Beavah

Yah, we're not the State, eh? We're the people, fellow citizens. And whether you've noticed it or not, faith is part of who we are and part of the public discourse in America and elsewhere. I agree wholeheartedly with da BSA that faith and talk about duty to God should be a part of our everyday life, not somethin' that's shameful that we keep in a closet and don't presume to mention in polite company. The very notion of servant leadership BSA supports in its leadership development is fundamentally religious. Me, I always ask a lad at an Eagle BOR about duty to God, if someone else doesn't beat me to it. Not as a "gotcha," but because so often in school and at home and among friends "God-talk" is devalued or shunned. I think it's important that lads find communities, especially ones beyond their own church, where talkin' about faith and God is normal, respectful, fun, challenging. I hope that from the beauty of a sunrise to the power of an afternoon storm, from the good humor shared with friends to the comforting of troop-mates in need, from the service a lad renders to his fellow men and women to the shared prayers at Scouts Own services - that God is recognized and welcome, and that each scout's growing quest for understanding and relationship with divinity is honored. Beavah

Will the BSA, or a BSA Council, approve an "unincorporated association" as a Chartering Organization? Yah, sure, they do it all da time, eh? Across the country. And lots of traditional BSA chartering partners might fall into this legal category too, eh? Some PTOs in smaller communities, even some small churches are unincorporated associations. Many homeowner's associations and civic clubs. Even some big organizations like the ABA can be structured as unincorporated associations. It's not a problem, and I don't know of a council that would turn down a charter on that (or almost any!) basis. Like I said, I do worry a bit about the smaller associations of parents and such, though. I just think they're less likely to provide the stable support it takes to keep a unit healthy in da long run. Not impossible, just less likely. Then maybe I'm just a traditionalist for likin' the long-time CO model, eh? Beavah

Yah, yeh know, sometimes I reckon we take ourselves a little bit too seriously, eh? Rank patches are meaningful things for the lads, as they should be. But they aren't the security codes to the nuclear arsenal. When we adults start takin' things too seriously we just take away from what matters to the kids. I'm with T164 and SR540. I think a lad should finish his BOR and be awarded his rank patch that night. He should be able to come to his very next scouting event (even if it's the next day!) wearing his new badge of rank on his uniform properly. And IMO councils that are gettin' in the way of that should be reducing staffing. Anybody who has time to spend findin' such ways to actively reduce quality of service is clearly unnecessary overhead. As far as I know, my home council has never gotten into this game, but I confess if they did I'd encourage units to just take a lad of each rank down to buy a half-dozen or so "replacements for lost badges and for extra uniforms" and then we'd keep 'em around for instant recognition, replacin' 'em with paperwork ones as they went. As for Scout Badge, it's deliberately designed to match up with AOL, eh? Dat's the whole point - seamless transition. The capstone cub award meets the joining scout badge. Even the Scoutmaster Conference is part of the AOL requirements. Only thing that isn't, IIRC, is the parent pamphlet on youth protection. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, I agree with Lisa'bob completely. The only way to make these kinds of calls is to know the people well, not lock somethin' into policy. At the point when a family is overwhelmed financially they're often overwhelmed in other ways. They might need more of our support than just helpin' with finances. We've got a few National Guard folks whose breadwinners have been on deployment overseas; it's not just the finances, it's all the other pressures on the remaining parent. The best units are there for kids' families and show the spirit of Scouting in their everyday life. I was at an EBOR for a lad at the end of last summer who was one of the best candidates I've seen in at least a few years. Not a typical high-achiever, but a boy who achieved highly if yeh get my drift. I know from bein' involved with the unit that they pretty much paid his way all 12 years of his career, right through high adventure outings and World Jambo. Deadbeat dad, mom who was tryin' to hold 2 jobs plus work on a degree just to get by. Grandma would send a small monthly amount out of her Social Security. He was clearly one of those cases where Scouting changed his life deeply, fundamentally, and forever. He's now goin' to be the first in his family to go to college, and the college is more than willin' to support him. I don't think we ever want to miss those opportunities to fundamentally change a lad's life because we're trippin' over a written policy or quibblin' over nickles. Beavah

Yah, Lauwit, don't get too depressed there, eh? What you describe is pretty typical of a unit that has had a lot of adult turnover. Things just sort of run downhill. It's just that bein' adult-led on campouts is bad, it's that if you're bein' adult-led on campouts those adults aren't doin' the things adults should be doing. Things like recruiting more adults and youth, injecting enthusiasm, havin' a strategic plan for the unit, pushin' a more robust outdoor program. They're spendin' their time in the wrong place decidin' on the dessert for da camporee. Do yeh think the SM is a good guy who is goin' to be around for a while? Are you goin' to be around for a while? Do yeh have a few years left on that Life Scout? If so, yeh might be the small core group that jump-starts things again. Get together at the local Pizza Barn and sketch out a turn-around plan. Where you'd like to be in 5 years, and then in 1, and how to get there. Pay a lot of attention to your Life Scout; he's da person with years of experience, not you, eh? Biggest thing is yeh have to commit to each other for the haul. Then you adults start buildin' adult program resources, and your Life Scout takes the kid side. It can be a world of fun. For your Life Scout, it's his chance to show real leadership and build da troop he wants. The adults won't get in his way, because they have their own house to put in order! For the adults, it's a chance to seek out great adult friends and resources who like the outdoors and like doin' things with kids, and to stay young and keep learnin'. Go to trainin' for the people and for the fun, and because it shows your commitment to each other! But it won't work if yeh don't have folks with a longer-term commitment to each other. It probably won't work if yeh can't bring yourself to treat your Life Scout as a friend and colleague. If you're figurin' on continued low adult commitment with high turnover, I'd say do the lads a favor and look for a troop to merge with or at least partner with. Beavah

If it is "The Friends of Troop 2" then they should be registered as some type of 501 organization and they would be responsible for whatever annual filing was required by the State or Federal government. Yah, a lot of "Friends of" chartering orgs were created in da aftermath of the Dale decision in different parts of the country, as units lost their sponsors. They also reflect the workin' reality that sometimes a CO is pretty detached and the unit gets run by the parents (especially for cubs!), so why bother with da CO. I'm not in favor of these arrangements, they tend to lack longer term stability. That havin' been said, there's no particular reason why they need to incorporate or seek an IRS determination (501) on tax exempt status, at least not for most units (you Sea Scouts with your own boats are a different story!). As J-in-KC describes, 501©(3) status in particular is too expensive in terms of time and money for most units to bother with. ©(7) social clubs aren't as big a burden, but yeh still end up with more overhead than a typical unit wants. Most states recognize unincorporated associations, and the "Friends of..." charters would fall in this legal category, eh? Beavah

Yeh take your boy to a meeting and an outing and you see if he makes friends and has fun, eh? You take a look at the older boys and get a sense of whether they're good examples. You do a "gut check" to make sure you can stand the adults in the unit without making a nuisance of yourself as a parent. And then you let your boy decide. B

Folks who aren't involved in units who might make good district recruits: Former scouts who are still in the area. APO fraternity members or alums. Former unit volunteers who have dropped off the roster (ex SMs, ex CCs, etc.) CORs. Anybody involved in youth programs/education, especially outdoor ed. Local outfitters. And yah, any scouter who moves into an area like emb. If your council doesn't have a way of "capturing" those potential recruits, take a mallet to the heads of your council staff until they put one in place. Beavah

Yah, I'm always a bit surprised by units that make the boys and parents host the Eagle COH. Seems a lot like the high school making the parents host the graduation. Eagle Scout is our award, that we bestow on a lad. The boy and the parents should be our guests of honor, not our hosts. So me, I would wonder a bit about da troop. Why didn't they arrange an event to present the award to the lad? Don't they care about him, or the example his earnin' the award sets for other boys? Now, if da troop is an Eagle-and-out program, then I reckon the issue isn't the COH, it's "why is it an Eagle-and-out program?" What can be done to improve that? Beavah

We have 5th graders and high school seniors and no, they should not be doing the same things at troop meetings and on outings ... Why would they be doin' the same things, acco? Wouldn't the youngest boys be learnin', the middle boys be helping, and the older boys be leading and teaching? Scoutin' doesn't have to be like school, where the change as you grow is that you get harder activities to do. It can be like life, where the change as you grow is that you get more responsibility and recognition. Beavah

Yah, hmmm.... Where do yeh live exactly? And what river? We Scoutin' types would want to know that each member of the group was experienced enough (as a swimmer, as a paddler, and as a group member) to undertake the trip for the conditions. But first, yeh need to know the conditions. Rivers in the spring can be very different from rivers in da lazy dog days of summer, eh? Amount of water flowin' down 'em changes them a lot. You should have someone with you who has paddled the river before at the current water level, and knows the river hazards and skill needed to paddle it. And yeh should be alert for trees and other hazards that have been "added" to a river during the winter. Then go back up to paragraph 2 . As college buddies and novices, you're gonna get wet. Water temperature plus air temperature bein' less than 120 will make yeh awfully cold and uncomfortable and at least mildly hypothermic if yeh aren't wearin' some good, non-cotton insulating layers and wind shells. Especially if yeh don't have good sunshine and yeh have some wind. Add alcohol and it gets worse - more hypothermia, and more frequent flips. Smaller, leaner folks will chill a lot faster than the big "well padded" guys, eh? So plan for that in terms of clothing. Lots of water and lots of food too, eh? Yeh need hydration and energy to stay warm. Think snacks all day - don't wait for the diner at the takeout. Headaches mean drink more water, flippin' or gettin' tangled more often than you were at the start means more food and water. If you've got relatively inexperienced paddlers, try to match folks by weight. If partners are badly mismatched by weight, it changes da trim and usually takes more experience to handle. Oh, yah, and da pointy end that goes forward is the one that has the seat closer to the middle (more room for legs in front of yeh). Back of a canoe has the seat closer to the end (more leverage for steerin'). Two people per canoe, 3 max with da laziest bum sittin' in the middle and most experienced in the back. Finally, if it looks too scary or if someone who knows what they're doin' tells you you're nuts, avoid testosterone poisoning. Portage (carry) your canoe around the scary part or go to the pub instead. It is always honorable to walk a section of river, and always better to live to canoe another day. Be safe out there, eh? Beavah

if you were going off trailing with a group of friends what would you take that would differ then on a normal (normal being on a trail) hike? What Gunny said. Actually, for me personally, I take less stuff with me OT. Hikin' on my own, I'm pretty lightweight with my gear. When I'm with kids or inexperienced folk, though, I bring more stuff. Bigger first aid kit, backups and repair kits. Add to the redundancy for dealin' with problems. I think groups with inexperienced folk should mostly stick to the trails. Each person in a group should be able to self-rescue in the event they get separated (why we teach "what to do when lost" to a Tenderfoot), and doin' that from the bush is probably beyond a novice's skill. So I probably carry more gear on-trail than off. Beavah

Rather, the idea is that in a good, solid, active, camping Troop, the program will be such that as a natural part of being a Scout in the Troop and participating in activities, the Scout will complete the First Class requirements in one year. Yah, dat certainly was the idea, eh? Da question, though, is "Has that been the effect?" Lots of times when decent ideas hit the real world, the effects they have are very different than what was intended. I think BobWhite is right in that it can be a lack of understanding of "the program" on the part of those deliverin' it, or at least that's one possible explanation. But then yeh have to look further and consider whether it's really likely that an average volunteer will understand how to make that sort of holistic program happen, or develop that kind of nuanced understandin' in a few days of training and reading manuals. I suspect not, and we seem to have at least anecdotal evidence to prove it. That's how the good idea fails and doesn't have the intended effect. Now, I also have my doubts about FCFY even being possible in an average, active program without watering them down or turning 'em into a school curriculum that only bears passing resemblance to Boy Scouting. The requirements haven't changed all that much from when we didn't try to do 'em in a year, eh? Were we really just lollygagging durin' our first 80 years of BSA Scouting? 18 months seems fairly common for active units trying to emphasize First Class; longer seems more natural for units that aren't emphasizing advancement. Point is, whether it's possible to do well but most volunteers don't "get it", or whether it's just too quick to be good Scouting in an average unit, it's a program failure. If our volunteers who are doin' their best don't "get it" we shouldn't blame the volunteer. It's our fault, eh? Me, I think the marketing and numbers people ran off with the toy. So Neil, how much effort is spent, do yeh think, on actually determining whether each of the supplementary modules actually have the intended effect in terms of understandin' and implementation? I reckon dat's the missin' piece in development. Beavah

Yah, I've found that technique can work well for really nervous boys, eh? Or sometimes for dealin' with an adult on a BOR who is pushin' too hard (ask the boy to step out and take a breather, coach the adult, bring the boy back in to a changed tone). I haven't seen it work for the monosyllabic. I think the kids who come in, lay back, and grunt at adults are askin' a simple question: "Do you care?" Do you care enough about me to expect me to do my best, to push myself, to be prepared and respectful? Or is all you care about whether I have signatures on a piece of paper? How each of us answers that question determines how successful our scoutin' programs really are, eh? I've sometimes stopped or come to the end of a BOR and asked a boy if he felt that really was his best effort. Kids are honest, mostly. The lad says "no," and then we schedule a BOR for a few weeks down the line where he can show us his best. Just one more arrow for da quiver, if it works for yeh. Anyway, good job, Lisa'bob. I think yeh gave the lad the right answer - "Yes, we do care." Beavah

Yah, yeh also need to keep your YP trainin' in the back of your mind, eh? Bouts of unjustified anger and such are one of those things on the list of "suspicion of child abuse." Be open and available to the lad. Be conscious of your reportin' obligations, both legal and moral. You mention an older brother in the troop. In addition to talkin' to the boy himself, I'd talk to his older brother. More maturity may allow for more ability to verbalize stresses and their causes, and give yeh better insight. Beavah

Yah, I'm with EagleDad. Da question for me is when would I not go off-trail? And I confess to havin' done plenty of off-trail hikin', huntin', snowshoein' and the like solo. Know your abilities, know the risks, accept da risks with da beauty and adventure. I wonder, is paddling or sailing by definition off-trail? My question would be how yeh could possibly teach scouts and venturers navigation and compass skills without going off trail? Do yeh just have 'em pretend to be navigatin' or what? Beavah

There has been talk on the forum that a Boy Scout Troop should have a three tier program, New Scout Patrol, Experienced Scout Patrol and Venture Scout Patrol and there seemed to be reluctance that this was the case. Yah, as has been discussed before, more recent BSA materials have been steadily de-emphasizing Venture Patrols. NYLT is as described. It runs parallel to WB21C. Boys are formed into patrols and there's some notion of progression from new to experienced, eh? Not as "tiers" but as a progression of development through the training. I'd be curious where a "three-tier program" is ever mentioned in those terms in any BSA literature. I don't believe it is. All I can recall bein' mentioned (in older publications like da SM Handbook) is the possibility of those three types of patrols, eh? In my experience, that kind of tiered setup can be used by Very Large Troops with some success. Tier one has a "SM"-like ASM and several assistants, an ASPL, and TGs all serving a few NSP's. Tier 2 has 7th and 8th graders, similarly with a SM-like "ASM", several assistants, and an ASPL. Tier 3 has high schoolers as several Venture Patrols with a SM-like ASM and several assistants and an ASPL for Venture. SM and SPL oversee the whole thing. As yeh can guess, each tier runs a semi-autonomous program and acts like a troop unto itself. Such programs have a lot of boys and a lot goin' on, eh? They can be very successful in that way. There's some downsides, too. It takes a SM who really likes that kind of organizational management role, and such big units often come unglued when that person leaves. It's also quite a bit more adult-directed than other setups, IMO. Finally the 7th/8th grade tier often is a kind o' poor country cousin, and there's more attrition in those years. I think these troops can only be built in moderately affluent, suburban communities. LDS units of course run a tiered program as well, with 11-year-old new boys groups, 12-13 year old Scouts, 14-15 year old Varsity and 16-17 year old Venturing setups. These are much smaller than the large troop tiers above, and IMO less successful because high turnover affects quality. Tiered troops make up a relatively small fraction of Scouting. Most troops are relatively small, where such a setup wouldn't make much sense. Beavah

There are instructions for many of the the things we do in order to insure the correct results. Scouting is no different. Nah, I personally think Scoutin' is a lot different, eh? All those things yeh mention are simple tasks. Simple tasks, like changin' a tire, can be scripted. Mostly. There's still quite a bit of judgment about when and where it's safe to change a tire and how to handle frozen lugnuts and such. Boys and girls don't come with manuals. Unlike lugnuts, yeh can do or say something to one kid and it works great. Yeh can do or say the same to another kid and you get a face full of attitude. They're funny that way. They can't be programmed like the TV remote. I figure Scoutin' is more like education. Got that notion from da Rules & Regulations, actually. It's a hard task, and achievin' the goals is a tough, long-term thing with many paths for many different kids and adults. Da kids and parents and CO and local community all interact with us in ways board game pieces do not. That requires a different way of thinkin', if we are goin' to use the program materials successfully. Not throwin' things out. But understandin' things in context. As for religion, I reckon Pappy will correct me if I got it wrong, eh? Always learnin'! Beavah

Yah, I reckon John-in-KC is just startin' to get used to talkin' like a cuddly, cute little beavah, eh? I bet when he meets friends for lunch now he starts up with, "Yah, yah, how 'bout da weather then, eh? Cold enough for yeh, is it? Yah." Everybody tells me that when I'm thinkin' and makin' points or arguments my accent fades, tho. Must be from all that time in school or writin' formal stuff. Like a beavah in a big city, I reckon' it's just puttin' on airs! Yeh can take da beavah out of the pond, but yeh can't take da pond out of the beavah? Beavah

Yah, in da parent thread, OGE commented: When on a campout with your troop and its hard to make mass on sunday, do you throw the religious requirements book to be a Catholic out the window? I'm curious for folks from LDS and Catholic churches (or others where denominational Sunday service has a very particular sense of obligation), how do yeh handle it on campouts? How about high adventure trips? If you're a parent of an LDS, Catholic, etc. youth in a non-church-sponsored unit, how do you handle these things? What good advice can folks offer on how to be reverent & respectful without havin' to give up outing days or wilderness high adventure? Is it possible, for you? Beavah

Thanks, Oak Tree. I had forgotten about the short-form "argument number" list, eh? scouting by the book is NOT infallible... where else in life do you throw the book away? Are these at all the same statement? Now I'm far from bein' a Catholic, but one of my best friends is an attorney who is also a Catholic canon lawyer, and I find that fascinatin' and a touch amusin'. We have many great discussions. From what I understand, Catholics aren't fundamentalists and don't believe the Bible is infallible, eh? Instead they believe it should be interpreted in light of sacred tradition. And the people in the church continue to interpret it. Only when you put all that together is it infallible. But I don't reckon they'd say they should throw da Bible away, eh? Seems like Pappy is makin' an argument from his own tradition, of sorts. The BSA "book", by itself, is not infallible. It should be interpreted in light of Scouting tradition (as Kudu often brings up as well). And good Scouters and scouts continue to interpret and apply it in different circumstances. Only when yeh put that all together do yeh get the best possible program. That's not throwin' anything away. It's keeping everything of value. Of course, maybe Pappy is just tryin' to offer da Tridentine Mass of scouting. Beavah

Yah, my apologies for bein' too lazy to track down the different threads, eh? I saw kb6's query and figured it was worth gettin' an answer on, and then while I was on the phone.... Anyway... Status of LaserTag (from National Risk Management) This is still considered a "wargame" and therefore remains an unauthorized activity. Can a Venturer Registered in a Crew earn Quartermaster? (from Venturing Division) No. They have to be registered in a Ship. Ignore ACP&P and the man behind the curtain! But it's OK if the crew all dual-registers in or as a Ship. What's up with training? (from Volunteer Training Division) People should be careful about drawing any hard conclusions from the training statistics. It's only recently that we've made a concerted effort to collect these statistics, and council level compliance in terms of reporting that data can still be spotty. If they did training some time ago those records might not be available, and when people move between councils or take out of council training they often get disconnected from their records. The online training we're now doing a better job of tracking. But its safe to say the training statistics are underreported. We stand by the BSA's position stated in the National Parent Initiative materials - "The Boy Scouts of America takes great pride in our adult leadership." Scouting volunteers are good people, and it would be wrong to draw negative conclusions from the training statistics. Those are more a challenge for us to do a better job making training readily available to scouters as part of our service. Training should be viewed as just one component that supplements, but does not replace, reading and becoming familiar with the materials, learning from other scouters in the unit, district, or council, roundtables, work of the Commissioner Service, etc. Respectfully submitted, Beavah and a good ol' Beavah too!

Yah, Victonate, if yeh actually care about such minutia, I'm happy to chat with you by personal message on how exactly all the training courses and BSA materials actually say and mean what I was describin'. But yeh don't need that, right? When yeh get a chance, if you feel it would be helpful, why don't you share a response to kenk's question - where exactly do you think your SM needs the most help? Beavah

Yah, this thread is so entertainin'! But as yeh all keep makin' references to the Handbook, I'm left wonderin'... Who said the Handbook is Required? Beavah

Anyone who gets a scout-related news feed or has dealt with such things within the BSA sees these sad tales go by on a regular basis. But this one caught my eye, because it relates to a discussion we had some months back about statutes of limitations for these things. This is a 40-year old accusation! The first the BSA hears about it is when the media contacts 'em for a comment about the suit. Da plaintiff attorney also looks to be venue-shopping, filin' the $5M suit in Oregon even though the council and troop are in Idaho. It can be difficult to defend against this sort of thing (do you know where you were on June 12, 1967, and how to contact da witnesses to confirm that?). Even then, the damage to reputation can be dreadful. Law must balance the scales of justice between victims of bad acts, whom we rightly feel for and want to defend, and defendants accused of bad acts, who may well be innocent. ------- http://www.2news.tv/news/15817857.html NAMPA - A new childhood sexual abuse lawsuit will be filed Thursday against a Nampa area Boy Scout troop and LDS ward, Portland attorney Kelly Clark said. Clark, who frequently handles such cases around the country, said the case will be filed in Circuit Court in Malheur County, Oregon, where some of the abuse occurred, although the Boy Scout troop, No. 101 and the LDS ward, Nampa Second Ward, were based in Nampa. Dave Kemper, a representative of Boy Scouts of America Ore-Ida, said he was unaware of any lawsuit. "Anytime there is an allegation it's taken very seriously," Kemper said. "Since we're not aware of any of it, it would be pre-mature to comment. And we will take the appropriate action based on the circumstances in regard to the allegation." Clark will be in the Boise area on Thursday and will provide more details, he said.