Col. Flagg

Our PLC has banned these silly items. Their solution: Make the Scout sign if you feel like you need to "fidget". Oddly, the two kids who brought up the motion have ADHD big time and called the spinners, "Ways to distract people who don't really have ADHD."

Update on El Rancho Cima. Their council is decommissioning with seemingly no plans to have in-council camps in 2018. Looks like they will partner with the council serving Austin to get their troops to summer camp. Our unit went to the Cockrell River Camp here in 1997.

This from Boys' Life. Timely!

We opted for an ALPS tent that is just a bit heavier than the standard 2-man backpacking tents, but lighter than the average "plop" camping tent. We use tyvek for the ground cloths. Much lighter and durable than the regular footprints. We add grommets so they can double as trail flies when not used as ground cloths. We swap out the stock tent stakes for lightweight ones. Split between buddies the total weight per two-man pair is just under 8 lbs.

We had to do this once. My only advice is: Make sure your unit does not need any training or other help from district or council. Plan to go to summer camp out of state for a while.

It is very good to use with that expensive gear since it does not eat synthetics like DEET and keeps noseeums away as well as the Greater MN Super Mosquito.

Where is this stated? All I can find is this reference where it says once you have completed training you can wear the patch. There's this in Scouting Magazine. For youth this would include: Taking TLT. Taking district leadership training (between TLT and NYLT). Taking NYLT or NAYLE or ALPS or Powder Horn, etc. Den Chief or LNT Guide training. So no, you do NOT need a POR to wear the "trained" patch. You can be a plain old Patrol QM, take your troop TLT and wear the patch.

Think it's pretty clear where the "NYLT Trained" patch goes versus the temporary NYLT patch. The guide says it all and so does this. The profit versus non-profit discussion is as clear as our tax law, so that's an unfair comparison.

Well, not sure what program the troop is running, but it's not Boy Scouts. One of the biggest problems in Scouting today is adults interfering with how the program should be run. Any time someone proposes a "rule", the PLC should be checking to see if it is allowed...and the SM and TC Chair should be doing the same. Otherwise they are not following the program.

But it's not "to each their own". You simply cannot deny a Scout the opportunity to begin a MB or go elsewhere because you want to keep it in the troop. No more than you can put age restrictions on MBs.

I suspect the confusion lies in the issue around the Congressional charter.

If you attended, you can wear it regardless of whether you currently have a position (POR) or not. Same as with the "trained" strip. It merely denotes that you attended the course.

Sleeve patch: Temp patch for right pocket (yours will vary):

Interesting, because if they rent out or allow usage of their facilities by non-members then the ARE subject to ADA. Which brings up an interesting issue: If councils have open family camp (where non-member family members use the camp, some of whom might have disabilities), doesn't that open them up to ADA compliance? That's probably an issue for the lawyers here.

Sorry to interrupt this back and forth, but BSA is not a 501©(3). Why would you quote that when BSA is a 501©(1)? Lastly, don't confuse tax-exempt status with being "non-profit". They are two different things.

I don't think it is right to base one's decisions to follow rules, policy or regulations based on the disciplinary action they receive if they violate said rule. Either someone complies with rules or they don't. The consequence does not matter. That's only how people who don't like certain rules or policies justify their behaviour. "Oh, it's a silly rule and I'll only get yelled at." What's worse is when younger people see their elders disregarding rules, they too begin to disregard rules. But then they start to disregard rules that their elders would never think of disregarding. Eventually, rules once held dear are not observed at all. Not because they were not good rules, but rather through nothing more than the continued eroding away of things in the name of "I don't agree with...". Don't like the rule? Work to change it, but comply with it...especially if you are a member of the organization.

Try the Dallas area shop. I hear they are good things about it.

It's not just lack of infrastructure, it's having to retool the program. It's having to re-write all the documentation to make it gender-neutral. It's about designing and manufacturing all the uniforms that will fit girls. It's about having all the training in place for the adults so they will be able to comply with YPT standards. It's about recruiting the female leaders so that coed units can go on adventures and events without it being led my all male leaders. Why rush in to the decision without knowing it's full impact? They can't spend money they (BSA) does not have yet, and councils may need time to prepare. Your oversimplification of this changes is either a) on purpose, or b) shows you have no idea of what would need to change to make coed Scouting effective and successful. It is NOT just opening the door as it is now and saying, "Come on in, gals!" National can dictate all they want, but if the councils don't have the money what then? What happens if a council does not have the temporary or permanent facilities by these dates? I think you are being simple about this issue. It's not about bathroom and shower facilities. It is about rushing in to a decision that could have huge financial and program impacts on councils who ALREADY don't have enough money. There's no guarantee as to how much revenue adding girls will bring in. The changes I noted above are just a few that would need too happen to accommodate women. Calculated all those costs AND THEN subtract the revenue from that. THAT will tell you what your profit will be.

Sorry, @@MattR, but since when is a good deed, service project or anything else we do as Scouts based on ability to pay? We don't discriminate when we perform a service. You think these schools, churches and other organizations for which our Scouts do Eagle projects can't afford to pay someone to do the same work? And yet we sign off on these projects -- many times with the funded entirely by the Scout -- nearly every day. I certainly hope your troop is getting those organizations to pay your Eagle candidates for their time, materials, supplies and such. Otherwise, its a but hypocritical, don't ya think?

I guess council shop was obviously a bust? When my daughter was in GS the local council was pretty helpful in getting patches they didn't have in stock. I assume you've already tried that route to no avail.

I think it depends on your location. Where I live we would typically set it up with the angled opening facing north. This would provide cover during most of the day, as well as take advantage of the prevailing winds. The down side? Most weather comes from the WNW, so we would not have protection from that. The contingency plan is to double up the tarps but with the second tarp as the mirror of the primary tarp. This does two things: 1) the double thickness provides added Sun and UV protection, 2) when weather comes we simply move the long portion of the second tarp to the north and stake it down, thus making a pup tent.

Is this it? http://www.girlscoutshop.com/GSSN-Juliettes-Boutique-Patch

LOL, can someone misread what was not written? Okay, so they are million dollar homes. Should someone's ability to pay dictate whether a Scout does a service project for someone who is poor or someone who is rich? I thought the idea was to provide a service, no? There's an old lady down the street from us. She can afford a great deal, yet my son still helps her with her groceries and brings her the paper when they throw it in the bushes. Why? Because he's a Scout. Same with the local church. They have millions in their operations fund. Could they hire someone to fix their volleyball court? Sure, but that would be a few thousand that would not go in to their food bank. Our unit does not put an ability to pay litmus test on providing service to others.

Curious, but why not just do it again and call it a conservation project?

Doubt all you want. I have witnessed first hand the impact coed issues have on existing camp infrastructure. You need to add time in your program day to cycle in youth boys, then youth girls, then adult men, then adult women. The impact to program was delays in start times for reasons solely related to coed issues and not anything else. Can these be overcome? Of course. But the camp needs to change infrastructure and program from what it is today. You can't just take the boy-focused program and apply it to coed.