Beavah

Yah, SunnyD has da right of it. Leastways that was my memory when we were rollin' out First Class Emphasis back in 1990. There was data that da highest attrition in Boy Scouting was in the first year, and there was data that boys who made it to First Class (at any time) were highly likely to stay in the program. So the conclusion was that to address the first year attrition, we'd push gettin' the lads to First Class. Justifications/hypotheses like what NealonWheels reports were very common - it will get them to bigger adventure, get 'em past the basics, etc. etc. That converged with LDS's need for a separate 11-year-old program (New Scout Patrol), and da worry from a few quarters about older boys and hazing (droppin' scouts from BORs). Those largely untested program changes based on scant data seemed to some like only minor/moderate "tweaks" of GreenBar Bill's stuff, but they've really turned out to be a huge change in da program, especially in da way the adults think about the program. Used to be you could play the game and have adventure while learnin' the skills. Like a game of pick-up baseball in da neighborhood, eh? Now yeh have to have the prerequisite classes well-organized for a year before yeh can start hangin' with the cool older lads. Hasn't helped our first year attrition one lick as far as I can tell. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, SM224, knock it off. Yeh don't know these people, so you've got no business callin' them names or accusing 'em of anything. Kittle, evmori has the right of it. You haven't shared what da reasons were for the committee changin' their mind after some reflection. Until you share that, there's not much more any of us here can offer. I suppose I'm a bit curious how yeh happen to know the real content of a private phone conversation between an MC and the cubmaster? If you're runnin' around trying to run interference for your son then I reckon that may be the source of "the politics of it." Your prior posts have some of that, eh? No way to tell from afar how much is attributable to da troop committee and how much is you/your son. If I may suggest goin' forward, your son needs a leadership position which you are not involved in. The Den Chief role where you are so heavily involved in the pack was a poor choice. I suspect da other folks in your small troop need to see your teenager stand on his own two feet, eh? I suspect your teenager really needs that, too. There are a lot of benefits from adult association. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, bilgrat, da cotton clothes are the problem. Switch to a dry poly or wool "base layer" top and bottom (long-underwear style), and a light fleece layer if yeh feel you need it (you really shouldn't). And a wool or fleece hat, eh? That should fix most of it. Yeh could probably add a bit of additional fat/food before bedtime too. A bit of cheese and such. Fats take a while to digest, so they provide fuel in the middle of the night when yeh need it. Last thing is yeh don't mention what sort of Thermarest. They come in a bunch of different flavors. If you're usin' one of the thinner summer-weight ones, you're goin' to need to supplement it with a second pad of some sort for winter. In fact, for deeper winter than what you're describin', you almost always need a second pad. Your sleepin' bag doesn't help a lick at insulating you from the ground. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, Buff. It's a good question. From what I've seen over da years in a lot of troops, First Class/First Year (aka "First Class Emphasis") was a bad program change for most of Scoutin'. It did, however, make the program alignment for the LDS units much easier, and works for them. I think it takes a fair bit longer than a year for a lad to really master and feel confident in all those skills. Yah, sure, you can expose a boy to 'em, but that's a very different thing than a boy actually learning. Learnin' takes time, practice, screw-ups, coaching. Especially when yeh have a month between outings. Lots of things fall out of kids' brains in a month or two. First Class Scout used to be a big milestone in a Scout's career, eh? It meant that now he was completely able to camp and life on his own without help, in all kinds of conditions, activities, etc. Because he was completely able to take care of himself, he was now ready to start takin' care of others by moving into leadership and other responsible positions in the troop. I think in a FCFY program, that's not what da rank means anymore. As a result, da adults don't trust a First Class lad to be on his own. Would you trust a group of your First Class Scouts to be completely on their own? Supposedly, they know a lot of practical first aid, can plan and cook meals, navigate, camp, swim, understand safety, the whole shootin' match. We should be able to trust 'em to be completely on their own, if we've done our jobs. But we can't do that job in a year. So we go through the motions, eh? We teach 'em "about" cooking, and let 'em do it once or twice each, then sign 'em off. They never learn how to cook. We run a first aid class, let 'em practice a couple times, then sign 'em off. They never learn how to really respond to a first aid situation. And worse, some units start to develop a full "curriculum" for First Class in a year. Blech. And since the adults can't trust a First Class Scout to be self-sufficient, they certainly don't trust him to really start to lead as he works toward Star and Life. So it reverberates up the program in negative ways. Finally, it pushes everyone into da LDS model of finishing Boy Scouting by age 14. If your kids make First Class in a year, what then? Gotta keep up da race. Or at least gotta have something for 'em to do, and you've already set the tone of "focus on advancement!". So the 12 year old has to be found a "leadership" position or such, even though we all know from ages & stages that that isn't usually the right thing to do for a boy at that age. And there's pressure to push on for Star and Life at age 13, and then Eagle-and-out at age 14/15 (or go dormant for 3-4 years and then do da deathbed Eagle thing). I know a bunch of folks in Irving like the whole Boy-Scouting-is-a-middle-school-program notion. And there's some merit to headin' that way. But to my mind it requires re-thinkin' the advancement stuff. Maybe First Class should be the top award for Boy Scouting, which finishes at the end of the 8th grade. With da current advancement program, I think it works better if they trust da BSA's "classic" way of approachin' the T-2-1 ranks, and ignore da FCFY revision. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, hmmm.... Yah, it would help a bit to know what's up, eh? I'd say da action is unusual. One that we hope would be avoided. However, there's nothing "official" until those committee members sign off on and submit an advancement report to the council office, which presumably they haven't done. At that point, the boy has the BSA rank in the eyes of the BSA. Still, the lad has to live in his unit, eh? And I reckon some good Scoutmasters would hold on to a badge and a card if they thought that was a necessary response to a real behavioral problem. As a parent, I think yeh need to focus on whatever the issue with your son's behavior was with younger scouts that elicited this reaction, eh? That's your role as the most important adult in his life. Da rank stuff is just a kid's game token. It can wait. Beavah

Yah, Merlyn, like any uninformed outsider to a discipline, yeh don't know what da questions are that count, and form your judgments based on superficial things. That's bein' intellectually young. It's what some of our young scouts and venturers do, eh? They're very quick to point out any seemin' superficial hypocrisy in others (especially adults, LOL). At the same time, they're overly credulous of themselves and their own level of understandin' and expertise. Happily, they learn and grow up. Scoutin' helps a lot with that. So do those many religions which you missed, which all have various versions of "first remove the log from your own eye, then you will see clearly to remove the mote from your brother's". I also reckon you're not bein' totally fair about medicine, eh? Here in da U.S., we have scientific medicine, we've got herbal medicine, we've got traditional Native American medicine, we've got imported acupuncture, and on and on. If you're goin' to compare medicine to da full panoply of things people call religions, it's only fair to use da full panoply of things people call "medicine." Beavah

Yah, hmmm.... Dat's interestin', bilgerat (sailor, are you?). I can make some guesses, but it might be better havin' a bit more information. 1) How much coffee/caffeine do yeh drink in the evening? 2) Any other medications or conditions? 3) What kind of "winter camp" are we talkin' about? 40 degrees and chill rain or -40 degrees and 3 feet of snow? 4) What's your ground pad setup like? Thermarests? Foam? 5) What kind of tent? Rigged with how much ventilation? 6) What are yeh wearin' for clothes at night? Hat? Gloves? 7) That new sleeping bag rated to 0 degrees... do yeh still have a problem, or haven't you tried it yet? 8) What are yeh eatin' right before bed? B

Yah, like I said. Yeh think economists all agree on everything (or anything)? Physicians? Yeh really are pretty young. Especially when yeh think lawyers or professors actually get things done. B

Yep, like I said. That was my biggest problem with da last administration. Not only did they betray a lot of conservative principles, they almost uniformly discounted expertise. Lawyers must know as much about science as da scientists. Believers must know as much about settin' up Iraqi economic institutions as financial professionals. Fact is, there really are experts in each discipline, eh? Feynman I reckon is an expert on science. Worth quoting him on science. But he's not an expert in other fields, so it's not worth quotin' him on other topics, except as a form of humor. And yep, there are poor lawyers, and not-so-bright economists, and ignorant preachers, and bumbling physicians. That doesn't change da fact that there are true experts in law, and economics, and theology, and medicine, (and plumbing, and every area of human inquiry and endeavor). Only da ignorant claim that because they once had a poor doctor they now never see a physician. You're that guy. Beavah

I don't see any reason to think that anyone is more 'expert' than anyone else when it comes to... Ah, the rallying cry of the ignorant everywhere!

Get Outdoors asked a great question that seemed like a great new topic! I still don't know what to do with these few older scouts. They have met the official requirments for advancement, participate in most troop meetings but I just cant get them on camping trips or anything outside of a Troop meeting. Trips that they sugested we do! Basically I think they are being lazzy or maybe "been there done that" or just have had enough of the outdoor program thing. However, if we let them slid on participation, where do we draw the line with the younger scouts. They could all basically camp a few times a year, do rank advancement and merit badges at home. Serve as leaders by text, Facebook and Twitter. We could all just get together a few times a year for COH's. I'll have the SM conferances with them via webcam. "scouting in the 21st century"......Kinda scary, isn't it. My main concern, is these few "slackers" (they are really great kids)are pulling down the rest of the older boy patrol. Peer pressure, "well he isn't going so i guess I wont go just so I look cool" I'm thinking of pulling the plug on this patrol and mixing them into our very active experinced patrols. What do yeh think?

I think I'm going to read out of the book at our next COH. Yah, happily that text has been deleted from da new handbook. New version strikes a more balanced tone, eh? "How well you live the Scout Oath and Scout Law can be judged by you and by others." (emphasis mine). It also prominently highlights Green Bar Bill's text from da 1959 Handbook: "You prove that you have caught this spirit by the way you help in patrol, troop, home, school, church or synagogue, and community and your habits of caring for your own things and protecting the properties of others." So they've done a much better job of makin' it clear that scouting is an important part of a lad's "everyday life" and that he is expected to demonstrate ("prove") his scout spirit to others. Spinnin' off Get Outdoors' great question... Beavah

I thought for a patrol to be able to go off without adult supervision, all the scouts needed to be First Class or above. however does anyone else remember something about youth protection and "no more than 3 year age difference" (I think in the context of sharing tents). Yah, I always get a chuckle out of these odd urban legends, eh? I've been around more years than I can count, and just when I thought I'd heard every one, there's a thread with two brand new make believe rules! I will say one thing for our Scoutin' trainers. They are a creative lot! Kudos (kudus?) to your lads, Anonymous. And a round of applause to you adults for doin' it right. Beavah

Yah, I think it's always a mistake to assume that because a fellow is knowledgeable in one area, that he must be knowledgeable in another. Just because a man is a fantastic plumber doesn't mean he's goin' to know anything about being an electrician. I used Feynman to comment on da ethics and responsibility of a scientist, eh? From his commencement address to CalTech students, IIRC. I figure Feynman is competent to comment on science. I don't reckon Feynman is competent to comment on religion or religiosity. Dat's not at all his area of expertise or study. About as useful as Brad Pitt commenting on international relations. And, BTW, there is nuthin' particularly honorable and certainly nuthin' to brag about beatin' on the ideas of young undergraduates or novices in any profession. Any of us can. Just most of us don't. Doin' that sort of thing doesn't make you a professor, and certainly not a teacher. Just makes you a bully. Beavah

I said nothing like that. No, I did. The attempt to impute my motives in so doing (and thereby communicate disdain for positions other than your own) is amusin'. Not particularly rational, since yeh have no basis on which to judge my intent. Now, let us take a step back and recall that it was packsaddle (among others) who attempted to equate religious belief (of the Catholics, I think), with belief in "magic." So since it was you makin' the claim, I reckon that the burden of proof lies with you, eh? We all await your proof of Christianity or Eucharist or whatnot = "magic." It's just so much easier to critique (dare I echo the claim of "cast the greatest possible aspersion on") da beliefs of others, while not holdin' yourself to your own standard of rationality. To paraphrase Feynman, the first duty of a scientist is to not fool himself with his own claims. Beavah (who casts good bait because he tries to follow in da footsteps of some famous fishermen )(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, eghlie, your school is playin' with fire. There are two issues here, eh? There's a legal issue. 501©(3) entities cannot divert tax-deductible donations/fundraising in a way that "inures to the benefit of" an individual member. So when yeh allocate it to reduce a member's cost, particularly on a per-dollar or per-hour-worked basis, that can be a problem. If yeh want to do that as a troop, your CO needs to treat your fundraiser as unrelated business income, pay the tax on it, and then pay the boy a wage with appropriate deductions for FICA and such. That would teach the lad more about workin' for a living in any event ("Who is this FICA fellow and why did he take my money?" ) Anything else is tax cheatin'. When we put on a fundraiser for Scouting, we're telling people that their hard-earned money is going to support the scouting program, eh? Not going to buy the boy a new backpack and set of hiking boots for his very own. That's what fraud is, eh? Claiming to be collecting money for a charity, and then using it for yourself. So there's also an issue here of committing fundraising fraud in addition to tax evasion. The moral issues are similar to da legal ones, eh? I think Calico describes these well. When we raise funds, we're representing that the benefit is goin' to Scouting. And we all know that in Scouting, there are some boys and families who are in dire need, and others who are well-off. To truly keep up our bargain with our donors, we need to allocate the hard-earned dollars they've given us to do the most good for Scouting, not the most good for da boy workin' the fundraiser. Buyin' backpacks for a troop to loan out to boys who need them is great. Givin' money to the lad who worked the fundraiser to buy a backpack for himself is just not kosher. So Calico has the right of this, eh? If yeh care about following the law, and you care about doin' what's right, yeh can't be allocatin' fundraising to individual accounts as though they were wages, and yeh can't be allowing fundraisin' dollars to purchase personal gear. Will yeh get caught? Probably not, unless someone complains. And as long as the dollar amounts stay small you're probably only goin' to get a slap on the wrist and a fine when yeh do get caught. But I don't reckon that sorta thing should matter to people who care about Timeless Values. As to transferring funds between 501©(3) organizations, that is allowed. One unit can donate to another if it so chooses. But then that donation goes into da general fund of the new unit, to be allocated as it sees fit, eh? Beavah Furry fellows in online forums can blather on and on, but nuthin' they say should be construed as formal legal opinion or advice. If you or your organization needs real tax or legal advice, yeh have to seek out an attorney in your area who specializes in tax law issues for corporations and NFPs. Don't accept any substitutes, online or otherwise, for da real deal! (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, to folks 250 years ago, electricity and electronics would be considered "magic", eh? And talkin' about the possibility of man flying a heavier-than-air craft a bit over 100 years ago would have engendered da same ridicule by the "rational" people that packsaddle trumpets in smugness here. As a Christian, I don't believe in "magic" or da "supernatural", eh? What I know as God and "miracles" and such are the very epitome of the Natural, because they spring from the source and fundamental nature of all things. As much as electricity or aerodynamics. I can only sympathize with da folks who call that "magic". It just shows how limited their knowledge and experience is. They are the Geocentrists of da philosophical world, eh? Everything must revolve around us. Beavah

Yah, monkeyboyev, a Scout Salute to yeh for wanting to get your PLC involved in the finance side of troop planning. The boys in your program should have a hand in budgeting and expenses as part of their planning of outings. Once yeh get into that, you discover that there are all kinds of things that cost money "in the background" that you might not be aware of. The two biggest things for most businesses are "capital amortization" and "overhead". Capital costs are costs for things like gear which yeh want to budget for, which means you build in some "reserve" each year for their eventual replacement. So for example, if you buy a tent for $200 and you figure the life of a tent under your troop's heavy usage is 10 years, yeh better be setting aside $20 per year. Overhead is all the administrative costs, eh? Costs for the troop website, costs for badges, costs for your meeting place, BSA registration, computer software like Troopmaster, postage, refreshments for committee meetings, markers for PLC meetings, etc. It also might include costs for adult trainin', extra background checks on new adults, costs for youth leader training, etc. Then yeh get into program costs. There can be a lot of hidden program costs - things like gasoline, fuel for stoves, first aid supplies, that sort of thing which might not be folded into the individual trip costs. In my experience, most troops give the individual trip cost as camping fees and individual costs (and maybe transport), but don't figure in all the incidentals. Payin' for the incidentals has to come from somewhere. Finally, some troops keep some reserve to provide camperships for their scouts whose family circumstances are such that without help, they wouldn't be able to afford scouting. The numbers you're giving aren't really out of line, but you're quite right that it's important for your troop to be "transparent" with its finances, eh? People should understand where money is comin' from and goin'. So follow Lisabob's advice, eh? Just ask. Politely, so that you and your PLC can do a better job of plannin' outings. Beavah

One parent, who is a tax accountant, said that if you're raising funds for a 503C organization - 100% of the funds you raise have to go into a general pool. In other words, a person can't raise funds for their own personal benefit under the auspices of a 503C. Even if the majority of what you raise goes to the organization. The parent is correct. Has anyone else ever heard of this? If it's true, I would wonder if it makes putting a percentage of the funds raised by a scout into his "Scout Account" illegal? Or is the Council considered the "general pool", and what a Unit does with the money distributed by the Council sufficiently distanced? Yah, well, dat's an interestin' argument to try . The better argument is that all of the fundraisin' is going to the unit as a common pool, but since one of da unit's educational goals is to develop character by instilling a work ethic ("a scout pays his own way"), the unit chooses to allocate some of the unit's funds to support the activities of boys in a way that encourages that work ethic. To my mind, that's "dancing with the devil in the pale moonlight", eh? But probably most units are flyin' below the radar and aren't goin' to cause an issue for themselves or their CO. Where the line is clearly crossed to my mind is when those scout accounts allow boys to take money out when they leave the unit. I also think that when they allow the accounts to be used for da purchase of personally-owned gear it's a step too far. Oh, yah, and the term you want is a section 501©(3) organization, eh? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, one of these days I'm goin' to make up a special award for "reading way too much into da wording". It could be a knot folks could add to their uniform! Honestly, yeh can't go thinkin' there's somethin' special because the Eagle Rank reqs say "successfully" and the others don't. All that means is that someone doin' the writing/typing got a bit more flowery and typed "successfully." Nobody in da National office does the kind of highly detailed continuity edit job that would ever catch those kinds of minor discontinuities. It'd cost a fortune and take forever. As I've said repeatedly, even legislators and regulators who have lots of people doin' detailed reads of precise language (and periods of debate and public comment to catch what they missed) don't catch all continuity issues. And in those things, it counts. Yeh must have everyone on the board give yeh a thumbs up to achieve any rank, from Tenderfoot through Eagle. B(This message has been edited by Beavah)

I disagree with this equivalence. Yah, just like the folks who shout ethnic slurs disagree when yeh call them out. Folks always come up with rationalizations and justifications. B

The reason not to blaspheme is the same reason we don't shout "Nigger!" at passing African Americans on the street. Yah, sure, we have a "right" to shout whatever we want, eh? That's not the point. The point is whether we should. Using emotionally-charged derogatory language directed at the things others hold sacred says a lot about us, eh? Says we're elitist, discourteous, self-absorbed at best. Says we're interested in oppressing others and their beliefs at worst. Comes nowhere near "courteous" "kind" or "reverent." And that's when we do it in private. When we shout "Nigger!" or blaspheme in public, that kind of thing certainly is pretty far away from "the best kind of citizenship." It usually divides people. Causes resentment and social unrest. I reckon that's why some civil societies restrict it, and all civil societies shun it. Of course defendin' or celebratin' blasphemy is one of those things that pampered teens tend to do when they are bored and rebellious. That's the province of teenagers; they have to try out their new-found frontal lobes da way they once tried out their new-found hands by pickin' up everything and sticking it in their mouth. After a couple of years, they learn. Well, most of 'em do, anyways. Beavah

Yah, I second BrentAllen and Lisabob. Da issue with schools has very little to do with number of days, it has to do with how those days are used. I remember readin' one thing from the international comparisons - when foreign teachers were shown videos of U.S. classrooms, they were appalled at the number of interruptions, special days, distractions, and disciplinary issues. It's not the time, it's how we use it. I'd hate to see the kids subjected to even less efficient time doin' the classroom drill-and-kill, at the expense the kind of deeper learnin' summer enrichment and programs like Scouting provide. Beavah

Yah, hmmmm.... Just no way to comment on this without more info. There are certainly plenty of places in da country where the drug enforcement gets a little out of hand. Generally speakin', I'd expect that with any competent representation a decorated military officer in possession of a small amount of coke that may reasonably have been da property of a third party would be able to cop a plea for a misdemeanor charge or otherwise avoid a felony rap. I suspect what we have here is a larger, salable quantity. So while it's possible OMH was da victim of an overzealous prosecutor and incompetent personal representation, I reckon it's more likely they made a possession-with-intent/trafficking case or somesuch. That to my mind is goin' to get in the way of any scout volunteerin'. It's hard to say "former drug dealer" is now a SM. But it just depends on da actual facts and circumstances. I would certainly expect a CO and council to look into the matter in some detail. And as da Blancmange suggested, I'd counsel OMH to look into havin' that record sealed or expunged. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

How can we have an exciting meeting, where the boys are learning/honing their skills? Go outdoors! Scoutin' ain't meant to be done inside. What kinds of activities can we do on a camping trip where the boys could use their knots and lashes Yah, this one is hard, eh? Generally speakin', yeh don't want your boys goin' around and cutting things down and lashing stuff at most campsites these days. And da T-2-1 knots aren't really all that practical with modern gear. If yeh do set up an old fashioned dining fly, make 'em take it apart each time. That way every time they set it up they have to bowline or hitch the lines up, and then taut-line 'em tight. what can we do other than to go on a hike and identify things (animals or plants)? Yeh have to decide what your kids need, eh? Go swimming and practice swim skills and lifesaving. Build in a random first aid scenario every trip. Go canoeing and practice safety afloat. Go out in da rain and practice fire starting. Go backpacking and practice navigation and packing. Join the VFW for Memorial Day and practice flag ceremonies and flag folding. Set up an orienteering course and run it as a race. Fake a heart attack and see what they do. Leave later on Friday and make 'em select a site and set up tents in the dark. Then try it with no lights on a moonlit night. Go rock climbing or fishin' and learn all kinds of new knots. Do all kinds of cooking - over fire over propane over backpack stoves deep frying baking poaching broiling braising boiling Have a banquet where everyone cooks a different thing to share. Sneak a bear suit into your kit, and visit their tents at night if they haven't been clean or have any food in with 'em. Camp without tents. Yah, pretty much yeh take every requirement and say "how can we play this as a game?" I reckon that's better than the old saw about retaining it by teachin' it. That comes from "how can we make this like school?" Beavah