qwazse

Practical illustrations of risks due to lightning along with explanation of how the damage occurs are hard to come by. This involves animals, not people, and thus may be easier to show to your boys. Plus, the explanation of the physics behind a strike (comparing why four footed species are likely to suffer more harm than two-footed) might help scouts understand our strategy of squatting in a broad circle if we can't find shelter. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/31/science/lightning-strike-dead-reindeer.html

I never had a STEM day with rockets. I had a build day, a paint day, and a launch/recovery day. Not once would I use the word science (although I might talk about what we know and can learn from reading reports and trying things ourselves), technology (although I might mention how certain paints go together and how some decals get printed), engineering (although I might discuss how you figure the right voltage for the launch pad, the choice of engines, the pad configuration, and the switch sequence), or math (although we learn how to triangulate altitude, calculate speed, estimate winds aloft, and predict recovery location).

Here's a recent update on the program http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2016/08/24/stem-scouts-pilot-adds-seven-councils-bringing-total-to-20/ Not to be confused with the STEM NOVA awards program: http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2016/08/24/stem-scouts-pilot-adds-seven-councils-bringing-total-to-20/

Loved the "Wakey Wakey", I think my adults would be teasing you mercilessly over that! They would rather you, in the time you spent providing "concierge" service a) get a shower or b) start the coffee. Mustering duty falls on our SPL, who by the average age they get elected is up an moving in time to perform it in his own style. If we're lucky, he has a bugler.

I forgot about leaders guides. Right there's your contract. ASAP, have a sit down, and EVERYONE on the crew read the leader's guide. Around the table. Out loud. One paragraph per crew-member. (Caveat: I've never read the Philmont guide, so if this is an unwieldy tome, highlight the scout-friendly must-cover bits.) @@Petey091, you know your people. So work with them accordingly. If this lot has tended to ignore meetings, then do what it takes to mandate your first one. Reschedule if even one participant can't show. This is where you all decide you're gonna be a team. It is where you all decide what are "must do" preparations. And it's not one-sided: Adults may need to get special training, maybe lose a little weight, re-arrange other obligations, this is where the boys hear them commit to doing that. Boys may need to gear up, plan payments, conditioning, and shakedowns. This is where adults hear them commit to doing that. I honestly think this kind of verbal "shake on it" agreement will get you more traction than a written contract.

Yeah, reference, but extreme redaction leads to extreme reactions. Either a practice goes unchanged -- out of ignorance or to curb expense -- at great risk, or it is revised at great expense and little benefit. Is this like those lean years where we all had to settle for margarine when it turns out that butter ain't all that bad? Or, is this like all those kidneys that are jammed due to chronic diet soda consumption? Knowing how much good can come from best practice is a strong motivator. And, maybe in demanding that from reporters, we force them to more closely inquire of sources.

A letter to the editor would be in order. But, I'm glad you brought it up here. Decades old still is quite new to some clinical practices. I myself haven't kept up with the regeneration literature. Lacking that, it's hard to balance the risks and benefits. In other words, what percentage of wounds fail to heal when cleaned with alcohol vs. those that fail to heal when cleaned with water. And what percentage get infected after being cleaned with alcohol vs. the percentage that get infected when cleaned only with water? I know, I know, the numbers guy gives everyone else headaches. However; knowing that balance gives us an idea of how great a safety issue promoting an outdated strategy becomes. The old "98% of body heat lost through your head" still sticks with me (be it true or false).

I think the expansion of cooking requirements comes from four things: No adult being challenged to earn the badge. {Insert standard rant: for-kids-only translates into make-it-like-school.} The rise of the public health service. We now know how much harm can be done with what folks get fed. We also know that giving folks better knowledge enables them to "see" and avert health hazards. Artisan cooking. My kids certainly take on more challenging recipes than I ever did until after college. I only watched The Galloping Gormet because it preceded the kids shows I didn't want to miss. Single parenting or both parents working full time. My best cooks seem to come from broken homes. Moms are letting kids in the kitchen because they are the ones home first in the evening.

One fine point on language. In trying to use succinct terms for the prevailing theme in a large movement, there is a possibility that words are chosen that have developed unintended meaning. So, I return to Webster's Ban ... 2: to prohibit, esp. by legal means or social pressure. Class ... 1a: a group sharing the same social or economic status ... 3: a group, set, or kind sharing the same common attributes. Deny ...3b: to refuse to grant. Objectively, I thought these are three neutral terms that accurately described actions without putting down anybody who feels these actions are good and just, or elevating any special interest who feels these actions undermine noble intent. But, let's allow the possibility that combined they sound more dark and nefarious than on their own. To be charitable and for the sake of political correctness, let's choose Barry's suggested phrasing (with emphasis on what I think he intends to be important) ... lots of other people think that BSA built a program over 100 years ago around building men of character. ... are boys missing something important because of their program's exclusive focus on building men of character? And, do boys lose interest in scouting because that focus is exclusively on building men of character? Change the rhetoric, the issue is no smaller or bigger than it was before.

Since I don't waste much time in things I don't believe in, I'm probably not understanding something, like that Mission and Vision statement http://www.scouting.org/About/AnnualReports/PreviousYears/2012/MissionVision.aspx which intentionally uses the word "youth" not "boy" in every direct reference to its constituents. I'm sure you also noticed that the requirement for scout rank no longer explicitly mentions "boy". Is the quality of the advancement program lowered? NJ, the requirements as written explicitly raise that bar.And the fine print of the BSA vision is "eligible". But we can look back on our history: .... Exclude adults from advancement .... Introduce a new scouting program for boys .... Lose some members .... Only open to girls in Exploring .... Keep losing members .... Endorse exclusion of athiests .,,. Lose public school COs .... Lose members .... Need to recruit female adult leaders, draw finer boundaries .... Lose members .... Ban some folks' beloved scoutmasters who "come out" .... Lose members .... Deny a nascent homosexual rank, .... Lose members .... Deny ovations of O/A Chiefs to tap out Venturing females .... Lose members .... Flip-flop on e sexual orientation thing .... Really lose members We can brag "quality" until we're blue in the face. But "quantity" is a quality of its own. So, thinking long and hard about who's not being served as a result of how we do things ... that stays on my table. I guess if I never had girls knocking at my door, I'd think differently.

Not sure if it was anything written, but we've always made clear that committing to an HA like Philmont, is essentially joining the hike-every-monnth club.

That's sort of like asking: if your boys want a youth-led movement, then why don't they get their leaders to adjust accordingly? Isn't it? From the few troops I've meet since my daughter left GSUSA, I've seen movement in that direction.

@@ianwilkins, one doesn't need testicles to earn Boy Scout ranks. One just needs to be male. There is no ban on eunuchs. You continue to be in denial that we are saying the same thing. This is not a discussion of changing a single requirement for the award as it is offered to Boy Scouts, Varsity Scouts, and Lone Scouts. So, your reference to "ninja warriors" seems to support granting deserving women access to due recognition. A percentage of 1st class scouts (by virtue of fulfilling the requirements just for the fun of it) are not eligible for the award simply because lots of other people think they should be denied the path to that award. There are special interest who would like to change things in the face of youth apathy. So we come back to ... How will any boy in your troop be dishonored if a girl in Kalamazoo were to get the same award? -- and on the flip side -- How will a deserving girl in Kalamazoo be dishonored if any boy in your troop gets an award that she can't? Any answers to either of those have been less than satisfying. The more important questions (and harder ones to answer): are boys missing something important because certain classes are banned from attempting a program designed for them? And, do boys lose interest in scouting because certain classes are banned from that program? Right now, I lean towards "no" for both. I'm not sure what data I would need for me to lean towards "yes."

I dropped in on the troop meeting, and the troop guides were explaining positions of responsibility to the boys. Adults were quietly in the back of the room. There's a lot that that unit could be doing better, but they are good at giving the boys the podium.

Although I've come to believe that there is no good reason for banning certain classes of Americans from scouting advancement, there aren't compelling reasons to lift those bans. Any reasons should center on boys, and speculate on questions like these: Demand. Who among banned groups are asking to participate in Boy Scout advancement? Certainly none of my female venturers or any girl scouts who I know. Stakeholders' well-being. In other words. Is it good for the boys in the program? Yes there's a lot of talk about co-ed. But even if it were to happen as ubiquitously as it did in Scout's UK. Boys would still be our major constituency. Would-be stakeholders. Is the notion of a nationally recognized award attractive to boys who are not in BSA? Would more boys be interested scouting if their sisters or girlfriends could also earn the same rank. This might be an issue for some, but I'm not hearing it. Girl scouts are more concerned about being denied programs that common sense should dictate their organization provide. I have an great niece adopted from a 3rd world orphanage who simply does not get why American girls her age aren't "allowed" to light campfires (which she does with flint and steel). Like my daughter, she envies all the camp-outs her brothers go on. Female venturers just want respect. For example, I've known advisors and scoutmasters who've dealt with boy scouts telling a girl that any award they could possibly earn would never compare to Eagle. (For any of my scouts reading this, thank you for being bigger than that.) The ones who are mastering wilderness adventure or sea scouting know they are "all that." If the boys around them give them their due, that's award enough. The fact is, an award like Summit or GS Gold means a lot to recruiters. But even if that wasn't the case, what Eagle means to potential employers or recruiters shouldn't be a consideration. What it means to parents shouldn't be a consideration. What it means to youth (both in scouting, and considering to be in scouting) is what matters.

Good questions, @@thrifty. Where adults can help boys in situations like this is after action review. (I.e., asking what went well, what didn't go so well, what should we do differently?) It's not just a matter of sitting in a room waiting for someone to come up with the next big thing. It's enabling each scout to evaluate what their decisions and come up with better strategies over time. If there's a health and safety reason to decide about summer camp, then sure, involve the committee. If not, then what's he harm of letting the boys live with their decision? Worst case scenario, they change their minds and lose their camp deposit.

Patch suggestion: how about a blank patch that they design themselves ... Maybe with stamps of leaves or insects. Activity: collecting leaves or fungi that could be used for stamping!

If all your boys have IEPs which require it, then you have bigger problems.

Welcome, and good luck in your search!

We train our scouts that a module of their backpack should be a "go" bag. That smaller bag (with toiletries, change of clothes and maybe a laundry bag) is what would go with them to their hotel room. On our backcountry trips, the go bag is suitable for carrying only what they might need for a day hike -- in case they settle on staying at the same campsite for a couple of days. Needless to say, if the boys are into climbing or caving or swimming, the contents of those go bags changes drastically. Depending on the location and how secure the parking lot is, you may want to ask for storage for your gear. Or plan on stacking the packs in a couple of closets.

Being surrounded by urban development is no excuse. Camp Guyasuta is an outstanding camp surrounded by greater Pittsburgh neighborhoods and serves BSA and sometimes school groups. Developers have to mitigate for wetlands loss. Camps and reservations can be part of a city's green solution.

Thanks. Writing a note as we speak. I've seen a lot of folks drift off of the Google satellite complex (among others) for their coffee-house meetings (which by the way are really neat to overhear, if a tenth of it is true, there's some spiffy stuff coming down the pike). I have never met a one in a Nascar racing team shirt. Usually one pen/mechanical pencil at a time. Sometimes none. (You can always borrow the barista's. Write on a napkin, then photograph it.) And when he was our SE, I only saw him in the blue blazer or venturing green. So, it's likely your FOS will have to gamble with some other scouter.

Laurel Highlands Council's Heritage Reservation offers a truck program. Well worth considering for older boys looking for whitewater, climbing/rape,king, and backpacking, Float a Kodiak challenge by your older boys http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2016/08/11/take-look-kodiak-challenge-hands-leadership-training-scouts-venturers/

To your question: boys can and do join troops (or Varsity Scout teams, or Lone Scouts) at age 14 and make Eagle. There is no time requirement for first class, so as soon as they participate in the minimum numbers of activities, service projects, and campouts, they can be at the same rank as most of the other boys by age 15. BSA has bent over backwards to assure that nearly any young man in the USA (and in some places abroad) has access to its advancement program. It has jumped through as many hoops to ensure that even the most able young woman cannot.

@@ammocanman, welcome to the forums! This is precisely why we don't talk about supporting particular scouts in committee meetings. The executive committee, if they need to, would get people's opinions one on one. I hope your situation improves, but as a son of a disabled dad, I can assure you that knowing I had to live within certain limits did me nothing but good. Your boys will grow up fine. Hopefully some of your fellow adults will too.