Beavah

Yah, what scoutldr and John-in-KC said, eh? I'm a bit confused by your gettin' an EIN number. Is da pack separately incorporated? This isn't usually needed and can create some (tax authority) confusions and complications. Incorporating and filing for your own exempt status under 501©(3) is a pretty durn complex undertaking with a lot of reporting requirements; it'd be some serious overkill for all but a very, very active troop or Sea Scout Ship wit lots o' assets. Better to do everything through your CO as John-in-KC suggests.

The BSA on the other hand is an organization which you can leave whenever you choose. This is only a matter of degree, eh? A person can choose to leave a state or country, it's just expensive and a serious headache. Workin' for change or makin' change by refusing to sit at the back of the bus might be a better choice... not just for oneself, but for the community. A person can choose to leave a job, but it's difficult and a headache. Workin' for change or makin' change by starting a union drive, going on strike, bein' a whistleblower, etc. might be a better choice... not just for oneself, but for one's fellow workers. A person can choose to leave da BSA. But da BSA has a monopoly on Scouting for boys in the U.S., so the choice is to leave that kind of youth work. That's annoying and a bit of a headache. Workin' for change or makin' change by doing what's right within your own unit might be a better choice... not just for oneself, but for the kids that you serve.

Calico and others have some great thoughts on this, eh? But most of what is being said pertains to council or district events (like summer camp). The Arkansas trip where the boy drowned is a unit activity, where rather than falling on the council, the primary liability and obligation falls on the Chartered Org. and volunteer. Da BSA pros may be there to help, but each unit should have its emergency plan in place that the CO signed off on. Bigger CO's will already have mechanisms for this that a troop needs to be aware of. The pastor, the school board, the VFW president, their legal counsel, and their insurer all need to be brought into the loop. How each troop should handle it depends on their setup, eh? But you want the procedure in the little red emergencies book; ya don't want to be makin' it up on the fly.

Dat's humorous, Tim. I like da notion of a simple consequence rather than a whole lot of adult lecturin'. Same with EagleinKY's hiking a scout back to his buddy. I think the easiest thing to do most of the time is simple, reliable consequences without a lot of talk. I've seen one troop where if they find a boy is out alone stops everything and everyone does a lost camper drill, just like it was "real." With the whole troop a bit miffed that you messed up an hour of fun, you learn quick, eh? And the rest of the guys learn da procedures for when it's "real."

1) I think this is your option. The guidelines for Boy Scout advancement in Sea Scouting state that "Position of responsibility requirements may be met by the Venturer serving as boatswain, boatswain's mate, yeoman, purser, or storekeeper in his ship." (ACP&P p. 39). Nothing particular about accepting signoffs when transferring units. Since the Skipper and the Ship Committee have to certify that the boy met all of the requirements, I'd treat this the same way we treat a merit badge that a boy starts with one counselor and then tries to finish with another. It's the counselor's discretion whether he/she accepts the prior "partial" or re-checks it, because it's the counselor's signature on the final "OK." 2)Don't know enough about the Sea Scout advancement requirement, but I assume it's somethin' like 75% over the course of some period of time. It doesn't seem to me like missing a month would affect anything very much. I wouldn't be inclined to flex for this. As for football, etc. it's not really your problem, eh? That's up to the kids and their choices. If you help 'em run a fun and exciting program, they'll make the time. I think, though, that Venturing tends to be more on "kid time" than "adult time", and you'd best get used to it. Kid time for high schoolers means periods of relatively "light" activity followed by periods of impressive effort. So maybe for your ship fall will be a time for a light load: day trips, social evenings, etc., and winter will be "heavier." Ya gotta let the kids settle this. Just share with them the CO's concern (and a bit of talk about honor) and they'll figure it out, eh?

Much like blacks sitting in the back of the bus and having different water fountains has changed. Excellent example, Lynda J. Those segregationist laws didn't change until courageous women and men chose to disobey them, often inspired by the values of the church to which they were "chartered." Hoping had very little to do with it, eh?

I'm with OGE. Ya gotta trust your fellow leader in uniform. Maybe it was the boy's parent. Maybe it was a good scouter who was having a serious conversation with a lad about something of greater importance (his parents getting divorced? his brother going to jail? his girlfriend being pregnant? his mom dying of cancer? ). If he waived you off, take the waive off in stride as cheerful service and support of a fellow scouter, who may be dealing with things you don't know about. Kids smoking is an important issue, but it isn't always the most important issue, eh?

High Water Cited in Boy's Death Swollen River likely a factor in Scout's drowning, officials say Arkansas Democrat-Gazette A swollen river from heavy rainfall Friday and Saturday likely contributed to the drowning of a Little Rock Boy Scout during a Sunday canoe trip, officials said. The U.S. Geological Survey indicated the Caddo River in Montgomery County was near flood level Sunday afternoon when Hari Natgunasekaram drowned after his canoe tipped over. Hari, who was 11 or 12, was with members of Troop 59 of Little Rock who had gone to the river for a canoe trip, according to the Montgomery County sheriffs office. Hari and another boy were a half-mile upstream from Manfred Road near Caddo Gap in southern Montgomery County just before 1 p.m. when the canoe struck a submerged tree and flipped. Both the boys wore life jackets, and Scoutmaster Brad Chilcote of Little Rock, who was with the troop, pulled one of the boys to safety, the sheriff said. Reached at home, Chilcote declined to talk about the accident. After Chilcote and a Scout leader searched for Hari for about an hour with no luck, they called 911, the sheriff said. Rescuers found the canoe upside down, completely submerged and trapped between two trees at 3:30 p.m., the sheriff said. The trees were cut loose and the canoe came free in the rushing water. It was then they found Hari. The boy was pronounced dead at a nearby hospital, the sheriff said. Little Rock Scout leaders did not return phone calls seeking comment. Marcell Jones, president of the Arkansas Canoe Club, said rivers across the state were running much deeper and faster than normal on Saturday and Sunday. The Caddo River is not dangerous under normal circumstances, Jones said. Any river can be dangerous when you have a large rain. At the clubs annual Canoe Safety School, which will be this weekend on the Mulberry River, one of the main topics will be avoiding trees in the water, Jones said. Not only can trees knock canoes over, but people can become caught on their branches underwater bringing on the nickname strainers. Those are things you avoid at all costs, Jones said. ***** I didn't realize they put on the river on Sunday. The river came up fast on Saturday and could have caught someone unawares; on Sunday it should have been very obvious that the river was in a flood. A tragic choice not to bail out of the planned trip.

Beav...where do you see difficulty for the PLC? Nice setup, anarchist. And nice implementation of youth run (with da occasional necessary promptin'). It definitely helps to be a big troop, eh? (way bigger than the average troop size around here). I've only seen this kind of setup in big troops. Da challenge I saw for the PLC was that your multi-layer stuff involves 2 or 3 times the plannin' load. Now, if you're mostly repeatin' year to year, that drops a fair bit. The second challenge I saw was instructional/leadership support for the multi-layers. How many older scouts do you have who stay "behind" with the younger guys to teach and help them grow? Do these guys rotate so they get some of da fun older stuff, or do they stay with the younger guys to get to know them better? Or do the adults do more of the instructin' through the same-age PL's? Do the groups change based on skill? So if a younger guy is a strong swimmer and watersports kid, can he go with the older boys canoein? Or does he have to stay with the weaker guys? Does an out-of-shape older boy who can't easily do a longer hike/bike have an "opt out" to a shorter ride? Sounds like you're in horizontal rather than vertical patrols?

In all your time, kd, what was your favorite scouting volunteer job? Da one that you remember most fondly as "magic." Go back and do that one. Just that one. Or, it could be that one of the things that's "magic" for you is learning/doing new things, since you've served at so many levels. If you've exhausted the list of scouting things, consider becomin' a LNT master, an ARC instructor, or some other outside thing that can bring back to kids in Scouting. Or perhaps it's time to leave scoutin', and take your skills to your local school system in some way (tutor? mentor? outdoor program?).

We seem to concur that the biggest failure of Crews, is that they do not tie themselves with any of the five Venturing Specialities Gotta agree with this, eh? A crew that tries to be more than one of those things ends up doin' nothin' very well. Ya have to know who you are and what you're sellin'. In fact, there should be different names for each group so as to clearly distinguish them. I'm not sure why they all have to be called "Venturing". After all "Sea Scouts" keeps its own name and distinct character. I'm not sure I buy the middle-school style monthly themes, though. Most of da crews around here that are successful meet on a high-schooler's schedule. Definitely not weekly. Monthly is about right for "business," with an activity schedule that goes from dead calm to frenetic at various times during the year. But there definitely is a lot of room to improve materials and support, which are decidedly "sparse." These should be tailored to the different Specialty areas.

If Gern's theory holds any water, whose sandbox rules applied, the BSA's or the CO's? The BSA stopped deliverin' sand. Since that pack and troop are apparently the only scouting game in town, they could just keep right on with business as usual, decidin' on a uniform, running trips and handing out their own parallel awards. In a few years, a DE anxious about "numbers" would re-issue a charter. Who knows, that may be how it plays. Or it may be dat the CO's make some leadership changes to the council and re-issue the charter. Or.... Lucky for the BSA that the CO was the ELCA and not the Catholics or Methodists, eh? That Pennsylvania council otherwise might have been left with a lot of sand. I'm still curious about what the real story is.

FScouter declared publicly an ethical position that he presumed applied to all of us in Scouting, to the point of calling other scouters unethical who did not comply with his view. I declared publically the contrary position. But you're right, OGE, while addressing the counterpoint to the argument is OK publically, takin' him to task for the unethical comment should have been done in private. My apologies to FScouter and the group.(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, mine too jr56. I wonder how many troops have protocols for this? One troop I know that has its act together has the scout leader call the COR, who then goes with the IH to personally notify the parents. Statistically, this might be more likely to be used to notify the family of an adult's death on a trip. They also have a very well thought-out in-troop accident review process. In many rivers, "strainers" like the one described are da most serious hazards. Even fairly mild current can pin a canoe or a person underwater against a tree. I wonder how many troops are aware of the hazard? I wonder how many carry ropes and saws and know how to do a quick extraction? The problem with Safetly afloat sometimes is that it seems generic for a flat, warm Texas lake. But this was different. This river came up fast with the rainfall, so that by midday Saturday it was runnin' at 20 times average flow volume. Perhaps a dam release too? This troop might have been caught in the sudden rise, or otherwise been unaware that a river is very different with different amounts of water in it, eh? They probably didn't understand how the river behaved with rain runoff. See http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ar/nwis/uv/?site_no=07359610&PARAmeter_cd=00065,00060 (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Minimum requirements is your opportunity to help boys develop habits that lead to character. Yeh really think so, Eagledad? I've always thought of minimum requirements as a sort of a bureaucratic self-defense mechanism to try to fend off complainers, eh? In my mind, I've never associated meeting just the minimum requirements with what I'd call "character." Da Scout Oath and Law aren't about minimums. They're about maximums. Each boy doing his personal best to do his duty, to go out of his way to serve others, to work hard to develop his skills and fitness. In da character business, a boy who is workin' flat out but not succeeding at a POR might get a pass. A talented, high-achieving boy who is nominally "successful" by doin' the bare minimum really shouldn't. (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Anarchist, how big is your troop? Seems like a much higher plannin' load than normal for an average set of PLC boys, eh?

FScouter in the Squirtguns thread writes: It is unethical to pick and choose which rules we follow, and unethical to teach boys the same. Yah, I wasn't sure which side of the squirtgun issue F was on, eh? But I'm troubled by da abandon with which F slaps his fellow volunteers with the "unethical" label. I am sorry to put this in a Christian context, but I trust others will add from their traditions. "On the sabbath... his disciples plucked and ate some heads of grain. And some of the Pharisees said, 'Why are you doing what is not lawful on the sabbath?' ... and again "The scribes and Pharisees watched, to see whether he would heal on the sabbath, so that they might find accusation against him... And he looked around on them all, and said to the man with the whithered hand 'stretch out your hand' and he did so, and his hand was restored. The Pharisees were filled with fury." (Luke 6: 1-11). or again "This man receives sinners and eats with them [making himself unclean according to the law]. So he told them this parable: "What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the 99 and go after the one he has lost?" (Luke 15:2-3) or again "'Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. The law of Moses commands us to stone her.'...he stood up and said to them "let him who is without sin cast the first stone." ... and Jesus said to her, 'Neither do I condemn you.'" (John 8:1-11). and on and on in the Acts of the Apostles and the Letters of Paul we are told again and again that the just man honors the principle not the rule, in the service of God and His people. It is far from being unethical to choose how we follow rules and teach children to do the same, for it is the lesson that was taught by him who many of us call Teacher and Lord. If you come from a religious tradition where duty to God means puttin' lawyer-like compliance over principle, then at least be reverent and respectful of da rest of us and keep your charges of "unethical" to yourself, eh?

I told this to the District Commish, and he said, and I quote "they're wrong; you answer to me; I AM the District!" (tact is not one his strong suits.) Nor knowledge of the rules and relationships it would seem. I love it as a UC when people in support positions start to think of themselves as feudal lords, eh? I'd encourage you to write up the conversation as a formal complaint, then trot it off with the COR to the district chairman and the DE (with cc's to the CAC for courtesy). Nothin' about the requirement issue. The real issue is that this guy is out of line, backdoorin' the SM and advancement committee like that. He can cause a lot of damage and ill will in programs with that approach. Then I'd just ignore him, eh? You're CEO of your program, your job is to do what's right for your kids. You don't report to the DC, you report to your unit committee and CO.

There's got to be some more in da backstory on this, eh? Anyone live in the area?

What if parents/scout appeal to council and national? Will COR's position still hold weight? All the weight he/she chooses to exert. The COR can always exercise the nuclear option. He/she can remove the boy from the roster. Parents who aren't really interested in developing character and citizenship in their sons don't have an automatic right to participate in and earn scouting awards and honors.

National should buy that 5,000 acre camp that Chicago is tryin' to sell. Plenty of space.

- Firearm: Waterguns are not a firearm. Yah, but paintball toys and lasertag gizmos aren't firearms either, eh? And yeh could put a drop of food collorin' or kool-aid in a water pistol and then it would be a dreaded dye gun. The only reason given for prohibiting these (safe) activities is da bit about not pointing a "weapon-like doohickey" at another human (presumably because toy gun play offends someone's sensibilities). So what about old fashioned cowboy cap-guns like when I was a kid? Nerf guns? Those cute little ping-pong-ball guns? I used to spend hours playin' "Army" with da neighborhood kids using sticks shaped like guns (and dry dirt clod "grenades"). Does it count if yeh point or throw those and shout "Bang!"?

SMT99, yeh should of course do what is right for the boy, eh? You know that, we all know that. And what's right for the boy is to teach him (and all the other boys) that a position of responsibility requires livin' up to the responsibility. If you're quick on the trigger, remove him. If you're not, don't sign. If a bureaucrat of a Commish gives you grief, tell him to go back to trainin' on what our aims and methods really mean. It's sad that every youth activity - school, sports, scouts, bands, theater, whatever - has parents like this mom. Some of da saddest cases are when the first person to say "no" to a young man is a judge pronouncing sentence. Do your part to uphold the expectations the way a man of courage should. That's the example dat the boys and the parents need, eh?

Not to get overly picky about nits, but it is important that we all understand da relationship, eh? The BSA's actions are limited to refusing to grant a charter to use the BSA's Boy Scout program materials. They can refuse to deliver sand to the CO's sandbox in the CO's playground. The BSA can deny registration to an adult, as part of its duty under the charter agreement to "assist" the CO in leader selection and training. But the CO can still allow the adult to participate in its youth programs, including the troop, in the same way that it can allow non-registered parents, its youth ministry director, its pastor, outside consultants, etc. to participate. And of course, if the BSA chooses to stop delivering sand, or the CO chooses at any point to dump the charter or refuse to renew, the CO can continue to run an outdoor leadership, character development program on its own or in partnership with someone else. For a small CO, that might not affect the BSA much and might increase the burden on the CO. For a big CO that already runs other youth programs and therefore has insurance and an infrastructure, this is not that big a deal. But it would devastate the BSA.

To complete an overly silly analogy for those who care, it's the CO's sandbox, but the BSA is the sand provider. The CO gets to decide who comes to play, and whether the sand is used to just dig around in or is mixed with water to build sandcastles or with cement to build a skateboard park. The BSA can choose not to sell them sand each year. And the BSA has a monopoly on sand. So they can leverage the monopoly in certain ways to try to make the CO do some things with its sandbox, by threatening not to deliver sand. In the big world of adults, we usually call such a practice a violation of the antitrust laws. But it doesn't change the legal and ethical reality that unit volunteers work for the CO, and have a fiduciary duty to follow the CO's instructions and policies first and foremost, because the CO owns the sandbox, "hires" the adults, and is the party legally responsible for what goes on.