troop he's part of now, has had the same SM for 6 years. Another local troop has had the same SM for more than 30 years. As far as I can tell, there are both good and bad sides to a 2-3 year rotation. On the good side: It is easier to get folks to step up if they know there's a defined end to the commitment. If a particular SM doesn't connect with some kids (or parents), they know another SM isn't too far down the road. Kids see a variety of leadership styles and learn from that. Different SMs bring different talents and perspectives. Less drama about changing SMs, or SMs trying to build a fiefdom, since change is a natural and regular process. On the negative side: Many new SMs seem to want to reinvent the wheel, which gets tiresome when it happens every 2 years. Webelos might be shocked to discover, shortly after joining, that the SM they thought they were going to have, is just about to step down. If there's a big shift in personality or philosophical approach every 2 years, it can be really disruptive. By the time the new SM figures out what they're doing, they're almost done. You need a pretty deep bench of ASMs who work well together, to pull this off every two years. What other pros and cons do you all see, here? Would you recommend this sort of rotation policy, whether for SMs or for other adult leadership positions? WHy or why not?

diannasav: Since you have a practice of rotating SMs every two years, I wonder: Where are you in that cycle, now? It might be worth it, to just bite your tongue and bide your time. (I think I'll spin off a new thread on this whole idea of 2-year rotations.) In my experience, COs tend to be conservative - by that, I mean, they like the status quo and they like to avoid a lot of upheaval. So I am not at all surprised that the COR backed the current SM. If he was acceptable enough to become SM in the first place, then in the COR's eyes, he's probably just fine. You DID ask the church to get more involved, and now they've done so. Other than backing the SM's continuation in position and asking you not to post stuff in the church, are there really other specific issues here? Or are people just generally unhappy that the COR is now exercising his voice in ways that never used to happen? Was there any sort of explanation given for the request to stop posting stuff at the church? There could be underlying concerns that just haven't been effectively communicated (for example: the troop's stuff is taking over space that the Sunday school program wanted, or the displays aren't updated and look sloppy, or the displays never seem to include pictures of any kids whose families are also church members, and so some church members are upset about funding the troop, or the displays are roiling church politics regarding something entirely unrelated & the pastor is just trying to avoid this, etc.) Are there any members of the troop who are also church members? They may have a better time talking with the minister about their concerns, since they have a stake in both groups.

Hiya, mbrownkc7! That scout you describe could almost have been my son. He decided that camp was the absolute WORST place to do many of the "eagle required" badges, and opted for "fun stuff" instead. I lost track of the number of times he earned the rifle shooting MB. He recently turned 18 and the scramble to get the last handful of Eagle MBs done was kind of intense, since he left personal fitness, personal management, family life, communications, and cit in community to the bitter end (yeah, he got it done). Some of his ASMs were pushing on him to sign up for these 5 badge classes at his final summer camp which happened to be just before his 18th birthday. But he said nope, he wanted his last summer camp to be memorable for being fun, not miserable! And you know what, as far as I can tell, he had a great time. He earned Rifle shooting (yet again) and Chess MBs (with his whole patrol) at camp this year, had a great time hanging around with his patrol buddies, went hiking and exploring a lot, helped out some of the younger guys, and generally loved being a boy scout at summer camp. Honestly, I think more of our older guys would enjoy camp if they took that approach. Good for the boy you described, that he figured this out!

Hey all, thanks for the feedback. From what I've been told, I think this is along the lines of what Twocub is envisioning - a few leftover boards and a couple half-used boxes of nails or screws. Not a lot of material, as I understand it. Right now, it is clutter in somebody's barn and the guy wants it gone. The scout really was trying to do the right thing, but it seems to not be enough material to be really attractive to anybody as a donation. And I think he's also interested in just wrapping it up and being done. Good lesson, though, just because the flashy build-it part of a project is done, doesn't mean you're finished with all the loose ends. Somebody suggested that maybe he check with the next couple of guys in the troop who are getting ready for their Eagle projects now, to see if they can use the material. Seemed like a good option, too. Calico, I'll suggest to this boy that if another scout could use it, then he see whether the beneficiary is ok with that and maybe just get it taken care of that way.

yeah, well it isn't about ME letting anybody decide. The scout & his family asked for clarification, and they are concerned that their actions not become a "problem" for the boy at his BOR. Those of us who have been around the block a time or two all know that sometimes folks, even those on BORs, can get a little hung up on interpretations of policy.

Well these all fit with my thoughts. Somebody apparently put a bug in the kid's ear that any use other than the project would be a violation of some sort of policy (some hazy mention of the new eagle project fundraising process) though, possibly leading to sticky moments in the BOR, and now he & family are hyper-sensitive to it. Thanks for the common-sense back-up. I'll share your responses.

While working on his Eagle project, a scout received a discount on building supplies from a local business, and ended up with some leftovers worth around $100. The business didn't want them back and the group for whom the project was done didn't want them, either. The troop doesn't have a place to store them & understandably doesn't want to end up with odds & ends from every Eagle project. Although the boy did a lot of fundraising, he ended up putting in a little of his own money to cover the difference between what he raised and the final cost of materials. I'm not certain how much he put in, but I'm guessing somewhere between 50-200, based on what I know he raised and the typical cost of other projects like his. So the question is, what to do with the leftover material? Is it acceptable for the boy's family to take the items & use them at home? The boy & family have a concern that they should not benefit personally, since the discount was offered on the basis of the materials being for an Eagle project. Some folks have suggested giving the material to another organization (like habitat for humanity), but there too, that wasn't the original purpose for which the discount was offered and there was a concern about this. Something needs to be done with the leftovers, though! My thought is that since the boy used some of his own money in the first place, to tell the family to take the leftovers and ask them to consider making a donation to a charity covering the amount they "saved" via the discounted material costs. What do you all think?

basement, it differs from place to place. In my location, you can't get your hands on the archery/bb beltloops unless you can show a certificate indicating that you earned them at a council-approved program. I guess it is possible that the current DE (who I don't know very well) would cave on this, but then they'd have to contend with an avalanche of other complaints from other similar parents - not to mention the complaints from the ticked off pack leaders who had just been undermined. So if I were a DE, I guess I'd be politely sympathetic, but I wouldn't agree to hand out the award in violation of the very clear rules, and over the head of the pack leader, 'cause that's just asking for it.

blw, I don't honestly understand why, but it is clear you are upset. Thing is, what I *think* you're upset about is not what I believe others (at least, me) were saying at all. I wonder, if we were all sitting in a room talking face to face, would we be having this problem communicating? Here's what I think you are upset about. Please clarify, if I don't have this right: I think you feel that folks (maybe me) are saying we refuse to talk with parents at all, and insist on secret discussion/meetings/contacts with children where information is completely withheld from parents. If that's what you are concerned about, please allow me to put your mind at ease. I certainly don't do that. I don't see others here saying that, and it isn't the way any MB counselors who I know operate, either. I do see people saying the boy should learn to be in charge of setting up his own meetings. That's not being secret or hiding info from parents or anything of the sort. I also happen to agree with this approach, which is in keeping with the training BSA provides to both merit badge counselors and boy scouts about how the boy should contact a MBC. So here's what actually happens. When a parent contacts me to try to arrange a meeting for their son, it isn't as though I hang up on them or something. Generally, they're parents of boys who only just joined scouting and they (parent and/or boy) aren't sure how to get started, or they're parents of boys with special needs that pose communication challenges and they're really just trying to smooth the path. So we exchange pleasantries, maybe I ask them how their boy is enjoying the troop/scouting so far, and then we have conversation about the merit badge process. I let them know that their son needs to contact me in order to set up a time and get started. If there's some kind of communication issue then we might talk about how to best help the boy do whatever he's capable of, or work around the issue if possible. For example, I worked with a boy who has a speech impediment. The parent wanted to touch base about that because some adults tend to rush him or just talk over him and not be patient enough to let him express himself. That was helpful to know. A little while later the boy caught up with me at a troop meeting and arranged to start working on the badge. The only times I've ever been a bit short with a parent about a merit badge were as follows: 1. The lady who called me, almost certainly drunk as a skunk, and opted to scream obscenities at me about her perception that I was being too hard on her darling (because I wouldn't accept a half-hearted something he did in, literally, 2nd grade, for a merit badge requirement when he was 15). The fact I'd known this lady for many years and had to remove her from previous scouting events more than once due to behavior and drinking issues, did little to encourage my patience, I admit. 2. The guy who tried to tell me - not ask, tell - how I would accommodate his son's very limited schedule for getting (not earning) a MB without actually doing the work. I was informed by this gentleman that I *would* find a way to meet with his son at a specific day, time, and location, and I *would* sign off on the completed merit badge regardless of what the boy actually had ready to show me, "or else." Um, yeah, we're all volunteers here. "Or else" what, exactly? Not to mention, I might be female and a lot smaller than he was, but I don't take kindly to attempted physical intimidation. I told him to pound sand. Perhaps I wasn't entirely courteous that day.

Former SM and former CC of a troop, got divorced and made a swap. SM & CC married and their former spouses married, too. Both had kids in the troop (must've been mighty confusing for them!). They all left the troop in a bit of an uproar.

Basement: Meet my son who, at 11, was totally geeked up about the reptiles & amphibians badge, wanted to know everything there is to know about those critters. Several times, we drove an hour each way so he could spend a happy afternoon with a MBC/high school biology teacher/ecology PhD, chatting about all sorts of watery critters. The two of them were really funny together: "Did you know..." "Yeah, and did YOU know..." Not to mention the frog he kept for a month - what kid doesn't like THAT? Then there was archery. Now, ok, he started that at camp but finished it at home with a guy who makes bows for the US olympic archery team. Yeah, that was cool & he liked it quite a bit. Then there was swimming. Did I mention my kid is part frog? (Or was it salamander?) He used to bug the MBC - "can we work on it this weekend? please? huh?" These weren't my ideas. They were his. He chose them, he made the arrangements to do them, and he loved them. (Stark contrast to a few I **did** try to convince him to earn, which he either never finished, or really didn't enjoy. Eventually, I learned to lay off. And yeah, I think you're right that after about 14, most kids don't get real excited about MBs anymore. They've moved on, by and large. But...at age 17, my son had a blast earning Chess MB this summer, because all of his patrol buddies decided to do it together. Truth is, it wasn't really about the MB, but they had a great time.)

Oh no, again??!???!

I'm glad these Japanese scouts you mention have the opportunity to attend the Washjam, hope they have fun & learn some new skills. My son staffed a range at the recent MI Int'l Jambo, and he also mentioned that scouts from several other countries where gun ownership is less common, really enjoyed the chance to shoot. Now, as an aside: Seattle, I wish you'd quit the childish political bashing, it is getting irritating, and in this case is also entirely irrelevant. Japan's culture, history, laws, and politics are different from our own, and gun-culture is, not surprisingly, also very different there.

blw2: I understand your concern, and as a MBC you should be aware that I would never attempt to keep a parent of a scout in the dark. However, part of the merit badge process in Boy Scouts emphasizes the BOY building up his capacity to communicate and take responsibility for initiating things. Consequently, the BSA's standard training for merit badge counselors (and for the boys, too) indicates that the BOY, not the PARENT, should make contact with the MBC. Of course, things are different in Cub Scouts, where the boys are much younger. On the other hand, Cub Scouts do not earn Merit Badges, so the discussion here wouldn't apply to Cub-aged boys. You might find it interesting to pick up a copy of the Boy Scout handbook sometime, and have a look at what it instructs boys to do, regarding getting started on a merit badge. Also, I think the Merit Badge Counselor training is now online, and you might find it instructive, too (for down the road, when your son becomes a boy scout). Basement: I'll just say that I think the interests of the boy should drive whether they work on MBs early in their time as boy scouts. My son really enjoyed doing some MBs as an 11-12 year old (reptiles & amphibians, swimming, archery). The problem isn't the young guy working on a few badges - the problem comes when he does that to the exclusion of anything else, or when parents/leaders push him into doing badges he isn't interested in. So let the boy's interest be the guide, provide him with a clear idea of what other scouting activities he can be doing too, and all should be well.

holy guacamole, Merlyn, that's news to me. Any leads on court cases challenging these? Thanks for posting.

Beavah writes: "why would anyone in da modern world call to set up an appointment? That's somethin' yeh do by text, email, or doodle. " To which my answer is: Because the council & district MBC lists don't include email, or cell #s. Those lists DO include home phone #s. And that's ok with me, because some yokels have taken the council & district lists, scanned them, and posted them online (unprotected) for the whole world to see. Bad enough that my name, address, and unlisted phone # are now online - I really don't need my email and cell # out there, too.

Yes, and No. Troop specifies. Parents should not be calling. As an MBC, if a parent calls me (happens, occasionally), I request that they have their son call me back.

Quality varies, apparently. Our state does an international jambo every 4 years (but it isn't designed to include cub scouts). Son just got back from staffing the most recent one. Scouts from 27 countries spent a week together, had a blast. Facility was a scout camp - staff was international, too. Every campsite included scouts from at least 3 countries. Son worked as staff on one of the shooting sports ranges - said it compared favorably to the national jambo, but with far fewer people and no waiting in lines for hours at a time. So sure, check it out. Call your council office and see whether anybody there has any info about an Oregon jambo - or whether they know who you should ask, if they don't have info.

"You need to take the other Scoutmasters to lunch and explain your concerns. You need to be willing to say no and walk away if you arent given some room to give the troop some of your style. As I said, its a tough job when everything is going well, so why bring predictable misery into your family. Family comes first." Barry's last paragraph was so good, I think it is worth repeating. Especially the willingness to say "no" part. So you're the only guy who will do the job? So what? Let's look at what will happen if you DO say "no." Three options: 1. Nobody else will do it and the troop will fold (highly unlikely, IMO, but then you already said you'd thought about moving troops a few times and so you have a back-up plan if it does come to this.) 2. Somebody else will come out of the wood work. (and then you would need to either support them fully, or find yourself another place to do your scouting or just step way back for a bit, even if your boys stay put.) 3. The old SMs will see the light and give you latitude to run the program your way. (sounds like what you want) In all three cases, there are options. Don't fall victim to the "I have to do this or else" mentality - that allows others to shut you & your ideas down from the get-go, and gives others permission to make you miserable.

Tokala, try contacting local colleges that have an outdoor recreation degree/program, and ask them if they have listserves, job postings, newsletters, bulletin boards, placement office/services, etc. Even if they don't - make a contact with some of the profs in that program (who tend to be pretty outdoorsy and outgoing people) and ask them if they could recommend local community forums in which to spread the word. Do the same at outdoor gear stores (REI, Dicks, Gander Mountain, etc.)

Sounds like a nice group that is serving the needs of those families. Glad to hear about it. However: when the "favorite activities" mentioned by the girls in the troop are the 'daddy daughter dance' and the 'mother daughter tea,' I am not sure I can easily imagine partnering with a cub pack or boy scout troop!

eh, basement, overboad. People's personal lives aren't necessarily fodder for internet discussion boards.

I'm glad that AHGnBSAMom has found a program that works for her family. I don't find that the AHG program would be an appropriate fit for many BSA units I'm familiar with, though, because in those BSA units, there are people of many faiths. For those units, a close partnering with an overtly Christian girls' group could be a problem because only some of the families would feel welcome in the "partner" unit. I think very few non-Christian families are going to want to put their daughters into an evangelical Christian ministry youth program. If the degree of partnership is very high, some families might also have justifiable concerns about the resources they put into their child's (BSA) youth program being used to support a different youth program with which they disagree. It might eventually cause hard feelings and new divisions within the initial BSA unit, and I can't see that leading to something positive. Better to just have separate groups, in that case. But as Seattle may have overlooked, I've actually said in one of the many threads that maybe this makes some sense for the specific cub unit Seattle is affiliated with (since, as I recall, that cub pack is chartered via a Catholic Church and he's noted elsewhere that most of the cub pack members are also from that Church). But hey, Seattle, keep right on assuming you know what I think. That's easier than reading what I've actually said, apparently.