600 straight months (50 years not 5000) of Camping!

[HelpfulTracks]

On 9/13/2021 at 12:55 PM, yknot said:

I kind of disagree. Having the mentality that you don't cancel for bad weather is the opposite of what I think scouts is supposed to teach. We teach be prepared, which includes being prepared to change plans. Even D-Day was weather dependent. This is scouts, not the military. 

No we do not cancel for bad weather. We change plans for dangerous weather. No one has said there is never a reason to change or if need be cancel an outing. Being prepared is just that, being prepared to deal with bad weather and if necessary use alternative plans if weather is dangerous. 

On 9/13/2021 at 2:13 PM, David CO said:

Yes.  Imagine how people would react if a coach said he would never cancel a game due to weather.  He would be fired.  

No one said "never cancel". And it's a bad analogy. A coach can't say "we have a game scheduled 60 miles to the East, but there is heavy lightning there, so instead we are going to go 60 miles to the West where the weathers is great and play the game. A well prepared Scouting unit can. 

On 9/13/2021 at 3:59 PM, David CO said:

I totally disagree.  This sort of mentality borders on fanaticism.  I have seen my fair share of fanatics in scouting and sports.  My job was to keep them in check.  

Fanaticism? Keep them, in check? If having a great program and being excited about it is fanatics', then maybe we need more fanatics. As a CC my job it to do everything I can to help deliver the program the Scouts have planned while reducing potential risk as much as passible. If there are dangerous conditions, my job remains the same, I just have to work harder. No where in any scouting book, or CO agreement or anywhere I can think of is it written anyone's job is to keep the program "in check."

The leaders and the CO's job is help provide a great program for the youth. If there are risk it is our job to use our knowledge, skills and imagination to reduce that risk and still provide the program. Anything short of that is just cheating the Scouts. 

On 9/13/2021 at 4:14 PM, yknot said:

Agreed. Kids shouldn't be dropping dead of heat injury during sports practices or drowning on scout hikes. 

A phenomenon I've seen the past decade or so is an overreliance on phone radar apps and online weather services as if they never lie or conflict. People have lost the ability to look up or use common sense.

This is a straw man argument. No one said that we should be allowing youth to drop dead, or that is even okay. We are saying good leaders know how to deal with bad situations and still deliver a program. And when necessary to change or even cancel a program. But canceling a program should be the last resort. If a leader cannot figure out how, in most cases, to still deliver the program, then maybe they are not the right people for that job.

On 9/13/2021 at 4:17 PM, CynicalScouter said:

Yep. Says the person right before their scouts are killed by a lightning strike or a fallen tree branch.

Just as reminder: currently BSA policy is that direct contact leaders who are "positioned trained" must take Hazardous Weather training every two years and at least one person per outing/event has Hazardous Weather Training.

https://training.scouting.org/courses/SCO_800

Again, that is not what was said. 

On 9/13/2021 at 4:48 PM, David CO said:

Nope.

The first thought I had when I saw that cake had nothing to do with achievement.  I thought about liability.  Imagine if a scout gets hurt during a bad weather campout.  Now imagine if that scout's lawyer sees this cake on the unit's website.  It would be fairly easy for a lawyer to connect the dots and make a case for negligence.  

So no, I am not going to congratulate the scouters who created that policy, decorated that cake, and posted a picture of it on the internet.  

Of curse the CO and unit leaders need to consider liability. I certainly do not think it should be the first, or even most prevalent thought. I disagree with you on almost all of your post, your concept of a CO powers is way to broad, and your view of a scouting program way to restrictive. But, to be unable or unwilling to congratulate a bunch of scouts on their accomplishments is sad.

-------

This thread has been one of the most enlightening threads I have seen in a long time when it comes to explain the continued downward spiral of the Scouting program. 

I have long blamed National for most of the problem, and may be this thread is just highlighting the effects National has had on local scouting. 

This thread is full of hyperbolic and false arguments castigating a unit, its leaders and scouts for what most would consider an impressive accomplishment. All the negative assumptions made so some can wag their finger to down talk the unit with little or NO direct knowledge of how this unit is run. Maybe worse, little or no concept or even desire to figure out how to help a unit achieve their program while keeping the scouts safe.

I have always thought that good local scouting could overcome Nationals failures.  But if the thread reflects the mindset of local scouting, I am almost certain wrong. 

[fred8033]

@RememberSchiff ... Still a really cool achievement.  Be proud.

[David CO]

2 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

Fanaticism? Keep them, in check?

Absolutely.  Every activity has its fanatics.  Scouting isn't unique in this, but neither is it immune to it.  The fanatics need to be controlled.  If they can't be controlled, they need to be removed.  

 

[David CO]

2 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

I disagree with you on almost all of your post, your concept of a CO powers is way to broad, and your view of a scouting program way to restrictive.

Most of the scouters on the forum would agree with you.  

 

[David CO]

3 hours ago, HelpfulTracks said:

As a CC my job it to do everything I can to help deliver the program the Scouts have planned while reducing potential risk as much as passible.

As an IH, my job was to ensure that the scouting program follows the rules and procedures of the Chartered Organization.  

 

[CynicalScouter]

1 hour ago, David CO said:

As an IH, my job was to ensure that the scouting program follows the rules and procedures of the Chartered Organization. 

But not the rules and procedures of BSA? Interesting.

Did you ever read or sign an annual charter agreement?

Quote

The Chartered Organization agrees to...Conduct the Scouting program consistent with BSA rules, regulations, and policies.

 

Edited September 21, 2021 by CynicalScouter

[Jameson76]

We sometimes have the conversation with our Scouts "Why do we camp in the rain?"  Their first responses are we're dumb, we can't read the weather maps, etc etc.

The discussion leads to that if you are planning to have an outing, and if you wait for all the conditions to be perfect, you will likely never leave the porch.  It is sort of like that in life; not the perfect time to attend that school, not the best time to start that business, maybe a better time to take that job, make that investment, marry that spouse, take that trip; etc etc.

Rather than look for reasons NOT do something, look for reason TO DO something.  It may not be perfect, you may have to change or update plans, but action is better than no action.

At the end of the day, you may end up camping in the rain (or snow, or heat, or ice)...and having a great and memorable time.

Edited September 21, 2021 by Jameson76

[David CO]

24 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

The discussion leads to that if you are planning to have an outing, and if you wait for all the conditions to be perfect, you will likely never leave the porch. 

I understand that thinking.  It might work if the scout unit thinks of itself as a stand-alone entity rather than an integrated program of a CO's youth outreach.  

A CO will often try to make rules and procedures so that they can apply them to all of its programs.  That way, nobody feels picked on.  The rules apply to everyone.  We don't want sports programs and scouting programs complaining that we favor one over the other.

So it goes both ways.  Sometimes the scouts greatly benefit by it.  Sometimes the scouts feel unnecessarily restricted by it.  I think it all evens out over the long run.

Edited September 21, 2021 by David CO

[HelpfulTracks]

5 hours ago, David CO said:

Absolutely.  Every activity has its fanatics.  Scouting isn't unique in this, but neither is it immune to it.  The fanatics need to be controlled.  If they can't be controlled, they need to be removed.  

Curious take on your part considering many think you take on CO's is fringe/fanatic.

3 hours ago, David CO said:

As an IH, my job was to ensure that the scouting program follows the rules and procedures of the Chartered Organization.  

Really, I have never hear of an IH that was not the head of the institution. But that does explain a great deal about your over zealous take on what a CO is. 

[David CO]

1 hour ago, HelpfulTracks said:

Curious take on your part considering many think you take on CO's is fringe/fanatic.

Very true.  Many scouters on this forum have said as much in past topics.  Many have also stated that the CO is more of a sponsor of scouting than the owner of the unit.  

 

1 hour ago, HelpfulTracks said:

Really, I have never hear of an IH that was not the head of the institution. 

Neither have I.   I don't think BSA would recognize someone as IH unless he/she is the head of the Chartering Organization.  This doesn't mean an IH cannot have someone above them in the hierarchy.  

AD/Parish/Diocese/Holy See      or       PTA/school/school district/state

 

 

Edited September 22, 2021 by David CO

[David CO]

I'm surprised the moderators haven't stepped in.  We are drifting pretty far off from the topic of this conversation.  

[MattR]

2 hours ago, David CO said:

I'm surprised the moderators haven't stepped in.  We are drifting pretty far off from the topic of this conversation.  

The Moderators work in mysterious ways.