packsaddle

Hybrid only when she takes me for a ride. But together we go farther and harder than any hybrid. All the way. Vicki, if you're out there this is where you're supposed to pronounce this as more sexist claptrap. I plead guilty.

OK, ok, I confess. I have a mistress. Her name is Sheila but she's Japanese and just as saucy and beautiful as anyone could desire. I'm the only man in her life and she seems just fine with that. I just love the way she responds to my touch, and the sound she makes when we're together, you know what I mean? Strangely my wife doesn't seem to mind either. She actually seems to like having me out her hair now and then. So big deal! Trouble is, I'm soon going to have to replace Sheila's rear tire.

I've seen many instances similar to the one Lisabob described (and GaHillBilly for that matter). But my observations are confined to this region. I'm willing to entertain the possibility that Yankees are better at natural history. Edited part: OK, as long as the 'shroom thing has, well, pushed up from its mycelium, I really like the story of Amanita muscaria. If you just eat a little, the poisonous alkaloids merely cause hallucinations. Siberian shamans at one time would 'do' these 'shrooms and in order to prolong the experience, they would collect each other's urine and drink it thus recycling the alkaloids. Mmmmmmm. My favorite is the one that you eat accidentally (the deadly webcap), then days or weeks after it is too late, the symptoms set in and renal failure concludes in a horrible, writhing-in-agony death. Is that COOL or what? Better yet, they're easily confused with and in the same habitat as chantarelles. 'Shrooms are way cool. Bon Apptit! Hey, no problem. I DID say that, Bob. But thanks for telling me to do what I already did anyway.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Heh, heh, In case anyone is a bit confused, I just found this photo of GaHillBilly: http://www.ski.org/Vision/Eyepage/Images/jumping_spiderB.jpg explains a lot.

Lisabob, in addition to the contentious method of 'reading' to learn something, I also would like the forum to know that there is no need for BSA to reinvent the wheel. Many states, if not all, have a program called Master Naturalist that is available to anyone interested in attending the training. They are taught by practicing professionals who come in to offer short, intensive instruction in their specialty. I have helped teach these and the individuals who 'graduate' are well-enough trained (and armed with books and papers that must be read) to be able to instruct other members of the public. I have also noticed that the individuals who complete the training are usually teachers or retired folks who want to volunteer to help the public. They would be a wonderful resource for anyone wanting to find competent MB counselors for the nature-based merit badges or as leaders for nature outings. That was a hint, BTW. I think GaHillBilly's comments on leader knowledge are correct. I also think the deficiencies could be addressed through...nod to Bob White...training - Master Naturalist training. Google it with your state name and see if there's a program available. If not, then perhaps you can stimulate an interest in such a program through your local department of natural resources.

Since this topic itself is much-ado-about-very-little, I'll answer Ed's question: "Has anyone noticed the extra hostility since Bob White's return?" I have noticed that Bob White's tone has been moderated and that compared to some of the exchanges prior to return, they are measured and objective. I give credit when due. Or did you mean hostility toward Bob White, Ed?

"I have one word for you, Benjamin:" KEVLAR

This approach won't exactly bring praise for your tact but if you know absolutely that your accusation is correct (I'm keying on Beavah's advice) you could just accidentally blurt out something incredibly direct and insensitive at a committee meeting. You probably need to have another prospective SM waiting in the wings. Maybe prepared to move on, yourself. If you are familiar with the character portrayed by 'House' on television, think in terms of how 'House' would handle the situation. I rather like it. But then, I am never, ever going to be a diplomat.

Eisely is sure right about that. I concur with regard to Coleman canoes. In addition to being way too heavy, they are pooly balanced and much less stable than other hull designs. I bought one of the early Old Town plastic canoes back in 1973. It was the Tripper hull design, dark green, with no keel and decent rocker, and high gunwhales to keep the water out. I took it down every river I could get to and...I still have it. In fact I'm taking it out tomorrow.

Yes, back when I was CM (I really love the cub scouts) we had a few terrible recruiting efforts. The district did it by distributing one-page advertisements to the local elementary schools. Then the DE held a single event for both competing packs in town. It was common for the whole room of 'recruits' to get up and walk over to the other pack although we had presented nearly identical programs and outings. The reason was the troop that the other pack fed was the strongest troop and that SM had stated publicly that he would not allow any boys from the other pack to join his troop. The DE did nothing to help this situation and, in fact, made it worse. I have yet to meet a DE that offered anything more than an obstacle to the program. So...during my last years as CM, as soon as I found out the date for the upcoming recruiting drive, I prepared our OWN brochures, circulated them independently ahead of the district drive and signed up the boys and their families BEFORE the other drive took place. It didn't make friends at the district level but the pack came back to life and was thriving when I switched to the Boy Scout troop. My advice: hit the streets running, stay lean and mean, show them how good you are, let them make an informed decision, and take no prisoners during the competition. And if you have a district that can actually help, let them. Otherwise don't be shy about going it alone.

As long as Anarchist has mentioned pfd equipment and a couple of posters have mentioned boat construction, I will add my 2 cents. I have four glass and 8 plastic hulls. The glass ones are going on 30 years old now and still doing fine. They're no heavier than the plastic Old Town hulls I just bought this year. I expect to replace them eventually with more plastic but the durability of any material depends on the type of use (already mentioned) and the intensity of use. My canoes never see flowing water so they don't get the abuse that rocks and inexperience combine to dish out. If I did take them on flowing water, I'd leave the glass ones on the trailer, as also mentioned before. But on the lake, the small keel and design of the glass ones make them faster and truer on track than the plastic hulls. There's always a trade-off. Your decision. Also, I have recently purchased paddles for all the new canoes and some of the old ones. You should follow, as closely as possible, the guidelines for proper paddle length. If you need paddles that are 66 inches (or less in 6-inch increments), you can find them made by Carlisle Paddle Company: t-grip, aluminum shaft, plastic blade. I got the long ones at a local sporting goods supplier for $20 each. They also had the shorter ones in several different lengths for the same price. If you can find a similar deal it will save you the shipping charges. I haven't found any other decent paddles for less cost. If you can't find a local supplier for that price, Campmor has paddles up to 60 inches for the same price and only an $8 (appproximately) shipping charge for all you can order. I ordered a pile from them until I discovered the local supplier.

Eisely, I'd be interested in reading your take on the events of these last few days including LEH, MER, and AIG. It's pretty much ended any chance I have of retirement anytime soon. I'd also be interested in reading anyone's reasoning for support for privatizing Social Security as a way to 'fix' it.

Man, I'm with you on your vigilance against just getting by and making stuff too easy. I see that often but usually among the MB counselors at summer camp or similar situations. But in this case, I think they did a good job and I'm willing to give them credit for it.

GW, if that's all the MB counselor requires, you're right. It'd be no different if the boy collected 50 insects with incorrect identifications. He'd learn nothing from the exercise. The counselor can make all the difference but I'd guess there are very few counselors who can correctly identify insects to species, especially 50 different ones selected by a boy.

GoldWinger, the new requirements, done completely, are actually MORE informative about insects than the old ones. The actual work involved might be more, now, than there was before - except for those identifications. http://www.usscouts.org/usscouts/mb/changes/mb065-08.asp And as I wrote earlier in this thread, I doubt that boys who were awarded this MB under the old requirements actually correctly identified 50 different insects to species.

GaHillBilly, if you will do a search, you will find that many of us share your frustrations with the way that some ranks and merit badges are NOT earned, but awarded anyway. We've had quite a few such discussions in these forums. There are ways to address the problem. But it is off topic.

Much more realistic requirements. Good job.

Bob White, accepting for the sake of argument that every claim you make is correct, are you SURPRISED by Democratic support for these decisions? The POINT is that the people who actually call themselves 'conservative' are supporting these measures: the Republicans, the President, his administration. Beavah wrote, "Then President Bush announces that, naturally, he's keepin' all of the bailout dollars off of the books and not part of the federal budget." If I did this in my personal finances I would be guilty of fraud. Beavah continued, "Easier to steal taxpayer dollars to bail out execs with big salaries if it's not recorded anywhere, eh? Especially when you're already runnin' a 408 billion deficit this year on the books." This alone should cause true conservatives to become apoplectic. But the Republicans are just shrugging this off. And then finally, "A Republican president has managed to socialize all of the risk from financial speculation while privatizing all of the profits. And nobody's battin' an eye." I note that you did not disagree with any of the above statements. Bush COULD and SHOULD HAVE vetoed the entire bill, even without the bailout language. The assertion that Bush decided to bail out his cronies because he had to save poor people from their financial contractual agreements is just incredible. Do you really believe that? YOU are not battin' an eye.

Mrs. Beavah needs to run for the disinfectant. I am in complete agreement. I am amazed that people who call themselves 'conservative' are quietly approving these incredibly costly and destructive policies. Sadly, the real burden is going to fall on future generations...that is, assuming we ever DO pay it back. If anyone was skeptical about this administration expanding government more than any previous one, this should settle that matter. So...I'm batting an eye - for what little good it does with these guys. Edited part: I have to add that the lies associated with this are in some ways even more profound than any of the other lies from these guys. This is not incompetence. As you say, it is theft.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Beavah, I can't speak for Merlyn but I obviously do understand the shades of gray thing (Technicolor is just too retro). Otherwise I'd be out of here like you-know-what through a goose. What I DO see in black and white terms is the contradiction that you just described nicely. Where you see a pragmatic balance between ideals, legalities, and practice, I also see that they are not the same thing and are, in fact, in conflict. I'm OK with the local option approach as it is quietly applied so many localities. It just isn't the letter of the regulation and if BSA turns a blind eye, I have to say I appreciate their hypocrisy. Nike, the membership application is a legal document. Boy Scouts are minors. Since he's not an adult you take the word of the legal guardian or parent. Edited to add: Or you can do nothing. He's already a member. Your job as SM is NOT to ferret out membership disqualifications. Let the boy and parents sort things out for themselves.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Nike, I'll offer a different way to look at what you described: membership requirements are (almost by definition) an attempt to impose orthodoxy of some sort on the membership. In the case of religion that would be 'religious orthodoxy' of a very vague and almost meaningless kind. Merlyn's observation is interesting to me because the moment that BSA staked out their "religious organization" status, the conundrum he has addressed was inevitable. Either BSA was too stupid to see it coming or else they don't really care except for the sake of appearances (translated: membership numbers). Given the reality of the don't-ask-don't-tell aspect with which Merlyn is taunting us, I suspect BSA was indeed smart enough to see it coming. The discomfort that Merlyn seems to be causing is actually caused by the inconsistency between regulation and practice. He's just making sure no one is able to ignore it.

I'll answer that for you, Nike. Not one damn thing. It has been made quite clear that the membership requirements are set by BSA and most of the rest of us have little or no control over them. Therefore, if someone signs the application, there is nothing more that you or I need to inquire about. They signed. BSA will accept that. The matter is between the signer and BSA. If, however, BSA ever does officially allow a 'local-option' approach rather than the 'central-authority' approach, in that case the CO and leadership might have more input to membership.

As I discovered a long time ago, transport of a craft, even temporarily, from a state that doesn't require registration to a state that DOES...can bring unexpected complications due to unexpected paperwork. Be prepared.

Amen to Bob White's hole-in-the-water thing. I maintain and administer a fleet of about 20 boats, about half are canoes. I use these for student activities but not scouts. My suggestions are based on this experience. Before anyone sets foot in one of these craft, I require them to take one of the online boating safety courses that various states offer. And pass it. Most of the time, there is a practice exam that will tell you the score and then you just print that page for proof. As an option, there may be an official certification for a fee. As for liability, I see state and federal regulations regarding pfd use, etc. The safety courses address most of these. There is one other aspect that I think has not been mentioned. If you accept a watercraft as a gift, you need to be careful about custody and ownership. Custody is a matter of storage and security. Ownership can be legally established and needs to be. If possible, you need to have each craft titled with the CO as the owner. If that isn't feasible, then a MSO and bill of sale can establish ownership for liability purposes. The reason for this is to protect the donor. Until the paperwork is done, unless legal ownership by the CO can be established, the craft could be considered a loan and the donor could be considered the owner long after the craft entered service to the troop.

I discovered this through the spun thread to which I have already responded. Interesting. I think Merlyn made a fair observation in the first post and lately has asked a fair question. I think that no one has produced a good response yet except, perhaps, to confirm his initial observations.