Scouter99

We can take every boy in the nation, Schiff, and people will still call us discriminatory because we don't take girls. Our policies aren't our critics' real problem, the problem is our industrial/modern ideals in a post-modern world. So, we can take homosexuals and then it's atheists, and then we can take atheists and it'll be girls, and then we can take girls in Cubs and Boy Scouts and it'll be something new after that over and over again until we strip out every aspect of our ideals that is a moral absolute, patriotic, competitive, etc.

If anyone has one of the shirts or hoodies on page 8 of this PDF I'd still love a scan of the logo.

"Cruiser" lightweight plans: http://boyslife.org/wayback/#issue=Q_T9HRnCiXIC&pg=64'>http://boyslife.org/wayback/#issue=Q_T9HRnCiXIC&pg=64 "Hickory" http://boyslife.org/wayback/#issue=Q_T9HRnCiXIC&pg=64

Boy's Life ran a segment called Litepac in the 50s-70s with do-it-yourself equipment including tents. I'm sure you could find a pattern close to the Explorer in the BL archive at http://boyslife.org/wayback/

I have a feeling that Royal Ambassadors Outside isn't going to fill any voids.

We've lost one CO that I know of and a few district people resigned post-vote.

You should challenge him to a duel or at least a knot-tying relay.

Write your issues down, explain them in a polite but frank manner at the next committee meeting, and let them know which things are not your job and that you're not going to be doing them anymore as of (one month later) and that's how long they have to find replacements or those things you're carrying on your own just won't happen anymore.

Approved for Scouters, p 61 of the Guide to Awards and Insignia.

With Schiff

Hopefully the leader in that photo was removed.

It sounds like the SM's problem is your son's level of activity over the past 2 years. That raises some questions: How active has your son been? Has the SM spoken to your son about his level of activity in the past 2 years, or only just now? Were the "things to do" that the SM kept giving your son part of his Position of Responsibility, and if so did he do them? Was your son's effort in his PoR (which fell in that 2-yr period) acceptable to the SM, if not did he meet with your son to correct him during his term in the PoR? Before your son and/or you approach the SM, you both (both, not just you, he's a big boy now) need to read the Guide to Advancement so that you have a clear understanding of the rules, what the SM is allowed to do, what he's not allowed to do, and what options are available to you if the SM doesn't budge (if he is wrong in the first place). You can find the Guide to Advancement here for free (PDF): www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf‎ If the SM's games are over your son's activity level, pay particular attention to section 4.2.3.0 Sections 8 and 9 deal with boards of review and the Eagle rank. By telling him he's "not worthy"? One of our best (active, avid camper, taught the young kids) scouts came to us from another troop at 17 because his SM had told him he'd "never be an Eagle." Guess who was wrong.

Does your council not maintain a list of registered MBCs? Use the troop resource survey to increase your pool of talent: http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34437.pdf‎ In either case, that doesn't go toward the issue that the troop program is not merit badge school, and you should not use your muscle as SM to impose a MB on your troop or uninvolved scouts (in this case the boy's patrol). If this trip was a one-off, that's one thing, if this is the MO of your program, things should be rethought. A solid program will provide MB opportunities, a MB-centric program is stifling.

My attacks? You mean where you moved and blame the council for not knowing because you never told them, but I blame you because the council isn't clairvoyant? There is plenty of room for improvement in BSA IT, none of it will fix that you problem.

Never heard of it. Sounds neat though.

I agree with that advice (to KDD) but some troops like to stink.

I'm in agreement with the folks that have advised you to sit down with the boy, explain your concern, explain that it's unacceptable, and explain the punishment that you decide on. Given the home situation, maybe the answer is not to send him packing, I don't know. If he was involving other boys, then he has to go away at least for a little while. For me, it's situational. If this were some bored entitled kid then I'd kick him to the curb. If he was involving other boys, there have to be serious consequences. And whatever the situation, the other boys need to know that it's not acceptable and that some kind of punishment happened. As for some who've mentioned the cops, meh, it's going to take some serious dealing or partying before I get the police involved.

Hoho, we got a live one. I did not anywhere imply that I was important because Mr Evans answered me, in fact what I said was that I was surprised he replied because I'm not important. Mr Evans has retired since July, his replacement replies to emails just as quickly. Hiking done toward the Hiking (and Backpacking) is done within Scouting, it is "under the auspices." I don't recall if BD thinks not, I certainly never said it isn't. Right from this start, you seem to be confusing "alone" and my phrase "individual pursuit." By individual pursuit, I mean something the Scout is doing for his own pleasure on his own time. A Scout might be hiking by himself to earn Hiking MB, but hiking for Hiking MB is not a personal hobby. This scenario is the same as the hiking scenario, and the same logic applies. If the Scout biked for Personal Fitness MB, then he's got biking miles. You're arguing against something I never said. I think you'll agree he is able to answer these questions quickly because he knows his stuff. Or let's take off our disgusted hats, and put on our thinking caps, and conclude that he was able to answer my email quickly because he had just answered the same question for BD. You're wrong, and the correct answer to your questio nis right one the award's webpage: Now when a Scout excels in outdoor participation, there are new awards to show for it! This program, conceived by the National Camping Task Force of the BSA®, includes a series of five badges designed to recognize a Boy Scout or Varsity Scout who has exemplary knowledge and experience in performing high-level outdoor activities. http://www.scouting.org/scoutsource/...wards/noa.aspx The award is designed to recognize Scouts who are highly active in Scouting. A boy, like King Ding Dong's son, who is "proactive in a less-than-ideal troop" should find a troop that meets his needs, not sit around in a crummy troop. The solution is not to bend the rules for him. They all get the same 7 years. Patrol, troop, district, council, OA, and national programming offers more than enough opportuinites for any proactive boy with a less active troop without manipulating the award.

With ScoutNut 100% on this one. In addition to his comments, what does the boy's patrol have to do with his MB? MBs are an individual pursuit. It's one thing if the Scout wants to ask his patrol to help him by foregoing the gear, it's another for you to dictate it. The broader issue here is that MBs should not be interwoven into the troop program. You can, and I think should, keep MB opportunities in mind, but troop meetings and campouts are not merit badge school. Your dual roles, SM and MB Counselor, will recreate this sticky situation over and over again. Now that you've seen the potential mess early, leave it here. You be the SM, there are plenty of MB counselors.

I feel your pain lately. Frankly, you've done your best, the troop is slovenly and doesn't want to do better. Don't waste any more boys on that troop, send them to one that is worth their time and your effort. If the troop doesn't like it, give them a list of their issues and they'll either fix it or not. Packs do not belong to a troop, and cubs should go to the best troop. Their problems aren't your problem. Oh boy, they saw a sucker

Scoutreach.

a-ha, I made you a little older than you are the first time. The calculator (http://www.westegg.com/inflation/) uses a different scale pre-1975. 2 1983 dollars is $4.54 today, so you've got a case there. We charge $8.00 and that hasn't gone up in over a decade.

I donnoooooo, where do snow shovels fall on the tool use chart? http://www.scouting.org/filestore/healthsafety/pdf/680-028.pdf

Care to share anyway?