Beavah

There are alot of fools who need to believe those rules exist! The population is getting bigger and bigger. Unfortunatly, so are the number adult people who light campfires with 3 gallons of gas, who bring a 18 pack of Bud because it's just no big deal, and who will ruin your whole troop if you just give them the chance! Balderdash. Our population in Scoutin' has declined, and I don't see any more of this sort of thing now than I did 30 years ago. In fact, to be honest, I see a lot less of it. There's not a real need for more regulation. There's just an odd sort of fear out there that creates da perceived need for more regulation. And, well, there's a need for executives to generate and respond to a perceived need for regulation because it justifies their salary . I mostly see what BadenP and Cricket and others do, eh? We have a lot of beginners out there, and just like beginner swimmers cling to anything that floats, beginners at other things cling to rules and regulations. Gives 'em a sense of comfort and confidence in da scary water, even if it's only a wading pool. Unfortunately it's easier to memorize da rule than actually put in the effort to go out and learn how to do somethin' well, eh? So by and large folks that know how to do, do, and those that don't know how to do make up a rule. Kids aren't as fearful, and by and large even when they're afraid they're willin' to go out an try. Ever watch 'em learning how to skateboard? Ouch! Too hard for my old bones. They're willin' to put in da effort to get good at things, eh? As a result, they don't have much time or patience for memorizin' 100 pages of rules and regulations. Booorrrriiiinnnng! Yeh have a few workin' rules and pay more attention when it gets scary, is all. So I don't think we need to worry about tryin' to regulate da mythical leader who buys 10 lbs of magnesium shavings for da fire. He's a fiction, and even if he weren't da fellow wouldn't read the regulations anyways. What we have to is to get more adults out in da field and comfortable with the real capabilities of kids so they aren't so darn fearful of hobgoblins. That way they won't feel da need to cling desperately to every phrase in G2SS... real, or made up! Beavah

Ah, yes, but often when I'm Camping in a beautiful woodland I find rapture... or at least it brings a smile to my face. Does that count?

I should add that if your council trainin' folks are clueless, the fellow from the troop can choose to do da PTC course to help 'em out. Also he might try to contact da climbing director in a neighboring council to see what they may offer. B

Yah, CNY, no "certification" is needed to take a troop rock climbing, eh? One leader just needs to be Climb On Safely trained (one of da online modules) and yeh have to make use of a reputable guide service for climbing instruction and supervision. If you're talkin' about a unit self-guiding a climbing activity instead of using an outfitter then yeh need to be aware of a few things. 1) There is no such thing as "climbing certification" in the real world, at least until yeh get up to the AMGA Guide level (think people who can lead yeh up Denali). 2) Consequently, the BSA / G2SS / CoS guideline is that outside of usin' a commercial outfitter yeh get someone who has been trained to approximately that level by a national, regional, or locally recognized group. That can be da National Outdoor Leadership School, Outward Bound, a College or University outdoor leadership/rec program, PTC, etc. It might also be a local outfitter that trains climbing guides for its own staff. In other words, that yeh get real, genuine training at rock climbing and climbing instruction from someone reputable who does that sort of thing. That should not be one of da typical seat-time "certification" trainings, eh? Da PTC offering IMHO is relatively weak, and that's a full week long outdoors. So yeh should look for something at least at that level of a week-long course (assumin' the fellow has plenty of personal climbing experience). I'd be a bit wary of da average Joe who has done some climbing leading kids in our sort of setting unless they've had some genuine experience with that sort of leading under supervision. Yeh can find some of these locally, I'm sure. Here's a link for an outfitter offerin' the AMGA single-pitch instructor training in the 'Gunks: http://www.high-xposure.com/ Yeh could also get an AMGA guide to set up a specialty/private class for yeh. Someone like http://www.thegunksguide.com/ Hope that helps a bit. Beavah

Yah, but what I want to know is if yeh can still be a Christian if you're still here, eh? Weren't we all supposed to be enraptured by now? Beavah

Yah, hmmm... I'm a long way from my chemistry classes, but I can't see how a chlorine oxidation of pine oil produces much chlorine gas, eh? Probably nuthin' yeh have to worry about. Da bigger concern with any of this stuff to my mind is three-fold. First, knowin' what you're doin'. Yeh can get all kinds of yahoo stupid Darwin Award candidates from folks who mix chemicals they don't understand. Chlorine and pinesol won't do it, but chlorine and anything with ammonia can get a lot of folks sent to the hospital. Second, it's quantity. A small bit of stuff is generally fine, eh? After all, a match or a lighter is a chemical fire starter, and those small fire sticks or gels are chemical accelerants. Only difference between a match and a bucket of black powder is the quantity. So small stuff to teach survival fire starting is OK, but folks too often get a bit carried away with how big a match they're usin'. Third thing is example. What example do we want to give the lads, knowin' that they'll copy anything we do on their own (and add "improvements")? I think yeh have to be mindful of that. Now, I also reckon education is a fine thing, eh? Teachin' a lad how to properly and safely use lighter fluid or self-starting charcoal to light a grill seems like it's somethin' they should learn in scouting. I could even see havin' someone who does theater pyrotechnics come out and do an evening demo. . But I reckon amateur evening campfire theatrical pyrotechnics is somethin' to take great care with, or reconsider. Beavah

Yah, hmmm... I reckon this sort of stuff belongs at da family level, not with the troop. I know all kinds of families who let their kids set up various online accounts at a young age, and a few who get all wigged out about a 17 year old having email. While I suppose there's some citizenship merit to actually making the lads read through one of those bizarre terms of service agreements or click-through software licenses just to be astonished by the unmitigated gall of the company, I doubt yeh could find an adult in da country that's actually read all of 'em. And let me tell yeh, I don't think a single one of 'em is enforceable as written. If yeh have time to worry about 12 year olds on Facebook, then I reckon things must be goin' really, really well in your troop, eh? In that case, spend your time dreamin' up some great new outings rather than being the Internet police. You'll be happier and healthier for it. Beavah

Yah, what OwntheNight said, eh? There is no "up the chain" here. A pinewood derby, like most good activities for kids this age, is like a pick-up game, not some hyper-competitive league with paid officials. Neither the Chartered Org. nor the BSA is goin' to want to hear about it. I honestly only want as fair of an environment as possible and let the best car win. Then yeh might have the wrong goals for Cub Scouting, eh? What we want for Cub Scouting is to have the most fun, friendly, learning environment for boys and for all of the adults. Winning means achieving that, eh? Just like a pick-up game. Nobody actually cares who wins. Nobody cares that the weaker batter got 5 swings instead of 3. Yeh play for fun and fellowship. Beavah

Aw Beav, Always the legalist, lol Yah, it's a congenital defect. Don't make fun of da handicapped!

So, JoeBob, same question, eh? Would you repeal all of the U.S. laws and abrogate all the treaties which make felony offenses of the mistreatment of prisoners, even in wartime? Would you do so to allow the Executive Branch, when it chooses to call somethin' a "War", to detain and torture those suspected of possessing information and their families without any check or balance? A yes or no will suffice Because that's what we're talkin' about here, eh? Millions have never been at risk. Aside from 9/11 which was a trick that could only work once, we've had nuthin' but Akhmed da village idiot, who posed more of a risk to himself than to anyone else. How many innocent folks are yeh willing to authorize the Executive Branch to take in the middle of the night in order to prevent one moron every five years from disrupting a plane schedule? Are we really such cowards that that risk makes us wet our pants and want to start torturing captives? Yep, as parents we all get a bit nuts when our kids are involved. Anyone who has ever responded to an accident scene with a kid knows that the first thing yeh do is manage da behavior of the parents because they sometimes pose a risk to themselves and others. That's why parents and family members would never be allowed to make these decisions by anyone who cared about 'em. Their brains are overloaded by stress and grief and they're nowhere near thinkin' straight. Again, far more innocent people have been killed in da war on drugs, eh? Far more people's children's lives have been lost or destroyed. Should we authorize the Executive to torture the kids who are caught with a joint for information? Spirit the lad who the principal thinks smells of marijuana off to Mexico to be "interrogated" by da specialists in their enforcement agency? Beavah

Yah, BadenP, whatever. I was respondin' to your statement that is why an EBOR is NOT supposed to ever be done, organized or controlled by the troop hierarchy but is under the direct control of the Dist. Advancement Chair and who he/she deems fit to determine if the boy has qualified for Eagle. That's clearly incorrect, eh? In fact it is often done by the troop committee, organized by the troop committee, and controlled/chaired by the troop committee. It is rarely under the direct control of the DAC, even when conducted at the district level. What I said in my reply was in fact exactly correct: "An Eagle BOR may be conducted by the council, by the district, or by the unit. The council decides which it will use. In the case of a council which does EBORs at the unit level, like qwazse's, the district or council send one voting representative to join the BOR. The unit selects the other board members. The district rep. may be invited to chair the board, or not at the unit's discretion." Beavah who has posted an award for his lost Schrodinger's Cat. If more people look, he might decide to exist!

Less well know than Schrodinger's possibly, but does that mean it doesn't exist? I reckon it depends who's looking, eh? I hear tell it has to be an intelligent being . B

It doesn't require any expression, eh? Both questions are yes or no questions. A simple yes or no. No need to worry about da Beavah misinterpreting that. Do you repudiate the teachings of your faith on ethical behavior even in wartime (because Sherman called war hell or whatever)? Yes or No. Do you wish the U.S. to repeal all of the laws and abrogate the treaties pertaining to the proper treatment of prisoners, which would give the Executive Branch carte blanche on the issue? Yes or No. I'll even take a simple Y or N. Yeh see, when yeh come right down to it and call it what it is, I think all good and honorable people are ashamed of this sort of thing, and while they might in moments of passion or grief wish for it, or in moments of intellectual weakness try to justify it, in the end those are only moments of weakness and not who they are. And thank you for all you do for the lads and the program, too. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Except that you're makin' an argument for a position in public, eh? So it's reasonable to ask yeh to justify the argument in public, or to withdraw it as bein' nuthin' more than tom-foolishness. So I'll ask again. Consider it a clarification question if yeh like, which is what it is. Do you repudiate the infallible teaching of your faith on the limits of moral behavior even in war? Would you repeal all of the U.S. laws and abrogate all the treaties which make felony offenses of the mistreatment of prisoners, even in wartime? Would you do so to allow the Executive Branch, when it chooses to call somethin' a "War", to detain and torture those suspected of possessing information and their families without any check or balance? Because that's what we're talkin' about here, eh? And all because we're afraid of Akhmed da Village Idiot. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

[double post. Google is reporting scouter.com as an "attack site"](This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, except da "War on Terrorism" is as much a word game as da "War on Drugs." So give up your word game dance and answer the question straight. Do you repudiate the infallible position of your faith in its authoritative teaching on the limits of just action even in war? Would you repeal da sections in the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the United States Code on the treatment of captives, and unilaterally withdraw da U.S. from all international treaties and conventions on human rights relating to prisoners of all sorts, so that you can authorize agents of the government to torture persons suspected of possibly having information... and their families? All on the say-so of the Executive branch, without any check or balance? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Location: Inside a high-walled compound in a posh suburban military district outside Tehran] Ibn Bah Ibnazz: "Ayatollah, I heard you sent Farooq to America." Ayatollah Fahd-al-Islami: "Yes, my friend. I figured there was a fair chance he might get Americans to start torturing their own children." Ibn: "Really? Surely that would be too much even for them!" Ayatollah: "You remember Akhmed?" Ibn: "Akhmed? The village idiot? The one who was caught urinating in Imam Ali's prize rose garden?" Ayatollah: "Yes, the imam was quite angry about that. So we gave him some leftover explosive we had from clearing that old stump out of Faisal's field and told him to stuff it in his underwear. Then we bought him a ticket to Detroit." Ibn: "He flew to Detroit with explosive in his underwear? But he's far too stupid to set it off!" Ayatollah: "Oh, we weren't so foolish as to give him a working detonator. He might have actually hurt someone here before he ever got on a plane. We just wanted to make sure the Americans caught him." Ibn: "Why would you do that, master?" Ayatollah: "Because Americans are like spoiled little children, Ibn. They are so fearful of anybody hurting them that they are terrified even of Akhmed the Village Idiot. Do you know what they did?" Ibn: "I assume they took away his underwear and sent him home to his mother with a spanking?" Ayatollah: "No, Ibn, you think too much like a Warrior for God. Because of Akhmed, they spent billions and billions of dollars installing special machines all over their country so that police could look at the citizens naked. All of their citizens, Ibn. Old women, 5 year old little girls. And then they made it legal to grope them up, too." Ibn: "Shameful infidels! All because we gave Akhmed some left over explosive and a plane ticket?" Ayatollah: "Of course. Americans are the most cowardly and depraved people on the planet, which is why it is a service to their own god Darwin to put them down like a lame camel. For fear of an idiot with a broken detonator who failed to harm a soul, they spend billions so that their police can look at little girls naked. And then those billions go to the company that makes the equipment, and they lobby the American government to install them in places other than airports so as to make more money. We couldn't have irradiated so many Americans if we had set off a hundred nukes across their continent!" Ibn: "And they claim to be businessmen! Hah! You got a million to one return on that investment!: Ayatollah: "Even better, we got rid of Akhmed. They're sure to torture him in Guantanamo Bay, and he doesn't know a thing. You know him, he'll make up hundreds of stories which will keep the American operatives chasing wild geese for years. We even mentioned a few things to Akhmed before he left that will lead the Americans to launch drone attacks against some of their own allies in Afghanistan. You don't think they keep hitting innocent wedding parties on their own, do you?" Ibn: "You are truly wise, Imam. Praise Allah!" (This message has been edited by Beavah)

The normal rules of chivalry don't apply to an enemy who wants to die so he can get to his virgins. Yah, there are always excuses, eh? But recall that I said "If we are at "war" against an unconventional enemy, then torturing captives only leads to stiffened resolve, better recruiting, less willingness to surrender, the torture of innocent parties by mistake, less willingness on the part of local population to cooperate in giving us vital intelligence, and the loss of allies and respect in the eyes of the world. " No claims about retaliation, we know they aren't goin' to follow da rules. It doesn't matter, eh? What they're tryin' to do is to get us to break our own rules, because that does the most damage to us. B

Yah, Horizon, I agree with most of what you said. I'd just say that it's not wrong because it's illegal, it's illegal because it's wrong. But the point is that we'd both act differently than Old_OX, eh? It is our business because we care about other people. Beavah

Yah, Scoutfish, I just use da regular embedded HTML, eh? < I > For italics < / I > < B > For bold < / B > etc. Scouter.com seems to allow a pretty wide range of embedded HTML, but I usually forget all da other ones . B

So I think you may be wrong this time, rare I know but still wrong. Mrs. Beavah would claim that I'm wrong all da time, at least when I disagree with her. Here's what ACP&P has to say on the matter: Eagle Scout Boards of Review The Boy Scouts of America has placed the Eagle Scout board of review in the hands of either the troop, team, crew or ship committee or the district or council committee responsible for advancement.... At least one district or council representative shall be a member of the Eagle board of review, when conducted at the unit level, and may serve as chairman if so requested by the unit. - Advancement Committee Policies & Procedures #33088 It's been that way for as far back as I remember, though as I get older I find I can't remember as well as I used to. So yeh see, in many councils, like qwazse's, EBORs are indeed organized, controlled, conducted by the troop committee, with a district rep. as guest. I think lots of times folks get used to da way their particular unit/district/council does things, eh? Perfectly natural. Then they start to believe that their way is the way, rather than being just one of the possible approaches. I've worked with both systems in this case. Of the two, I find the unit-level BORs generally provide a better experience for everybody. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Sounds like a nice progression for da boys, moosetracker. I'd do somethin' similar, starting with ground school and then moving to a gym. The more yeh train the boys the more yeh can do, and the safer you will be in the field. Safety is always enhanced when the participants have more knowledge. I agree with nolesrule, eh? Even if he is a Seminoles fan. For climbing activities yeh need to keep a pretty high supervisor to participant ratio. So I'd return to your 3 instructors. They should be 1) very familiar with the climbing area being used, 2) have real experience workin' with novices and kids, and 3) have some preparation from a recognized agency. Number 3 is just because da self-taught folks often have holes in their understanding and procedures (as demonstrated by their accident rate). Now, the thing yeh should be aware of is that there is no recognized, portable "certification" for climbing instructors. It just doesn't exist, short of da AMGA programs which are for Denali-level guides. So yeh have to use your judgment. For just basic top roping, I'd be inclined to accept anyone who has worked for any commercial provider of outdoor climbing experiences if they had an instructor training program. Beavah

Choices that impact me, or mine, are my business, others are not ... it's just that simple. Yah, hmmmm.... So if I may ask, why are you a scouter? That sounds a bit harsh, but it isnt meant to be. Here's what I mean. If a lad in your troop were to start smoking weed or having sex with multiple partners, would that not concern you? Would you not involve yourself in some way? Judging acts is just justice, eh, and justice is necessary for love and compassion. We judge the acts of others in our mind and heart because we care about them, and want to help them learn and grow. That's a different thing than judging people, which is left to God alone. B

LOL, Jackpot indeed! Though BA and I agree far more than I let on, especially on Scouting. But I'm really interested in an answer to my question, OGE, if yeh care to share. I'm always interested in those whose professed beliefs and advocated actions are so at odds. Beavah

Yah, BadenP, I'm afraid yeh got your policy and practice wrong there. An Eagle BOR may be conducted by the council, by the district, or by the unit. The council decides which it will use. In the case of a council which does EBORs at the unit level, like qwazse's, the district or council send one voting representative to join the BOR. The unit selects the other board members. The district rep. may be invited to chair the board, or not at the unit's discretion. Most smaller districts/councils use the district level EBOR that you describe, while most larger districts/councils use unit level EBORs for practical reasons. I can only guess that you must have worked in one of da former. In my experience, district level EBORs can often be worse than those at the unit level. The unit level folks know the boy and have a long-term relationship with da boy and the family, while the district folks at times tend to see themselves more as external gatekeepers and inquisitors. YMMV. Beavah