Oak Tree

For grade-based packs (most of them), Webelos I represents 4th grade dens, and Webelos II represents 5th grade dens. It's a distinction that matters a lot to the internal operation of the pack - where are the Webelos I dens setting up their tents, which section of the pack meeting area is for the Webelos IIs, how many Webelos IIs are there, etc. It's a common shorthand in use everywhere. I do find it a bit pedantic to have people correct this informal usage, especially in Scouting circles where everyone knows what we're talking about. This type of correction never happens in real life in my experience, only on these boards. I can see the point about making sure people know what the meaning is, but I also know that many people don't like to be corrected on the forum. But shortridge, I'll go one further. You say "They're all Webelos, period." In fact, this is incorrect usage. According to the national site, the word Webelos should always be used as a modifier, never as a noun. So correctly stated, "They are all Webelos Scouts, period." See why people don't like to be corrected? :-)

We've had older brothers along on a number of Cub Scout camping events, and all the ones I can remember always slept in their own tent. I would definitely count camping with a Cub Scout pack. I would count staff camping as the one week of long-term camp.

I hadn't given the cover a second thought until now. We do usually have one or two boys each year for whom the swim test is a big deal. For the rest, it's hardly a memorable event, but for the ones who are barely capable (or not capable) of passing, it's a real concern. It's great if you can find an understanding adult who can work with these kids.

Ok, if not talking about personal habits, how about this? My wife occasionally helps out with the troop. Stops by to bring things in response to my urgent calls about things I forgot, or even plans to help out with a training session or something. I've met the spouses for all of the ASMs, and so have most of the boys, I'm sure. Should you have to keep it a secret?

SO I had to explain it Actually, you didn't have to. You chose to.

There is a troop that has biked across the country. They did get on the cover of Boy's Life, I think. http://www.troop845.net/2010-cross-country-bike-trip/ They've also done a John Muir trail thru-hike and this summer they are doing "a 500+ mile backpacking trip on the Camino de Santiago in Spain"

The default set of rules are those published by the BSA in the various documents. Nowhere are given detailed instructions on how (or even whether) to conduct votes, determine quorum, etc. If there are no bylaws, then it's up to the committee to decide. In practice, the committee chair can decide, but it's always good to build a consensus.

nolesrule, OK, you got me on a technicality. If the scout is camping while helping run a Cub family camp, that is a scouting event. OA weekends are scouting events. No unit involvement in either. I'm going to say that technically, the pack camping trip is indeed with a Scouting unit - the pack. I think of OA chapters as units, but they are not technically units. There might be other times when the district puts out a call for volunteers, or some other event that is not unit based but is coordinated by some larger Scouting entity. You're right - there are Scouting events that are not unit events. I'd count those. The one thing that has come up in other venues is whether merit badge work is a "Scouting event." My answer is no. It's an individual action designed to reach a Scouting goal, but it's not a Scouting event.

Ours is the committee member who will sign the Eagle project proposal. As SM, I won't sign until he has. His primary role is to make sure the Scouts understand the process, and to iterate on the project proposal with them until they have it in a reasonable state to give to the district board. When a Scout earns his Life rank, the L2E Advisor will give the Scout/parents a booklet full of information on how to get to Eagle, some sample project proposals, the links to the district process, etc. Every now and then he'll nudge a Scout to see where he is on the project application.

I'd go ahead and say that the primary reason is to keep everyone safer. I'm sure that no one in the BSA wants to see kids get injured or hurt. If the BSA gets sued, it's because someone got hurt or something of value got destroyed or you forced someone to spend a bunch of their money on something (fire-fighting, hiker search, etc). There is no way that's a good thing, regardless of whether or not the BSA gets sued. Are some of the policies a bit extreme in their risk-aversion? Yes. It's been getting a little bit better recently, but there are still things that don't seem to be written with any common sense. However, except for the "unauthorized activities", BSA coverage is still in force even if you are negligent in following the guidelines. Therefore, I don't see how it's the lawyers who are forcing the creation of the document. We humans design systems of operation, and refine them over time based on what works. Hence we have much safer airlines now, and we have much safer Scout swim areas, too, I'll bet. I have no objection to systems that are clearly in place to aid with safety. The unauthorized activities might be due to liability, but then that also means it would also be due to increased chance of injury. How much risk is OK? In a few cases, the BSA has decided that certain risks are too much. My biggest gripe is the inclusion of things that aren't safety related at all. Laser tag, for example, appears to be purely a political concern. But I guess the G2SS isn't really just about safety, it's about a few other topics too - like privacy, tobacco, immunization, insurance, etc. Gotta call it something, though. There are lots of Scouters who are attorneys, and physicians, and safety professionals. And I have no doubt that they make some rules to try to avoid the last death. The book is intended to help us run safe events, though, and I'm fine with that. (I'll just reserve the right to use my own judgment on some of these things :-)

Can someone summarize the updates? What's changed?

I'm not sure I get why this would be hard. Ask the SM about it - he may want the proposal to go through the PLC or he may be happy to just throw it on the calendar. At least, that's how it would work in our troop. The backpacking events would get put on the calendar as another troop event.

Yeah, I'm not sure how much more clear this could be. You ask the question Does the 20 days and nights have to be scout camping, done as a scout with a scouting unit?? and then you post the requirements that state The 20 days and 20 nights must be at a designated Scouting activity or event. So the answer to your question is "Yes".

Ah you guys are missing it Lisa, you've lost control. Pure and simple. What started out as a clever observation on the half uniform has been sucked back to the standard argument. As for me, I'd love it if an entire patrol showed up in Scout pants one day without their Scout shirts. At least that would prove they all have the pants :-)

Remember it's your council that reviews Eagle applications. The district advancement chair may have a "rule of thumb" about how many signatures with the same last name would give rise to more scrutiny. The Eagle application does not have a place to list merit badge counselors. At no point in any process does our council or district ever get any list of who has actually counseled which Scouts or which badges.

Minimum membership is - five youth - three committee members - a unit leader

As far as I know, council could revoke your charter for any reason at all, just as you could choose at any point in time to stop having a BSA unit. Because councils get rewarded based on growth in units and members, they are not likely to revoke charters whimsically. I can imagine all kids of reasons why a council might revoke a charter. The husband/wife SM/CC go off the reservation and appear to be embezzling money but have no financial records available for audit. The unit insists on having inappropriate role models hanging around the kids. The unit does meetings that bring unwanted publicity on the BSA (hanging out outside a strip club, or something). Religious rituals the BSA doesn't agree with ("at this point of the service anyone who wants to can voluntarily carve the turkey symbol on his arm with a pocketknife.") Generally being such a pain in the butt to the council that they can't stand to have you around any longer. I could go on and on with the fun scenarios. Put up a web site with the SE's picture, describe what an awful human being he is, and post his name and address. There is no way the BSA can have rules that cover all possible situations. Nor do they have to.

Is it possible for a troop to write by laws "Suggesting" or setting a concrete limit to the number of badges that a parent can counsel his kids on. Yes. From scouting.org:The Merit Badge Process The requirements for each merit badge appear in the current BSA merit badge pamphlet for that award and in the current edition of the Boy Scout Requirements book, available at Scout shops and council service centers. When a Scout has decided on a merit badge he would like to earn, he obtains from his Scoutmaster the name and phone number of the district/council-approved merit badge counselor. At this time, the Scoutmaster also can issue the Scout a signed Application for Merit Badge (blue card).Here's the key quote: [the Scout] obtains from his Scoutmaster the name of the merit badge counselor. The Scoutmaster/CO can use whatever process they want to in deciding which names to hand out.

For the most active boys in the troop, Scouting can add up. For the least active, it can be pretty cheap. Annual dues - $50, includes Boy's Life. Uniform - maybe $50 - depends on whether you need the pants and whether you spread out the cost over multiple years. Summer camp - $200 The monthly trips are a big cost and are highly variable. Our cheapest trips would have just food and gas - maybe $30 for the weekend. District and council events are in the same range. If we go skiing, or whitewater rafting, or climbing where we have to hire a guide, the cost can easily climb to $100 for the weekend. Our average Scout does maybe six trips a year, at an average cost of $50 - but a bunch of that money is for food that you would otherwise have to provide to your son anyway. The most active Scout, who goes on 12 outings, could easily spend $600. The other potential big expense is camping gear. This is also extremely variable. When we did our winter backpacking trip with the older Scouts, we just about kept REI in business all on our own for the week prior to the trip (boots, gaiters, snow pants, rain coats, backpack, stove, water filter, Mountain House, socks, ...) . The kids who do the simpler trips really need very little, but if you go ahead and get all good equipment for every trip, you could add it up pretty quickly. So the cheapest might be someone who doesn't do summer camp, doesn't buy any special equipment, and who goes on a few of the cheaper trips. $300. The most expensive would be someone who's really into it, goes on almost all of the trips and buys a bunch of equipment - in addition to backpacking gear, they might also have bike gear. (I don't think we really have anyone who has bought their own climbing gear or boating gear or skiing gear just for Scouts.) Maybe up to $1500. And that doesn't count the year that we go to Philmont.

My theory is that the form is trying to stop an unscrupulous individual from running his own child labor troop. Because having to file this form would pretty much be the one thing that would stop that from happening. The straightforward answer is that the council would want to see there was a reasonable need for the money being raised. My question is, why would a troop object to providing this data?

Oak Tree, I'd like to see a reference to the following statement "6. Homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the requirement in the Scout Oath that a Scout be morally straight and in the Scout Law that a Scout be clean in word and deed, and that homosexuals do not provide a desirable role model for Scouts." Not that I don't believe you, but I know that the BSA likes to keep that view somewhat under wraps. acco40, I'm going by the BSA's stated position in the Dale case. In fact, if you google the exact sentence that I quoted, you'll get a bunch of hits. Wikipedia gives the quote and points back to the Dale case, which has similar if not exact wording. In http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a2427-95.opn.html, it says According to Parvin L. Bishop, National Director of Program of the BSA, the requirements that a scout be "morally straight" and "clean" are inconsistent with homosexuality, and therefore known or avowed homosexuals or those who advocate to scouting youth that homosexual conduct is morally straight or clean, will not be registered as adult leaders. You can find other references to the Dale lawsuit where the U.S. Supreme Court restates the BSA position - here's one: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=530&page=640 This isn't really surprising. The BSA may not have to state the policy all that precisely on its web site, but when defending itself in court it really needs to argue that it believes this statement. Otherwise it would just be excluding a group because it didn't like them, and that would not be permissible.

As a practical matter, it's much easier to get a TroopMaster transfer file than it is to re-type all of the advancement data. For anyone who transfers in, if their old troop used TroopMaster, we always ask for the file.

The normal meaning for "day camp" is a district/council event that involves multiple packs. Otherwise it's just a pack outing. We've done pack camping when it got down the to low 20s, and had very little issue. It can up into the 60s that same day. The absolute #1 key thing for that type of camping is to warn people ahead of time and make sure they have warm enough sleeping bags. They'll usually bring along plenty of warm clothing on their own. It's not a good first camping trip for a new Tiger family. As with everything, use your judgment.

I agree with this as well - I'm starting to suspect that TwoCubDad is somehow channeling my thoughts into a more effective writing style. The more the other SM acts like there is something to hide, the more concerned I'm going to be. Especially saying that they won't talk about it - that really does make it sound like they're concerned about a possible lawsuit. It's much easier to give some minimal description - "He was really tired one day and one of the adults pushed him pretty hard to do his part of the chores and he finally lashed out and smacked the leader." I just don't get the firewall either. Why wouldn't you pass on the information? I can see why some troops might decide they don't want the information, and want to give the kid a fresh start, but I just don't see the justification for not describing the situation to someone who has a reasonable "need to know."

Ok, yes, fair enough. Setting up an obvious video recorder would do the trick, though. Everyone clearly knows they're being recorded. Still, roughly 3/4 of the states let you tape a conversation with "one-party" consent, at least according to this: http://www.rcfp.org/taping/Twelve states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington.