83Eagle

I keep tossing an idea around in my head but I can't seem to get it to crystalize into something that I can make work. Maybe someone out there has done something like this. I'd like to do a hands on camping demo for our first pack meeting of the year when we get all the new scouts in to generate a little excitement. So I'm thinking that we could set up a number of stations--one where the boys would set up a tent, another where they would do a quick cooking something-or-other, one where they would learn a campfire song or two, another where they would build different types of fire lays, etc. Complicating this somewhat is the fact that we meet at the school so we're limited to the ability to cook stuff or actually set things on fire...though we could change the venue I suppose. Well anyway, I'm looking for some info and examples from anyone who might have done something like this. Thanks.

Just to follow up on this. As usual the easiest way to do something is just to do it. So we divided up into 2 patrols and had them meet in different parts of our big meeting area. Different adults work with each group. Nothing really magical about making it happen. The boys liked choosing patrol names based on available BSA patrol patches. They are going to put their patrol patch on their red vest for now which they can move to their tan shirt when they become Webelos soon. (I'm sure there's something against the guidelines about that patch approach, but I don't care because they like it.)

I think that discussion is great and criticism--that is, an argument based in critical thinking--is helpful. My point is that it's all too easy to get mired in the negative, and too quick for points of discussion to turn into giant B&M sessions. And I cant help but wonder, if some people have the time to write, quite literally, page after page of points and counterpoints to virtually every topic that comes up, couldnt those countless hours be better spent actually working to effect the change they're looking for? This is, after all, not some empowered councilits the electronic equivalent of hanging around the water cooler. Second, I did mention that I was drawn to this site for the idea sharing. And to that end, there have been some bright spots to be sure. But unfortunately, there have been many instances where new (and proven workable in the field) ideas and honest questions are met with the attitude of You cant do that, Why reinvent the wheel? or even Why in the world would you want to do that, you knucklehead? Its a bit off-putting, to say the least. I will tell you that I have refrained from posting ideas and questions, and responding to the same, because I just don't want to deal with the snide, the sarcastic, or the SHOUTING. It's like there's a competition to see who can find the greatest number of faults or best cite the details of G2SS or whatever. I know that to some extent it's just the nature of anonymous electronic discourse, but nothing sucks the joy right out of an idea that you're excited about than to be whomped upside the head with a big dose of "can't-do" attitude. Twocubdad said it best: this place isn't for woosies. And that's actually pretty sad.

After a hiatus from Scouting, I returned to the BSA ranks, this time as an adult leader. A few years afterward, I found out about this site, and it looked to be a great source for sharing ideas about ways to make what I felt to be a great program even better. And I do believe that Scouting is a great program today. What I see today is at the Cub Scout level, it is certainly TONS more fun than when I was a Cub making macaroni crafts at the Den Mothers house. At the Boy Scout level, I see troops working where the boys were in charge and doing fun and adventurous stuff, completely unlike the top-down led, bookwork-focused program that I had plodded through. But after just a few weeks here, it seemed that I was wrong. Ive learned that todays Boy Scouting sucks and Cub Scouting sucks even worse. Woodbadge sucks. National sucks. Its only a matter of time before this already-declining program goes the way of the dodo. So I wondered, what are these apparent problems with the BSA traced to? Ive been able to glean some insight from lots of reading and have some definitive answers: The problem is that Boy Scouts doesn't allow gays. The problem is that the Boy Scouting program is "gay." The problem is that Cub Scouts are integrated into the BSA Scouting program. The problem is Boy Scouts dont integrate well with Cub Scouts in order to interest and retain boys. The problem with Boy Scouts is that we treat them like older Cub Scouts. The problem with Cub Scouts is that we treat them like younger Boy Scouts. The problem is the Boy Scout program has changed over time to stray from its mission. The problem is the Boy Scout program hasnt changed to be relevant or interesting to todays youth. The problem is the program is behind the times when it comes to technology and youth interests. The problem is the program panders to modern interests, like video games. The problem is the program doesnt focus enough on traditional outdoor skills. The problem is the program is too slow to incorporate modern methods and tools when it comes to the outdoors. The problem is that the Cub Scouting program is focused too much on arts and crafts and inside activities. After all, these are young boys! The problem is that the Cub Scouting program emphasizes camping too much. After all, these are young boys! The problem is that BSA isnt co-ed to entice more recruits. The problem is that BSA has a co-ed program that siphons off recruits. The problem is that Scouting looks like a military, neo-Nazi organization. The problem is that Scouting needs to look more like a military organization with uniforms that boys will think are cool. The problem is that parents arent involved. The problem is parents are too involved. The problem is that Cub Scouting leaders are untrained and inexperienced. The problem is that Wood Badge was opened to Cub Scout leaders who want to get more training and experience. Well, quite soon I felt rather depressed. I mean, if its really this bad, this disorganized, and this systemically doomed to failure, why are we all committing all this time and personal energy to it? Do you even want your sons involved in something so misguided, misdirected, mismanaged as Scouting? (Not to mention homophobic, religiously intolerant, and racist?) Well, maybe Im the minority, but I hope instead that Im part of a silent majority out there for whom things are, on the whole, going pretty well. Call me Pollyannaish, or say that I have my head stuck in the sand... Finally, I want to extend my thanks to all the volunteers out there who keep the tradition going, and to those in these forums who have taken the time to provide helpful tips, answers, and resources.

Yes Scouting is for the boys but there is nothing iherently wrong with scouting being (also) a program that is for adults. There is nothing inherently wrong with adults volunteers (also) being personally ambitious as it relates to the earning of knots and whatnot. We can't ask for, or bemoan the lack of, volunteers on one hand, and then begrudge those same volunteers for (also) claiming a personal stake in the program.

I've seen it first hand among The Chosen Ones in our council. They are BOY SCOUT volunteers here to deliver a BOY SCOUT program. The Cubbies are more than welcome to do their own thing, just don't ask them for anything. I've experienced this first hand at the Roundtables. Doesn't matter that I have an Eagle knot on my uniform, it's the blue shoulder tabs they focus on. Locally, I can't get a den chief either (we've never had one in our Dens, period) and although our "feeder troop" professes it wants to "increase interaction" between the CS and BS when I visit the Pack meetings, I never get a call back or follow up. Time to look at some other troops? Yes. But the larger point is that I agree with the comments about how BS seems to do what it can to dismiss the CS program, when it should be cultivating it.

read my first post. I did (again), and it doesn't mention Tigers, so I'm not sure what you're referring to, so perhaps you could be more explicit. Unless you are saying to drop the Tiger program altogether as part of shortening the Cub Scout program? I'm not really gonna argue this any more because it's not germane to what I have to do to run our program. I'm just stating my experience with crestfallen Kindergarteners who pick up a join up flyer at the school presentation and then find out they can't join for another year. So I'm wondering why make it 2, particularly when it's been shown in another scouting program that you can have a successful, and integrated, K program? Though I will admit that I do not know what the retention rates of GS is at higher grades, and it may very well be much lower than BS. It's not a perfect paralell.

Scoutfish, I think this is a great idea as long as you are respectful of their role, which it appears you are. When I became a Tiger Leader, I was told "just follow the book," except for the part about getting parents involved in running things because "that doesn't work." Needless to say that didn't work well and in hindsight I would have loved to have a coach with ideas for how to get things done and be fun. Now that I am CM and with DL experience behind me I have lots of ideas for activities and "what works" and I let the TDL know I'm available. Sometimes they take the help, sometimes not. The key is to be available without being cloying. I think the first "5 or 6" meetings as you describe might be a bit much except for the fact that you meet in the same location and have a plausible reason to be there already. The problem you need to avoid is the DL and Den looking to you as the "high ranking officer." In our case where everyone meets separately I offer to run the first tiger meeting. There, I set up a signup sheet for the various activities in the book and have parents sign up for one or more. Then I ask for a "coordinator" (sounds less forbidding than "leader") to keep the meetings running and work with the pack throughout the year to keep the den on track, but I don't revisit the den meetings (unless asked or if there is a problem). So far, so good.(This message has been edited by 83eagle)

>>Girl Scouts handle this with no problem--Daisies are kindergarteners, and Service Unit activities combine all the ages. From what I've seen and been told, the older girls don't really get bothered by events that involve the "little kids" until about 6th grade,

The points about the program being repetitous are well taken. The food pyramid in both Tiger and Wolf...really? And like they didn't cover that in school well before you had to cover it in the badge book. You all know the many other examples out there. Having the same Den leader for 4-5 years can be a drawback. There are different skill sets needed for Tigers versus second year Webelos and not everyone is good at spanning that range. Not everyone is the outdoorsy type and that becomes increasingly important over time. Not to sound sexist, but if 2nd year Webelos have the same "Den Mother" who was helping them do leaf rubbings as Tigers...it can be a real yawner for the kids. Regarding separating Tigers from the Pack, I don't think that's the way to go. Most grade schools are K-5 and the K group is already disappointed when the pre-roundup and Boy Talks come to school that they can't join. Girl Scouts handle this with no problem--Daisies are kindergarteners, and Service Unit activities combine all the ages. From what I've seen and been told, the older girls don't really get bothered by events that involve the "little kids" until about 6th grade, at which point they're the equivalent to BS anyway. It can be a challenge designing a program to span a large age group, but that doesn't mean it the rank should be split off.

We will have two Bear dens. Now, it so happens that these two Bear Dens will meet in the same location, at the same time. And sometimes, they will be working on the same project or activity. This just makes sense for sharing resources, facilities, expertise, planning, and to preserve the dynamics of the group that have caused the Den to grow from 5 to 9 to 13 boys since the Tiger year. So call it a matter of semantics then...My thinking is that boys will find the idea of having Patrols and Patrol names somewhat more interesting than being part of Bear Den 1 and Bear Den 2. I'm already envisioning the Clone Troopers and the Jedis or something like that. (Though I wonder if that would run us afoul of G2SS restrictions on war-type motifs...but I digress...) I am simply looking for examples and anecdotes from those who have done a Den split after several years. There is more to making this work than just decreeing it is so. And, related to this move, I am looking for examples or advice of how to move the boys toward more self-direction and responsibility, which I am hoping the smaller patrol...er, den...structure will encourage also.

Eagledad, I'm really inspired by the level of responsibility your Webelos have taken on. Honestly, sometimes our current 2nd year Webelos are worse behaved and less responsible than the Tiger den. This is really a result of a combination of the W2 nanny-style den leadership along with what had traditionally been a top-down controlled Pack program. I have already changed the latter but, as to the former...well, they're crossing over in two months so it's time to begin setting expectations with the W1 Den (and Bears, etc.) I have always found that boys will live up or down to your expectations of them and giving them more responsibility is a good thing. This is also an objective of the virtual Den split we are going to do, in putting the boys gradually more in charge of the program.

Eagledad, I really like your ideas when it comes to planning. Since we have very active parents in the den I think that would work well. Could be a hybrid parents/scout/family planning. Definitely something to think about because a lot of our parents are at the meetings anyway. (Oh, the last time I brought this up I was admonished here that that one of the purposes of Cub Scouting is to "wean" the boys from parents to transition into Boy Scouts, so let me say that I understand this, and I consider parental involvement a blessing!) I'd like to stress that the DL and ADL get along very well, as do the boys. This is a matter of logistics, and to provide a quality program while keeping the great group dynamics that we have built over the past three years.

Well, I just bit the bullet and built this in to the December Pack meeting. I decided to "blame" it on the Den Leaders who said their scouts were "disappointed" that we didn't sing more, since it's part of the Tiger and Wolf book to sing at pack meetings, and Webelos could use if for their showman pin, so who was I to argue! Cub Scout Spirit, some Christmas songs sprinkled thru the meeting, Oh Tannenbaum and Vespers. Worked very well and being the Christmas party helped as well. Sometimes you just gotta do it.(This message has been edited by 83eagle)

Thanks for the advice based on experience of handling larger dens. Regarding the advice to split into two bona fide dens, that is not an option that we are going to pursue. Or, fine, call them two dens if you will--we are going to have two Bear Dens, with two different Den Leaders. It just so happens that these two dens will meet in the same place, at the same time, and will probably be working on the same activity in their own part of the room. And the two dens will get together as a big group on occasion for various activities (snow tubing with 13 works just as well as with 6 or 7). So, I appreciate any additional advice from direct contact leaders who have had success with this type of strategy.

Our Bear den has grown to be somewhat unweildly at 13 scouts. It works, but it was easier to get things done when the group was smaller. So after talking about it, the DL and ADL are going to form 2 "patrols." The den still meets together (the time works for everyone and the space is plenty big), it's just a way to make things managable and also hopefully move the boys toward more self-organization/direction. So don't read this as bona fide Boy Scout Patrols--maybe "dens within a den." I'm wondering if others out there have done this and, if so, I'm looking for helpful suggestions as to how to make this work best. (Please note--what I notice in these forums is when someone asks a question there's usually a few waiting in the woodwork who start bopping you upside the head with various rule and regulation citations and generally try to make you feel stupid. If you don't have anything constructive to add, then please don't add anything at all.)

I love the foam finger idea and tying it to a correctly uniformed incentive! Always better to incent through rewards than punishment if you can. The tutu idea is awesome and your kids will love it. Good idea setting a managable goal, which you are sure to exceed. (Don't listen to any detractors--some people can find the cloud in any silver lining and just can't wait to give you unsolicited advice based on half-informed assumptions!)

Do you have a problem with equality? Absolutely not! If society thinks the death tax is a great idea as a means to take what people have earned after they die, that practice should be applied equally, rather than after some arbitrary limit that taxes descendents unequally. Tax 'em all the same percentage from dollar one. That would be completely equal. Likewise for income taxes. If we are to have income taxes, everyone should pay the same, equal percentage of their income as taxes, rather than the current inequal system that discourages productivity. If everyone were taxed the same equal rate, without deductions and loopholes, it would ensure that everyone paid their fair share of government services commensurate with their abilities, rather than half the country paying no income taxes like we have now. Would you have a problem with that true equality?

-sigh- If you'll read my earlier response, I said: "He should be told to do so by the CM, or the CM or the advancement coordinator should do it." I don't know how this equates to being relieved of his position, but if you want to read it that way just to argue I'm not going to play along.(This message has been edited by 83eagle)

This is not that hard. The book says the scout will get the totem and beads, period.

When grandma goes toes up and leaves something of sentimental value, it usually is not of siginifcant monitary value. Tax it as such. If its a $3Mil diamond necklace, you better be able to afford keeping it. If you can't afford the taxes on that, you'd be better off selling it anyways. You're dancing along the extremes again...millions of dollars on one end, versus no significant monitary value on the other. If the death tax is good for large estates, it's good for everyone, right? If not, why not? And if not, what should the arbitrary threshhold be? Face it, the death tax would never see the light of day if it affected most people's inheritance--and I would bet that most people would have to liquidate it just to pay the tax. But when we're talking about those million dollar estates, sock it to 'em, right?

According to the Tiger Handbook, after a boy learns the motto, sign, and salute, "he is awarded the Tiger Cub Immediate Recognition Emblem," not "he may be." It also lumps the recognition emblem and track beads among the "recognition items" that "will be presented to them at a simple ceremony at a pack or den meeting." It goes on to say that "A boy receives totem beads as he completes each part." Sounds pretty clear to me, so if the TDL is not doing this he is not following the program and is cheating the boys. He should be told to do so by the CM, or the CM or the advancement coordinator should do it. Besides the fact it is a program rule, what is important is not what the TDL wants as it relates to this issue, it is what the boys want. And I guarantee you the vast majority, if not all, of them will want the recognition.(This message has been edited by 83eagle)

And as a relative newbie around here myself, I hate to say that seems to happen to a lot of newbies. @clemlaw--I completely agree with you; this can be a vicious forum where assumptions are made and judgments quickly cast. But I find the "ignore user" function works pretty well.

I would not give awards that have not been earned, period. This sets a bad precedent to the boys who did not complete the rank badge activity, and it minimizes the work of the boys who did complete the badge. Believe me, the boys know who has done what! Our den had the issue of a boy joining very recently, after many boys are 3/4 thru the Bear Badge. I explained to the scout and parents that he was "behind" the other boys in terms of badge progress, but that was OK because scouting was not just about the badges, and that he could work on anything at home that he missed. Regarding awarding badges to boys as soon as they have earned them, this is a great practice because it motiviates the boys who might be "behind" because they see the others progress. Using the badge progress posters are also great.

As a relative newcomer to these forums I have been amazed by the level of personal insults and general lack of decorum here. What shocks me is that this is supposed to be a Scouting forum were people who believe in a common set of values come together to discuss things of mutual interest. Obviously an "Issues and Politics" thread is going to generate debate. However, going through the Scouting-topic threads shows plenty of evidence of people who seemingly wait at their keyboards for the next opportunity to whip out the rule books or generally make people feel stupid with "I can't believe you would do that"-type responses, rather than be helpful. I participate in many other forums related to personal interests and hobbies, as I'm sure many of you all do, and this forum is by far the one where the dialog degrades so quickly and frequently. Again, this is surprising given the shared code of conduct we all supposedly believe in via Scouting laws and promises. That's just my opinion as someone who has only been exploring here for a few weeks. Those with a few years and a few thousand posts may see things differently...