OldGreyEagle

So a scout leader thinks abuse is present in a youths home, checks the website and sees he is not a mandatory reporter. He can sleep easier at night knowing that if anything bad happens to the child, he is not legally responsible. The child is still dead or injured, but at least the leader is not on the hook. Attending a presentation at a University of Scouting I heard a Child Abuse Specialist (great job title huh?) say she would rather investigate 10 cases reported by well meaning people and find nothing than "find" the one case that everyone knew about but nobody said anything because they didnt think it was their place to do so(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

Within your council, or at least close by, do you have any Native American groups who could help you? Explain what you are doing, and ask for their help. Most will be happy to help you both be accurate and with technique.

Couple years back we have 32 crossovers, had 3 new scout patrols and 6 troop guides and an Asst Scoutmaster in charge of the New Scout Program. That raised the total youth to 93, it was our high water mark. We are now at 58, youth have aged out and we never had close to 32 crossovers again. The CO and Adult Troop Leadership decided not to cap the size of the troop, but growing past the 93 was never an issue. We had families visit us and say we were too big, they wanted a more intimate atmosphere for their child. Other parents thought our size was a great asset. I had a History teacher back at St Charles Borromeo Preparatory Seminary in Lockport, Il. Mr Canady, his tests were always essay questions, when someone would ask how long should the answers be and he always gave the same answer, the answer should be as long as it is complete. So, how big should a troop be? A troop should be as big as it is complete. And that is decided by the Youth, Adult Leadership, CO and the community in concert

Merlyn is real, he is an Atheist activist who helps keep us on our toes. I cant say I always agree with what he says, then again I agree with him alot as well. He brings alternative views to the table that we would not have without him. Pappy? Well that remains to be seen. He has his views and runs his unit the way he and his community wishes. Is he for real? He says so and until we have proof otherwise, I dont see any reason to doubt him

So, see what happens when you bust your butt? You lose out on the fun stuff. BTW, have you ever been to Sight and Sound Theatre and then followed the road down to Shady Maple? Thats good eating

Well then, there shouldnt be an issue with untrained leaders, should there?

Beavah, I can make that pledge, but as they say (who is "they" anyway?) the mirror has two faces. When someone posts what BSA policy is, what the publications say, and how the training sylabbi reads, then there should not be any disparaging comments about the real world and what the books say. If we are all to remain scoutlike, then everyone's opinions and stands are to be respected, even those which aline 100% with BSA literature Edited after Posting: So how Scoutlike is labeling FScouter as the "Inquisitor"? Sauce for the Goose...(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

Bow White, you asked how many adults were trained in the BSA. Then Ed and I gave you the answer, then you asked how to remedy this situation and Ed gave an answer. It may not be the answer you were looking for, but it was answer. Having 3 of 10 adults trained is a horrible number I agree. But what is the fix? Ed already has alluded to dormant CO's and I agree with him that non-involved CO's is a big problem in the BSA. Does it prevent dedicated unit leaders from presenting an exciting program, no it does not. Does the involvement of an CO make kids want to join or quite a unit? Not very much, kids come and go based on how worth (fun) the program is. But, if the question is how do you increase the number of trained adults in Scouting and CO's are where the real power lies at the local level, then asking CO's to require training seems like a good idea. When a DE starts up a new unit, I cannot fathom why they would not have the IH, COR, Scoutmaster and COmmittee chair all trained before the first unit meeting. It would requier that an active and responsive Training COmmittee exist, but how do we train all the untrained without an active and responsive training team? It is very sad there are so many untrained leaders and perhaps requiring training isnt the silver bullet, but desparate times call for desparate measures. Many COuncils are losing scouts, is it because of non-trained leaders or a lousy program (you know I have to stop asking this or else I may have to reconsider my position on mandatory training) If we want to beat our breasts about how lousy the trainig rate is in the BSA we have done that, if training is the answer, a model has been presented the question is do we have the will to implement it or not.

C'mon Ed, he is to the right of Attila the Hun

Not that your COuncil camp doesnt "exhibit a vacuum", but if you havent been there for 7 years, how would you know? If you went there 8 years ago and havent been back, are you 19 now? In which case you dont need a Venture Patrol, you need a Venturing Crew. I understand that if a COuncil doesnt have a quality program, the Troops get to vote with their feet, but to not experience it after 7 years and then say it "exhibits a vacuum" may be not quite right

One free shot at me with no retaliation

John, Ed, I am with you as well. I started a thread about CO's in the open program section and John, you were the only one to repond. Obviously lack of CO participation isnt as big a deal as we think it is although empiracally it does seem to be an issue

what does the Buckeyes have to do with this ?

Q: What do you call a group of Cub Scout age youth firing a potato gun? A: Tater Tots

"Seems like what I've seen so far is mostly a requirement for da unit leader or for at least one person in the unit." Then again, there may be things on Heaven and Earth that are not dreamt of in your philosophy Beavah... From the August Newsletter of the COuncil I serve http://www.minsitrails.com/Documents/Newsletter/Aug2007/final.pdf In 2004, all Cubmasters, Scoutmasters and Crew Advisors were required to complete the basic training for their position before the council would renew their units charter. In 2005, this training requirement was expanded to include the Committee Chairmen of each unit. In 2006, all newly registered direct contact leaders, age 21 and over, must complete the basic training for their position by the units rechartering date or the Council will not reregister that person in that position. (18-20 year olds must finish training before turning 21) Direct contact leaders for Cub Scout Packs include: Tiger Cub Den Leaders, Cub Scout Den Leaders, Webelos Den Leaders, Cubmasters, and Assistant Cubmasters. Direct contact leaders for Boy Scout Troops include: Scoutmasters and Assistant Scoutmasters. Direct contact leaders for Venturing Crews include:Venture Crew Advisors and Associate Crew Advisors. National Average? According to the COuncil Newsletter it's 29.5% http://www.minsitrails.com/Documents/Newsletter/Mar2007/final.pdf PS Ed, you win, being within .5% is good enough for me! (This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

OK, since this topic seems to have come up, here goes In the council I serve requires training for unit leaders, assistant leaders, committee chairs and members. Back when these requirements were being discussed, I was in a meeting attended by the then Council Training Chair. The disussion was what positions should need what training and the order of the implementation of the training. When the meeting was about over, the Training CHair asked if there was anyone we forgot and should also be trained. I thought the guy was serious and said that requring training of at least the Charter Organization Representative should be mandated and the institutional head should be considered. The guys face almost turned white, he barely stammered out that if we ever let the CO's know what they are on the hook for, more than half would pull their charters or not recharter the following year. So much for a Scout is Trustworthy. The CO of the unit I serve is great, the COR is a former Scoutmaster and Crew Advisor, I know he shows up at the Annual Meetings but regretably not many do. It was suggested that we dont want the COR's of the IH's to know too much about is, or at the very least we dont want to require them to do too much. And I completely disagree. How many times has the question been asked on the forum how to "get rid of X" be the X be the scoutmaster, committee chair, whatever. It should be crystal clear that this is done by the COR and IH, no one else. Beavah likes to say that its the Chartering Organization's program, and I understand what he is saying although I dont always agree with him, but since it is the CO's program, shouldnt they know what's going on in it? Its the CO's that wield the most power in the Program yet many are blissfully unaware of what they should be doing. I have read about several scouters here who have examplory CO's and also have read about deplorable as well. Shouldnt the CO's all have the same understanding of the program? I know there are supposed to be visits to the IH by the DE, but with the turnover in DE's in the District I serve, I think if an IH gets a phone call from a DE once every three years, its the average. We keep reminding each other that the BSA is not a democracy. The unit leaders do not decide who is to be Scoutmaster or COmmittee Chair, that is the CO's job. How it's done practically we all understand but shouldnt the people charged with selecting the leadership be required to know what those leaders are supposed to be doing? I can see not having them attend a joint meeting. That training would have to done on a one to one basis by either the DE or designee, but to have dormant CO's is to ignore a problem that needs to be addressed.(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

At one time I got mileage out of saying that One's Honor was the same as saying "word to your mother" and the kids understood that. Not sure if they would today, anyone knmow?

Gentlemen, if I may... The CO of the Troop I serve is great, the Pastor calls me by name and the Troop helps set up the Fellowship Hall after meetings for banquets so often it usually takes 10 minutes to provide seating for 150. The COuncil Dinner will be there this week. BUT Many posters have commented here that they have CO's in name only. A lot is layed off on the CO and speaking from my experience, many CO's could care less. The annual meeting for the Council will be held prior to the Dinner. If the lessons of the past holds true, perhaps 25% if that many of the CO's will be represented, if that many. The COuncil President will be elected amoung other offices to the approval of a paltry amount of CO representation. The Council I serve has required training policies and we have dropped units that didnt meet the criteria. I think it might be time to require the CO's to be present at the Annual Meeting. I mean, every 365 days or so, a representative of the CO has to show up to see who is running the program from the Council level. Is that too much to ask? So much power is in the hands of the CO's and I am not sure all that many realize or care to exercise it.

In the interest of a nicer, gentler forum. Lets remember to only disect the arguments, not the poster. After all, its the politics forum and if the other person is wrong on their opinion, lets hear yours. We don't need to denigrate the other person, no matter how much they deserve it :}

The issue of Sea Scouts has long been a concern in the COuncil I serve. We have a diffucult time keeping a Ship afloat. One such unit has been created, disbanded, recreated and disbanded so many times we refer to it as the SS Yoyo. It's been up and down so many times its well you know. The problem centers on money for a the boat(s). Apparently the people who start the units do not have a good handle on how much money it will take to support the actual boats of a Ship. How do you guys manage it? Donated boats and trailers can always be found, its the upkeep that kills the units financially.

It's a Beautiful Day for a Ballgame, for a ballgame, today. The fans are out to get a ticket or two From Walla Walla, Washington to Kalamazoo It's a beautiful day for a home run But even a triple's okay We're gonna cheer And boo And raise a hallabaloo At the ballgame, today! or Hey hey holy mackerel No doubt about it The Cubs are on their way The Cubs are gonna pitch today They're gonna hit today They're gonna field today Come what may the Cubs are gonna win today. Hey hey holy mackerel No doubt about it The Cubs are on their way They've got the hustle They've got the muscle The Chicago Cubs are on their way. Hey hey holy mackerel No doubt about it The Cubs are on their way They've got the hustle They've got the muscle The Chicago Cubs are on their way! Jack Brickhouse was a CHicago god, Cubs Baseball in the Summer and in the Fall, "the Chicago Bears are on the air" Ernie, lets play two, Banks at first Glenn Beckert at Second DOn Kessinger at Short Ron Santo at Third and a battery of Holztman and Hundley Billy WIlliams in Left, Adolpho Phillips in Center and whomever in right THen on the south side, The lilting tones of Bob Elsonand Red Rush doing the CHicago WHite Sox, Tommy Macgraw at second. Little Louie Apparicio at short, Norm Cash at First, yes the glory days(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

Just a matter of semantics perhaps, but the Mass is not a sacrament. Holy Communion is and Communion is a required part of the Mass. The seven Catholic Sacraments are: Baptism Penance Holy Communion Confirmation Holy Orders (becomming a Priest, Nun, or Brother) Marriage Sacrament of the Sick (used to be Extremem Unction or Last Rites) I don't wont to confuse any of the non-catholics out there.

I beleive the Civil War/War Between the States/War of Northern Agression is recognized as the bloodiest in American history. Accounts of causalties vary, but I beleive of all the deaths that occurred, only a third were from combat related action. The others died from dysentry, exposure, etc. Yet Lincoln is seen as the great uniter, a man of leadership, not one who threw sent men to their deaths,poorly equipped and all. Is it time that softens the man or the preconceived opinion?

As I once heard a few times, all politics are local, this is how the Council I serve did Mandatory Training. It may not work everywhere, I know it wouldnt, it has to be a Council wide decision. The Executive Board of the Council said it wasnted to move to mandatory training. The Council Exec communicated this to the Council Training Chair who talked about it with the District Training Chairs. The District Training Chairs had to beef up their staffs and agree to provide training on a rotating basis so that training would be available every 2 months in the Council. Also, the District Training Chairs committed to do one on one training or have a trainer go to a unit committee meeting if that was what it woud take. In all of this, a committment to present the syllabus was made and the chairs sit in on sessions in their and other districts to assue this is so. Many people in the COuncil are now invovled in training. I am the Venturing trainer for the Distirct I serve, there is a Cub and Boy Scout Lead trainer as well. Before the training requirement was made official a lot of work was done talking about what it would take and were we committed to making it work. It was talked up, the COuncil President, Exec and Commissioner had "Fireside Chats" with each District to talk about this issue and others. The enforcement was not to recharter units that were not trained, and this was done. First year 3 units were dropped. A few units ended up with different scoutmasters because the first guy wasnt trained, many saw that the requirement was serious and they got trained. At first all Scoutmaster, Cubmasters and Crew Advisors had to be trained. Then the next year it was All COmmittee CHairs, then the next year COmmittee members and Asst Scoutmasters. At the present time if you sign up to be an Asst Scoutmaster, you need to take training in 2 years or you cant be an ASM. It takes a dedicated training staff and dedicated scouters to present the material as many times as it is needed. I would not suggest a council just say we require training unless it has the infrastructure in place, Council reps may sit in on any training session to assure it adheres to the syllabus. It can be done, and done well if you have enough people to do it, other wise it would not be attainable(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

you are, dont worry you are