mk9750

In our Troop, one ASM did a military crease in his blouse, and the kids thought it was so cool, almost all of us do it now. We used it as a teaching lesson. A few of the moms complained about doing the extra step, so we taught the boys how to do it themselves. From what I hear, we have about 8 guys now doing their own ironing (at least of their own uniforms). We've been trying to tactfully let it slip to other moms to quit doing the military crease in their son's uniforms, in order to get the Scout to start ironing himself. I know the trousers came in a poly / wool blend, but I din't know the shirt did. I may need to investigate... Mark

Hunt, We've been lucky enough to be able to get a yes answer from most everyone we've asked to take on a task. It hasn't been hard to figure out who is committed and hard core. These folks end up as active committee members with "full time" jobs like CC, advancement chair, etc, or ASMs. A good percentage of the rest are committed, but don't have the resources (particularly time) to be "full time". Those are the folks we ask to be popcorn kernel, or take charge of the work adults have to do for a fund raiser. More and more, this stuff is being done by boys. I think we knocked the principal of the school out of her seat when a 15 year old contacted her with a request to use the cafeteria and kitchen for a pancake breakfast. She was ready to tell him to go home and get his mom until he had a laminated presentation to show her describing when, what materials we would use, what adults would be there, etc. She called the SM to confirm this kid was for real, and gave her permission. But I digress. At any rate, a big project that has a specific start and end date work great for these folks. The next group of parents are the ones who really aren't very committed at all. We usually ask them to take a task like organizing the boys to clean and store the kayaks for the winter.. A one time job that requires a few hours, and they're done for the year. Most love to be asked to do stuff like this, they can feel good that they're involved without it taking much effort. Every once in a while, a parent wants nothing to do with anything. After a few times asking, if they won't be a part of their son's Troop, we don't bother asking anymore. But I'd say of the 55 parents (if I'm counting right) that we have, 50 of them do SOMETHING for the Troop. If we didn't ask, if we just let the dedicated people do everything, we'd probably be at 10. Sorry to make a short point long, but my point is, if you want someone to do something, ask them. 90% will say yes, if you tailor the task to their ability to deliver. Mark

Bob, Please take this in the spirit in which it is intended - Has anyone ever called you Cliff? As in Cliff Claven from Cheers? Mark

Our Troop has two ASMs for each Patrol. Their sole ongoing duty is to make sure that if the Patrol plans an outing, and need adults there, at least one of them goes. He also recruits the second adult if needed. Occasionally, they step in and help the SPL train the Patrol Leader, and, if an issue gets to the point that a the Patrol Leader and the SPL don't feel they can handle it without adult intervention, they step in. This was how the situation evolved in the thread "A patrol of difficult Scouts". We have two ASMs "at large", who have specific skills that help us do some of the outings that we do - Rapelling and kayaking. These are activities that require direct adult participation, but these ASMs don't want to have week to week responsiblity. Because we have a total of nine ASM for a Troop of @ 30 right now, we can afford to let them work this way. Mark

Shell, We both must have come to the same realization at the same time. I thought Blaze was just frustrated at his situation, and couldn't see through the smoke caused by a difficult situation, and had no idea how to keep the Pack alive. A number of us offered a few ideas how to keep the Pack going. Blaze's rejection of those ideas, coupled with a singlemindedness to shut the Pack down makes me wonder if the issue here isn't one of his ego. Kind of an "If I can't (won't) be the boss anymore, than no one will. We'll just shut the whole thing down". If that's the case, then there is some redemption in the fact he wants to make any effort at all at keeping boys in Scouting. But beyond that, it's just plain selfish to walk away without a real effort at saving the unit. Now, if I'm wrong, and Blaze just hasn't considered the possiblity that the Pack could continue without him, then I'd encourage him to read through the suggestions posted before these again for some very valuable ideas. And perhaps, the best thing we can hope for is that Blaze's Unit Commisioner, or DE sees this and recognizes this Pack, and steps in before permanent damage is done. Mark

I think Ed and I go to different areas of the same camp. If the tents on his side of the camp are the same as on mine, yes, both are heavy canvas wall tents. And yes, they are heavy, do have large heavy poles, and they are not a whole lot of fun to set up. In both cases I remember, the tentmate of the boy working on the MB at camp helped pitch the tent, just as he would help at any other campout that counted for the MB. These boys made a choice. They wanted to earn a MB, they needed to count the nights at this camp in order to earn the badge, they had to pitch the tent they slept in in order to have the nights count. I admire them for making the effort! Mark

Dan, Every other year, our Troop does summer camp at a Scout Reservation in Canada that does not provide tents, so most of the time, anyone working on Camping MB, who wants (rarely do any of our Scouts "need") to use the week at summer camp, they can count this without problem. A few times in my history with the Troop, we've had a Scout who wanted to complete this badge at the other summer camp, and "needed" to use the week at summer camp spent in camp - pitched tents. When this has happened, I've suggested that they take the tent down, clean it and fold it properly, then set it back up again. This helps meet both the letter and the spirit of the requirement. In that I am not a counselor for this badge, I have no right to require a Scout do this. But in the cases where I have suggested they do, the actual MB Counselor has appreciated that the Scout made this effort to meet the requirement. And of course, there is no requirement that any summer camp nights be used. If a Troop camps out doors once per month, two nights at a time, they could complete the requirment well within a year without ever going to summer camp. Mark

Personally, I'd count any hours he spent directly benefitting someone else (A). I wouldn't count the hours he spent on his own advancement(B). Although I wouldn't do it, I could see someone subtracting B from A to arrive at net service hours and counting those. My biggest question here would be who has the authority to make any of thee decisions? I'd think that would rest within the Troop, not with anyone on the Day Camp Staff. However, that solution then provide the opportunity for some Boy Scouts to be credited with service hours while others are not. I'm not sure I know which way to go on that one. Mark

I also agree that the Scout Executive should be contacted immediately. I have a small caveat to the advice given here. Bob's comment that Youth Protection Training is available on line is true. However, that sounds like a suggestion that you should do this training on line if you have not already been trained. We have been asked by our Council to direct all new leaders to live training the first time they get Youth Protection Training, and I think this is a very good idea. The on line training is really very good as a refresher. But it is no substitute for the two - way communication possible when taking this training for the first time. If you want to see what YP would suggest you do in this case (or any other), a quick route could be going through the training on line. But I would strongly suggest that any new leader consider doing their frist YP protection in a live course. Mark

This is an interesting question. For the last 6 years of my 9 with my Troop, I have been trying to help our CO understand that we are part of their youth ministry, not a seperate organization that provides us with a few resources. It has been a long, uphill battle, but it has been working. It might have been quicker if I were a member of the CO, but I belong to different Parish, so it's been tough. What has been the result of this effort? Until 2 years ago, we NEVER saw anyone from our CO except parents of Scouts at an event. Not meetings, not COHs, not Eagle COHs, not service projects done for them, not fund raisers. Now, the COR has come to all but one COH, both Eagle COHs, has helped promote our fund raisers, and has made sure we have gotten publicity in the Parish for our Service work. Until 3 years ago, our meeting area was a small basement, with no partitions available to help with Patrol meetings and activities. When we wanted to meet outside, we had to clear it with the athletic teams first, as we alsways seemed to be in their way, and, "their moms complained that we were distracting them while they chit chatted during practice". Now, we get our share of time outside. We have a better meeting place (not perfect, but a lot better). Until almost 2 years ago, all of our equipment had to be stored at a leader's house, and our trailer was parked in the parking lot of one of our dad's business, because the CO wouldn't give us space to store anything. After a new barn was built (my son was instrumental in completing this as his Eagle project), we now have space for two trailers, and all of our gear (we do hope that no one tells them that techically, THEY own the gear. It's better that they don't know this). How did this improvement happen? I, and a few other adults in our Troop, MADE it happen. We went to every one of their Committee meetings and asked to be allowed to report on the status of the Troop. We developed a PowerPoint presentation of the things we do - both adventure and service, and showed it to them. We had boys feed them at one of their meetings (this was a big one). We asked for more opportunities to do service projects for them. When they could think of things for us to do, we suggested projects that saved them thousands of dollars. And probably the most effective thing we did was ask to allow some of the products of the Troop - five of the boys who had graduated from the program, four of them Eagles, to speak about what THEIR Scouting program had meant to each boy. All were impressed with these guys, but our West Point Cadet, newly accepted at the time, made biggest impression. Is our relationship utopian? Oh my gosh, no. Will it ever be? Pretty doubtful. But it has gotten 5,000% better than it was. And that's because we made it happen. A common thing we have recently been trying to get our Scouts to accept (see the thread "A Patrol of Difficult Scouts") is that each of us can only control our own actions, not the actions of anyone else. We've had to live that belief in dealing with our CO. We used to think they were worthless, that they did nothing for us. It wasn't until WE acted to improve the relationship that it got better. Mark

Blaze, I think I can appreciate the frustration you feel. I've been intensely involved with two other organizations that have died while I was deeply committed to them (one bowling league and one golf league), and it's a personal hurt that is difficult to make go away. If I can relate some of my experiences to you, from the perspective of being in a similiar position, I'd like you to look very carefully at Shell's last post here. I think she is saying something very important, although I think she is trying very hard to be nice, and it might not be obvious what she thinks. A large part of your Pack's problem is the group of five of you that have kept it going so well for the past 9 years or so. You've done a wonderful job, it seems - Happy kids, vibrant program, etc. - But, in doing so, people who have come into the program with their boys either were not encouraged to particiapte, or feared stepping into the clique that you five seemed to create. This happened both times in the leagues I spoke about. One or two people who ran the league for years on end, never giving up any responsiblity, never asking for help, always being more like OZ behind the curtain than someone looking to recruit new blood. For various reasons, people started leaving. Some because they were just moving on. Some because they had a tift with "the boss", and didn't want to be associated with him or her anymore. Whatever the reason, membership started dying. When it become obvious that the ship was sinking, both people abondoned ship, leaving a shinking vessel with a few committed people looking for more captain and crew. It's kind of tough finding people to get excited about taking over then. What's sad about this is that these people, like you and the other four of your core group, did this out of the goodness of your heart, your commitment to a quality program. It was just misguided. And now, it's time for you guys to jump off, but no one wants to take on the difficult job of righting the ship. My suggestion would also be to include your Unit Commisioner and / or you DE. My guess is that you have never dealt with how to keep Scouting alive in a situation like this, but they have. I'm betting that they pursue Bob's angle of involving the Charter Organization, because, whether or not you want to call your situation real world and Bob's position a fantasy, Bob is right - His description is how it SHOULD be. And it has the best chance of success if it is that way: If the Charter Organization commits to using the program of the BSA, and commits to finding the resources to make it happen. Can you close the Pack down? In reality, your actions can cause it to happen if no one else steps in. But it doesn't sound like that's what you want. Who knows? Maybe that will end up being the result anyway. But if you DO want the Pack to survive, take Shell's and Bob's advice. At least it provides hope. Good luck. Mark

Bob, I'm a bit confused over your position concerning SM Conferences. To paraphrase what I think you said, because the SM didn't initiate a conference with this boy, it was the Scoutmaster's fault, and therefore, he should be awarded the Palm. If I have this right, and we apply the same logic to merit badges, if the Merit Badge Counselor doesn't initiate a meeting to review the work a Scout does (not the original meeting. We know the procedure is for the Scout to obtain a Blue Card and the names of Counselors from his SM. I'm talking about a follow up after the Counselor knows a boy was working on the badge), the MB should be awarded anyhow, because the Counselor was at fault for not providing the opportunity to meet with the Scout? I don't think this makes sense, and I don't think it makes sense in the case of the Eagle Palms. Do I think that the SM could have done more to provide this Scout an opportunity to meet? OK, I'll buy that. But I don't think his failure should result in a Scout receiving an award he did not earn. If he didn't meet all of the requirements, he didn't earn the badge. And if he didn't meet with the SM, he didn't meet all of the requirements. FOG, I've come to have have a level of respect for your attitude about Scouting. Sometimes your ideas are good, once in a while they're not so good. But I realize that your heart's in the right place. Given that, is it really Scout-like to call people names, especially fellow Scouters? Look, your feud is well documented. And sometimes your points are valid. But if others are like me, you negate any credibility you might have with people when you start off a post being unScout-like. Do with this what you will, but I hope you consider softening your tone a bit. Mark

marc, Welcome to the forum! I hope you enjoy your stay here as much as I have! I admire your intent to expect the best from you Scouts. As a few folks have said around here, sometimes it seems that not enough of us hold Scouts to lofty expectations. I do wonder, however, why it is that if a Scoutmaster believes the only evidence he will accept for whether a Scout has mastered a skill is to test him at the SMC, why he doesn't just eliminate all other people from the advancement process and require that the SM sign off all requirements. This sure would take a lot of the confusion out of the process. I mean, I can imagine a Scout saying "Wow, I got Pete to sign off on my lashing. He's tough. But I wonder if Mr. marcpaige will be even tougher?" Why not just eliminate Pete from the equation and have the Scout go directly to you? Not that I think your approach is poor. As a matter of fact, for the few (and they are few) requirements I feel qualified to sign off, I use the same method you do. Instead of reading the requirment from the book and saying "OK kid, show me your stuff", I usually develop a scenerio that asks a boy to demostrate or explain the requirement in a more life-like setting or situation. I think I have evidence that suggests this is a good way to work. Although I am consistently considered the toughest tester for requirements, whenever I do BORs, it seems that I am the only one whose initials are in any of the five or so boxes that I sign. All the boys seem to find me when it's time to do these requirements, even though there are plenty of other people, particlualry Scouts, who could sign them. But back to your original question. Please, PLEASE continue to hold your Scouts to the highest standards. But I can't urge you enough to find a different way to do so. If the people you allow to test have lived up to your standards thus far, they will almost certainly live up to them when they test others. As long as they do, why use time that could be spent getting to REALLY know a Scout retesting him on skills he's proven to have mastered? And if you find that one of your testers have let you down, he is the person with whom you should work, not the candidate for a new rank. Again, welcome. Mark

FOG, I can tell you what I'd do. Either before an actual BOR, if possible, or during if necesary, I'd be asking the Scout if he really thinks he completed the requirment. If he said yes, I'd be asking him to produce the job description to which he agreed when he took the job, and asking him to explain how he met the requirements of the job description. After he tried to justify his effort, I'd ask him to either go back to the SM and discuss whether he really met the requirement, or feel free to submit to a BOR. I suspect that in 90% of the cases, the Scout and the SM would come to an understanding that results in the Scout delaying his own advancement. In the other 10%, I'd fail him at the BOR. Mark

In our Troop, the SPL seems to be annointed by acclaimation. In the last three elections, the ASPL ran unopposed. We have been trying to get the guys to understand that that doesn't necesarily allow for the strongest SPL. But it's not working. On the other hand, the last two SPL's did a very good job, so maybe the boys are wiser than we give them credit for. I hope that pattern (ASPL being a good SPL when it's his turn) works, as my son was just appointed ASPL by our newest SPL. As to rank requirements and such, there are no official requirments in our Troop. However, the boys tend to chose the highest ranking Scout who is interested in the job of PL. Mark

Here's how it went Friday night... All the families were represented. The boy who chopped the tree (We've been calling him George Washington) had both parents there, including dad who had to take half a vacation day to be there (does anyone else recognize the irony in this? They only kid to accept his responsibity for the problems this weekend was the only one withn both parents there). The rest of the families only had mom there (one of the problems, as we see it, is that none of the dad's are involved with their sons), except for the dad of Scout # 1, who is an ASM, and was the Den Leader of these guys, hopefully you remember the story. We started by stating we were not there to rehash the events of the weekend, that if the parents wanted to hear the list, we could repeat it, but it didn't really matter, that this past weekend was just the culmination of three years of problems. One of the moms kept trying to get us to talk about all of the positive things their sons have done, saying that if any progress was going to be made in "the leader's poor attitude concerning our children", then we'd have to find away to forget the few bad things their sons might have done and concentrate on the good. The moms started to try to debate who was at fault. We wouldn't participate. After they realized we were not responding to their position (20 minutes), they finally stopped. We told them that the only acceptable attitude their sons would be permitted to have if they are going to continue in the Troop is one of personal responsiblity, or, in otherwords, adopting the virtue of stocism. we laid out what must take place over the next 6 weeks or so: 1) Boy who chopped at tree to make birdhouse to cover damage, after researching what type of bird would be appropriate to make the birdhouse for 2) Letters of apology from all to camp ranger and SE 3) Formal expectation to live up to Scout Oath and Law, including a class on what these expectations are 4) Must prove worthiness to attend West Point Camporee 5) All future issues to be dealt with by calling parents to come pick them up 6) Any safety transgressions to result in immediate removal from Troop 7) "Three strikes you're out" policy for all other issues. 1st is call home, second is call home and suspension, third is expulsion. Suprisingly, as angry as all of the moms were over how we approached this, none said their sons were going to quit. We believe that as irrational as they are (believing their little Johnnys can't be at fault), they recognize that the Troop may be the only place were their sons have a chance to become men. The ball is rolling. We'll see where it goes... Mark

No offense taken, NW. If I were perfect at my job as Advancement Chair, I'd find no reason to have badges in inventory. This is the same as in business. If they plan perfectly, and everything goes according to plan, they should not carry safety stock. But I ain't perfect, and I'm not willing to let a boy go without being recognized for his effort. I ask the Council for the Troop's Advancement Status Report 3 or 4 times a year, and reconcile my records with theirs. Once in a while I find I've made an error, but not too often. I replenish my stock when I run out and have a badge I need. When I do, the Advancement Report is being sent in, with, say, 2 Basketry MBs earned, but me asking for 4. They know what I do. Frankly, although I think we all know it isn't the prefered method, I think they like that I do it this way. Mark

Three excellent points! Bob, I and two of the three other leaders who will represent "the Troop" tonight would prefer to do this one family at a time. Unfortunately, the mass meeting was arranged before we could determine how we wanted to approach this. Not the best situation, but we'll deal with it. Ed, The four of us debated this at length. On a split decision, it was decided that not allowing them to add their own ideas would be viewed as unilateral action and rejected out of hand by the parents. We'll see how it goes. Dan, funny you mention this. I thought the same thing, but not like you did. I think that this kid may be taking the blame even though it wasn't him. His dad is the only one of the parents who has been reasonable, and we think perhaps his dad may have convinced him that admitting the wrong, even if it wasn't him, might make things go away. But we are aware of this. I'll let you know how it goes. Mark

I also have a brief case that is overstuffed right now. I keep committing to cleaning it out, but every time I start, someone comes up to talk... In it I have Advancement guideline, Council MB Counselor list, BSA Hand book, Merit Badge Pamphlets for the 8 badges I do, adult applications, new Scout applications, calenders back probalby a year and going forward never far enough, The 2004 Requirements book, roster, usually advancement status sheets (Troopmaster) for all the guys in the Troop, pens, pencil, and about 6 legal pads. I also carry a tackle box with MBs and Rank badges, POR badges, a few extra neckerchiefs of two styles, a couple extra slides, red numerals for our Troop, MB presentation cards, rank presentation cards, MB Blue Cards, and a stapler. Mark

Here's the latest update: We have a meeting scheduled for tonight with the parents of the guys involved in this weekend's mayhem. Suggestions will be solicited from the parents for ways to correct this kind of behavior once and for all. My bet is that none will be offrered, but I'm trying not to go into this with preconceived notions. But if none are offered by the parents, here is what we have decided to put on the table: 1) A letter of apology to the camp caretaker and the Scout Executive written by each Scout 2) The very strong suggestion that the PL work with these Scouts to develop a service project for the camp 3) Exclusion from the next event 4) Zero tolerance for similiar acts, to be dealt with by calling parents to pick up their son One of the Scouts, the boy who is a year younger than the rest, just e mailed the SM and me to admit to using the axe on the tree. As disappointed (and suprised) that this Scout had done this, we were quite happy that at least one of them owned up to their mistakes. A 5th idea origianlly planned, construction an appropriate birdhouse to cover the damage on the tree, will now be his responsiblity alone. However, this guy is also going to get a healthy amount of praise for taking responsiblity for his actions, with the hope that it will be an example to the rest, and their parents. With some of the responses I have seen to the invitation to this meeting, I suspect it will not go well. Most of the parents have already been posturing to make the case that it wasn't their son's fault. It could get ugly. Mark

It's kind of good to hear that I'm not the only one to ever sit through a "clunker", but it's better news that it doesn't have to be bad. The guy who did ours is a good guy - He really is. But I might consider writing the $1,000.00 check if they don't send him back next year (just kidding. PLEASE! just kidding!). Thanks all. Mark

Bob mentioned in another thread that he does FOS presentations. It reminded me that I had a question I wanted to ask after this weekend's event. But with some other stuff going on (see the thread on a Patrol of Problem Scouts), I forgot. During our Court of Honor, which was going gangbusters, we had a slot carved out for our District Asst. Commissioner to do an FOS presentation. Now mind you, I was actually looking forward to this. I had always balanced my donations between FOS and United Way, but I made the decision to funnel all of this to FOS, so I was kind of looking forward to the presentation. The presentation was HORRIBLE! First, this guy read the entire presentation. Absolutely no ad lib at all, let alone having it be fresh by doing it in his own words. He gave some of the Cubs we had there some posters, and asked them to hold them during the presentation, but never made reference to them, and I could not see a correlation between these and his speech. An event that had people having fun, laughing, and enjoying themselves (I'll just say you never know what's going to happen when an adult never gets up to speak, which is the way the MC for the event planned this one), ground to a screeching halt because some boring muckity - muck interupted the proceedings. I know these presentations are vital, and for a Troop the COH is likely to be the best place to conduct them. My questions are: 1) Is it a rule that the presentation is canned and has to be followed to the letter? 2) What do those of you who do present this do to keep it interesting? 3) What the heck were those posters for? Thanks! Mark

GreenEagle, Yes, it does seem like it will be very interesting. As Marty points out, as I understand, the selection criteria is tough. I think that you have to have a former Scout from your Troop at the Academy, or have the brother of a cadet in your Troop, to be high on the list for consideration. However, I think a unit can apply without benefit of a direct connection. If you have such a connection, the odds of getting picked, from my understanding, is 2 / 3. Without such a connection, the odds are 1 /5 (these were estimates that our cadet gave us. I'm sure they're off the top of his head). They have competetive events scheduled, and look to be very interesting. If you have a cadet connection, I would check it out. We haven't yet been there, so I'm only guessing, but I think this will be great. I was hoping to hear from someone who has been there and can advise me on the logistics: Arrival, campsite selection and setup, meals, etc. Some of the info in the material are a little sketchy. Anyone? Mark

Ed and Bob, Thanks for the sympathetic words, and valuable advise. I especially like Bob's line about boys who don't act Scoutlike not going on events for Scouts. That one will get repeated, with your permission. To clarify, all Webelos in attendance had their dads there. Once in a while we get a DL who calls and asks if one boy can come without his dad if one of the other dads takes responsiblity for him, and we say yes, but this is a Father / Son campout. And this year, every boy had a dad. It was not the SPL who witnessed the match throwing, it was another older Scout. The SPL has been in the loop about how the adults are handling the situation, and he has been instructed about how to handle issues with these boys. We never considered he would have to deal with saftely issues of this magnitude, or you can bet we would have instructed him to inform us immediately. He did what he thought was his best to handle this on his own. The SM has already planned a sit down with him to go over how it could have been handled better. This is a tough one. If the right thing to do would have been to try to deal with this himself, without help from adults, he did a really great job. Ineffective, yes, but considering who he was dealing with, he really did well. But of course, this should have been turned over to the adults. My thought was exactly what Bob's is concerning doing K.P. - punishmnet isn't the answer. But the SPL's decision to have them do K.P. was at least partly based on having them do something that kept them supervised during times they could find themselves in the cabin without adults. Believe me, there was a punishment factor involved. I've not found a kid yet who, while in a position of responsiblity, won't resort to punishment when most every other method they have been taught has failed. But he had a coherent reason besides punishment for the assignment. I think it was KS who helped the most with the post he made suggesting that there is only so much we can do before we ask the Scout and his family to consider whether Scouting's values match what they want for their son. We're at this point now, I am certain. I hope that the boys, and their families, take it upon themselves to work within whatever plan is devised to prevent behavior like this going forward. But there WILL NOT be behavior like this from these guys again. I think that it is more likely that these guys will no longer be Scouts. That saddens me tremendously. Ed, BTW, from what we can tell, we dodged the bullet as far as Webelos and their dads seeing this play out. You never can tell if people are being polite by not saying anything, but we make the rounds during breakfast on Sunday asking all the guests their impressions of the weekend, and no one mentioned this stuff. Maybe we got lucky in more ways than one. Mark

Ed and Bob, Thanks for the sympathetic words, and valuable advise. I especially like Bob's line about boys who don't act Scoutlike not going on events for Scouts. That one will get repeated, with your permission. To clarify, all Webelos in attendance had their dads there. Once in a while we get a DL who calls and asks if one boy can come without his dad if one of the other dads takes responsiblity for him, and we say yes, but this is a Father / Son campout. And this year, every boy had a dad. It was not the SPL who witnessed the match throwing, it was another older Scout. The SPL has been in the loop about how the adults are handling the situation, and he has been instructed about how to handle issues with these boys. We never considered he would have to deal with saftely issues of this magnitude, or you can bet we would have instructed him to inform us immediately. He did what he thought was his best to handle this on his own. The SM has already planned a sit down with him to go over how it could have been handled better. This is a tough one. If the right thing to do would have been to try to deal with this himself, without help from adults, he did a really great job. Ineffective, yes, but considering who he was dealing with, he really did well. But of course, this should have been turned over to the adults. My thought was exactly what Bob's is concerning doing K.P. - punishmnet isn't the answer. But the SPL's decision to have them do K.P. was at least partly based on having them do something that kept them supervised during times they could find themselves in the cabin without adults. Believe me, there was a punishment factor involved. I've not found a kid yet who, while in a position of responsiblity, won't resort to punishment when most every other method they have been taught has failed. But he had a coherent reason besides punishment for the assignment. I think it was KS who helped the most with the post he made suggesting that there is only so much we can do before we ask the Scout and his family to consider whether Scouting's values match what they want for their son. We're at this point now, I am certain. I hope that the boys, and their families, take it upon themselves to work within whatever plan is devised to prevent behavior like this going forward. But there WILL NOT be behavior like this from these guys again. I think that it is more likely that these guys will no longer be Scouts. That saddens me tremendously. Ed, BTW, from what we can tell, we dodged the bullet as far as Webelos and their dads seeing this play out. You never can tell if people are being polite by not saying anything, but we make the rounds during breakfast on Sunday asking all the guests their impressions of the weekend, and no one mentioned this stuff. Maybe we got lucky in more ways than one. Mark