qwazse

BD, such a drama queen. We are kinda stuck until National promotes hiking and camping independently with your mates as the pinnacle scouting experience. Well, whatever. If I never see your posts here, but we cross paths on the trail ... it will be a win!

Things usually aren't as bad as we make them out to be in our heads. Keep us posted as you work out the operations in your units.

Geesh! What happened to kids who would show up to an ECoH because their buddy's mom was making their favorite cookie? I judge the caliber of a troop by their worn-out boots and the smiles on the boys' faces.

@@fred johnson, I'm with you in wanting to remove the BS from the BS of A. But the interpretation of "should" vs "must" is very much a semantics game that you don't want to play unless the boy understands it might not fly in your district. Get your council advancement chair on the line, and start the paperwork for the extension. Worst case, national denies it, and you're back to parsing words. Best case, your scout can devote his remaining time to his project and his assigned PoR, knowing that nobody had to stretch the requirements to fit his circumstances. In the future, you can join me in pontificating about how 18th birthday deadline undermines good scouting.

That would be a terribly bad read of natural selection and game theory. Such a miscalculation led the Axis nations (and many subsequent modern tyrants) into folly. There are selective advantages to a species maintaining some individuals as menaces and only taking punitive or remedial action after a first strike.

A few people you should ask: Your patrol. If they were all planning on going to the district dinner anyway, the whole distance thing is moot. The organizer of winter camp. There might not be time on the schedule for beading. Your spouse. Your councilor.

You'll have to take that up with the previous writers of the Insignia Guide, which until this year read that neckerchiefs were not to be worn over anything but official uniform shirts. I figure National Supply wanted to make sure they were selling nearly as many shirts and slides as they were scarves. Scouts at World Jamboree broke that bronco, what with their friendship knots and piling on multiple neckers (representing their favorite exchanges) over activity shirts. I suspect some of our boys (maybe girls in crews too?) would gladly give up their ODL uniform shirt (known to be the world's most colorful) to have one of those scarves from another nation.

This may not be about getting "your" leaders up to speed. It may be about getting all of the leaders in the district up to speed. That frees everybody to do grow and learn ASAP.

Most of us who deal with "citified" or "suberbanized" parents get that. On top of it, some potentially really good leaders have disqualified themselves with DUI's, nasty divorces involving protection orders, etc ... they may eventually turn their lives around ... but not anytime soon. But, those aside ... That's really the most honest answer a parent can give you. And, sometimes those are the folks your CC has to try and crack. I get the impression that "back in the day" things worked differently. I think the SM of my youth got the position from my CO as a "retirement gift." There was no question about him holding it for decades until the Parkinson's got the better of him. Of my former scout-buddies who were fit for the job (or for COR or CC), most of us left town or were going through existential crises (e.g. going gay or godless ... not sure if any went girly) ... the only guy left with the heart to replace him didn't have the head for it. Actually there were some great women who remained and could have pulled a troop together ... had they been scouts. But there was no vision for that great a shift in personnel. But that's a different topic. Fortunately in my hometown there's a little industry, and another CO is taking up the Boy Scout mantle (and yet another is fielding a crew). But, there was a decade or more hiatus of mediocre program ...

Some days they make it so easy .... Well, I suspect there are a few dudes (due to divorce or orientation) out there looking for a good female role model for their boys!

Couldn't find anything official in a quick search. We've always considered the usual: hold a position of responsibility or organize a service project with the boys in the troop. But, at this level boys are branching out. So, service in a youth group or community organization may count, as might attending a youth leadership training course. Obviously, demonstrating leadership would include talking to one's scoutmaster about how one would like to fulfill this requirement for one's next Palm.

Tempest in a teapot, @@Stosh. We already have non-married male-female teams managing troops. Finding moms and older sisters who are competent SMs/ASMs is getting easier. That configuration will be increasingly popular as we move forward, be we co-ed or unisex youth. The G2SS is expanding quite readily without co-eds -- mostly as a function of tech gear and the availability of more extreme sport. I don't see the rate of that changing if troops remain unisex. If we remain unisex, i figure the "bubble-wrapping" of outdoor scouting experiences will continue.

@@Sentinel947 and @@baggss, under uniforming, did they mention the latest insignia guide revision which now allows the neckerchief to be worn without the field uniform? The official syllabus has not been revised, yet, but maybe your instructors were willing to go off script! Just curious ...

This is all a concession to post-modernism. Where one can flatly reject someone else's grand narrative ... and still be worthy of noble position. Sometimes that's a good thing. Other times it leads to thinkng less of someone else, even when one's own narrative should disallow it.

Things that I've seen merit an SM's hour of undivided attention: Boy's been suspended from school (again) and mom's afraid his attitude will rub off on the scouts. Kid barely speaks English can't learn it -- or so the school said -- and now he's marching off into the wilderness with you. Parents recently divorced and haven't figured out how to get on the same page raising their scout. Adoptive mom is dying and adoptive dad isn't sure he can keep it together to bring up junior. Kid's ADHD med regimen is kinda complicated. Kid want's First Class, but can't swim ... no, really ... doctor figures he'd probably die trying. Money's tight, scout is working two jobs, needs to support the folks and isn't sure he can finish his monthly payments for the next adventure. Kid's a hero and that medal of honor paperwork is a pain. Now, I buy the notion that it if you do invest time in some people, you may reap benefits in them being able to carry some type of load like the one's above for you. But usually the investment isn't around accelerating junior's advancement.

The date-stamp feature on my camera is busted ... so when I look back, they all kind of blur to me. I suppose those electronic devices are almost to the point that they could monitor when a boy is sleeping ... go in radio telescope mode (to detect those standard candles in the universe) ... and based on clarity of signal deduce if there is nothing more than canvas between boy and sky ... then synchronize signals from the other nearby boy's (and girl's .. just to stay on topic) devices to determine if they are indeed with registered scouts and two adults within 300' ... finally checking with a tour-plan database to confirm that they are on an "official" activity. The morning after night seventy, all the devices in the vicinity sound reveille in unison and announce "Congratulations to Troop ###'s latest Eagle scout!" Or, maybe we can be content with boys being intentional about 20 nights, and just doing the other 50 for fun!

We're not trying to distract or minimize your initial concern, which basically involves folks being mavericks ... a behavior that this organization rewards at times and condemns at others. Just be careful that you don't get worked up about it and the consequent effect on membership. The question you'll need to ask (very gently so as not to bruise egos, BTW): was that a decision for the convenience of the adults, or do the kids like each other so much that they stick together so tightly? Little confused here. Middle school Boy Scouts under age 14 can not be venturers. Do you have any of those? I wouldn't worry about boys holding both titles. They could just as well join some other crew not related to your CO, or they could be in a youth group or gaming league, as well as boy scouts. Giving 14+ year olds "either or" ultimatums just backfires (says the guy whose band director said either attend band camp and retain my position or national jamboree and do a different activity for senior year). I train my venturers to "switch off" the venturer and "switch on" the boy (or girl) scout as needed. This is where you as venturing CC have a much different role than troop CC. If your vision is for a consolidated committee for both units, you need to set aside time when your committee is listening to the crew president. (Could be during the troop committee meeting or a different time.) The discussion would be along the lines of "How's it going ... What's the plan ... How can we help?" Over time this builds into a relationship than ask the tough questions like how to involve boys crew while helping them fulfill troop responsibilities. All the other stuff ... it starts with getting on the same page as your COR as to who signed what. Frankly if your CO is happy with the both of you, run with it. The new advisor does not seem like a stranger to the girls. So it seems like you should start having an honest conversation with her (estwhile him) and say you're not so sure about how to work this in a way that maintains parents' -- especially conservative ones -- trust. The chuch nursery policy? Completely irrelevant. The teen group policy -- if there is one -- is what you might want to regard. But either way, that's disingenuous. Scouters are best served when they call a spade a spade ... especially when they feel slighted.

@@5yearscouter, I think part of the "hot mess" is -- as @@Stosh points out -- that the crew and troop meeting are one in the same. There's no crew meeting to visit. I suspect that there is no activity that one unit plans independently of the other. I also suspect that it's an assumption that any 14 y/o scout is enrolled in the crew. I also suspect that no male crew member has actually on his own filled out a second BSA youth application and acquired his parent's and the advisor's signature. There are a lot of problems with this. The most important is leadership models. The troop would elect it's SPL+PLs (really with only 11 boys it could just be the PL(s) ... but let's spare us the digression); the crew, it's President and Vice-Presidents. Most of you are familiar with the troop youth and troop committee working with the SM as the go-between. (If you'all are boy-led to the bone, the SM would give the SPL that job ... but that's a rare unit.) Ideally, each youth in the crew would be planning their pet activity and the president would report that and any pressing needs to the crew committee (yes, the committee, not the advisor ... we advisors just coach the president on how to do this). This could include the president requesting more chaperons for any number of reasons -- including but not limited to the girls or their parents wanting an adult who spent adolescence as a female. So you see, @@SnarlyYow, if you want to keep holding both positions and live up to how both programs are designed, you have to figure out how to very clearly switch hats. You have to make time for this committee of yours to listen to the crew president. You have to accept that the crew and the troop might go off on different activities some weekends and the multiple-registered boys might have to make a thoughtful decision about which one to go on. The PL might feel the troop needs a "boys-only" weekend or the president might need a "registered crew-members only" weekend, and you the advisor and the crew president have to be okay with that. Most importantly, you have to be cool with some of your committee being all about the boys and others being all about the co-eds ... and only a few free to tend to both.

On paper there are two units. You should be registered as CC for both of them. Proof would be the two carbon copies of your adult applications (one for each unit) that should have been returned to you with all the signatures saying you're legit. Or, you should be able to log on to my.scouting.org and access unit tools to see who has been registered under each roster. You should have access to all of the unit copies of adult applications. Your CO should have on file all of the CO copies of adult applications. Both of you should know everybody. You need to get on the same page with the COR on this before you have your committee meeting. You and your COR sign off on leaders, THE TWO OF YOU need to know who your adult leaders are, when they were registered, by whom, and why. You need to do this before your attempt to air laundry in some big old meeting. If the CO says LGBTQIA is a non-issue, then it's a non issue. No need to whitewash things. You heard from the DE that your advisor is who she is regardless of who he used to be. You don't have to like it. You do have to decide if you can be CC in this kind of situation. What matters: who signed off on her? Did your people select the best advisor? Do the girls in the crew know and trust her? By the way, I know you are trying to think "one big happy family" etc ... but unless the SMs/ASMs are cross-registered as crew committee, they got no skin in the game. Letting a couple of crew adults form their own committee that is sensitive to the crew's needs may be a healthy long term strategy for you.

Some days it's like shooting fish in a barrel ... Because he knows how to start fires on his own?

@@T2Eagle, do you know what referee's do at the end of the game? Walk off the field! They don't arrange conferences to review play calls. A parent is more than welcome to tell me he/she thinks their son met requirement X. Then I will check with the PLs to see if they have any proof of mastery. I never talked to coaches about my kids' play time. (Although recently, maybe because they've all graduated, he's been a little reflective with me.) The only thing I want them to know is if there's stuff happening off the field. Offer the boys gramps' farm and swimming hole to camp on? I'm all ears. That hour we'd spend would do more for EVeRY BOY's sign-offs than you can imagine.

@@fred johnson, I like the concept, but am generally averse to bean-counting. Most boys love to go camping ... They don't love having to log every night they went. In fact, have you kept a diary of your last 70 nights outdoors? I'd rather make sure our direct contact leaders knew how each counselor operated ... one way to do that is to allow them to earn MBs. The BSA has zero quality control of its MB program. The GTA after-the-fact policies catch a fraction of the slip-shod MBCs. If one or two caring adults in each district were earning MBs, that would help quality control. Limiting advancement to age 18 impedes rational development of the program in so many ways. Limiting it to males only is unlikely to improve it.

Agreed. That said, we do want to look at the precedents set in other countries to see if opening to girls discourages boys from membership. We need to get a handle on how many boys would be deterred by the presence of girls. In the UK, at least, it seems that if any are deterred, thier numbers are being offset by many more who find the whole proposition to be attractive. Another way of looking at it: do boys join BSA to get away from any girls? All girls? Or certain kinds of girls? Or, does the "boy" in BSA represent a promise of activities attractive to boys who would be scouts? If so, then it stands to reason that a boy or girl comes to the BSA looking for adventure worthy of an aspiring scout. If this is indeed the case, they have a lot more that unites them than what would divide them by virtue of opposite sex and developmental stage. I'm not denying there's a little of both playing around in a boy's head. But is it enough - one way or the other - to lead a lad to seek adventure elsewhere?

Do you want those in bullet points entering stage right or stage left?

Several of you touched on it: people like to feel useful while they are being trained. If they are in camp with their scouts just on the opposite end of the field, they are more relaxed, more willing to ask questions, loaded with relevant questions, in no hurry to rush out, in an environment conducive to practicing. They just did double duty: hauled scouts and gear to a campout and picked up skills. That boy-led tutorial ... what if it involved a step 1: "observe the boys in the patrol due north of us for one hour, point out what you see in terms of servant-leadership, come back by tea time and we'll discuss."? Who in their right mind would rather do a power-point?