Oak Tree

I think you need to be clear on what you are trying to accomplish by registering volunteers. When is it 'necessary'? It is rarely necessary to register volunteers. It is often a good idea. According to BSA policies, you would need to be registered as a committee member if you are going to sit on a board of review. You need to be registered to wear the uniform. You need at least one adult to be registered in order to take the Scouts camping. You could require training and vetting without requiring joining. Our troop does require any adult going camping to take Youth Protection and Fast Start. In practice, though, you have a bigger problem. The problem isn't how to choose whether or not to register parents and what position to pick. Your problem is that your Scoutmaster and committee are overwhelmed. You need more committee members and more assistant Scoutmasters.

"Here are the things you CAN'T do. If you do them and someone gets hurt, the BSA will not stand behind you, your leaders, or your CO. The council insurance policy will not cover these activities." Many people hypothesize that this is what the G2SS says, but it does not say that. That's not how insurance works. Can you find that statement in the G2SS?

have the Webelos II den leaders understand that if all of the boys haven't bridged, their job isn't complete. Got to say, this would just not be practical in my experience. Have a den of one that continues to meet after the rest of the den has crossed over? But if we say that we are in it for the boys, that removes that argument. Most of our pack's den leaders say they are a den leader so that their son and the other boys will have a good den leader. I don't think they would say that they are in it just to help other boys. I'm confident, at any rate, that it would not remove the argument. Not letting the Scout cross over to me seems like a pretty good way to encourage them to drop out. "Sorry, you can't do Scouts equally with your friends for the next three months. We really want you to stay in Scouting, though." Since the Scout didn't earn Arrow of Light, he may be pre-destined to drop out anyway, but I don't want to accelerate that process if I don't have to.

You might lose your Totin' Chip for randomly throwing a tomahawk around the camp, but I'm not aware of any general prohibition on the activity. We've done it.

>>Some packs address it by working with the troop to ensure that the boy is included as a "guest" of the troop, until such time as he is old enough to join. This requires a clear understanding that he can participate, but that nothing "counts" toward any ranks or awards until he is officially a member.

Maybe, "I do not condemn you. Go, and rebel against the program no more."

The thing is, the BSA is not called the Straight God-fearing Scouts of America. Now, if someone who hated camping joined Scouts and then complained that they couldn't get Eagle without going camping, well, I'd agree with you - why join a group if you don't agree with the central mission/vision/tenets of the group. Many people just don't see that someone's sexuality or religious beliefs are core parts of the Scouting mission.

For school programs, the uniforms are normally provided. For non-scholastic leagues, the parents often have to pay. That is the one point of similarity between the Scout uniform and a youth soccer league uniform - the parents are expected to buy the uniform. And I agree, it would make sense that parents should be willing to pay to be part of the program. So I'll agree I'd rather not hear a parent gripe about the cost of the uniform when they are willing to pay big bucks for other youth programs. But the reasons for wearing the uniform seem to be entirely different. I think most of our youth, especially our older youth, would view the uniform as more analogous to a McDonalds uniform. Something they have to wear because of the rules, but take off as soon as possible when the rules permit. Some employers even make you buy your own uniforms.

BadenP, sorry for the misquote. I'll try to read more carefully. So what you actually said was: Female scoutmasters [...] just goes contrary to what boy scouts is supposed to be about. but you still say any chartering organizations that wants single-gender Venturing Crews is biased ... exclusionary ... narrowminded ... cultic I still say "Wow."

BadenP writes: Female Scoutmasters ... are incapable of leading but as for chartering organizations that want single-gender Venturing Crews, they are biased ... exclusionary ... narrowminded ... cultic Wow. Just wow.

The way the BSA is structured, district leaders are definitely *not* superior to units. The district leadership can't really tell your unit how to do anything. The unit reports to the chartered organization's institutional head.

Scoutfish, Since I recommended the ideal time as being during tenure as a Boy Scout leader, let me follow up and say that in your case you probably would be well-served to take it as a Cub Scout leader. For the benefit of the entire Scouting program, it's great to have leaders from all different types of units in the course. And for the benefit of your pack, it would be great to have more trained leaders. My answer was a bit more theoretical...I think that the highest average usefulness of the course for a given person, assuming that they spent time as both a Cub Scout leader and as a Boy Scout leader, would be while a Boy Scout leader. But I agree with Lisabob and Twocubdad, for the reasons they state, that this does not mean that you personally should wait. I'd say you should take it when you think you're ready.

I just don't get the sport or band uniform analogy at all. I would never have worn my band uniform or my basketball uniform any time other than when I was performing that role in front of the public. We never wore the uniforms while traveling. We didn't wear them for awards banquets. The sports analogy is really terrible, I think - that uniform has a giant number on it and each team intentionally wears different colors. Plus, the uniform is required by the rules of the sport, whereas the BSA specifically doesn't require them.

I know in Weblos or the Boy Scouts he will be rejected. This is not necessarily so. Some packs and troops pretty much take a don't-ask-don't-tell attitude towards this - saying that religion instruction is the province of the parents.

If I had to pick a time to take it, I'd say two years after starting Boy Scouts. I think Cub Scouters could get a lot out of it, but I'm glad I didn't do it as a Cub Scout leader. Because the entire program was structured around operating as a patrol, the course seemed to have some extra relevance for Boy Scout leaders.

Tiger Cubs became fully integrated in 2001, more or less. Before that, it was indeed a "year before Cub Scouts" in many ways.

Calico, I read mds3d's proposal for the district as pertaining to district leadership, not to all units in the district. So an LDS troop wouldn't be subject, say, to a district commissioner who was gay or atheist. BadenP, I'm not sure why you think a local option is unworkable. That's what we have for female Scoutmasters, for example. Or for girls in Venturing. Or even for membership in a church. Or whether units can camp on Sundays. Units can use lots of other criteria to decide on appropriate leadership as well. Given that the local option works for all of these, why wouldn't it work for gays? Atheists are a little different, with the current wording of the Oath. mds3d, I think that there are several problems with that solution. While it is an elegant logical solution, it fails in a variety of other ways. It would be hard to tell a volunteer, for example, that he could serve as district commissioner but not council commissioner. BSA does not have that policy for women leaders in those positions. It also does look a bit odd to the outside, and it would be hard to justify. "We don't discriminate, except when we do." As le Voyageur points out, summer camps mingle Scouts from many different units, district, councils, and even regions. Your solution would be creating a complex (and constantly changing) web of who would be eligible to have which positions. We have a gay district commissioner, but we just got a new LDS church in the district. Do we have to fire our DC? I feel safe in saying that this will not be the solution that BSA eventually proceeds with.

Are you sure you don't want to move to the south? We'd welcome your son and you in our troop any time. We let our older Scouts hike ahead with no adults. Sure, this one time they got lost at night in winter on the Appalachian Trail... :-) Hmmm, maybe that doesn't sound as good as it did in my head... Anyway, they knew enough to realize they had made a wrong turn and they turned around. There is always room for debate over where exactly the right line is - but in my experience the Scouts are generally way more capable than parents and some leaders are willing to presume. Sorry that you're frustrated. I'd say, let your son go and have fun (or not), and try to let go. It's a shame, because you'd be a great adult asset to the right troop.

Brent, I'm with you on this one. So, can an EBOR say either full complete uniform (as the Rules and Regs read), or no uniform at all? Yes Can an Eagle Board refuse to meet with a Scout in his Scout shirt and blue jeans? Yes The ARP&P that say a uniform isn't required and the R & R say you can't wear only a partial uniform. Do you enforce one, and not the other? No, you enforce both. Our district Eagle board of review says to either wear the full uniform, or come dressed as you would for a job interview.

BadenP, I'm not sure you're disagreeing with Beavah. You both agree that Scouts are not perceived to be cool. Beavah is saying it's not because they do good deeds - it's because of the uniforms and stuff associated with Cub Scouts. You are saying it's because of the uniform and because of the goody-two-shoes image. I'd say you're both right. So what causes the goody-two-shoes image? I think a lot of it is the uniform. Another item is probably the constant repetition of the Scout Oath and Law, especially while in uniform. I don't think that it's doing service projects though - lots of groups do those and don't share the same image.

Stosh, I think that's exactly the right way to go. Reward, encourage, notice when the Scouts wear the uniform. Give them little rewards. Nothing wrong with any of that, as far as I can see. Now, I personally probably wouldn't do it on the Klondike Derby - but it might depend on what expectations were communicated to the Scouts. As for when you can tell if you're going too far, I'd say that if you start to turn boys off because of an over-emphasis on the uniform, you'd be going too far. That point is very different for different boys and for different troops, though.

I agree, the recruiter award does not transfer over. According to usscouts.org, "There are NO formal requirements for these strips. Each unit establishes the procedure for awarding the strip. Usually, a Recruiter Strip is awarded to a Cub Scout or Boy Scout the first time he is successful in getting a friend, relative, classmate, or other acquaintance to join his unit. Typically, only ONE strip is awarded to a boy while he is a Cub Scout, and another may be awarded while he is a Boy Scout." I've noted before that there are a number of other awards that could transfer over, but they are all pretty unlikely for a Cub Scout to have. Still, the recruiter award is definitely one of the ones that they mean when they say that other awards don't transfer.

I'll play with Beavah's questions. 1) Do the youth leaders sign off on advancement requirements? Yes. Star and up can sign off on most requirements. 2) Does the PLC set the calendar? Roughly, yes. They pick the outings and the months. The adults try to coordinate with all the other calendars. 3) Does the PLC set the budget for the troop, and determine how program money is spent? No. 4) Can the Quartermaster dispose of or purchase gear on his own? Hmmm. He can, yes. Does he? That's a different question. 5) Do the youth leaders have keys to the building/trailer/locker? Yes. 6) Can the PLC add, subtract, or rewrite troop "policy" for youth members? Yes. 7) Do the adults ever touch a stove/pot/shopping cart, or are the youth responsible for their own meals? The youth are entirely responsible for their own meals. The adults cook as their own patrol. 8) Does da SPL present the program to the Committee or does the SM? The SM does, but this is almost a trivial exercise. 9) How many times in the last year have yeh knowingly hiked or driven miles out of your way because the lads took a wrong turn and you let 'em? Oh, man. Too many. 10) If a boy suffers a minor injury, who does the first aid? If it comes to the awareness of the adults, the adults do it. 11) When an event is canceled, who makes the decision? I don't think we've cancelled an event in the last six years. We have moved an event, cut short a couple events, and discussed whether we should cancel events. Typically this is done by the adults, sometimes in consultation with the SPL. Usually this is me, trying to convince the other leaders that the Scouts can handle the situation. I'd add 12) Who plans the troop meetings? 13) Who runs the troop meetings? Who stands up front at the beginning, calls the meeting to order, and explains the meeting plan to the Scouts? 14) Who sends out emails reminding Scouts to be at PLC? Or describing what has to be done for upcoming troop meetings? 15) Who sends out PLC minutes? 16) Who plans the courts of honor?

Exactly right. I find that if you engage the boys in serious discussions, they can come to pretty good decisions. Now, if you just let them go with the first thing that pops into their head, that's a different story. I also want the boys to lead as much as possible elsewhere, particularly while executing plans. It would be nice if they did detailed project management style planning, too, but I've come to accept that's just not the strength of any teenaged boys. Adults sometimes have to set the framework, but for decision making, the more you can delegate to the boys, the better. I think you need to move gradually in that direction so that they start to take it seriously before you ask them to make the big decisions, and quite often they need guidance and the adults can have a strong influence through the kind of suggestions they make and the type of questions they ask. For example, one thing I see on the forum about the SPL election is that the SM is often too nervous to let the boys have complete control over the election - concerned that they will elect a goofball or a slacker. And if the troop is adult-run, maybe the SPL doesn't matter all that much, so the Scouts don't care. But in our troop we have no minimum requirements to be SPL and I haven't vetoed anyone from running for the office. But yet the Scouts have never elected an undeserving choice. They know the decision matters, so they take it seriously.

If you search through some of the old threads, you can find some longer posts on this topic. There appears to be a continuum of CO involvement, and this is probably true regardless of what group is your CO. But it seems more typical for COs to be uninvolved when they are groups like the Lions, Elks, etc, especially when they don't have meeting space to provide. Churches seem to tend a bit more toward a middle ground - they often have a little more involvement - although some provide a great deal (and some, primaily LDS, are completely intertwined), and some provide nothing more than meeting space, I'd say that most fall in between those extremes. Our church has been quite responsive, although we don't see the COR in particular all that much. We've had Eagle projects for the church, we've had service projects, they work with us on Scout Sunday, they provide us meeting space and closet space.