Krampus

Yeah me too. Seems that is not working. I hesitate to post the guy's email address as that is a bit too personal. I can tell you that there are several organizations who "certify" trainers. Red Cross, Emergency Care and Safety Institute, NOLS, etc. Many of the courses are very similar. I did call my friend locally who is a physician and scouter and created his course because of his passion for scouting and medicine. His recommendation was to link up with the Red Cross. They usually require folks to be trained and certified in basic first aid, advanced first aid, CPR/AED. He ended teaming up with ARC and they sponsored his program. The BSA seems to say that any of the ARC, ECSI, NOLS or other programs listed on the link below will work for BSA "certification". NOLS, to my knowledge does not certify a competing program but may take your friend on as a local instructor. ARC does a similar thing. http://www.acacamps.org/accreditation/firstaidcpr

Well all I can tell you is that the Ozark Trail tents we have had have lasted 5 years, 10 camp outs a year, hot and cold weather and 75+ scouts beating the snot out of them.

"Snack size burrito" [snicker] Yeah, regiment style and keeping your smellables to zero is paramount!

Actually, I do need a guidline like GTA. I have parent lawyers in my troop and they will read all the BSA docs and ask me to cite where Tommy does not make it. I do like the idea of having our TC develop guidelines and adopting those.

Fixed your post.

I don't disagree with you BD but where are the guidelines that allow you to hold him back? He's going to ask "Where does it say that I need to be awesome in knot typing or how to cook bacon?" Guess what? It doesn't. So the scout (and his parents) are going to ask why Tommy cannot be in OA simply because the scoutmaster thinks he needs to hone his camping skills -- skills which were signed off on as completed already. We cannot add or subtract from any requirements for rank advancement or merit badges, that is clear. What is less clear is what justification a scoutmaster has for denying Tommy Crappycamper his shot at OA if he qualifies. Trust me, I get what you are saying about why and how you deny him his OA slot. My point is, what policy justification do we have for holding him back? Without a codified policy that defines what should be taken into consideration during the Scoutmaster recommendation phase then it is left to somewhat arbirary reasons.

Well, he can try to put your husband down as CM but as was pointed out your husband has to fill out a new membership form for the new position and turn it in to council for it to be legit. Find a new pack. I know the saying is "for the boys" but you can let some of those other parents step up and help.

@Rick in CA: You cannot seriously think that the people who don't want gays in Scouting are on an all out crusade to get ride of the non-Christians too. I am not saying they are not out there -- just as there are the rainbow-pride folks who want openly gay leaders to be allowed -- but I think that is a VERY small minority of people in Scouting. From my read of people in my council I would say we are 60/40 or 70/30 in favor of the current policy but using a more don't ask/don't tell approach. The minority would be in favor of allowing Scouts to stay even if they come out. I have yet to meet anyone personally who is at either end of that spectrum. To be honest, if you have been part of Scouting for a while, it is still the same place you always liked. That discriminatory policy has always been in place, so leaving after losing a vote is a bit silly in my opinion. Now, if you were on the other side of the debate and saw the organization you knew parting with values they (and you) have held for a long time, then I could see leaving if the vote goes opposite your view point. But leaving after losing would be like me joining the NRA and then quitting after the assault weapons ban fails.

There are two cotrolling policies on statements of political support or activism that apply to the uniform issue: 1) The rules governing when and where to wear the uniform are clear. Essentially, if it is not a Scouting activitiy then its a no-no. I think we are all smart enough to know where the grey areas are. Wearing it to a 5k for breast cancer because the Scouts are doing a flag ceremony? Yes. Wearing the uniform because your troop is setting up chairs for service hours? Yes. Doing those same funcations at a political rally? No. When in doubt ask your council. 2) As far as badges or patches like the rainbow knot, the Insignia Guide and BSA policy on approved licensees of BSA products are also pretty clear. If the temp patch is making a statement or supportive of a cause it cannot be worn. Period. That goes for gay rainbox ribbons, breast cancer ribbons, wound warrior patches, etc. In my troop we follow a simply policy: If it did not come from the Scout Shop, Council, District or OA we simply do not wear it. The ONLY exception are homemade neckerchief slides (as long as they follow guidelines), temp patches we do as a troop (very seldom and done through classB) for special events and that's it. I even asked an ASM to remove his "I Voted" sticker at a meeting last fall. Rather than invite argument or debate I thought it best remove it. He did...without question.

50 miles at Philmont will take care of that apnea...and make that end of trail beer taste really good.

We have an unofficial adult meeting (or meetings) prior to any trek. I pick up a few rounds and we do the same thing afterwards. That usually buys the goodwill I need on the trail from those who don't have scouting in their heart.

Sounds reasonable. What I usually do is find out what they will cover int he program, monitor how they teach it and if we approve we will sign off after the boy can demonstrate it. Not everything covered is signed off, nor if they cannot demonstrate it then more work is needed. Sadly, old fat Scouters tend to bring golf carts with them. I'd rather not see them either. Medical reasons? Sure. But at one camp in 2009 there must have been 15 carts brought by Scouters. That's a lot of medical waivers.

BD you have to understand not all of these programs are weak. Two out of the last three camps my unit has been to has had top notch first year programs. Low ratios with plenty of hands on, repetitive instruction. One even had a test at the end of the week. Scouts teaching scouts. I agree validation is key before sign off.

I would hold them to that age-old standard if I could back it up with something concrete. Imagine this: Tommy is a Star scout and below average in his camping skills. He is in good standing. Attends 80% of the meetings. Has 20 days camping each year. Is not on probation nor is he a problem kid. He needs reminders to stop goofing off like most of the 11-4 year olds. Tommy does not meet the "elite" status we all remember from the OA of the past. He does meet all the requirements to be on the OA ballot. On what grounds would I hold Tommy back from the ballot?

This may not help since you have already had the vote. For my crews we had the Scouts decide up front what made a good crew leader, scribe, chaplain. The troop scribe took the notes and the boys agreed that leadership (by example), participation, planning, experience, training, etc., were all good things. These were put into role descriptions (on the board) by the scribe and then boys were nominated and seconded. Secret ballot and leaders were selected. We also had the boys do the same for advisors in terms of developing a list of what good traits for advisors were...mostly for our own edification. Going back on a vote would be hard. You might get out there and find he's a great leader. Or, you may find the opposite. Happened on a trek years ago with me and the boys replaced him on the trail...realized he was not leading and not pulling his weight (literally). Being active or a runner does not mean they can handle a 50+ mile hike. I have seen fit football players unable to carry 45 pounds after 25 miles. It is mental and physical together. Not sure you can do anything other than advise the crew to have back-up leaders in case of injury or sickness. Then you are covered.

Yeah, but this is the same general public that does not read anything anyway. Most people are sheep and cannot be bothered to do their homework. They would read the TV Guide with more vigor than the major membership policies of an organization that will take care of their son hundreds of miles from home. Go figure. [i am rolling my eyes hard on that one]

I wish, but no. We've been entrusted to watch over these kids. All too often there have been night time issues (bear in camp, sickness, asthma attack, home sickness, injury, weather issues) that have come up and it would have been catastrophic had we been short leaders. Also, just two-deep does not cover it anymore. Now for more events in your tour plan you need no less than a 1:10 ratio or you are in violation of your coverage. If you are in a scenario where you are doing HA or something, you must make sure one of the adults present is trained in first aid, wilderness first aid, weather safety, safe swim, safety afloat, etc. So unless you have every adult cross-trained and still have your minimum ratio then you would be in volation of your permit. I think you then lose your insruance coverage. Plus, most reservations do not allow you to come and go without checking in/out and you cannot be on reservation at all under the influence. Big no-no.

You are right, those are not arbitrary reasons. That would all fall under behaviour and might even be considered a discilpinary issue which would be covered under the GTA in the section where they point out that scouts with such issues may not be considered in good standing. I get that and well spotted. My issue is with scouts that may be weak scouts. The show up, participate, get mbs, earn their ranks but have weak core camping skills. If they have been signed off on these skils, even though they are weak, and they have the camping days, there seems to be no reason a scoutmater can hold them back from OA. In my day they would not have been elected, let alone on the ballot. Cannot say why my scoutmaster only put forward the strongest scouts, but he did. Today if someone qualities, short of them being inactive or not in good standing (behaviour) then I still don't see how a scoutmaster can keep them off the ballot.