LongHaul

Eagle1984, First, how is answering to this parent your responsibility? Are you a member of the TC? Is she a member of the TC? If the TC decides that no power tools are to be used then that is all that needs be explained. The TC has no obligation to justify its policy to anyone except the CO. Yes we all want to live together in harmony so the TC tries to explain all rules and policies but even National cant force the CO or TC to approve actions which the CO or TC find questionable or possibly dangerous. If the TC and CO are OK with the use of power tools why should you object? Second, just which type of power tool are we speaking of? You posted I figured that the person in question wants to know why her 16 year old son can't run gas powered equipment. If its her sons Eagle project why is he planning to operate the equipment instead of supervising the operation? Are we talking about one gas powered tool? Third, just what is the project that is being proposed? Has anyone spoken with the District Advancement Chair as to the current or past practice policy on such tools? Is this a safety issue or a personality issue? LongHaul

SR540Beaver, IMO committee meetings should be open to all parents just as sessions of Congress are open to the public. The public may sit quietly and observe but do not participate in the business being conducted. I have spent too much time at committee meetings explaining to parents that they have no say in how the troop is run and that the committees role is to support the SM not dictate to the SM. You want to voice an opinion take a position on the committee, you will then be allowed to report on your area of responsibility and have a single vote on general issues before the committee. Try attending a school board meeting and speaking without being on the agenda. Try attending a town council meeting and speaking without being on the agenda. If a parent has an issue about which they want to address the committee we will make time but monthly troop committee meetings are scheduled to address the operations of the troop not the concerns of the parents. A well staffed and functioning committee is a sign of a healthy troop, spectator attendance is not necessarily condusive to that end. LongHaul

ASM59, Look at what Owasippe Scout Reservation has to offer. It is located in White Hall Michigan which is about 200 miles from Chicago. From the Adventure Patrol for the first year camper (scout or tenderfoot) to the outposts for the senior scouts that are looking for a day or two away from the troop, we offer a good program. LongHaul http://scarlet_sassafras.tripod.com/id12.html http://www.owasippe.com/docs/ldrs_manual_06.pdf

I stand corrected Ebm021 The correct term is elected not nominated. There are no nominations for election only eligability requirements. LongHaul

In the 1950's I grew up on the south side of Chicago. Across the street from my house was a prairie which was a half a mile on each side! We had a park for us little guys with a sand box and monkey bars, swings and a water fountain in the center for hot days. We had a soft ball diamond with backstop and a full size hard ball batting cage type back stop with base lines which (depending on how far we wanted to push our lawn mowers)could be a quarter mile long. I walked over a mile each way to school as early as 1st grade. No adults, just 50 kids in groups of 4 and 5. As my fellow poster have said today it just isnt so. The prairie is a sub division, the park and ball fields are a school and I too would not let my sons walk a mile to school . Lynda J thinks the bad elements were not there when we were kids, I think society just dealt with them different. In the 50's a child molester didn't get probation or a suspended sentence and even in prison they were treated differently by the other inmates. We don't intimidate the criminal anymore. We don't have the prairies in the urban areas anymore. Our park activities are either indoor or scheduled to the extent that "pick-up" games are excluded. Today, when Scouting should be praised and sought out as an avenue to the outdoors it is shackled and ridiculed. LongHaul

Can you join a Lodge outside your council? No. Can your boys take their ordeal induction through another Lodge? Yes BUT! you must have expressed written permission from your Lodge to do so. Our Lodge has inducted members from other Lodges at our Summer camp inductions. We serve boys from several councils every summer and our staff comes from different councils. Being inducted out of your Lodge is strongly discouraged however. As to who will be nominated for induction; that is entirely up to the boys and there has to be an election run by the Lodge (or Chapter if the Lodge permits). The Scoutmaster has no say in who the boys elect and eligibility is determined by rank and number of nights camped in the previous two years. A boy must be First Class and have camped 15 nights (5 can be long term) in the last two years. http://www.main.oa-bsa.org/programs/ttr/ttrpak/A1-Unit-Elections.pdf Have someone from the Lodge or Chapter speak with the SM before the election but don't let this slip by. If the SM does the nominating then the whole meaning and purpose of the induction into the OA has been lost. LongHaul If the SM intends to use the "Unit Leader Approval" section of the eligibility to "rig" the election this needs to be made clear to the election team.(This message has been edited by LongHaul)(This message has been edited by LongHaul)

Michelle, No, I can't think of any reason not to visit a Troop. The more the Den rubs elbows with the Troop the more at home they will feel and hopfully they will get a sense that this troop actually is waiting for them and not just willing to take them in. As for Nephew, don't forget to have him change his Den Chief cord to Webelos Den Chief and as he has served the Pack for one year be sure to have him look over the Den Chief Service Award. He can wear that braid even after he stops being a den chief. IMO I don't see enough of them being worn when I see groups of scouts in dress uniform. LongHaul

Msnowman, Have you taken Outdoor Webelos Leader Training or the new equivalent? I ask this only because that training addresses the outdoor pins you refer to. I think easing the boys into the camping and outdoor aspect is the best course. Yes the AOL is the goal but use the entire 20 months of program to get there. You say it's only July, as a Webelos to Scout transition coordinator I see it as it's already July. These boys became Webelos 1s June 1st. They could be getting their Webelos Badge at the September Pack Meeting but most packs don't work on advancement over the summer. I'd focus on the Webelos badge and getting a solid relationship with a local troop established. Use a scout or better yet a den chief to work on the oath, law and outdoor code. Next spring is early enough to start camping unless these boys have camping experience. Maine is a great place to work on Forester and Naturalist at anytime. Involve the boys in planning decisions and scheduling, in 20 months they will be making all the decisions. Help them ease into the boy run mind set. LongHaul

Commandopro, I guess you can't get more professional than National HQ right? Well as you noted CAC has been a mess for a while. We contacted National in the beginning and were told it was a local matter. We contacted National in the middle and were told it was still a local matter. We finally took the local matter to Civil Court and got rulings favorable to our cause and vision of scouting. Now it's a National issue and National has decided that if we continue to fight in court it will refuse to recharter the Chicago Area Council and all assets will revert to National. Couldn't get help when it was needed but soon as the CORs and volunteers get the upper hand National steps up and wants status quo. Read the whole release at http://www.fortdearborn.stalphonsusscouts.org/ Bottom line is sell the land, bank the money, and go with LFL over traditional scouting. How does this fit in with your understanding of what the professional staff is supposed to do? Where is this hand in hand stuff you talk about? This comes straight from National, sell the land MONEY, support LFL at the expense of traditional units NUMBERS. Writing is on the wall for those who can read. LongHaul

Commandopro, I've been following your exchange with BadenP. I notice you do not identify your council so I have no idea how you do things in your neck of the woods. I'm from Chicago Area Council and if you want to know how the professionals do things in my neck of the woods start by reading the links at the bottom of this district's web site. http://www.fortdearborn.stalphonsusscouts.org/ I've been in this council since I was a cub scout in the 1950's and yes this is the extreme end of bad right now but I can not remember when the volunteer base has thought of Council in a favorable manner. I've read your posts in this thread and wonder if you realize how they read to others. You wrote "The main job of a District Executive is to recruit, train and support District-level volunteers. THESE VOLUNTEERS IN TURN SECURE FINANCING FOR SCOUTING." By your own words the main job of a DE is to raise money not deliver support to those who deliver program, not provide camping opportunities for their units. You tell BadenP to leave the organization saying and I quote You have no desire to keep the movement financially strong. If its not about money why choose the term financially? I have in all my years NEVER seen a DE run any District level training. I have in all my years NEVER seen a DE recruit District level volunteers. Even when the Executive Board redistricted our council, in an effort many of us lowly volunteers saw as a means to disrupt opposition to the selling of ALL our Council camps, the DE's didn't recruit new District level volunteers. Those that were left sat back and waited for the smoke to settle while the old district committees tried to work out who would be asked to do which job. The ONLY area that did get their attention was FOS. The approach in Chicago is that if the district FOS does not cover the salary of the DE and the DD then the district doesn't get one. If we want any of the service you speak of we have to pay for it. We have to spend our time getting money for their paychecks. All that support you say the units need, both directly and indirectly, well in Chicago that support comes from volunteers. What we get from the professionals is paper work to fill out so they can get credit for our efforts, excuses for why we can't get materials, and demands for more fund raising ideas. We had a Professional in charge of our Camping Department who is quoted as saying "This would be a great organization if we could get rid of the volunteers" and an ASE whose reply to unhappy volunteers was "There are 50 guys out there to take your place, I don't need you." I'm leaving in a few hours to run some boys up to summer camp who couldn't go today with the rest of their troop so I won't be responding for a few days. In the mean time do a search on my username in Council relations concerning our professional staff here in Chicago. What is happening here and other places in not the norm yet but it will be if everyone goes around thinking things are just grand. Across the country camps are being sold and focus is being put on LFL and traditional scouting is dwindling. In my opinion I think this would be a great organization if we could get rid of those who do it for money rather than a belief in the program. LongHaul

SR540Beaver, I'm interested in knowing how the pre-swim test is administered. Swim checks take a lot of time at camp and anyting which could help should be looked into. My question is one of accountablility, how do I as a water front director know how the test was administered and what the qualifications were of the person administering it. At our camp the first thing that happpens when a troop arrives is Med checks and swim checks. "I want to know if you have a pulse, are you on drugs, and can you swim!" LongHaul

This sounds like a really fun event for Cub Scout aged boys so there must be a problem somewhere, its Murphys Law. As Calico Penn has pointed out the space between the bridge and the water allows for little catch space. As the bridge will not be able to twist the scout will have to fall over board so that will increase the spotters chances of interception. The height of the bridge from ground level does throw things into the Climb on Safely category. The bridge could be at shoulder height for some scouts this puts it into a range where safety becomes a factor. When a scout is on his hands and knees and is higher than shoulder height above the ground, a restraint is recommended. All this only comes into play if someone is hurt and things go to court. My only recommendation is dont get the bridge too high from ground level, and Have FUN! LongHaul

Regina Dutcher, In the course of explaining how we must all follow the rules without change you quote yet another conflicting BSA publication. "...Have a buddy present with each Scout at all sessions." No where in any requirement for any rank or merit badge does it say that the scout must have a buddy with him. It is part of the methods and proceedures but not one of the requirements for anything. How can you require a buddy be present and not be adding to the requirements? Concerns over YP does not give one permission to change the requirements. LongHaul

Gilski, I hope you can understand the difference between what your SM can do and what he is authorized to do within the guide lines of the program. In your last post you make two statements which I would like to address. The first is your statement So it is in addition or in conjunction with the normal 6 hours. The word addition, by definition makes the SMs action unauthorized. However the phrase in conjunction with puts him back on safe ground. If its in addition its unauthorized, if its in conjunction with it could fall under the SMs decision as to whether the SM will approve the project of not. The second statement is So the SM can officially approve a 6 hour service project then request another project with leadership for SMC or BOR. This, the SM is specifically forbidden to do. Once the SM approves a project and the scout completes the approved project the requirement is finished. The SM can refuse to approve projects which dont show leadership but Im sure all of the forum members will agree that requiring an additional project is unauthorized. I think all forum members will agree that after approving a project the SM upon completion of the project by the scout should consider the requirement fulfilled. Whether you leave the troop over this is your decision but whether the scouts can take the SM at his/her word is something else. In approving the project the SM has entered into an agreement with the scout, breaking that agreement for whatever reason, except that the scout failed to complete his end of the deal, is something an adult should never do. On my Honor should permeate the scouting experience. One of the common explanations of A Scout is Trustworthy is that a scout can be taken at his word. To me the breach of faith with your son is way more important than the breach of policy. LongHaul

Starwolfmom, I think it was a combination of the uniform and the mother's notion of what type of person would be wearing that uniform. She needed help, she needed it now and saw you as a person who would not refuse to give it. Would any uniform have elicitted the same reaction? I choose to think not. I think people still see us (Scouts and Scouters)as an organization that does good things. LongHaul

The majority of the people on this planet at one time believed the sun and stars revolved around the earth. The majority of the people on this planet at one time believed that the earth was flat. As my mother used to say to me "If everybody jumped off a bridge would you jump too?" What the majority does only indicates what the majority does not what is correct or incorrect. Adding is when the rule says one thing and we wish to change what the rule says. Interpretation is when the rule uses terms which must be interpreted; "may", "at least" , "with the approval of", "serve actively", "show leadership". BSA has put checks into it's program, troop committee,CC, COR,CO, advancement committees unit,district,regional,national to oversee the interpretations because National knows "one size does not fit all". LongHaul(This message has been edited by LongHaul)

Tough question. Back in the mid 70's we had something called Corner Stone which was a form of Scoutmaster training. It consisted of nine moduals and took 4 or 5 weekends to complete. At the end I had a stack of trained cards that would have choked a horse! We got a card for each area Knots, Fires, Woodtools, First Aid etc. I can't see how it could be confused with WB though. If this person doesn't remember what he used to be, I used to be a BEAR myself, then I really doubt he took WB of anykind. LongHaul

As a Camping Merit Badge Counselor I have not seen any reference to "mountain" with regard to the requirement in question. At our summer camp the boys are given credit for the rappel portion after rappelling from a 50 foot tower on the High Cope range. Regardless of the fact that I personally have never understood what this has to do with Camping Merit Badge skills, I see no stipulation as to where the rappel must take place only that it must be 30 feet or more in duration. Actually one could rappel down the side of a mountain for 30 feet and not descend 30 feet vertically. Which is not to say that I believe the requirement stipulates a 30 foot vertical decent. LongHaul

The question of late has become not whether hours worked at an Eagle service project can qualify as service hours toward Star and Life but rather whether they must be accepted as service hours. Once again forum members have aligned themselves on one side or the other and read the words to suit their position. Examples for and against are worded to support an argument not enter concepts for discussion. Ive said it before and I will say it again now, I wish I could just hand each scout an Eagle rank when they join my troop. Those who are only interested in the prestige and bragging rights of beig an Eagle Scout could then leave and those who want to learn what Scouting has to teach can stick around. It would put an end to this type of debate once and for all. Physically being in a place does not constitute service even if service is being rendered by others. (Now lets debate the meaning of take part in:() LongHaul

Region 7 Voyageur, First the entry in the Requirements publication you are referring to is part of the methods and procedures not the requirements for rank advancement. Second you have misquoted the entry it does not say that hours worked on an Eagle project may be used for Star or Life service hours, it says that Star and Life service projects may be approved for scouts assisting on Eagle service projects. The difference is that the "may" is the decision of the SM not the scout. What I approve as an acceptable service project for a Tenderfoot scout may not be an approved project for a Star scout regardless of the part the Star scout played in the project. LongHaul

Ed, So where does it say that the scout gets to pick which part he does? Where is "take part in" defined? Where does it say the SM can't assign duties? Where does it say a SM has to approve or can't refuse to approve any specific project. You can say what ever you like and interperate this requirement as you see fit in your troop as long as your CO doesn't object it still doesn't change what the requirement says. You want to imply things which simply aren't there. LongHaul

No matter how many people say its adding to the requirements, no matter how bold the type is, no matter who the person is, the requirement will still read the same way. The requirement states that the SM must approve the project. The boy can do 100 hours of work if the SM didnt approve the project it doesnt fulfill the requirement. No where in the requirement does it state what parameters the SM is required to use as a base for his/her approval. No where in the requirements does it restrict the SM from establishing his/her own parameters for approval. What the requirement does say is that National has given the SM the right and power of approval. What shall and what shall not constitute an approvable service project is entirely up to the Scoutmaster according to the requirement as written. Denying the SM that right, restricting that right, placing conditions upon that right by anyone other than the CO, is altering the requirements. Page 20 of the requirements publication is titled Selecting Leadership Service Projects The prefacing paragraph speaks about Leadership service projects but as soon as this SM wants to include leadership in the service project the cries begin. LongHaul

Gilski, I started to reply to Hunt but thought I should speak to you directly instead. You say your son has completed a new project. This suggests an old project had been completed. If your son had already completed a project was that project approved by his then SM before he started the work? You have said your son has done work with missionaries in Mexico, was the work approved as a service project before he did the work? If the SM implemented new conditions after OKing a project then IMO that is adding to the requirements. A boy has to be able to rely on the word of his leaders. If on the other hand the new conditions simply just took effect and your son is one of the first affected then IMO the SM is not adding to the requirements the SM has just set a different set of conditions for approving a service project. We have a publication which comes out every January which lists the requirements for rank and merit badges. The current publication is # 33215B. This publication also contains sections on methods and procedures which should not be confused with the requirements. Once we start allowing interpretation of the requirements then we run into this type of problem. On the other hand if we try to go strictly to what the words say again we run into this problem. In my troop when a scout passes his BOR he is encouraged to read the current interpretations of what is expected for his next rank. My troop has each rank in a separate binder with explanations for each of the requirements. Exactly what is meant by service project is spelled out and examples of acceptable and non acceptable projects are listed. These interpretations were made by our PLC and SPL. I gave advice when asked and have final approval of all changes, tough I must say that there have only been two changes over the years to the interpretations arrived at by the PLC and SPL when this system was implemented in 1995. Once a boy starts the rank the interpretations can not change unless National changes the actual requirement. This has happened over my time as SM and when it did the boys who were currently working on the rank affected were asked to sit in on the interpretation of the new requirement along with the PLC and SPL. However you work out this current situation I suggest a system where the boys know up front just what is expected, and what is required for completion of each requirement. Surprisingly the things I discuss in this forum are not the problems within my troop. Ive had more discussions with the scout and his SPL over useful camp gadget then acceptable service project or any other requirement. LongHaul

Ed,your quote referres to Leadership service projects, your position is that requireing leadership is adding to the requirements can't have it both ways. Hunt, the issue under debate here is whether a SM can impose conditions which are not specifically stated. You say a SM should not impose conditions but the requirement makes no reference to what should and should not be approved as a service project. Bad internet connection sorry. Specifics are left up to the SM. What qualifies as an acceptable service project? Is the SM forbidden from requireing more from a Star Scout than a First Class Scout? The requirement staes at least 6 hours, does that men the SM can set a 20 requirement? Does at least mean no more than? Some are so ready to declare "adding to the requirement" that they fail to examine the actual facts. We all know what we are trying to accomplish in being leaders and sometimes read things into the words or fail to read the words to suit our goals. What I would like to discuss is how we interprete the written word consistantly. Unless National puts out a diffinitive list of acceptable projects it's the SM's choice to approve or not approve. Saying service is service and that the requirements for approval for Life should not exceed the requirements for approval for Second Class, except for duration, is an individual interpretation. In the end the wriiten requirment states that the SM must approve the project before it is done, it sets no other conditions. The requirements do not say that service projects shall not become more involved or demanding as the boy progresses in rank. The requirements set a minimum hour limit but do not set a difinitive hour limit. That is to say a service project lasting six hours is not necessarily acceptable as a Life project even though it may have been acceptable as a Star project. The requirements just don't say that even though some interperate them that way. LongHaul(This message has been edited by LongHaul)

Been busy with the earning a living thing. Noticed that no one responded to my example of a boy who gets paid to do his service project. So I'll ask straight up all those who have solidly said approving only Life projects which show leadership would be adding to the requirements, would you approve a service project which was landscaping which the boy was being paid to do? He would be providing 6 hours of service to others just as written. Approve or Disapprove. Would you approve the same project if the boy was not being paid and the service was to people other than his own family or friends. LongHaul