Torveaux

I guess it is getting late for much on this, but here are my 2 cents. I try to learn what the boys are into outside of Scouting as well as inside. Perhaps if part of the program dovetailed with his interests, he would be more willing to help out. I have one or two boys who really love charades. Ever since the first den meeting that we did charades for Wolf or Bear, these guys have loved it. I use the chance to do charades as a carrot for getting other things done. As mentioned by the others, this is a parent thing that needs to be addressed early. I understand and appreciate parents that are willing to force their kids to participate in things that are good for them rather than simply what they want to do. The problem may be a babysitting thing, but it may be that they just do not understand the degree to which he is 'checked out'. I usually have 1 or more parents at any given den meeting. Does this boy act the same if a parent is there? Sometimes the parents are not on the same page. I have one boy that snaps right in line for dad, but mom is too wishy washy with him. Other boys are more apt to do it for mom.

Unless the Pack Committee authorized her in advance to spend Pack funds, I would suggest she keep any items she purchased and write off the rest as a donation to Scouting. More importantly, I would like to recommend something we tried this year to avoid future issues like this. 1) Tell everyone up front what the cost of a year of Scouting is in your Pack. In our case it was about $100. 2) Do the math to figure out how many $ worth of sales each boy needs to reach to 'pay' for his own membership. 3) Let the parents know up front that any boy that is unable or unwilling to sell at least that much is responsible for the balance to the Pack to cover his membership. (ie, if you get 40% profit and they sell $100 then the family is responsible for the remaining $60 as dues) 4) Do whatever you can do as a leadership group to make selling popcorn easy. In our Council we use the show and sell method (the Council provides the Pack with the popcorn up front so it can be sold and delivered at the same time). 5) Help any poor families in your Pack work it out in some other way to avoid a burden. 6) Set some additional incentives for the Dens/Individuals. If your Den all reaches a plateau, get them ice cream, or pizza, or a banner, whatever works for them. 7) Follow through by letting everyone know what the average sales per Scout was. In this way, those who do a good job of selling popcorn do not feel that they are having to pay for those who do not really try. This type of system helped us almost quadruple our profits in one year. (about the same number of kids) The bonus is that incentives and such may help get your profits up high enough to absorb the difference in the few cases where boys cannot reach their goal. In all honesty, we charge a base set of dues up front and then the balance is targeted by the popcorn sales. There is not really a good reason why you could not have the whole balance reachable through sales.

Mr. Lastname. Our Pack it is the same throughout. The High Schoolers that I coach in rugby also call us Mr. Lastname or Coach Lastname (or at least Coach). The respect is important and first names tend to start making boys think they are peers with adults. I think it is important for kids to understand that they are not adults and not everything adults do is OK for kids.

Our pack has skits at 3 or 4 Pack Meetings per year. The other meetings are too filled with activities and fun to fit skits into them. As a den leader, we have little enough time for working on requirements, crafts, games and such to add skits to every month's process. I guess with our small group, if a boy misses a meeting it gets difficult to rehearse a skit. I guess it is a bigger priority for some units than others.

Prairie, I don't know if you are being deliberately coy or if you simply do not understand the dynamics of life in the wild. Let me try to explain. I hunt pheasants, ducks and geese. Like most of my fellow hunters, I am lucky to get shots at 'a' bird, much less a 'trophy'. However, I understand that the big game types tend toward the larger males with showy antlers, horns, jaws, etc. (depending upon what species they are hunting) Now, a certain acre of land can support a certain number of any given species. Anything in excess of that will reduce the amount of safe cover or fodder for the animals. If there is not enough food and cover, the animals freeze to death or starve to death. One often leads to the other. Animals with low food intake freeze more easily. Mother nature does not care much about big racks and such. Often the 'smarter' animals are not those who are genetically larger or chronoligically older (those who tend to be bigger). Shooting the 'trophy' may or may not be the worst thing for the herd. The larger animals generally need more food, so shooting a 'trophy' could be better for the herd in the cases when food is scarce. Again, whether hunters shoot the strong or the weak does not really make the largest difference. The number per acre make the most difference. You may or may not be aware that hunting seasons tend to be in the Fall and early Winter months, long before the period wherein animals have starved, frozen or would be emaciated. By reducing the herds and flocks before Winter sets in, the starvation is prevented. Which animals are killed means much less than keeping numbers in check. Also, the license fees and (for many hunters) association dues (Ducks Unlimited, etc.) go to pay for the maintenance and improvement of the habitats favored by the animals. I am sure there are exceptions, but I don't know any hunters that kill for trophies that do not also process and consume the animal. While you can make the high-end case for expensive guns and equipment raising the cost. However, you must average that with the people that hunt for food. They do not have fancy new guns. They often have family heirlooms that have been through 3 or 4 generations. Many of them load their own rounds further reducing costs. They also butcher their own animals. The most expensive part is the license for these types of families. I would invite you out to ride with Game and Fish Wardens in the winter to take your photos of the dead and dying animals. Overpopulation kills more animals than hunters. By portraying the animals in an unrealistic light, you could be doing more harm than good. Shooting is much more humane than starvation.

MarkS, I think you have it backwards. We lose a good many Cub Scouts before they ever can join Scouting. Modern parents, right or wrong, get their kids into activities and earlier and earlier ages. If Scouting does not have some program to get them in the door early, they will never even try. Sure, the attrition rate may be higher, but the net total boys that are exposed to Scouting can be much higher. That mean more kids total in the program as Webelos at the end of the day. Now, if the program tries to be too intense or too rapidly get the boys camping and such, it could be counter-productive. But, a well-run, introductory program would be outstanding for overall recruitment. Face it, by age 5 or 6 most boys have participated in at least one extra-curricular activity (usually sports). The boys at this age can 'shop' for something that suits him and his family. If Scouting is closed to him during the shopping hours, he may use his available time to committ to soccer or Tae Kwon Do, or some YMCA activities. Sure, some parents are not interested in participating with their sons. Better that they learn that at age 5. You are not losing any additional people because they would either never join in the first place or they would wait until Wolves. Any good Marketing research proves that it is much easier to retain that to recruit. The ability to penetrate the market early is vital. Families are building relationships with organizations and the other families involved in them. The longer a family is involved in a program, the less willing they are to sever that relationship. The time available is limited and as such must be treated as a commodity. For example: Our feeder school has about 12-17 boys per grade. We generally get 8 or so as Tigers and then we lose 3-4 until about Bears. Most dens sit at about 5 kids. So what happened to the 7 or so boys who never even tried? I think by having a starter program for Kindergarten, we would see 10-15 boys in the initial program. Even if we lose 50% we still have 5-7 boys (up from 4-5) by the time they reach Bears. It may not seem like much to get 1 or 2 more boys per den, but that represents 20-25% increase in membership. Ultimately, it is the quality of the unit that will determine the retention rate. You cannot retain boys that have never had a chance. You avoid the problem with having a Pack program for them by only having them attend the 'special' Pack meetings. Den meetings are shorter to deal with shorter attention spans.

I love to hunt, mostly upland game and waterfowl. I don't care much for big game hunting, but I can understand how some would enjoy it. If you city boys have ever come across animals that have frozen or starved to death you could certainly understand why we need to have hunters. If you have driven on rural highways and seen the number of deer that have committed suicide against the grille of a vehicle, you would beg for hunting to be required. If you raised grain for a living and herds of deer devastated your crops, you would vote for any sort of hunting that would cull the herd. Hunters do more to protect the flocks and herds than their well-meaning yet sqeamish friends that take photos and leave the animals to starve.

OGE, 20 gauge, or .410 bore is one thing. A 16 kicks every bit as much as most 12s. In fact, I would much rather shoot either of my 12 gauges than my father's 16. That thing kicks like a mule. That being said, I started hunting at age 12 with a 12 gauge. Even so, I would recommend that inexperienced shooters start with a 20. Scouting may not have age limits but some states do. Be sure to check your local regulations.

MarkS, Where did you hear the diamond was being discontinued? The oval patch was introduced to go with the OPTIONAL tan shirt. The two do not cancel each other out.

First off the type in the subject is a bit off-putting...eeek! The devil is in the details. My daughter was a Daisy. Now she is a Brownie. My older son is a Web I. My next son will be in Kindergarten next year. I would love to be able to have a program for him and his classmates. The trick is to make it 1) affordable 2) interesting 3) give just enough connection to the Pack to make them interested in moving on. Here is what I would do: Meet once per month in school where possible or with the group in a fun place. Stick to 1/2 an hour perhaps up to an hour. Stay away from Pack meetings except on 'special' occasions. It may be different for some Packs, but Pinewood and Crossover would be enough. Give them a taste and include them in the ceremony to go from Lions to Tigers. The uniform? The red vests. That way they will have them and can use them as they grow. Like the Daisies, I would go for a patch system that builds on itself. The goal would only be to acquaint the boys and their families with Scouting. Perhaps they could learn the Law of the Pack and the Cub Scout Sign, but fun is key. Cost? $5 plus vest. National gets $1. Council gets $1. Pack gets $1. Lion's Den gets $2. The recruiting goal would be to get 100% participation. I see a lot of people who get their kids into Soccer (and to a lesser degree other sports) by this time. If you get people interested early you have a better chance of keeping them. If it is 'easy' for parents to attend and does not have a heavy investment, you will be much more likely to get them in the door. Don't think in terms of retention %, think of getting as many in the door as possible. Even in our small school/pack we get 1/2 to 1/3 of the boys in each class at most. If you can get 90-100% in a 'lite' program, you can go for 60-70% retention rates and still improve the overall size of a program.

The Red Shirts can be worn in environments where red is a naturally occuring color. Perhaps where Sumac grows...or in the fall...perhaps where certain flowers are in bloom that approximate the color. Or, perhaps they can re-define the color scheme and make the red shirts blended with green.

Prairie...WWI and WWII were both entered into by Dem. Presidents. Vietnam was drastically escalated by Dems. Lots of conspiracy theories (true or false) around US involvement in all of those. As for the lying thing. I think I prefer the middle ground in this argument. Yes, lying is always wrong. However, it can be the lesser of two wrongs in extreme cases. (the preserving of innocent life being paramount here) In the Anne Frank scenario, there may be clever ways to avoid lying, but lying to save her is less of a moral problem than offering her up. When it comes to policies, deliberately ignoring the policies in a deceitful manner is not often (ever) being done to preserve life. Hence, the two situations are not even remotely related.

While there may be quite a few differences in blue jeans, the current pants rules provide little more uniformity. 1) Shorts or Pants 2) Poly/Cotton Poly/Wool or Cotton 3) All outdated uniforms are still OK. 4) Like blue jeans, olive pants fade (and at different rates depending on material. It is not only the pants either. There are a variety of sock types and shirt types allowed as well. The combinations are many. I guess Uniformity is in the eyes of the beholder.

Bridging is one thing, that is what camping with Troops and Troop visits and learning the Scout Oath, etc. is all about. Webelos are part of the Pack, not part of a Troop. The uniform for Cubs provides a location to show what the boy has accomplished. Just when he gets much to show off, they have him change shirts and start over? If they insist on the tan shirts at some point, they should have them continue to wear all of their Cub Scout awards.

I think it is appropriate. I would, however, suggest that you consider having the boys make or select a few gifts for those less fortunate than themselves. Visit the elderly, do a craft that can be shared. Most kids already get too many gifts and do too little giving.

Same problem for my 7 year old. There are fewer and fewer things available, but fortunately she has 3 older female cousins that hand things down to her. So far sizes have been OK, but I don't think she is going to stay their shape much longer. Then we will be really stuck. Great job by the author.

Your suggestion makes a good deal of sense. Despite that, some will wail and gnash their teeth over the loss of the 'uniformity' of the uniform. This despite the fact that the current uniform is not really uniform either. Thank you for your perspective.

Kittle, I would suggest remaining with the Pack as well in a much reduced capacity. Serve on the Committee, help with an event or two. My reasoning is purely selfish for your younger son. He will have a better program if you and others like you continue to lend it stability. There are pros and cons to turnover. Some 'old-timers' are great leaders. Others are just power hungry moles that need to get a life outside Scouting. I think there are real advantages to units having a mix of parents and non-parents as leaders. The old-timers can lend continuity, but the unit needs the new blood as well. I am lucky, in a sense, that when my older boy bridges to Boy Scouts, the younger one will become a Tiger. I will remain active in Cub Scouts and offer limited service to the Troop. I think my older boy needs to spread his wings and Scouting is one of the safer places to do so. Maybe I will be a MB Counselor or some other ancillary role, but I will not be an ASM or SM, nor will I serve on BsOR. Perhaps after a couple of years learning the ropes, I will step up for those roles.

One major difference that I believe makes this intellectual exercise rather pointless. Monopoly is a game that is purchased and used. The owner is free to do as they please with it. Parker Brothers is not attempting to build character, they are merely attempting to make a profit. I think people still read too much into or out of the 'rules' to get consensus on what is a tweak. In my book, ignoring moronic rules like 'official' pants is a tweak. They add nothing to the program.

As mentioned earlier, the reason the BSA didn't have an explicit policy excluding gays before is that they didn't feel they needed one. Using the reasonable man standard, and placing oneself in the period prior to the 1980s, morally straight would include, well, straightness. I have noticed a good deal of "presentism" in these discussions. Some people seem to enjoy applying the cultural and moral norms of today to earlier times. This is one of the cardinal sins of historical research and would result in quite a poor grade if used in a paper. I guess on the lying issue, I see a lie such as responding tactfully when my wife asks a loaded question as a personal matter between she, I, and God. When one lies when representing the moral and ethical principles of others, it rises to a public level and becomes reprehensible. Even if you believe that someone else is being dishonest, that does not justify dishonestly in retaliation. BTW, the wording of the English language Bibles is poorly translated. The commandment is more accurately, "Thou Shalt Not Murder".

Bang! The badges are both OK. Oval was created for the Tan Uniform only. My son was never a Tiger and he likes the 'fruit salad' on his blue uniform, so he will use the diamond badge. 4 of 5 boys in our den wear the blue shirt. Only one was a Tiger. My understanding is that the Webelos Badge takes the place of the Tiger Badge on the blue shirt. Caveat: If my son outgrows his present shirt, there is no way I am going to buy a new blue one for the last year or so. He will probably start wearing the tan shirt late next year. Frankly, I think the tan shirt was a bad move. It further separates the Webelos from Cub Scouts. They are part of the Pack, not of the Troop. The more things that are kept unique, read cool, about Scouting, the more likely the boys are to continue. If it were my decision to make, I would have made the Tan shirt only OK for those boys who had earned their Compass point badge or entered 5th grade. (Essentially, Webelos IIs) Alternatively, I would have done something to ensure that those Cubs that had worked hard to get arrow points and rank badges would have had a way to display them on their Tan shirts. I would also have a small pin or something for each Cub rank that could be worn on the Scout uniform (akin to service stars?). Sorry, I guess I like the idea of the boys having an official way to show their accomplishments and dedication to Scouting.

Some things we did that helped... 1) Show and Sell. I don't know if this is available everywhere, but our council allows us to take product and essentially check it out (no fee) so the boys can take and fill an order. 2) We are sponsored by a private school, so we set up a booth for after Mass and sold to some hungry people. (we got a few unsolicited donations as well) 3) We were up front with people about what it cost the previous year and how much we needed to deliver the program. Most of the parents understood that if we do not sell enough, either the dues go up or the program goes down. 4) We did a skit that showed the boys how to sell. We made it funny, but emphasized safety and manners. 5) I don't know if this actually motivated any seller (more accurately, their parents) but we told them that, in effect, we needed them to sell enough to net the Pack $x or we would need to get the balance from them directly. I am not really in favor of this method, but we did do it. 6) Unlike previous years, we planned our meeting schedule such that we could have the popcorn sales info out to the families well before the sales could begin. That way they had multiple weekends to sell product. 7) As I mentioned before, in addition to the prizes from Trail's End, we started a Scout Account program wherein the boys could 'keep' 1/2 of the profit from their sales above a certain level. The money is retained by the Pack and the Treasurer can reimburse scouts up to that amount for scouting related purchases at the scout shop or for fees for scout projects/outings (mainly camp fees). The money cannot be 'cashed out', but we will forward it to a troop for those moving up. 8) Our Council has an award of sorts that covers the cost of Pinewood Derby cars if the Pack meets certain objectives. I don't recall if it was a recharter goal or a membership goal or just a sending someone to the popcorn organization meeting. (not really a popcorn item, but it saved the Pack some money) I think the biggest thing is being up front and honest with parents about the costs. We take a few minutes out of each Pack meeting for the CM and/or CC to talk to the parents. The kids are busy doing a fun activity during that time. I hope you can use some of this. Good Luck.

I was referring to the language argument that suggests that the Founders did not really intend to enumerate the rights of individuals to own guns. The first time the whole 'Militia' thing became misconstrued was in US v Miller (1939). That is the sawed off shotgun case. The court held (incorrectly) that since the sawed off shotgun was not a weapon used in national defense, it was not protected by the 2nd Amendment. In effect, the court was saying that any weapon used as part of the national defense WAS protected. The incorrect part of the ruling was that such weapons were not used. In fact, they have been used since WWI. The court did not hold that one need be a member of the National Guard or any formal militia, by definition, the militia consists of any able bodied man (read person in modern lexicon). The 1867 case (US v Cruikshank) was one of a number of post war cases wherein former slaves were not protected by the Court. (Involves the KKK trying to disarm some former slaves) The wording of the ruling did reaffirm that the right to bear arms was an inherent right that pre-dated the Constitution and could not, therefore, be conferred by it. Interestingly, the same reasoning was used on the 1st Amendment portion (right to assemble) of the case. The difference between the two is that the 1st explicitly mentions that Congress shall make no law, leaving the states free to do as they wish, while the 2nd has no such language. The Court held in Cruikshank that the 'Congress' part of the 2nd was implied. To make things even more convoluted, the 14th has been interpreted to effectively limit states in exactly the same way the Founders limited the Federal government. This interpretation, however, has been disjointed and not all rights have been handled this way. For example, states cannot prohibit free speech, but they can exercise some limits on gun ownership. Somewhere among this mess is some very bad judicial reasoning. The 14th was never intended to push the states into adopting an exact replica of the Constitution, the purpose was simply to prohibit states from disenfranchising minorities through legal trickery (not very effectively until 1965). However, if you make the argument that the 14th does have such a purpose, it is specious at best to suggest that it only applies to some rights and not others. In other words, if the 14th forces states to permit free speech and prohibit unreasonable searches, it must also force the states to abide by the 2nd and stop infringing on the right to bear arms. There is much more to that case, but the rationale was manufactured to allow Louisiana to continue to prevent those "of African descent and persons of color" from lawfully assembling and bearing arms. This was not really a 2nd Amendment case so much as it was an early race case while the Court was still populated by segregationists (the polite way to say it).

I am a Web I DL. I see my 'mission' as giving every boy ample opportunity to earn the AOL. I expect each of our 5 boys to be done with their Web Badge by year end or no later than February. There are variables that are simply outside my purview. Fitness is primarily a family pin and it is required for the Webelos Badge. The religious portion is also something over which I have little control. I can mention it, but we cannot do it as part of a den meeting. I have no intention of aiming for getting all 20. If any of the boys mentions this as a goal, I will be happy to help him get there. When the whole group is accomplishing such a daunting task, I start to wonder about the quality of the work and the fun involved in getting there. That being said...There are about 20 months in the Webelos program and that is only one pin per month. We had a council camp that effectively covered all of Aquanaut, 90% of Readyman, and healthy portions of many of the other outdoor pins. The goal is attainable, but only for those who want to get there. At this point, every boy in the den has at least one pin and a couple of them have 3. By the end of the month most will have Communicator and perhaps Fitness. A few are working on Traveller over the holidays. My predecessor told me to get most of the AOL requirements covered in year 1, because 5th grade has so many more outside distractions around here...band, school sports, etc.

Shorenuff! Brainiac Shorefirecure. ShoreT. BTCruiser. ToBornotToB I agree with many above. It is a combination of comfort and security. You never know who may be reading the posts without ever mentioning they were here.