CalicoPenn

"But then if yeh go and listen to the interviews with the molesters, they talk in detail about the type of youth they are sexually attracted to..." Yes, let's use interview with criminals trying to deny that they are committing criminal acts by trying to justify what they are doing is an act of love and not an act of violence to develop an argument that heterosexual males that molest male children are really closeted homosexuals. I'll repeat it once again, and add a clarification - sexual orientation is determined by our consensual relationships with, and attraction to, adults. A married man who sneaks around and has sex with adult males is either a closeted homosexual or is bisexual. A married man who victimizes a male child but would never have sex with a male adult is not a closeted homosexual, is a criminal. But by all means, go ahead and try to determine if the outwardly heterosexual, married man that is signing up to be one of your Scout leaders is secretly a closeted homosexual who will molest the Scouts, if that's your viewpoint. Good luck with that.

Child molestation isn't about sexual orientation. It's about power. Power of the molester over their victim. Heterosexual men who molest male children aren't closeted homosexuals (and that is what Beavah is suggesting). They are victimizing a less powerful individual who happens to be male. There have been cases of homosexual men who have molested girls. That doesn't make them closeted heterosexuals. Sexual orientation is defined by your consensual relationships with ADULTS - not by a criminal act.

Ok - here's the nod. The regs are as ScoutNut posted. Reality is that there is no such thing as a uniform police and no one of authority is unlikely to call you out over wearing a reasonable non-BSA marked temporary patch, unless the patch is so egregrious that they have no choice but to mention it. By person of authority, I mean the Scout Executive. By reasonable, I doubt even a Scout Executive would object to lads temporarily wearing a park service patch from a trip to Yellowstone National Park. Wearing the Playboy bunny? Yeah - that's gonna cross the line. A Commissioner may mention it, but good Commissioner's just mention it in passing, not to demand that you remove the patch. After all, a Commissioner is just another volunteer - and really has no authority to take any action excpet maybe complain to the Scout Executive. You might be confronted by a few volunteers that make up the unofficial so-called "Uniform Police". Best thing to do is to look them square in the eye, and tell them to go pound sand. That's right - I advocate not being polite to these dweebs because frankly, they aren't being polite in confronting you - and why give them the satisifaction of believing that you listened to them. A well-placed "leave my sight and never darken my visage again" message is sometimes needed to deal with these types of over-bearing volunteers. Oops - there's that word again - volunteers - means they are no more important than you are. A 3-bead Woodbadger, a Silver Beaver holder, a Council President, is no more important than a brand new Tiger leader - in fact, I'm bold enough to suggest they may be less important in some respects because the new Tiger leader is going to set the stage for those Tigers to remain active in the program - and without youth in the program, there is no need for a Council President, a 3-bead Woodbadger, a Silver Beaver holder.

Collapsible walking staffs - two of them. There's a reason 4 legged animals are more stable on trails than us 2-legged humans - and using two walking staffs, though not quite duplicating 4 legs, provides a lot of stability, and helps take some of the load off. I use the REI Four Winds - a four section walking staff, because it collapses into one of the smallest staffs for packing. 2GB only holds 400 or so photos? My digital camera is a Sony - at the VGA setting, their 2GB card holds over 12,000 photos. It's a good thing too - I often take 400 to 600 pictures a day when I'm traveling - just last weekend I went to the Chicago Botanic Gardens and took over 400 photos in about 2 1/2 hours.

Gee - here's a thought on the best way to avoid problems. Follow the program as laid out by the franchisor - I mean the Boy Scouts of America. Why is it we can walk into any franchised McDonalds anywhere in the United States (heck in the world) and feel comfortable that the Big Mac made in San Diego is going to look and taste the same as the Big Mac made in Altoona? I know, I know - "but we're not McDonalds". I say balderdash - we're exactly like McDonalds - a national oprganization provides the standards, it's our job to follow them. That applies to both those Troops that think they should follow the old ways because those ways were better and to those Troops that are lax on the standards because - well, who knows why they're lax - I could suggest laziness as one possibility, I'm sure there are more. Follow the program and you won't have any problems with transfers.

The only problem with the Boy Scout generational diversity presentation is that the dates are based on a parental fecundity (number of births) generational theory while the discussion is based on the peer personality generational theory of Strauss & Howe. Using Strauss & Howe, the Baby Boom generation is dated from 1943 to 1960, the Gen-X generation is dated from 1961 to 1981 and the Millenial generation is dated from 1982 to 2000, and the peer personalities are much closer matches within those date ranges. Someone born from 1961 to 1964 has far more in common, personality wise, experience wise and viewpoint wise with someone born in the 1970's than they do with someone born in the 1950s. The disconnect is bound to happen when you name one of the cohort groups the "Baby Boom" generation then try to figure out the parameters of that generation based on birth rates. In the late 50's the birth rate was starting to go down - but then blipped up again in the early 1960's - a douple-dip boom? Under Strauss & Howe, President Obama is the first Gen-X president. Sociologists wouldn't be surprised at the large amount of support that President Obama got from the X-ers and the Millenials - after all, he speaks the language. Sociologists wouldn't be surprised at the large amount of pushback President Obama is getting from the Boomers and "Matures" (most folks that identify with the "tea party" are Boomers and "Matures") because he doesn't quite speak their language. Speaking to Clem's point about feeling disconnected sometimes, there is another possible dimension to the whole thing too. (Like Clem, I was born in 1961 too, and have always considered myself an X-er, ask a boomer who had the first television on the block and most can probably answer - ask someone my age or younger and we'll wonder what planet you came from since everyone had a television at home when we were children). That other dimension is that there are occassional generational shifts usually brought on by massive upheavals in the social order or technology. When that happens, there is usually a small cohort group (5 or less years - not quite a generation, but generally indentifiable in hindsight) that act as a definable "bridge" between two generations. There is some indication that the years 1961-1964 is one of those bridges. We had massive social order upheavals while this group were children, and massive technological changes while this group were children. What was new and unusual in the Boomer's lives was common place by the time this group was hitting middle school. And it was this cohorts ability as the real early adopters of the new technologies and social order that smoothed the way for the later members of their generational cohort group, and the following cohort group, to adapt quickly to a new world. The same difference isn't really seen in the shift from X-er to Millenial - there really hasn't been any technological upheaval since the early 1960's - we aren't really developing new technologies as much as improving existing technologies - making things smaller and faster. We've seen this kind of bridging before - the industrial revolution brought massive social and technological upheaval and there was a 4-5 year "bridge" cohort.

The question in the title of the thread is "When do you take the scouts word?" The answer is a rather simple 4 words: A Scout is Trustworthy I think those four words answers the question and says it all.

It doesn't take decades to forget something we've learned. It just takes the time we move from one test to another. If I test you on the clove hitch this week and then start concentrating on new skills next week, unless you're given an opportunity to practice the clove hitch in real life situations, then by the time your being tested on all the new skills you've been learning, chances are great that you will have forgotten how to tie the clove hitch. Apparently, many of you have forgotten what it's like being a student with cram sessions at the end of a semester for final exams - we don't engage in cram sessions because we've remembered everything we've been taught in a semester, we engage in cram sessions because we've forgotten much of what we've been taught, and tested on, throughout a semester.

Again, there can be unintended consequences. I can envision something like the following happening in a unit with such a rule: In August, the Committee tells the SM and ASM that until they have certain training, none of the camping trips the lads will go on count. SM & ASM discover that the training they need isn't offered until May of the following year and lets committee know but the committee won't bend. PLC plans a full year of camping trips. In September, SM announces that none of the camping trips can count towards advancement because the SM and ASM are being required by the committee to get training in something they can't get training for until next May so rather than waste everyone's time, including their own, they're just going to cancel all the trips since they can't count anyway. Can anyone guess how long either A) The policy goes away, B) the parents lynch (figuratively) the committee, C) the committe stuggles to find a new SM and ASM, D) the unit folds or E) all of the above?

Given the choice between aluminum (alloy) and fiberglass, I'd take aluminum alloy every time - no matter the weather. First - aluminum alloy poles are stronger. The tensile strength of a pole (which measures the amount of stress a pole can take before breaking) is measured in pounds per square inch. But we can't just use that measurement to determine which material is the way to go, because we can make aluminum alloy poles and fiberglass poles meet the same PSI number. What is important is the size of the pole and how that relates to PSI. An aluminum alloy pole that measures 75,000 PSI (for example) is going to be smaller in diameter and lighter than a fiberglass pole that measures 75,000 PSI. If we make a fiberglass pole the same diameter as an aluminum alloy pole, the fiberglass pole will be lighter, but will also be much weaker, having a much lower PSI rating. Under heavy winds, or a snow load,your aluminum alloy poles are likely to hold up much better. There's another factor too, especially as it relates to cold weather camping. In winter conditions, fiberglass poles actually become less flexible, and the less flexible they are, the more likely they are to shatter. Field repairs to a shattered fiberglass pole is difficult at best, and pretty much impossible in most cases. Break an aluminum alloy pole in the field (and it's hard to break an aluminium alloy pole unless you deliberately attempt to break it, or are very careless) and you have a much better chance of making repairs that will at least get you through the weekend. In a few years, this discussion is likely to become moot. The future of tent poles is carbon fiber. This material has been used in fly fishing poles and some golf clubs for a while now and has proven to have tremendous flexibility and strength. Some of the higher end tents are already using carbon fiber poles - as the price comes down, it wouldn't suprise me to see carbon fiber tent poles becoming the standard. But until that day comes, stick with the aluminum alloy poles.

My question would be what are your plans? Are you going to be camping out on the high peaks of the Rockies in winter? Then you may need a 4-season tent. Otherwise, your three-season tent will work just fine. My alma mater is in Maine - the school is an outdoor recreation and environmental sciences college. The Outdoor Recreation department classes camped all winter long - and no one used a 4-season tent. I worked for Maine National High Adventure and was an Okpik instructor (before it was rolled out as a unit level progeam). We used 3-season tents. Unless you're planning to tackle Denali, or Everest, or the high peaks of the Rockies or Cascades, spending the extra money on a 4-season tent just doesn't seem worth it to me.

Here we go again. The BSA admitted it was told well in advance that the President's schedule would preclude him from appearing in person at the Jamboree. I'll take the BSA's word on this - after all, we are supposed to be Trustworthy. Instead, he appeared on video, as have other President's before him. Yes, the President's signature appears on Eagle certificates - as with all new Presidents, there is a period of time before it appears. Someone who doesn't understand the program obviously jumped the gun. Edited to take out the intemperate question that deserves to be asked but is rather un-Scoutlike. (This message has been edited by calicopenn)

Sure, the committee could set those rules - up to a point (as was pointed out, the MBC decides if a camping trip counts for camping merit badge, not a unit committee, and it's the SM that verifies the numbers of days and nights camping for OA< not a unit committee). However, it's a pretty stupid rule since there are unintended consequences. If it were me, I would feel that a weekend of my time was just wasted by the Committee. I'd hand them the SM patch off my sleeve, and encourage my ASM's to do the same. Then I would work with the ASM's to form a new unit and poach every single Scout in that unit who doesn't have a parent on the committee and who wants to join a real Boy Scout Troop.

Wait a second - where's the "violence" component. Who was the violent party? So far, I see an incident with a knife, a scout speaking out about improper use of a knife, and a parent screaming. Given that parents sometimes scream which is inappropriate, I;m not sure this rises to the level of "violence". Improper use of a knife? What does this mean? He used a buck knife to spread peanut butter on a cracker? He ued a whittling knife to cut down a tree? The only things I can think of that would suggest violence with a knife are stabbing someone or pulling a knife and threatening someone with it. If that's what happened, why use the words "improper use of a knife"? Why not call it for what it is? So far, based on what I've read, a parent screamed at a Scout for speaking out about a Totin' Chip violation. If this was reported to the SE and the SE didn't flag anything to prevent the Scout from joining another Troop, it suggests to me that the SE's take on the situation is quite different from your Troops take on it. I wouldn't say anything to the other Scoutmaster at this point, unless I was asked.

I think most people would accept time at a high adventure base for the long term camp requirement. Resident doesn't neccessarily mean remaining in one place the whole time - it means that Scouts aren't going home at night and coming back the next day. It really delineates the difference between day camp and non-day camp. "Believe it or not we have two scouts for whom this is a real question. Both attended summer camp in '09 but not in 2010, so their typical resident camp experience will be >2yrs past by the time we have our next OA election in March." You can check my math/calendar skills, but it would seem to me that if an election in held in March 2011, then summer camp 2009 would be within the two-year time frame (assuming that summer camp is held after March 2009). I see it as: March 2009 to March 2010 = Year 1. March 2010 to March 2011 = Year 2. Anything done after March 2009 would count as part of the 2 years. Don't shortchage yourself by declaring that years are 2010 and 2011. If you're holding election in March 2011 and counting 2011 as Year 2, then you're only counting 15 months as 2 years, and not 24 months which is how I would count 2 years.

Never heard of the US Environmental Assessment Center. The US EPA has a National Center for Environmental Assessment, the Forest Service has a Western Wildland Environmental Threat Assessment Center and an Eastern Forest Environmental Threat Assessment Center, Brooklyn College has an Aquatic Research and Environmental Assessment Center, but it appears that no one has a US Environmental Assessment Center (though it certainly would make a good name for an NGO environmental think tank). Methinks dhmo.org is pulling a few legs here to see who will believe them. Mention in one sentence that you don't get funds from the EPA but that you are affiliated with some official sounding organization, and see who makes the connection between the EPA and the official sounding organization, even though there is no connection between the EPA and the official sounding organization because the official sounding organization doesn't exist. Clever, huh?

Mea Culpa - I saw Charleston and the word Patriot's Point and my first thought was the Boston area, known for an awful lot of patriots of the US Revolution. I read the newspaper article and didn't notice that the paper was from South Carolina and not Massachussetts (there are an awful lot of papers on the intertubes that make it hard to determine exactly where they are. It's not like reading the New York Times, the Chicago Tribune or the LA Daily News - there is no doubt where they come from. But name a paper the Democratic Republican Tribune and it could be from anywhere. Pack - ah, got it - it was more a comment on the Disneyfication of the monument than Disney running it. When I was there, I didn't see any fake Presidents running about, or caricature artists, or the like - perhaps there was a special event going on? But I will agree that there were quite a few "Dumbos" walking around - on the road in, there was a Mountain Goat standing along the side of the road and some woman kept trying to get close so she could pet it.

Development around this a good thing? Doesn't anyone ever pay attention to local news? If this area is developed with the fairly heavy residential component, within 10 years, the residents will begin complaining about all the traffic and noise generated by those visiting the USS Yorktown, and will be demanding that the village shut down the tourist operation. One photo caption I saw is that this is state land. If so, why can't the rest of the taxpayers in the state demand that the State of Massachussetts turn Patriot's Point into a State Park and protect the area from development completely? Just because millions can be made from the oceanfront property doesn't mean we have to accept that development is the highest and best possible use of the land.

"That said, they might make more money by turning over the entire operation to Disney and just take a cut plus taxes from the increased tax base...sort of like the US and South Dakota did with Mt. Rushmore." I'm curious if the National Park Service, and the new Superintendent of the park, who starts on September 27, 2010, after working as Superintendent of the Herbert Hoover National Historic Site in Iowa, knows that Mt. Rushmore has been "privatized" and is under the management of Disney. Now I wouldn't be surprosed if some eager beaver government type had suggested letting Disney take over management of one of the most recognized US National Monuments in the world, but I've not been able to find anything to suggest that it has actually happened. I suspect, though, that what is being referenced is the public/private partnership with the Mount Rushmore Society's Mount Rushmore Preservation Fund that teamed the US Government with private contractors to create better facilities and trails for visitors to Mt. Rushmore - new and better trails, a new visitors center, a new parking garage, which cost $56 million and rather than being funded by tax dollars, is being funded by parking garage fees, food service and gift shop purchases run by private concessionaires rather than the United States. Could that model work in Charleston? Maybe - if there is enough visitors on an annual basis to make it possible.

Tami, Have you looked into Lone Scouting? Contact your District Director and ask what it would take to register your son as a Lone Scout. Tell the District Director flat out that the local Troop is not an option as long as current, and ignorant (and don't be afraid to tell the DD that the leaders are ignorant) leaders are still in charge, and neither is traveling 45 minutes one way.

Maybe I'm just not getting it so bear with me. I'm a parent in your pack. You just told me it costs $65 per year for my Cub. You say I can pay the $65 and I don't have to drag my son around to stores, or door to door, or drag the order form to work and beg for people to buy popcorn. Maybe last year I (my son) was the Pack's top seller, selling, oh, maybe $1,000 worth of popcorn, but this year, now I don't have to. I'll gladly pay the $65 so I don't have to bother with popcorn sales. Now at $35 to the Pack per $100 sold, if I sold that $1,000 worth of popcorn, that's $350 to the Pack, minus my $65, for a loss to the pack this year of $285, which would fund the activities for 4 poorer Cub Scouts. Or maybe I was the top seller last year at $1,000 and since I only have to sell $200 to earn the $65, I just won't work as hard - once I hit $200 in sales, I'm done. Result? Still a loss to the Pack. And speaking of $35 per $100. If the first $100 gets me $35 and the 2nd $100 gets me $30, what happened to the other $5? Don't I have to sell a few dollars less than $100 the second time around to make $30? I'd suggest a different way of looking at it. Develop the hard costs first - Registration per person ($15), allowance for awards ($10 per year?), cost of pinewood derby kit ($4). That's your Pack dues amount - $29. That's the fee to charge every member of the Pack. Those that need assistance can be dealt with individually - either a payment plan set up or help with a grant program (some units have arrangements with their sponsors or a local service organization to help sponsor needy Cubs, where they will cover the basic fees, as long as they aren't out of line). Everything else is funded through your fundraisers. Whether it's your popcorn sales, or something else, the key is to meet with the parents at an early Pack meeting (a good time for the Den Chiefs and a couple of Den Leaders to take the lads outside for a quick game) and explain that the registration fees covers a very basic program - registration, awards and pinewood derby cars, but that everything else is paid for through the fundraiser and you need as many people as possible to pitch in to make sure the PACK has the best year possible. Yep - this is time for communitarianism - everyone is in it together, and everyone is pitching in for the common good - the Pack, not just for their own sons. Some will do better than others - heck, some may not participate at all, but most of the time, you'll be in far better shape if you let the fundraising proceeds dictate the program budget rather than letting the program budget dictate an annual fee.

The last time I was in Arizona, I saw Pronghorn (aka Antelope) in Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge. I suspect that's well south of the northern mountains. As for Saguaro being unsafe, my understanding that Phoenix is the least safe area in the entire state of Arizona. For an urban national park, there is less crime in Saguaro than in Yellowstone or Yosemite.

I am a Counseling Psychologist. I work trying to keep teens and young adults from killing themselves. Perhaps that gives me a different perspective on things. When I read this post, I immediately saw warning signs and red flags, not about the Scoutmaster or the Troop, but about this boy. Is that qualification enough for you? In my time on this board, this is only the second time I've ever offered a professional opinion. Both times, I was very careful not to offer any kind of diagnoses or comment on causes. Like Dan Kroh, I can come up with a multitude of possibilities here. And while clearly there is indication of something serious going on (at least to me, and based solely on the description given)it would be irresponsible to speculate on what those possibilities might be, which is why my strong recommendation is that this lad seek professional medical help right away. Sometimes in the game of scouting, we run into situations like these. Clearly this is something beyond scouting, but part of the game of scouting is to teach citizenship and develop community. What kind of citizenship does it teach if we model making a problem go away by pushing it aside and ignoring it? What kind of community do we have if we decide to punt on problems instead of helping to solve them? It's unlikely that this Scoutmaster, and the Troop can solve this lad's problems. But this Scoutmaster and Troop know that there is a problem and have a couple of choices. They can try to get this lad the help he needs or they can toss the lad out and pretend the problem never happened. I hope I'm never involved with a Scout Troop or Scout Leader that would rather ignore the problem and pass the buck than do the compassionate thing. This Scoutmaster also states he is good friends with the boys father. In an ideal world, friends care about friends and their friend's family. I can understand not recognizing signs of trouble, but if someone else suggests that there may be an issue, what kind of friend ignores signs of trouble? Hypothetically, what happens if this boy never gets treated and in 2 years harms himself or someone else because of his untreated problems? What happens if no one pushes for this boy to get treatment and it's discovered he had a physical illness which could have been treated if caught in time but is terminal by the time it is diagnosed? How will you feel knowing that you might have been able to prevent it had you just acted when you had the chance? We are not talking about a 7-year old boy throwing a temper tantrum. We are talking about a 14-year old boy, who should be feeling pretty self conscious about himself, often to the point that he's embarrassed to be seen by his friends hanging out with his parents, throwing temper tantrums characterized as common to a 2-year old in public. This is not about Scouting. This is not about the Troop. This is not about the Scoutmaster. This is not about the Committee. This is about a boy that appears to be in crisis. This is about what is going to be done to help this boy. Doing nothing is one answer - I just hope most people see it as being the worst possible answer out of all of them.

My nephew is in an "emo" band - Cap'n Jazz - though the band rejects the term. They're considered part of the "new emo" genre identified not by guys in black pants, black shirts, and black eyeliner, but brainy guys wearing glasses (more nerds meet grunge if you ask me). It got him to Japan, Germany, Scotland, England and Australia. I'd say "emo" did alright by him.

"He has not been diagnosed with any behavioral problems, he's just extremely immature." And yet he has a behavioral problem that's not being addressed and is being written off as being "extremely immature" Forget all this stuff about "getting attention" or using peer pressure to deal with this, or using thorns and roses, or using consequences to change negative behavior. That's all well-meaning advice and I mean no disrespect to those who gave it, but based on the description you've given, in my professional opinion, there is something much more serious going on in this young man's life and he needs professional medical help - NOW!. This young man has undiagnosed behavioral and emotional problems, and they are undiagnosed because his parents are in denial that there is something mentally or emotionally wrong with their child. It's much easier for parents to avoid the issue than to admit that their son might be mentally or emotionally ill. You're good friends with this lad's father. It's time for you to tell your friend that his son needs to see a doctor, preferably a Psychiatrist, and that the parents need to be upfront with the doctor about what's been going on. They could even start by being honest with their family doctor and getting some advice and a recommendation for a good Psychiatrist. Yes - I said Psychiatrist, not Psychologist. In the short term, he needs a medical professional to determine if there is a medical issue going on. It's possible that there is an undiagnosed physical condition that is causing these tantrums. That needs to be ruled out. It's possible that there is a chemical imbalance in the brain. There are many possibilities here - but he needs to see a medical specialist in this field, and he needs to see one immediately. Longer term counseling can be done with a Psychologist, but the cause has to be found and treated first. This may be one of the most difficult conversations you have with his Dad but you must stay firm. Don't threaten with expulsion from the Troop or anything like that - you need to make sure you're coming at this as a good friend who is very concerned about the well-being of his son. This will be hard at first, but it could also end up being the most gratifying thing you've ever done. (This message has been edited by calicopenn)