Oak Tree

I would treat the previous Scoutmaster's verbal statements as equal to his written records. In both cases he stated, either verbally or written, that the requirements were complete, and he informed the Scouts of such. I am a big believer in your statement that we should not make the boys suffer for the mistakes of an adult. I appreciate your dilemma, but I'd advise making changes going forward, and not trying to go back to any extent at all. Retroactively annulling the previous Scoutmaster's statements is certainly going to cause discouragement, and could be worse than that. And I assure you that we are *not* in a highly regulated environment here in the BSA. With Scout camps regularly handing out unearned merit badges, it's not like your former Scoutmaster was all alone.

I'm guessing Gern was thinking of the 2000 election. Gore: 50,999,897 48.38% Bush: 50,456,002 47.87% But he's technically correct even in the 2004 election. A majority of Americans did not vote for Bush. Bush vote: 62,039,073 American population: 303,190,370 Percent of the population who voted for Bush: 20.5% It's possible I'm taking things just a bit too literally here :-)

The topic asks one question, while the post asks other follow-on questions. I think that Lisa partially answers her own (rhetorical?) question asked in the topic. It's harder to make changes because leadership turns over more slowly in a troop. I'll hypothesize a few other reasons as well: the boys themselves are more likely to have a sense of tradition in a troop, whereas Cub Scouts will for the most part just go along with whatever; people are more likely to have some personal stake in the way the troop operates - they view it as part of their identity, while Cub Scout parents are more likely to see themselves as just passing through and are happy to do a leadership position that's just part of being along for the ride. Those are just my thoughts - I have no good way to know if they are right or not. Certainly I've observed the same situation, both in my units and on the forum, that packs are much more amenable to change. Troops generally have way more ASMs than packs have ACMs. In packs many of the leaders are den leaders, whereas in the troop there are a bunch of people who all take some responsibility for the entire unit. I'd say the answer to the final question is, as always, "It depends." Some of it is just practical - how long does it take to understand the situation, know what really needs to be changed, know who the people are who could change things, build enough allies to make a change effective, build up enough personal respect that people think you know what you're talking about. I'd say it can't hurt to ask lots of questions early on, let the leaders know you want to help, give them feedback on how things appear to be affecting your son. In one troop it can take a whole generation of boys before things will really change. In another situation, you might be able to get some incremental changes started quickly. I'd say it can easily take a year before you look like you know what you're talking about. If it looks like it's going to take five years to make a change, then you may have to decide if you want to stick it out that long.

We spent Saturday doing Troop Leadership Training at a local state park. The weather was beautiful and the boys were great. The training materials were also well-done, so hopefully they actually learned something.

Around here I'd say it's the norm for troops to do their merit badges in-troop. That, plus summer camp and the occasional merit badge fair or group class. I did go up to council to get the list of counselors, and the woman looked at me kind of funny, like I was asking for some type of state secret. Eventually, after continued prodding, she printed out the list for our district. It only included those who not checked the troop-only box, and there were a reasonable number of people on it, but it was not a large number, given the size of the district. I'd guess that it was maybe 20% of the registered counselors.

In my real world, the role the ACM plays is very dependent on the Cubmaster. A Cubmaster who is good at defining roles and delegating tasks can get tremendous value out of an ACM. When I was CM I had three ACMs, and I tried to give them as much as I could of the day-to-day work. If I were to do it over, I'd give them even more. A good, valuable ACM will do more than just wait for assignments from the CM, though. He'll look around at the program and try to figure out where he can help. It can be any of the areas listed in the job description, or any of a myriad of other activities.

"Council Advancement Committee said they wanted to see 40 hours of time put in by the scout planing the project." Ok, so I know that you can't add to the requirements. But when you first come to this point in a Scout's career, it is really handy to have some rule of thumb as to how much leadership and planning is sufficient. If the boy does three good hours of work, is that enough? Should it take more like 100 hours of work? Yes, if you go to enough Eagle project approvals (in our district, the district approves these things before the Scout starts work), you can get an idea of what they're looking for. But that shouldn't have to be the way to do it. Phrases like "sufficient leadership" are very, very subjective. And I do agree that it wouldn't be good for districts to end up with really different ideas about how much leadership is enough. So while you can't require forty hours, you can certainly give people an idea of how much time you would think would be needed.

Here's an oddity on the list. Right next to each other. 538 Chief Cornplanter Council http://www.cccbsa.com 539 Chester County Council http://www.cccbsa.org

As long as the unit is functioning smoothly, I don''t think you need the COR to do anything except sign the papers. Sure, he could do more, but doesn''t really need to. The bigger issue comes if something goes wrong and you need to involve the COR in making some decision for the unit. Then you really want someone who''s on your side. Eamonn is right that you don''t officially have any say. But in our CO, and maybe in yours, the IH would happily take my advice on who the COR should be. You could talk to the PTA head and see if he/she cares. I expect that normally they''d take the recommendation of the unit leader/CC. Here''s what I''d look for in a COR, in order: 1. Someone who''s not going to go on a power trip and start ordering changes to the program. Their vision for the program, if they have one, should not conflict with the unit leader''s. 2. Someone who is available to sign the papers. That''s the one primary job and you don''t want to have to track the COR down and spend a week getting an appointment. 3. Someone on the good side of the IH. The better their standing in the CO, the better off you are when it comes to getting resources. Sometimes you''ll be lucky to get those first three. That''s about where we usually ended up. But if you still have several options, then: 4. Someone that you like and trust and you think will be on your side in any controversies that arise. 5. Someone who understands Scouting, and has an idea about what the COR does. To summarize, I don''t think you need to switch CORs. Unless the current one is looking to get out, I think he''s serving your purposes. But you could look to make a switch at the next recharter.

That is eerily similar advice, right down to the exact wording of "have their act together". Could be great minds, or maybe it''s just that fools seldom differ. At any rate, it''s always an honor to be grouped with you, Lisa''bob. :-)

Pamlico Sea Base does now specifically list surfing as one of the activities you can do there. http://www.pamlicoseabase.org/outerbanks.html

"where should I go to learn how troops that really work, became that way?" The best thing you can do is talk to other Scouters who have a lot of experience, and in particular, ones who are running troops that you admire. This can be at roundtable, at camporees, or even at training sessions. The training is intended to give a basic vision, and I''ve sat through some fairly painful approaches to conveying that basic message, but I find the most exciting discussions occur off the main course. Break time, lunch time, whenever. There is no perfect, magic bullet. Every situation is different, and what will work in one may not work in another. But you can pick up hints and tips and ideas. Reading this forum is another way. And because different troops emphasize different aspects of Scouting, you''ll find different definitions of "really work". Some troops take pride in how much they camp and all the outdoor fun they have. Others take pride in how many Eagles they turn out. Others in how ''boy-led'' they are. All can be right. I think the most successful troops are those that have dedicated, enthusiastic leaders who will commit the time, use good judgement, develop a real rapport with the Scouts, and relay a vision for the troop. I''m sure this correlates with training, but I think that''s more because dedicated leaders will go get trained than because training makes good leaders. The Scoutmaster training courses (IOLS and Scoutmaster-specific) were two of the worst courses I''ve taken - both in terms of the actual presenters, and in terms of the syllabus. They might have been good for someone who was being introduced to Scouting for the first time, but everyone in the class was an experienced Scouter. Some of them were very good, from excellent troops. Your troop, too, can be excellent (for your own definition of excellent), but it''s going to come from a dedicated group of adults who put in the time with the troop, not just from training courses. I will say that the Strictly for Scoutmasters course at Philmont is excellent. Tons of sharing amongst lots of dedicated Scoutmasters. It''s not just the basic vision of "here''s how you should do it", but much more practical advice, the kind you''re asking about. A little pricier than your usual training, though. As for which council might offer better training, very hard to tell. But I''ll offer this suggestion: councils that have their act together in terms of planning and communicating their training courses are more likely to be doing a good job on the actual training itself. Are the courses listed on their web site? Are they planned out a year in advance? Can you register on-line? We have one district in our council where the training team is excellent. I''d go back for their training if I have an option. They have their act together.

Gern, Thanks for the story. Great to know he was found. I''m sure that real-life experiences like this make the point much more vivid for your Scouts.

Our district usually has a big training day where they offer all types of training, and Den Chief training is one of those classes. They also offer it at other, seemingly random, times. It is a real, honest-to-God course with materials and everything. This class is the requirement for a den chief to wear the Trained strip. Adults who work with den chiefs are also encouraged to take the course. You can do your own training, and you''ll need to do some anyway - probably more so with the den leaders than with the den chiefs.

Would I want that parent? Nope. We''ve declared dens to be full, and people accept it just fine. But generally they wouldn''t know our pack from any other, so they just move on. It''s a little trickier if it''s a member of the CO. We would try hard to accomodate new members from the church. But by October, it can be hard to split a den. I support your right to declare your dens to be full, and I agree the parent sounds unreasonable.

Our pack has all of the money go to the pack account. The prizes seem to be motivation enough for the boys. At the troop level we do Scout accounts, with 50% going to the individual accounts, and 50% going to the troop account. It''s definitely more work to keep track of this. There''s another active thread about what happens when a boy leaves and there''s money in the account. The money was raised from people for use in Scouting - it should not go to the individual. If that boy isn''t going to use it for Scouting, then it should go into some other general unit account. I am not a big fan of waiting until you see how you do. Setting expectations is important, and it''s much easier for people to get upset when you don''t tell them what to expect. They''ll probably just assume it will be similar to last year - or through some other method they''ll set their expectations. Better to have you do it. You should have a good idea how popcorn sales generally go.

I too would be surprised to see a den in our pack go off and do its own fundraiser. So I''m curious as to how it got to be that way. But given that it''s been done, would I demand that they turn over the money to the CO, or to the pack, or return it to the donors? Only if I wanted to sour all the den parents on Scouting. There''s no fraud - they are using the money for the purpose intended. I''d let them keep it, and I''d encourage them to use it up and get into a position where they don''t feel the need to do it again.

Our committee has a person who is the Camping Coordinator. He does all the legwork associated with exploring the options, getting the reservations, sending out logistical information on the pack email list, etc. The Cubmaster is responsible for the program aspect of the campouts, and he will often delegate various aspects to others - Den Leaders might have some time for den activities, someone might organize a service project, an ACM might do a campfire plan, someone will take the worship service, a few people will plan one big pack meal, while the rest are done by families, etc. The Cubmaster usually does some of the program himself. We camp four times per year, so it''s essential to distribute the workload.

This happened to me once or twice in the pack. (It doesn''t seem to me that this really has much to do with the Internet.) I struggled with it for a little while, too. In the end, all I could figure out I could do was this: ask the parent if he or she realized that they were making an extraordinary claim. And if so, would they mind if I asked them some more detailed questions about it, because I''d want to be able to tell other parents that I''d looked into it and I really did believe they''d actually earned all those awards. The parent was generally happy to discuss what all they''d done. But in the end, yes, you pretty much have to take the parent''s word for it.

The reason you''re having a hard time carrying the 2 is that John-in-KC should have said "the letter before ''p''".

Thanks to everyone for the kind words. I haven''t yet reached the point where I''m going to leave the forum, but I do appreciate what might cause someone to do so. Lisa, you''re right - there''s a lot good about the forums, and that''s why we all come here. There are lots of good people to talk to. There are indeed problems in real life that often get glossed over, and it''s great that those get discussed here. In fact, it''s not at all surprising that we get the thornier problems here, and it''s not really the topics that bother me. For me the more relevant issue is whether I find that I''m encouraged and built up by what happens here. Or do I end up going away disappointed or saddened by the personal interactions. A lot of people here are great, but it''s certainly easier to be blunt in this virtual reality. "what a bunch of slackers" - I guess the honey/vinegar thing applies in the real world, but not here. "you don''t have a real Scouting program - period" - this recent comment used to be a common statement in this forum, and I was very happy to see it fade away, and am sorry to see it reappear. This blanket statement that tells all Cub Scouts who wear just the shirts that they aren''t real Cub Scouts just seems harsh. "What purpose is served by making a snide and sneering back-handed comment" "The ego and arrogance factor is at work." "I''m not sure what alternate reality you''re living in" - ok, so I''m guilty too And then we get the rulebreaking argument, R8. "If its ok to break a rule, its ok to break all rules. You either obey rules, or you dont." http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=156126#id_156215 "They can wear whatever they want, right? And they can take the same attitude with the G2SS as well. If they want to play paintball, then they can, right? Same with hunting - they can all go on a dove shoot in a couple of weeks - great Scouting event! They can all ride out to the field in the back of a pick-up truck - that sounds like lots of fun! After the shoot, they can race the ATVs around the field." "I can make up the rules. I can turn Cub Scouting into what I think it should be." "What else isn''t needed? A second adult, PFD, enough canoes to hold all the boys that show up? Maybe next time it''s a quickie run up the rocks. How many falls on that rope? 9 mm or 11? Gloves, rappel devices? Does every boy have a helmet? Is he still using pitons and the munter hitch? " The idea seems to be that a troop or adult who uses judgement on one item is therefore likely to ignore all rules and not care about putting kids in danger. This idea does not match my observations, and really seems like a fairly strong insult. So this is just my plea for courtesy. I guess I long for Beavah''s monthly posts on forum etiquette. Thanks, Oak Tree

9/19, Germany calling. But yes, there''s been a noticeable silence.

I''ve been thinking about my comment to Nessmuk around alternate realities. Maybe the phrasing was a little dramatic, although I do think we have very different circumstances. But what it really got me thinking about was that this forum is very much an alternate reality. Real world - People I can see and talk to and physically interact with, and for these purposes here I''m only indicating my own personal experience and not making sweeping statements about the entire real world. In the real world, conversations are typically friendly and upbeat, and arguments are rare. In the real world, I attended Strictly for Scoutmasters at Philmont this summer. Arguments were non-existent, even as we discussed all manner of Scouting issues. People said "Here''s how we do it, and how it''s working for us." Everyone loved the interaction. No one, including the instructors, ever told any Scoutmaster how they were doing things wrong. The most common comment from the instructors and from the class members was, "You''ve got to figure out what will work for you." In the real world, I don''t think I''ve ever had an argument about how essential it is to follow the rules. Here it seems almost constant. Sufficiently common that we''ve created the canonical list of arguments. In the real world, no one has ever suggested that since we don''t require uniform pants, we may very well be ignoring all other aspects of the Scouting program. In the real world, no one seems to care if we wear uniform pants. I''ve thought about it, and I guess I really don''t care. I know the boys don''t care (and some actively oppose the idea), and the parents don''t care. In all our interactions with the official BSA, and there are many, none of them give any indication of caring either. The only people who seem to care if we wear official pants are people on this forum. In the real world, we never discuss gays in Scouting. In the real world we have constant positive interactions. In the forums, not surprisingly, most discussions start with some description of a problem. In the real world, people use the term ''Class A'', and don''t get corrected on their terminology. At Philmont the head of the Boy Scout division used the term, with a wink and a nod. No one complained. Kahuna left the forum in 2006, giving a well-written explanation of why the forums were no longer for him. I know where he''s coming from.

The argument that position patches only exist for positions that count for rank advancement seems a little bit bogus. There is an Assistant Patrol Leader patch, and that position does not count for any advancement. The best argument I see is that the patches conflict somewhat with the idea that your first duty is to your unit. But I would have no issue with a decision either way.

That cost would represent very different things to different people. If it''s a full month''s pay, as moxieman relates, then I agree that it will indeed be hard to convince a lot of people that it''s worth the cost. In our town the median family income is around $80,000, and I suspect that our troop median would be higher. So that makes the cost closer to a week''s pay, and sounds much more reasonable. But regardless of what your average is, there will be families making more and families making less. Unless you do a lot of fundraising, there will some families at the lower end of the scale who won''t be willing to devote that many resources to the trip. For me, yes, I''d recommend doing it. It''s a Scouting place really unlike any other.