CalicoPenn

To the best of my knowledge, the Boy Scouts of America has never, in it's entire history, revoked a person's Eagle Scout rank, for any reason. A judge cannot revoke a person's Eagle rank at any time - he doesn't have any jurisdiction to do so (Eagle Scout is a rank given by a private organization to a private individual). If the BSA revoked an Eagle Scout rank (and again, it's never happened) and was sued, all a judge could do is agree with the BSA and dismiss the suit. In theory, the Eagle Scout rank still belongs to the BSA, as do all other ranks and the BSA can demand that they be returned at any time - in theory. In practice, it would never happen. The BSA could send a letter to someone demanding the return of the items and the person would likely either ignore the demand or just respond and tell the BSA to go pound sand. In order to enforce such a demand, the BSA would have to file a civil suit, and if the defendant no longer has the items the BSA would likely only be able to collect the face value of the items in question. Total value of the items - $25. Cost to file the suit? Not worth it. So, where does this urban legend come from? I have a little insight into this - a few of my clients earned the Eagle Scout rank before admitting they were gay - some of them were told by former Troop leaders, or other adult volunteer Scouters who learned this, that they would make sure the lads Eagle Scout rank was revoked. Even though they never got any official letter from the Boy Scouts of America, they were still told by some "official" in their eyes that their Eagle Scout rank was revoked. They in turn perpetuate that by telling their friends that they used to be an Eagle Scout but it was revoked by the BSA (they don't know this isn't true - they were told by someone in authority that it was). It isn't long before someone mentions to a friend who is in the civil rights biz that they know someone whose Eagle Scout was revoked, and it gets told as an apocryphal story to an eager news media who couldn't tell you the sky was blue unless someone standing next to them told them the sky was blue. Calico

The Boy Scouts will still be able to meet in a public school (all else being equal). This provision doesn't change things. It simply prevents taxpayer dollars from being spent to build, renovate or ugrade religious facilities in schools and funding religious studies departments. In Illinois, a number of colleges have installed foot baths in some rest rooms. At first, it was challenged because it was for a religious purpose - and yes, originally it did have a religious purpose. BUT (and here's a rare case of common sense that neither side disagreed with so all is copacetic - at least in Illinois) - Muslim students weren't going to stop taking foot baths if the foot baths weren't installed - they would just continue using the sinks to wash their feet. From a health standpoint, it was much better to install footbaths (which are open to anyone to use) then to use sinks. The schools couldn't ban students from using the sinks to wash their feet (that would be religious discrimination not allowed under the 1st Amendment) so the made a sensible accomodation. The biggest problems in a couple of schools was keeping the janitors from using them as slop sinks after mopping the restroom floors. As has been pointed out, the story is coming from "What the Fox?" news - all the news that they can twist to sell products to the brain dead. Calico

Seems there is a much simpler solution than all the hand-wringing going on about the G2SS, the rules, were they in sight, should people smoke out of sight, etc. etc. etc. - and it's a friendly and courteous way of handling it too. Ask the Scoutmaster for a moment of his time - privately. Without any anger or judgement (very important), simply explain that some of the Scouts had approached you as a neutral party (also important - you need to remain neutral - you're just being the messenger here) about the adult leaders on the trip passing out and lighting up cigars during evening chore time (don't be accusatory, you're just repeating what they said) and that they were uncomfortable with this and would prefer it if the adults would do so in private next time, and they asked you to be their messenger because they felt uncomfortable speaking up about it because they want to remain respectful. Calico

Patience, Grasshopper. Congress has been in session for 1 month. During that time, the House was concentrating on an economic recovery package and the Senate has been concentrating on a new presidential administration's cabinet picks. Give them a bit of time, and they'll probably get to it fairly quickly.

Lets cut to the bottom line. You're a Merit Badge Counselor. Your son wants to earn one or more of the badges that you counsel. Your son's Scoutmaster approves of you as the counselor for your son. There is no official policy that states a parent can't counsel his/her own son. So what's the issue? Despite lot's of advice from foks who suggest you shouldn't do so, there is no policy that say's you can't and the Scoutmaster approves - and your son is taking a risk that you'll actually be tougher on him that you might for someone who isn't your son (which, in my experience happens far more often that a parent being more lenient). So what to do? Go for it - and enjoy the time with your son (heck, it's not bad practice for when someone else might come calling). If your son starts to rave about how much great stuff he learned doing the merit badge, you just might get more people from his troop interested too. Calico

$145,000 more has already been brought into the US Treasury - so why are you complaining? Now if only we can start "vetting" all the lobbyists, ex-congresscritters, and corporate executives - on both sides of the aisle, maybe we can make a dent in the national debt. I'm comforted by the knowledge that the tax code is just as complex and confusing for these folks as it is for the rest of us.

This is a real easy fix - forget the palms, forget the Hornaday awards, forget the sit down with the district folks, forget a sit down with the father and/or son. All you need is COR and CC support. If the COR and the CC agree (you want a united front), send a letter to the Scout Executive (not the District Executive - go straight over his head) with a copy to the "Council Registrar" (even if they don't use that term, they'll know what that means) along with a check from the Troop to refund the annual dues from the lad and his father and telling (note, I said telling - not asking) the Scout Executive that the Chartering Organization no longer wants this boy or his father involved in their unit and effectively immediately, they are no longer on the roster of the Troop. Then stand firm - that's the most important part - if anyone - the Scout Executive, District Executive, District or Unit Commission, or the father himself calls and trys to bully you into reversing your decision (or even suggests telling you that you can't do this) tell them flat out to go pound sand - it is done, we don't want them in the unit anymore, and it isn't your problem anymore. A second letter to the District Chairman, District Committee and District Executive, with a copy to the Scout Executive should also be sent warning that the unit will not stand for any interference in your unit's operations by this father. That's it - it's done. Simple and effective. And whatever you do, don't accept a recharter - check your paperwork when it's returned to make sure they didn't just slip it in.

Seems to me we need to clear a little something up here. The executive orders are not about funding, or not funding, abortions in other countries. Congress has never allocated any money, ever, to be used to fund the actual act of abortions. I would call it disingenuous of Anti-Liberty activists (you can call them Pro-Life if you want to, 95% of the so-called "pro-life" people I ever met are also for the death penalty - and you can't truly call yourself "pro-life" if you're also "pro-state putting people to death") to keep claiming the money is being used to fund abortions, but that would be tantamount to winking and nodding at the complete dishonesty about how the funds are used. Instead, I'll call it for what it is - Outright Lies. The funds are used to offer information about choices in family planning and health. Reagan and the two Bushes signed executive orders prohibiting any funding to be given to any organization that provided information about abortion as a method of family planning - even (and this is very important and is lost on the Anti-Liberty folks) if the grant request is for a program that doesn't involve abortion or family planning at all. An organization may have requested a grant in order to put together an educational program to stop the spread of AIDS, or to warn women of dangers from Breast Cancer, or even to provide information to mothers about infant vaccinations, and if that organization also provided information about abortion - even if none of the grant money would be spent on that part of the organization's mission, the GOP exec orders prevented funding from going there at all. Clinton and Obama have signed exec orders reversing that first exec order - in doing so they are showing that they believe in giving people all the information they need to make informed choices, and they have gone back to the original intentions of Congress in allocating those funds. Had Congress not wanted it to go for abortion information, they would have said so - they didn't. So given that the US does not now, nor has it ever, funded abortions overseas (with the very narrow possible exception of female US military personnel), the questions posed in the original post are moot. Calico

BuffaloSkipper asks: "I have a skill related question for the group. I have a flint and steel kit, but I am having a real time trying to make a spark. I can get a small one every 15th-20th strike, and a medium to large one about every 50th-75th. I have seen others make plentiful sparks with every strike (making this look easy)." It may not be a matter of skill, it may be the kit itself. Where did you get your kit? Is it the BSA kit with the shiny metal rod? I was never very successful with the BSA kit but the kit I purchased at a Rendezvous has never let me down. It is the metal striker that makes the sparks - not the flint as many think. Flint just happens to be a rock at just about the right hardness to cause iron to spark. You can use any rock, or for that matter, any solid material that meets or exceeds flint on the hardness scale. Note something important - not just any metal will do. The "steel" in the BSA kit I had really was steel. And steel won't spark. Neither will aluminum, or most alloys. There are, however, certain metals that are poryphoric (I think I spelled it right). It means they burn. Sodium and Magnesium are perhaps the best known. Another is Iron. Pure iron, when exposed to oxygen, does something interesting - it burns. Yes, oxidizing iron is actually burning. Because of the large size of most pieces of iron, and a small surface to mass ratio, it doesn't feel hot to us. Nevertheless, it is burning. And when it burns, it creates a thin layer of iron oxide which serves to keep oxygen from reaching the iron. The surface of the striker is no longer pure iron - it is iron oxide. When using a striker, we are flaking off a very small piece of iron from the striker - because it is so small, it has a high surface to mass ratio and because it isn't quick to oxidize, we get a spark. If you truly have an iron striker, then the issue is tour flint - it's just not hard enough to be effective in shaving a piece of iron off the striker - then you need a harder flint. If you aren't using real iron, then you need to replace the striker itself. Calico

The position of the BSA on wearing the Den Chief Service Award cord is implied when it states in a few different books that the Scout may wear the cord for as long as he is a youth member (meaning he could wear it up to age 21 depending on the type of unit he is in). The implication is that at 21, he can no longer wear the Den Chief Service Award cord, so therefore adults can't wear the cord. I agree that the Den Chief Service Award should be granted a knot - and once suggested an overhand knot that is red, ehite and blue.

The amount of hair in dryer lint shouldn't amount to a hill of beans as far as odor goes - in other words, those adult leaders were just full of, well, beans is an apt description. You are at a crossroads here, both with this leadership and with your son. It sounds like your son checked his resources, and came well prepared - that's the kind of Scout that good adult leaders, and good SPL's really like having around. However, he has now discovered that adults can be completely clueless at times which of course means that he's about to make the leap that you can be completely clueless at times (but then again, if I do my math right, he's just about that age - 14 - where he might be thinking that anyway - the real problem is if he was thinking it, it's now been proven). He's also at real risk for just chucking the whole shebang when it comes to Scouting - though a lot of credit goes to him for verbalizing what he's feeling and giving you an opportunity to help him find a solution to staying with a program he seems to like. Nothing, and I mean nothing, discourages a Scout more than when his efforts aren't valued by his mentors (and that is what adult leaders are). What appears to have happened here is that the adults have lost the trust of your son. He's pretty much told you that in saying he doesn't feel comfortable going to them anymore. You need to start evaluating the leadership in a bit of a different light. They may be the right kind of leader for an 11 year old, but do they adjust well for a 14 year old? Are they open to new ideas or set in their ways? Can they reverse or change course or do they hold onto an idea, even if its misinformed, like a bulldog holds onto a bone? Are they trained??? Sit down with the Scoutmaster and have that friendly chat - first to get the leaders take on the story, and also to better understand the vision they have. If you come away feeling that the trust can be rebuilt, then express that to your son (but put the unit on double-secret probabation - just keep an eye and ear out, don't tell them - and be ready to act if it isn't meeting it's promises). If, however, your feeling that the situation won't get better, start looking for a new unit - or just be prepared to support your son when he tells you he's done with Scouting and wants to move on. And yes, despite the adult association arguments, this is a time for you, as a parent, to express your concerns (as a friend, not as papa bear). Most Scouts are just not capable of telling an adult that they no longer trust and may no longer respect them. We are ingrained not to say such things to our elders. But parents are good at tactfully expressing to adult leaders (most of the time)about how their sons are feeling/thinking. Something to keep in mind, and something every adult leader in Scouting should be reminded of all the time: The MOST important volunteer in Boy Scouts is the Scout himself. Without the Scout, there is no need for Adult Volunteers. And Scouts vote with their feet - if they stop liking it, they leave. 10 times out of 10, the answer to an adult leader who asks "what am I doing wrong" as their units decline is "You're not giving the Scouts what THEY want". Finally, (and here I put on my "wish he were in my Troop hat" - if, after your son gains his confidence in the unit back, he doesn't think about becoming a Webelos Den Chief, it would be a real shame and waste of talent - that's just my rah-rah cheerleading about Den Chiefs. Calico

"I picked up some sort of fungus at a mountain man reenactor show. One spark gets is started and it's hard to put out." It's called "Tinder Fungus" - its a black knob-like fungus that commonly grows on birch trees. Break it open and it's a crumbly reddish/brown color. You can break it apart, crumble it up, and use it just as tinder, or you can set a spark in it and let it just smolder then a few hours later, blow on it to get it to catch flame again - it was often used to transport fire from one campsite to another. When I rondy, I will use flax tow if I have it. I also have some 4 inch lengths of old rope in the fire starting tin I carry in my possibles bag to break up and use as tinder. The tin carries my flint, steel, char cloth and some tinder, and a small piece of wood which acts as a plug when I use the tin to create char cloth. In the fall, when the cattails are bursting, I'll harvest a cattail head and use that as tinder. I can usually catch spark on my first try - the secret I was taught was not to do it the way I learned it in Boy Scouts which was to put the char cloth on the tinder on the ground and try to aim sparks at it. The secret I earned was to hold the char cloth in its nest of tinder against the flint and strike with the steel right where the char cloth is - if you get a spark, it will catch in the char cloth right away, and since I'm already holding the "nest", I don't have to pick it up to start blowing on it.

I prefer water color paints for Cub Scouts. Parents don't get quite so mad, or calm down pretty quickly when they realize all they have to do is pop their Cub Scout into a shower to wash the paint off. Oh, wait - you weren't really asking about what kind of paint is best for painting Cub Scouts, were you? Nevermind. CP

Yeah, about that morning sun thing - maybe that made sense when we camped in colored dense canvas tents which would be dark enough to take a nap in at noon on a cloudless day and might see the sun through a small gap in a tent flap or through a ventilation screen on the door, but with most nylon tents these days, it really doesn't matter where the door is facing when the sun comes up as far as light goes - the sun will pretty much infuse the entire tent with a soft glowing light as it rises. Even white canvas tents get that soft infused light throughout.

I prefer to set my shelter up so that the door I'm using faces away from the direction that wind and weather is likely to come from, and that all depends on the time of the year. If wind and rain is more likely to come from the West, the shelter is set up with the door to the East. From the Northwest? Set up facing the Southeast. From the Southwest? Set up facing the Northeast. From the East? Set up facing the West. That's the pattern I tend to use. If I'm unfamiliar with a region's prevailing winds, I ask someone (usually a ranger - I tend to camp in state and national parks and forests). Some of my tents have a double door (including my 12' canvas pyramid tent). I choose one of the doors as my main door - the other either doesn't get used, or (in the case of my backpacking tent) may be used as access to gear left out in the vestibule (leaving my main door vestibule gear free so I don't trip on things coming or going). I also deliberatly used the word shelter - I've simplified my Rondy gear and rarely use my 12' pyramid tent anymore (mostly in early spring and late fall when rain and frost is more likely). Now, I use a diamond fly and the most important consideration in set up is direction that wind and/or rain is likely to come from. I know I've set it up wrong if rain splashing on my face wakes me up in the middle of the night. I know I've been blessed with wisdom when it rains all night and I stay dry as powder in a watertight jar. So I would say my definitive answer to the question is "It depends on which way wind and rain are most likely to come from" which is about as definitive as possible. BTW, jjgoscie - Welcome to the Campfire. It seems you've caught us in a playful mood! Calico

If you include the Presidents of the Continental Congress in the listing of President of the United States, the answer would be Peyton Randolph who served as the First President of the Continental Congress from 9/5/1774 to 10/22/1774. However, if you date the United States to the signing of the Declaration of Independence, then the First President would be John Hancock who was serving as the (4th) President of the Continental Congress at the time. You could date the United States to the approval of the distribution to the states for ratification of the Articles of Confederation (which coined the term United States of America) on 11/15/1777 in which case the First President would be Henry Laurens, who was serving as the President of the Continental Congress at the time. If you date the United States to the final ratification of the Articles of Confederation, which coined the term United States of America, the First President would be Samuel Huntington, who was serving as President of Congress when the Articles of Confederation were ratified. On the other hand, perhaps the First President is Tom McKean, who was the first person elected as President of Congress after the Articles of Confederation had been ratified. But then there's John Hanson - the so-called First President of the United States (mostly by his family and some amateur historians) because he was the first President of Congress elected under the rules of the Articles of Confederation. If however, you date the United States to the signing of the Constitution of the United States (which replaced the Articles of Confederation) then perhaps the First President was Arthur St. Clair, who was the 15th President of Congress at the time of the signing of the US Constitution - 9/17/1787. But once again, there's that ratification stuff that muddies the water - so maybe the First President was Cyrus Griffin, who was President of Congress when New Hampshire ratified the United States Constitution (the final ratification of nine states needed) on June 21, 1788. For my money, though, the first President of the United States of America, as we understand the term as the Chief Executive of the country, is George Washington, and the oath he took is the one that is written in the Constitution of the United States. (This message has been edited by calicopenn)

This would be an interesting assignment for a constitutional moot court for a constitutional law class. In reading the 20th Amendment, it makes clear that the term of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January and that their successors terms shall begin. It appears that a very good argument could be made that this sentence in the 20th Amendment amends the requirement that the President shall take the oath of office before he enter on the execution of his office. The 20th Amendment very specifically states, with no requirement of an oath of office, that the new President's and Vice President's term shall begin at noon on the 20th day of January. If this is the case, this makes the oath of office in Article II, Section 1 purely ceremonial now. So what this all boils down to is that precisely at noon on the 20th day of January, the President-elect becomes President. Hypothetically, had Barack Obama died between noon and the the reciting of the Oath of Office, Joe Biden, whether he had taken an oath of office or not (and there is no requirement anywhere that the VP do so at all anyway - more argument that the oath is now strictly ceremonial), would have become not the 44th President, but the 45th President. Barack Obama would still be considered the 44th President. As for who would have been President had the President-elect died before noon on the 20th, the simple answer would be the Vice-President elect - but its a little more complicated. That simplicity is only true if the President-elect dies after being chosen by the Electoral College. If he had died between the election and the meeting of the electoral college, and the electoral college still gives him the office, the Vice President-elect would serve as an acting President, until a new President could be chosen. Lastly, I took the pause by Obama to be a stop because he knew what he just heard was wrong and was trying to decide how to proceed - repeat what he heard, or say what it should have been - it appears he had decided to just repeat what he heard while Justice Roberts realized his error and started to correct himself. The first fumble is rather understandable though - I've found that most people find an oath's rythym to be more natural to our ears and thoughts as "I, (stated name), (pause for next section then repeat) "do solemly swear that I will" than the "I, (stated name), do solemnly swear that I will" (with no pause & repeat) method.

Think one pot and simple. You're goal is hot food that's quick and easy to make. Now is not the time to think gourmet, or even home cooking. Its time to think about survuval food - giving your body the nutrition and energy it needs. For breakfast - oatmeal - stick to your ribs oatmeal - and not the instant kind (well, ok, if you insist, it's ok). I prefer a big pot of real oatmeal with raisins, apples, nuts, brown sugar and cinnamon available to add in. You want hot and fast in the morning. French toast, eggs, pancakes, bacon, sausage, etc. - complicated - takes too long. Lunch? Soup and sandwiches (hint - pre-make the sandwiches as much as you can - and think "outside the box". A great sandwich for winter camping (heck for any kind of camping/hiking) is peanut butter and cheese on a bagel. Bagels hold up well while hiking and packed. Peanut allergies? Then use lunchmeat. Dinner? Beef Stew is good - if you are in camp long enough to be able to cook it properly (which may mean someone, usually an adult or two staying behind while the Scouts go do something active). Otherwise - keeping with simple and fast - Macaroni and Cheese - yes, the yellow stuff on noodles sold by Kraft - but doctor it up - add ham chunks, peas, corn, carrot pieces. Believe it or not but on a cold winter day, this reallt hits the spot and tastes good - stickes to the ribs too. Calico

"Just wait, it gets even more complex When you hit Webelos age... Mom's boyfriend can't share a tent with the scout." "When staying in tents, no youth will stay in the tent of an adult other than his or her parent or guardian." Question - Wouldn't Mom's boyfriend be the Scout's guardian if Mom gives him that role so wouldn't that mean that Mom's boyfriend could share a tent with the scout?? Calico

Wouldn't just one simple sentence take care of this whole issue? "Single-parent families are exempt from this rule - please participate and enjoy some quality time with your Cub" Single parent families have not been all that unusual since the 1970's - it's now 2009. How long will it take to drag well-meaning folks kicking and screaming into this new millenium of ours? Haven't we gotten to the point where we have figured out how to be inclusive and thoughtful of single-parent familes yet? Lulu - you sound like just the person your Pack needs to make a positive change happen for the single-parent familes in your Pack. Go for it! Calico

Unless there is a change I missed since the mid-1980's, there is no set National policy on when it is too cold to take Scouts out camping. Check with your local Council, though - they may have their own rules regarding that. In the mid-1980's, I worked at Maine National High Adventure, Howland Base, teaching OKPIK winter camping (back before OKPIK was rolled out to Councils as an activity). There were only two things that would cause us to cancel - rain and blizzard. It's much more dangerous to camp in winter temps in the rain than it is to camp in sub-zero temps when it's otherwise dry. And blizzards were dangerous because of lack of visibility on the trail (intrepid units could still camp in a blizzard, but it was in the "backyard" of the base, rather than a 1-hour ski-trip down a trail). Most of the time, camp was in the 10 to -10 range (staff actually disliked weather in the 30's - snow starts to melt, and then things just get wet). Occasionally, it dropped to negative 20 or so. Just made it that much more braggable for the lads. Most of the time, we built a couple small quinzhees, but still had tents for most people (as staff, I had my own tent - but usually used a fly-shelter - which was more to try to get the adults on board with them - build a short wall of snow, as if for a snow fort, cover it with the fly - and lay down a bed of pine boughs (hidden in the woods from week to week - shhh - thats a secret) - kept me nice and toastie warm - my ski poles acted as tent poles - you can't just lay the fly flat over the top of the wall - the ski poles held the fly up a bit in the center to form a peaked roof so if it did snow, the roof wouldn't collapse). You could also build a short snow fort wall just a bit larger than the size of the tent and set the tent up in it. Even though we never cancelled, there would be times when the unit's leaders would cancel - usually after the lads begged off (not to knock Connecticut or Massachussets, but the units that would cancel and go motel it for the weekend generally came from these two states - units from Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont would never cancel, and oddly, units from New York would never cancel either (probably because it took them so long to drive up and gosh darn it if they weren't going to get their money's worth - remember, this was still a High Adventure Base trip, and even through it was a weekend, it was still almost as costly per lad as some summer camps). Otherwise, nrp1488's answer is the definitive - it's too cold when the parent say's its too cold. Calico

TO answer the question "When did it change" - the answer is never. Ever since Explorers, Air Explorers and Sea Scouts were given the opportunity to earn Eagle Scout, it has never been required that they be members of a Troop as well. Contact the District Advancement Chair and ask him/her what his/her position is on this (as I read it, you only have these two well-meaning but incorrectly informed Scouters word on what the DAC expects - and nothing from the "horse's mouth"). If the DAC states that your som must be a member of the Troop and refuses to either prove that up by showing you where, in an official National BSA publication, that rule is stated, or refuses to change his/her mind if you show him otherwise, then contact Council and find out who the Council Advancement Chair is an officially request that your son's Eagle BOR be provided at the Council level without the participation of these three folks. If he/she refuses, then it's time for the Chartered Org partner to contact the Council President and Scout Executive to find out why the Council is refusing to follow the program that they promised to deliver to the Chartered Organization. Calico

Good thing Pack was talking about fish and not cats or dogs - then we'd be worrying about having another Jeffrey Dahmer on our hands. The only creature I ever dissected while it was still living was a sea urchin in my Marine Biology class - and the only reason was because the internal organs collapse pretty much as soon as it dies. The hardest part was trying to get a dissecting scalpel through a mass of wriggling spines to a plate border, all while trying to hold onto a ball or wriggling spines without getting stabbed. Of course, the distinct possibility of being stabbed by the sea urchin spines during the process certainly seemed to even out the score somewhat - though man being man, we were ultimately bound to come out the winner. I, however, did not take any pleasure in this and was glad when that lab was over, and never to be repeated. Now a dead creature - I've got no qualms about that at all - ask me about Gross Anatomy sometime. Calico

We can gnash our teeth and pull our hair out all we want at this point - but let's simplify things based on additional information you've now given us. You said the previous Scoutmaster has "approved the lad for his Eagle". I think a very good argument can be made that he's had his Scoutmaster Conference and doesn't need another one before the BOR. I'd set up the BOR and let the chips fall where they may - he is young enough so that if the BOR rejects it, he's got time to fix it, but this is one of those times when I would let the BOR make the decision and you can act as a champion for him while he works to correct any deficiencies should the BOR reject him. Unfortunately, your records are weak - if the previous SM has verified the lad held a POR, you have to take him at his word (since you can't prove it either way). As for the past two years of "activity", drop it - it's a non-starter given the way National has defined "active" (which is defined essentially as "Registered"). Calico

It really depends on the units involved - and this is one of those opportunities for the Scoutmaster and Cubmaster to have a chat. In most cases I'm aware of, the Troop provides the lad with the POR patch (to keep - once the POR is done, the patch comes off the uniform but can be put away in a keepsake box or sewn onto a patch blanket - I have to say, just in my opinion, that requiring the lad to turn the patch back over to the Troop just screams "cheapskate" to me), and the Pack provides the Den Chief Cord (usually at the next Pack meeting after the Den Chief has been appointed because younger lads like seeing their Den Chief get recognized - even if the "recognition" isn't an award but a symbol of office). Sometimes, the Troop will provide both. Rarely does a Pack provide both. This is the time for the Scoutmaster to contact the Cubmaster (or vice-versa) and just ask the question. If I'm not mistaken, if a lad is wearing the Den Chief patch, he shouldn't be wearing the Den Chief Cord at the same time - it's one or the other. Den Chief is intended to be (again, if I'm not mistaken) the only POR that a lad may hold at the same time he is holding another POR - for instance, a Patrol Leader may also be a Den Chief - and this is the function of the Cord - to identify the Den Chief POR while wearing another POR patch. While there may be units out there who have a Patrol Leader who is also the Librarian (as an example), it's not generally recommended. Of course, this shouldn't be taken to mean that the Den Chief can't be given both the patch and the cord - just that one has to be put away (however, it is common for a Den Chief who wears the Den Chief POR patch to also wear the cord to Pack Meetings, especially if the cord was given to the lad by the Pack and to make it easier to identify the Den Chiefs at a glance from say, a crossover ceremony team - and I for one wouldn't quibble with that - insignia guide notwithstanding). As for the Den Chief Service Award Cord - pretty much every time I've seen it awarded, it was the Pack that bought the cord and formally presented it at a Pack Meeting as a recognition of the hard work the Den Chief has given to the Pack. Many times, the Pack will invite the Scoutmaster to the Pack Meeting to help with the award. When I earned the Den Chief Service Award (oh so many years ago), the Cubmaster handed the cord to my Scoutmaster who put it on my shoulder. At the next Court of Honor, I was recognized by the Troop as having earned the award, but it wasn't re-presented to me. Calico