qwazse

I time my water-intake-cut-off at 2 hours before bed time. That keeps gives me enough space between latrine runs for a full nights sleep.

SF, I feel your pain man. I'm an inch taller than you and shrinking slowly. That isn't the real issue, though. I don't stretch regularly like I should ... and all that not doing the physical fit thing catches up to ya on the weekends. A 90% full air mattress can cause your back all manner of grief! I learned from the weeks camping with my wife the trouble it can cause. Try out some thermarest pads. (I'm sure your friends have them). My wife for a while needed a hospital egg-crate foam pad. It took up space, but made a difference. More importantly, my #1 woe is high wind, the solution: low profile I've taken the opposite tack from what you suggest. I wait till everyone is in bed, snap up my 30" pup tent (or lay out a tarp if I don't feel like staking) change in the dark and crawl into my bag. The pup tent gets a lot of laughs for a big guy like me, but I just explain that I'm doing some early "coffin practice." Any piece of canvas that withstands 100 mph winds earns a lot of love in my book. On a dry enough night, I just toss my pad and bag on a picnic table and change in it. Something I learned from coral reef sailing in the summer: sleep topside. That said, if a dad has space in his taj mahal, I'm not beyond free-loading.

SP: Well, how do you teach adults too? In this case, I'd give them EDGE for several reasons.Many adults are years removed from education and many of them have got on with their jobs/hobbies and have not been challenged to teach anyone a skill. My SM really appreciated learning EDGE because it gave him the confidence he needed to start instructing is PLs and counseling MBs.Many adults have learned to be critical of the written word. I use the manual for assembling new stuff about half the time. I know my father-in-law does less than that. A few of you guys testified that book-learning just isn't your thing.Most adults, even if they don't realize it, have specialized skills that aren't in your average handbook. Sometimes the guys who can teach us the most aren't all that expressive. Giving them a few steps to follow (be it EDGE, edDICT, or FERAL) and being receptive while they find their groove is all you need to unlock a font of knowledge and wisdom. But even if you don't disclose the meaning of a mysterious acronym, if you ask a guy if you could come over to his shop one morning and have him show you how to do x, I bet just by being receptive, you can make him a "professor of x" by lunch time. The acronym is just a "lucky penny". You rub it before the big game and toss it in your left pocket, and somehow it makes everything go that much better.

Bottom line: jump through what ever hoops your charter org. rep says you have to to establish guardianship. Work from there. Harsh reality: looking at every adult as potential abusers will not help you protect the boys. (The skilled predators, as Beav commented earlier, will put on a good show of complying.) Identifying signs of abuse in boys or predatory behavior in adults -- even though that usually means after the first incident -- is the closest we can come to stopping abuse. As soon as cubs are willing, encourage them to bunk with each other. You'll save on tents because you can pack a bunch of those little gompers in one! (This strategy worked well with my oldest son, but not with my youngest.)

t/s: Off to go babysit two year old twins who make seem right! Let me know what ya think. I think two-year-old twins are more than I could handle anymore! Seriously, it is very important to put the COR on notice about when you think your term will end. You should also feel free to talk to the pack parents about who can step up to the plate. It has nothing to do with the goings-on in the troop. (Well obviously it will, because the future pack CC will have a boy who hopefully crosses over someday. But the landscape may change once that bridge is crossed.) It has nothing to do with the age thing or finagling, either. Sure it would be nice to know you have a vote -- if that's what decides things you deem important. But, even if you did, it would be about time in your life to concentrate on transitions. All of us should be looking for our replacements! This is actually the normal order of operations.

Never fretted over the details. Got plenty of contractor dads who are better at coaching the boys than I. But I would say the Eagle Project is the right challenge at the right time in a boy's scouting career. It introduces the community to our boys after they have met challenges of advancing to the first five ranks. Even with our least organized boys, our community leaders never cease to tell me how they like how a project lead by a boy can pull a community together. No, they are not equal numerically. Johnny's may not be as big as Billy's but in either case it should be the biggest thing either boy has faced to date. Each should reflect the boys abilities. Each should force the boy to turn his perspective outward. It's just that simple. I guess that's why it's so complicated.

All of our boys who were den chiefs while their brothers were cubs turned out quite well. Some of them chiefed the same den as their brothers, others opted for a different den that met on the same evening. I wouldn't worry about about the other boys feeling excluded. Never seen it happen. Some only-children will probably love "borrowing" a brother for an hour once a week! If fighting is a concern (doesn't sound like it by your description), your best bet is to ask the boy point-blank if he thinks it would be better if he was with is brother's den or if he thinks it be better to work in a different den.

My best guess ... The top dawg in the unit might need to throw back a few cold ones with the biggest donors. Can't do that legally 'till the 21st b-day. (Note: I'm as temperate as they come. But, my fundraising isn't all that great either.) Actually, there is a little bit more discretion that seems to appear during years 18, 19, and 20. Not sure how much that may be because we've lowered our expectations of 18 year olds. But, growing up on the border of a state that was late raising the drinking age I can tell you that we lost quite a few 18 year olds on their "beer run."

The method I suggested (above on 4/6): Does not depend on the kid. Does not depend on the topic. Does not depend on the language spoken. It has been used. Before I and my scouts used it, this rather uncouth civilization (a.k.a. THE WEST) used it to pull itself out of the Dark Ages. Is it better than EDGE? I dunno. But then again, I'm not saying a kid should or shouldn't advance depending on his ability to recite my method.

O yeah, I remember your crew debacle ... But, it did come as a shock, when the Council/District Leaders would tell you the Ventures were not a threat to the Boy Scout troop.. But, when you ask them to help sort out the mess between our troop & Crew, and were told the actions of this person, their response was.. Well create a better program so the crew can not steal them.. Nothing about speaking to her and informing her this was not the right way the Venturing Crew goes about recruiting.. Not reading their minds, but I suspect experience told them that explaining things to "runaway advisors" is generally a waste of time. The best thing to do is let nature run its course. Now she's a "runaway COR". Hmmmm, wonder what the best thing to do is here? And, I agree that things not working out for the best in a troop is the wrong reason to start a Venturing Crew. The right reason to start a crew is you see youth (male or female, in or out of a troop)with a need, and folks think you're the right people to meet that need.

FWIW - After 6 years of ranting (or in my opinion, simply spewing the facts), our troop is not sending boys to the summer camp "trail to first class" courses. It took that long to build up the facts: 1. Advancement to first class was no faster than when crossovers learned skills in the troop campsite. 2. The percentage of boys leaving the troop before aging out was no lower than when they learned skills in the troop campsite. 3. The percentage of Eagles among boys who aged out was no higher than when they learned skills in the troop campsite. I almost had them convinced last year -- pointing out the above plus explaining to people how having boys learn for unknown (although competent) scout instructors undermined the patrol method. There was still insistence that the PL's would be busy enoughtesting and signing off. (Even though PL's *knew* teaching was their responsibility as well.) I simply didn't have the snazzy marketing campaign to parents for "Your boys can earn a couple badges that won't count toward advancement until 3 ranks down the road, fish, shoot some stuff, and --best of all -- sit around camp and learn essential scout skills from their mates."

"ASM" "hands-on" and "she" in the same scentence = lightning rod Anyway, my priority would be coaching the ASM away from the "involvement ledge". The time will come when her sitting back ready to handle a health and safety issue will be more important than making sure your McCale's Navy Patrol gets a fair shot. The communication issue, well I'm sure your leaders have a "wall of infamy" somewhere (if only in stories after taps), let her know she's now on it! Sounds like your boys have it together as good as any. A stern, yet understanding, warning about giggle fits is all they lack! Sounds like the PL's ready to give that one for you.

MT, Yep. Family does have a way of getting us sucked into stuff, doesn't it? MT's Son, First of all, thanks for volunteering. I assure you that I could use a few mor guys like you in my neck of the woods. And, I really really do get the whole "seeing the boys not have fun and wishing I could do something about it" feeling. But: harsh reality, volunteers sometimes get treated like dirt. Even if you're over 21 and there's no official reason for the treatment, sometimes someone will trump up an official reason so they can treat you like dirt. Sometimes you can effect a change in peoples attitudes, but that doesn't happen instantly. Sometimes you gotta vote with your feet. Short of that ... If these people are so officious that they actually will heed little pieces of paper, you could walk into the meeting with the minutes from the meeting where it was approved to grant you voice AND vote on the committee. If their motivition is to not have their decision questioned in the future, they may listen. If their motivation is to stonewall you, well ... As an ASM, you can make your opinion matter disproportionately by simply conveying to the institutional head and charter organization rep: "These are the leadership structures under which I will happily serve ..." Then it's up to the CO to weigh your opinion with the committee's and decide which structure they want to invest in. The real question, and the only one that matters, if things don't go your way, will you still serve cheerfully? Otherwise, there is the feet thing that I mentioned earlier ...

You also have to coach parents. At meetings after announcements have an ASM take the parents to another room and explain the patrol method and your expectations for the boys. Periodically let them know how it's working. I would suggest at the three month mark having the boys decide yes/no about holding elections. They can make a decision to maintain the current slate of PL's, in which case the next election can be at the six month mark. Or, they can decide that they want some adjustments, in which case you schedule elections at the next meeting. To the older boy I'd say something like "I don't care if you put a patch on your sleave or not, I need you to coach the PL's and SPL. They need you to have their back. Give them good ideas for activities and skills to practice at meetings. Let them know about the fun stuff you've done in the past couple of years. If you just help me do that, it will make things go so much smoother." Slip him in as JASM on the sly.

MT, Have I mentioned that your family seems a little too invested in this unit? Bless your future daughter-in-law, but she should be a crew president someplace, not the "muscle" behind some figurehead CC! Bottom line: do nothing on paper that does not reflect the facts on the ground. If she can't have a vote, she's not a MC! She should not do the work of one. And your son may not have a vote on the committee, but that does not prevent him from sending recommendations directly to the IH and COR. If he wants to be heard he can send them a note reminding them that a committee vote for SM can only be seen as a recommendation that they have a right to override. Next paragraph: he respectfully states his opinion. (But, here's the kicker: someone in the future might be reminding a COR of the same thing regarding him or the Mrs., so courteous and kind are the rules here.) Your husband: in for only one year? Yeah I've heard that one before. A year is insufficient to train and identify a suitable replacement. Plus, he has reason to be dissatisfied with the leadership style. Have him work his job (the one that pays) and donate the $ to send the new SM to training. You. You picked the unit, roll with the punches! Honestly, if on the whole these are good people, and when they aren't stuck in a meeting they are good for decent conversation around a campfire, and at least one of them makes a decent cup of coffee, and the boys are having fun, and you arent loosing 100% of your crossovers in the first year ... enjoy the ride.

Yep, SP. That's where you make the phone call to the SE. (If the mom didn't tell you it was "in process" of being handled.) He will tell you if the story is old news or if this is a new allegation. Either way, there is a better chance of nipping the rumor mill in the bud. SA's are removed from troops for far less than that. And FWIW, "tag-along" siblings (especially older ones) are far worse YP risk than co-ed Venturing crews. I expect my Venturers to respect the reasonable requests of adult leaders from other troops, but I have no idea who's expecting what from the "tag-alongs".

qwazse - Despite your use of a bold font, those are in fact hypothetical responses to the situation. I wish, in fact, they were. I'll grant that those are very real possibilities for some situations, but certainly not the only way that it could be handled at the unit level. I would have said the same thing, before the second time... There's also no saying whether the SE's response would be any different, or any better. Not different, just independent from all of the unit's biases. To avoid speculating on how the SE would/could/should respond, is there anyone with any first hand knowledge of the policies (if any) that guide how a council follows up on a YP-related infraction by a volunteer? My experience is the SE contacts the unit leader immediately. If the offense is not actionable, the leader is warned of the "potential risk to youth in our crew." The COR is also informed. (Beav, that's why I put the SE first, but your point is taken that sometimes communication is less than perfect.) So it comes back to the unit to sort out, but with the knowledge that a third party has eyes on the situation.

When the communication/preparation grinds to a stop, it's too cold.

I'm calling my crew president. I think we have the activity for May's meeting. I'm glad you could "raise the bar" for some boys and their leaders. That's the point of camporees. As for scoring: not decided by the boys, I bet. When sailing can be done with just velcro, we'll see how well the Sea Scouts of the future can tie knots!

OGE I'm not sure how you teach a physical skill, psychomotor skill ... if you don't explain, demonstrate guide and enable. It's entirely possible that to use those four, and I would consider the skill untaught. 1. If you don't tell a boy he must read up on the handbook as part of his teaching process, he likely won't read it. 2. If he doesn't know the skill well, he'll miss an opportunity to learn from the reference. 3. Even if he knows the skill well, if he doesn't use a reference while teaching a boy, he may omit useful parts of the explanation. 4. If the boy was taught without use of the reference, he has no idea that the teacher may have skipped something (or maybe added a juicy tidbit in). 5. The temporarily enabled boy goes off not knowing where he can look in case a disability of memory overcomes him. The process repeats itself. Civilization collapses in a heap of hearsay.

why?! The SE ... I have several good reasons why you should go directly to the SE and not the CC or COR. Let me emphasize these are not hypotheticals. A committee chair or charter org rep or anyone close to you and the SM has an inherent bias. In my experience it is to protect the direct contact leader from outside "threats." Then the "sweep it under the rug" strategy kicks in. If this is an incedent that needs management this is an obvious problem. But most of the time, it's a one-off exceptional thing so what happens is half-a-dozen people get involved micro-managing a minor issue. These people delude themselves into thinking that they are doing the adult leader a favor. They literally come of thinking that he owes them some respect or something. So when they have an agenda to push, they expect him to fall in line. Oh, and the person who raised the issue in the first place gets treated like dirt -- not by the accused adult, but by everyone who "protected" the accused. Every good thing that person does is treated like there's some ulterior motive. These people will spend years fighting to avoid the SE so "nobody gets drummed out of scouting." They will actively work to cripple a leader's attempts at making youth-led decisions. With the way people move from unit to unit, this gets a little ridiculous. Eventually, someone will crack and call the SE. But, because nobody's really talking, nobody knows the whole story. Then, some other unit leader gets an unpleasant call from HQ about an incident that's a year and a half old, and instead of running program, he/she has to sort out the truth and determine with the SE if his/her youth are truly at risk. Now maybe your CC and COR will have the spine to approach a problem like this openly and will respect you and your concerns. They may even call the SE on your behalf. But I have never found peeling the bandaid off slowly to be worth the time. My previous statement (talk to the SM) still stands. But, if there's more to it (e.g., a hair raising on the back of your neck kind of feeling), then do us all a favor, contact the SE. That's the one person who is more likely to have a tempered reaction from experience, and most able to address serious issues effectively.

Guess your patrols will be out of uniform. Do you compete in any contests where the boys are graded on uniforming? If they like the patches, it may be worth risking the loss in points.

Sounds like you got this second hand from your boys maybe? If so that's a shame that something like this clouded their weekend. Not sure why hiding in camp would improve your score? First part of inspection is all boys present and accounted for. An absent boy scores zero (sometimes negative) points on inspection and drastically reduces the patrols average. Anyway, if all the PL's present decided to give this patrol leeway in advance, then I'd say ok -- maybe for the sake of disability awareness. But our troop takes bad kids from time to time, and we don't expect any handouts from anybody. Poor scout spirit: dock 'em. I'd rather them come crying to us about that, than an entire camporee of boys look down on them because we somehow parlayed a free pass. Obviously, get your facts straight as much as possible. Let your district activities chair know how much your boys are bothered about it. If your boys have control over your troop's schedule, they might not stop wanting to go to camporees.

An SM doesn't need paranoid parents "keeping eyes open". Simply get a moment with the guy and tell him "I noticed that you came home with only one boy in your car. Why didn't you make sure you had two boys?" He might be like me and not consider consider it a YP issue if you're in a car on the open road with one boy in plain view of the rest of your troop. It's no different then having an SM conference outside 300' from the other patrols. Or, he might of considered it, but there was an extenuating circumstance that you know nothing about. He might actually appreciate someone to talk to about it. Or, he might have considered himself "off the clock" and have no clue about the suspicions he was raising. Or, he might be a predator gradually culling this boy for his evil designs. Regardless, he's better off knowing that you are the kind of person who pays attention to those things and is available to help as needed.

My boys love survival weekends! So do I, actually. I'm assuming that your concerns are solely about the LNT regs, and that none of your boys have any qualms about eating meat. BSA is not going to revoke your troop's status if anyone snares a rabbit and eats it. However, in setting up any kind of trap line, you are taking on the responsibility to monitor traps frequently, and quickly dispatch any prey that gets caught and injured. That's part of "a scout is kind." Scouts who go on a 7 mile hike away from camp after setting a snare are being unkind. An animal fighting a poorly anchored snare for a few hours can tear up a lot of turf. That's where you cross into LNT violations. You might want to consider inviting a local trapper to a meeting to explain some of these issues to you. He or she might be able to give you some pointers about how to better set your snares. Pack's points are also valid. Besides, having a solid understanding of all edible plants might pay off in better spices for that rabbit stew - once you catch one!