qwazse

I find my venturers, with their insane school/sports/work schedules, tend to hanker for "just a campout." Or, as one VOA President put it "Structured unstructured time." For example, there was this lovely 1000+ foot wooded climb in back of the camp where we were this spring. I basically said whoever wants to bushwhack it show up at 1 PM. About half the crew (all boys from our troop) did. The other half took a hike down stream and found "the perfect wooden bridge" and watched clouds drift overhead the whole afternoon.

This is where you nail your position patches to the wall and say "Who wants them?" There's plenty of literature out there about who appoints youth leaders, and it ain't the committee. It's not on you to find a policy to the contrary, it's on them. To combat this ... Here's what I did (as advisor of a crew, but I would not hesitate to do it for a troop full of boys in this circumstance): I required that no committee be held in the absence of the crew president. It's very simple: youth leadership starts and ends with the direct contact unit leaders, otherwise don't have direct contact unit leaders. If your gaggle of old farts wants to push some boys around, then there'd better be a carrot for that stick. I would suggest the following amendment to your by-laws: No amendment to the by-laws may be voted on the day its motion is submitted. SPL and ASPL have full veto power over every motion to amend by-laws. The amendment must be proposed, given a review period sufficiently long enough for the PLC to meet and discuss it. Then brought up for a vote. The SPL/ASPL must be present for the vote on the amendment. At each change of youth leadership, each amendment may be reviewed and the SPL/ASPL may submit a motion to rescind any amendment that they and the PLC deem to be ungainly. In other words, if they want to play SM via parliamentary procedure, you want it in writing that they will act like an SM.

PD, I have a funny feeling that this scheme didn't just pop into the CM's head. So if it comes down to litigation, the BSA will be on point for this. But, I've seen these guys manage catastrophes, and dickering over age is not part of their protocol. Besides, come rechartering time, they'll get a $1 and change from the little gompers for unit accident insurance. And this group poses exactly the kind of risks someone would be glad to underwrite!

First, tell folks to "kill the drama factory." If you lose a 6 year old in the woods, the BSA registration is the least of your worries! Second you all can come clean with your district executive that you have a group of kindergartners whose parents (with a little help from the pack leadership) pushed registration through. Then ask if the district or council can help to plan suitable programs for the boys. Thirdly, if you think you're going to have this problem next year, ask council if there's anything you can do about it to officially recognize those boys as BSA members. If not, ask your charter organization if you can operate a "pre-Tiger" program under their auspices.

I would put it the other way. If you are not scouting properly, you're possibly undermining STEM. It's not merely the science-related MBs that make BSA already "STEM oriented." Keeping "mentally awake" is the obvious direct connection to STEM, but "Duty to God and my country" implies that there is something out there greater than yourself, and being mindful of "the other" opens you to discovery. that there are people who need you to amass skills and understanding to tend the resources at our nation's disposal. [*]"Physically strong" implies that you understand how a body works, and you apply what you know to build and maintain it. [*]"Morally straight" implies that you are willing to ethically channel the technology at your disposal. Scouting, in its purest sense, puts demands on observation skills and resourcefulness. When I was teaching Girl Scouts orienteering last month, I had them figure out their pace and work on some distance conversions. One girl moaned "This is Math!" To which I replied, "Funny how it followed you out of the classroom!"

Or, the cubmaster or committee chair manipulated the dates so they would only have to muck about with registration once for this group of kids. Run a suitable program. You'll have to think about things like weather these boys are ready for resident camp or should they wait another year. Correct the birth dates within the next year or so. That way the boys won't be pressured to cross-over to scouts too soon. Or -- this is highly unlikely -- a 17 year old won't have problems on his Eagle application because on the books the registrar thinks he's too old.

Unless the geniuses are true champions, then playoffs ...

It starts with the moms. They need to believe that it's good for their girls if they pick up the outdoor skills that their baby boomer moms neglected to teach them. Mrs. Q believed that our daughter was right to be bored with her brownie troop learning homemaking, that time with dad in the wild lands was a good thing, that forgoing some school dances was not antisocial. Every depression era campfire girl and girl scout I've talked to said "Of course." It was a darn shame that the one Troop with any sort of outdoor "roughing it" attitude had full membership. Because the GS do hone those leadership skills.

A little of both. At the district/counsel level, it sounds like you have "scope creep." The addition of the cub camping event, while fun at the time, ate into time and personnel dedicated to round-up and cubmobile. Lacking more people, something's gotta give. At your level, you now have boys spread across two units. Maybe you are growing more into troop activities. Or maybe you would like to try to operate more on a district level and help them set priorities. Well, if either's true then you need to delegate your cub responsibilities. Maybe you are really good with helping your pack run, then stick with that. Show up for your older son's activities when the troop needs a driver or a 2nd adult. Regardless, you have to let some stuff go. Accept that fact that in most of these circles folks are going to make decisions that are beyond your control. Scout cheerfully!

Funny how the inspection sheets aren't scored pass/fail.

My SM and I are so thrilled when female adults hit the trail with us, we've concluded that this is not the hill we'll be dying on. However, our moms generally hang that uniform up in the closet when they take on troop responsibilities. If they were to ask, I would give them the policy, but also direct them to the variety of BSA dress uniforms for adults. We haven't had any who were really up for ASM (again, we haven't found one who really wanted that position), I'm of the general philosophy that committee members do just as well without the uniform, and therefore this is a non-issue for us.

Well, hmmm. I've lost love one's to smoking related illnesses. It ain't pretty. Lot's of stories about regretting ever starting the habit. So yeah, if you love someone -- be it adult or youth, blood family or otherwise, call them out on it. For their sake. But, I enjoyed every moment I spent with those smokers even if some of those days as a kid meant giving them a moment and putting up with the 2nd hand fumes. They were good to me and helped me grow into what most folks considered a fine young fella -- nonsmoker at that. So I never fretted much if my little ones saw someone they respected smoking. Smokers can do right by your kids. If all you're worried about is the effect on little Johnny, seems to me you're putting up a hedge against the wrong enemy. In the grand scheme of things, the Good Book teaches that it's not what goes into a fella's body that puts him in peril, but what comes out of his mouth. I don't think the evangelists were thinking of burnt tar at the time of writing that.

Agree with Merl., here. Never liked the BSA marketing rhetoric. Cub Scouting is not meant for boys/families bent on Deceit, Disloyalty, Self-service, ... and Irreverence. Says so in the fine print. Boys/families fitting one exclusionary category may resent being lumped in with those fitting another category, but neither should be blindsided by this tripe.

Seems odd to me to throw dimes down on these particular MBs. Did he think the counselors in his neighborhood were inferior? I'm not against classes indoors. As a scout I went to MB pow-wows on a local college science department -- the counselors were professors; and the opportunities, great. I could understand "citizenship camp" at a national monument during a reenactment week or where the instructor was a judge or ambassador or retired general or something ... and the boys might actually hike over to a hall and observe a hearing, I could also see camp staff who are scouts from another country teaching 'World under the CD's supervision. But, IMHO, there has to be a point to it. Something more than mere convenience for the scout and his parents.

Let's hope not. When they are no longer racy, they will lose their impact. The point is to use whatever will get someone's attention and hope that it motivates self-examination more than it may motivate some other survival-neutral behavior (say, silicone implants). And I think that's where we have to meet the young scout who instinctively feels uncomfortable about this. Telling him we're trying to get everybody to not be shy is presuming that there is something wrong about his inhibitions. Admitting that he may rightly be embarrassed -- but our society is making a trade-off in order to forestall death -- helps him to deal with the conflicting roles caring adults play in this world.

Of course I watched the video. All of the little uniform aberrations were so distracting from the seriousness of the the topic.

Ya know, S947, one of my WB buddies had what you're doing as a ticket item. I went to one of his troop's CoH's and was truly impressed at what he accomplished in a year with willing adults.

I haven't been to a coordinated meeting to compare #s in a while. So I can't speak to our merger(s). Any numerical growth is a credit to boots on the ground who sacrifice income by taking a pass on the second shift at work. What it has provided our boys is the sense that they have more primitive camps to choose from in "exotic" locations. (For example, one is near Flt 93 memorial.) There's a consolidated reservation system for every campsite in council, so a boy can figure out plan "B" if his patrol's first choice is already taken. And right now the merger has provided more choices.

KDD, whatever the reason, it's patently ridiculous that a couple of competent 20 year olds can't take their crew on an outing. If this change allows that, it would be welcome.

As long as you don't mind contentious old salts who'll forgive 'baccy and dodgy t-shirts after hours and aren't blinkin' an eye at your bear DL if he/she is askin' $5 per month dues from tight-fisted parents. Thanks for your service to the boys.

The only thing in stosh's reply that is even close to official is and that, boys and girls, is how Exploring got started. Nothing new here. Also, some older boys do want to associate with youngns and others don't mind once and a while. Nothing new here. Everything else are ideas that folks have been kicking around for years. Sometimes Boy Scouts gets classified as a program for Jr. High kids, allowing 2 years for Web's. Other times 5th graders get put in the older bin. Guys in green shirts and Brits like 'skip got no problem with it going coed. Guys like myself see successful GSUSA programs and think, "Just give them a few more tarps to camp under and they'll lock that market." As more scouts actually talk to their counterparts from around the world (at Jamborees or via Cit. in the World MB), new ideas are added to the mix. (E.g., beer drinking Germans with mixed-sex tenting.) Anything's possible, only a few are probable.

Well that just about sums it up! While we're all pulling enough motes from each others eyes to light a campfire ... let's not lose track of the two things from the OP we want to teach our boys. 1) Smoking cuts into your enjoyment of this great country. It's really sad to see scouters turn back a mile into a trail because his/her lungs can't take the climb. (Patrol method lackeys can take a powder. There are some things a dad shouldn't miss.) Our boys need to understand that if they want the most out of every adventure, nicotine addiction is best avoided. That said, the SM's bad habit is not likely contagious. 2) Sometimes a method can overwhelm the message. We need our boys to understand that early detection spares life and limb, but folks seem to have a psychological barrier to self-examining and getting those check-ups on schedule. Humor can break that barrier, but it's a blunt instrument that sometimes falls on the wrong ears (or, in this case, eyes). Not all of our boys are going to see beyond the objectification of a "save the breasts" campaign ... until they see the fear and despair in a relative's eyes. In both of these cases, nothing in the rule book stands in the way of BSA leader and their vice. But, the parent has more control than we often give him/her credit. A simple sentence "I like SM/ASM __, but I don't like when he/she ___." to your son will let him know that there are boundaries.

There are myriad ways to offend and be offended by one another. And in this case there is an ethical underlying controversy. I.e., are we, through the humor, teaching women that their best path to advocacy is through objectification? I think the best thing you could do is let the ASM know that you weren't prepared for your son to be exposed to the bluntness of the campaign (especially the t-shirt). But also respect his enthusiasm for getting the boys involved in something he thinks is important. Even if you find his actions questionable, the good news is that he did something tangible and public. And, that's NOT the hallmark of someone with predatory intentions.