|
Hi Andy,
Can a council demand
letters of recommendation for an Eagle board of review? Our District
Advancement Chair says that this demand can be made because the Council
Advancement Chair has said that this is a council’s choice. Since
there’s nothing on the application or worksheet to this effect, we have
an Eagle candidate who, at the proverbial “11th
hour” was told he must comply, despite his having been totally unaware
of this “council policy” beforehand.
Also, the Eagle
Scout rank application asks for the Scout’s unit number for each merit
badge he’s listed... What happens if a Scout has been in more than one
troop? “ScoutNET” surely has him and all of his merit badges on his
current troop record, and, if checked by council, they wouldn’t find
those merit badges earned in a former troop's record because they’d be
listed with his current troop. (Of course, the Scout’s “blue cards”
would show the troop he was with when he earned them.) Our District
Advancement Chair is saying that all merit badges must be credited to
the troop a Scout was in when he earned them. But, unless the Scout kept
his blue cards, how does he do this? Plus, what if the Scout earned a
merit badge while he was with a Jamboree troop, where no real records or
blue cards are kept? (Name Withheld in Simon Kenton Council, OH)
Regarding
recommendations of Eagle Scout candidates, the candidate himself isn’t
responsible for the acquisition of any letters of reference. Per the
Eagle Scout rank application, the Scout is only responsible for
providing the names and contact information of up to six people who know
him and have agreed to be references for him. While a council may ask
the Scout to send a letter of request to each of these people, the Scout
is absolutely not responsible for obtaining responses, on the simple
principle that no one can guarantee the actions of another person.
On your merit badge
question, if a Scout has earned merit badges while a registered member
of more than one troop, then he lists the troop he was in at the time he
earned the merit badge(s). This can happen when a Scout transfers from
one troop to another (either locally or cross-country, such as when a
family moves). A "Jamboree troop," however, is not a troop a Scout ever
registers in. He's a member of his home troop, even while participating
as a provisional member of a Jamboree troop, so he would list the troop
he's actually registered in at the time he earned the merit badge.
As for "blue cards,"
these are back-up records. Every time a Scout earns a merit badge, he's
supposed to be given a merit badge card (also called "pocket
certificate"—BSA Catalog No. 34393), that contains his name, the name of
the merit badge, his council name and his and troop number, the date,
and the signature of his Scoutmaster. A Scout should be keeping these
cards (a clear plastic, pocketed “baseball card holder” works well, and
so does a rubber band) and his ranks cards in a special place, so he can
refer to them as needed.
Hi Andy,
My son just finished
the Cub Scout program. We have two houses, in different cities, and
it’s hard to stay in one troop area. The two houses are about 45
minutes drive from the other one, and there are not specific days we’re
in one or the other—it varies. How can our son join up as a Lone Scout?
(Name & Council Withheld)
While your son (and one
of his parents) can apply for the Lone Scout status and program, he'll
be missing out on almost all the main aspects of being a Boy Scout... He
won't have any friends in a troop or patrol, he won't go hiking or
camping with Scouting friends, he won't go to summer camp with friends
from his troop, there will be no courts of honor when he advances in
rank, he won't be exposed to the role-modeling older Scouts and his
Scoutmaster provide, he'll learn nothing practical about team-building
or teamwork or being a leader or being a team member, and he'll have no
youth or adult mentors, no flag ceremonies or Camporees or troop dinners
or quiet moments around the campfire with his Scout buddies... the list
goes on and on.
I’ve checked the two locations you described to me and, according to
MapQuest, they’re more like 25 miles, or 30 minutes, apart. This seems
to be hardly a distance significant enough to deny your son the
advantages I've just mentioned. Yes, it may mean a little extra
driving, on occasion, or planning where you'll be on the nights there
are troop meetings, but if your son's anything like my own three, HE'S
WORTH IT!
Dear Andy,
You mentioned a “typo”
at one time in the Scout Handbook about the Bugler position as an
Eagle-qualifying leadership position… So what’s your advice for a troop
that has a Life Scout who’s citing that source for his application for
Eagle rank? He was a Bugler as a Life Scout and he’s arguing that the
Bugler position counts as his position of responsibility for Eagle
rank. He’s citing req. 5 (page 444) in his Boy Scout Handbook.
When questioned by us about this position about eight months ago, he
told us that he’d received confirmation from the then-District Eagle
Rank Advancement Representative that Bugler counted as a leadership
position for Eagle. Back eight months ago, when this Scout requested
his advancement records in preparation for completing his Eagle rank
requirements, our troop’s Advancement Coordinator told him that Bugler
wouldn’t qualify for Eagle, and encouraged him to participate in the
troop elections a month later (that would be six months ago, now), so
that he could be either elected or appointed to an actual qualifying
position, and would have the necessary six months tenure before his 18th
birthday (which is now only about a month away). When he didn’t agree,
we advised him to contact the District Eagle Rank Advancement
Representative for further clarification. Between that point in time,
seven months ago, and now, neither he nor the DERAR has spoken with
anyone here in the troop about whatever discussion they may have had.
Now, this Scout has requested an Eagle Rank Board of Review, saying that
he confirmed with the then-DERAR that the Bugler position does count.
We need to resolve the leadership position issue… If it was a typo, and
this Scout has in his possession the handbook with the typo, and the
DERAR did, in fact, tell him that Bugler is an Eagle-qualifying
position, then what do we do now, a month before his 18th
birthday? (Troop Advancement Coordinator, Council Withheld)
Let's start by checking the Eagle Scout rank application (go to
http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/512-728_web.pdf).
If you look at req. 4, here's what you'll find: "Patrol Leader, Venture
Patrol Leader, Assistant Senior Patrol Leader, Senior Patrol Leader,
Troop Guide, Order of the Arrow Troop Representative, Den Chief, Scribe,
Librarian, Historian, Quarter-master, Junior Assistant Scoutmaster,
Chaplain Aide, Instructor; (and) (effective Jan. 1, 2010) Webmaster and Leave No Trace Trainer."
Further, page 448 of the Boy Scout Handbook-Eleventh Edition
(which has been in effect for the past 12 years) names, with the
exception of the two newest positions, precisely the same positions as
the application, and page 441 of the Twelfth Edition exactly echoes
this.
Consequently, it's unclear as to where this Scout became confused.
Page 444 of the Eleventh Edition lists Bugler as qualifying for Star
rank, and page 445 refers to the same list as on the prior page, but
qualifying positions for Eagle rank do not, as I've just noted, list
Bugler. Moreover, neither pages 438 or 439 or 440-441 of the Twelfth
Edition list Bugler at all!
This would mean that even the most current handbook doesn't support this
Scout's position at all. So again, it's unclear as to where this Scout
became confused.
You've told me that, seven months ago, this Scout was specifically
advised that Bugler is not a qualifying position for Eagle, and this
conversation took place in sufficient time for him to be elected to, or
to request, a leadership position that would, indeed qualify. With
troop elections six months ago, had this Scout followed the information
provided to him, he would not be in the situation he's in now.
If, however, the District Eagle Rank Advancement Representative can
verify to you that he did tell this Scout that Bugler will qualify, then
we become lenient, because we don’t inflict upon Scouts the errors of
adults who are supposed to be authorities on matters such as this.
(Yes, you should obtain a written statement from this person.) If,
however, it should turn out that either this conversation didn't occur,
or that the Scout was advised by the DERAR that Bugler doesn't qualify
for Eagle, then the only hope this Scout may have is if, for six months
while a Life Scout, he held another leadership position in the troop
that does qualify.
If either of these two options isn't present, then the troop has the
unhappy responsibility of informing the Scout (do this in writing, of
course) that he hasn't met the stated requirements for Eagle rank. The
Scout, of course, has the right to appeal the troop's decision by going
to the district advancement committee, but I'm not going to be terribly
hopeful here. It may well be that, by his rigid adherence to his own
error, he has managed to disqualify himself from attaining Eagle rank.
As for any "typo," the only omission is in the new, Twelfth Edition, of
the handbook: It doesn't list Webmaster or Leave No Trace Trainer as
Eagle-qualifying positions. The only other error—one which doesn't
affect the outcome here—was mine, when in a recent I said that Bugler
doesn't qualify for Star or Life (which it does). However, it doesn't
and never did qualify for Eagle, which I did state.
Thanks Andy! It’s good to know that all the information I’ve given
this Scout was correct. (I was starting to think I was going crazy and
just couldn’t find where Bugler was listed as a position of
responsibility for Eagle.)
I have asked the
Scout to show me or provide me with a copy of this mysterious handbook
that lists Bugler as an Eagle-qualifying position, mostly out of
personal curiosity and but also to emphasize to the Scout and his
parents that it just isn’t there. I’ve also contacted the former DERAR
and asked that I be provided with a written statement of the substance
of any conversations that may have taken place with this Scout in the
past seven months regarding his Bugler position qualifying for Eagle
Scout, along with copies of any email or other correspondence the two of
them may have had about this issue.
If the former DERAR
is unable to verify that it was confirmed to this Scout that Bugler is
an Eagle-qualifying position, I plan to notify the Scout that he’s
ineligible for Eagle and give him the procedures and contact information
he’ll need if he chooses to appeal to the district or council. I’ve
also asked our current DERAR to recommend what types of documentation we
should provide to this Scout, but I have a feeling that, as the troop’s
Advancement Coordinator, I’m going to be writing a description of the
events and conversations leading up to the present. I’m guessing that
all of this may well hinge on the former DERAR’s written statement.
As an aside, I’m
wondering if it makes any difference if it turns out that former DERAR
agreed with this Scout on the strength of his own stating that it was
listed in his Boy Scout Handbook (and not by actual research on the
DERAR’s part). I can envision myself telling a Scout that if it’s in
the handbook he doesn’t need my confirmation, but obviously that relies
on the Scout’s ability to read the handbook correctly… So I’ve learned
two lessons here, myself. First, if I refer a Scout to another source
for confirmation of information, I need to follow up with that Scout and
the resource about the resolution of his inquiry. Second, if a Scout
asks me a question—even if he tells me he’s found the answer in his
handbook or other BSA literature—I need to be sure I check it out for
myself! Your explanation and advice are much appreciated. Thank you
for your time, expertise and quick response. (TAC)
As you're awaiting
information from that DERAR, there's one further aspect to consider...
Seven months ago, you were certain that Bugler didn't qualify for Eagle,
and you recommended to this Scout that he seek an elected or appointed
leadership position in the upcoming month, when your troop's elections
are held. He didn't do either of these; yet, apparently neither the
Scoutmaster nor you nor anyone else advised him that this absolutely
must be done. In this situation, there's hardly just a single "guilty"
party here! Or did you all advise him, and he still clung to the same
song he'd been singing? If the latter, then the "life lessons" for him
are (a) that Scouting hasn't "let him down," (b) he let himself down by
his own inaccuracy and rigidity, and (c) "thinking" you're right and
actually being correct aren't always the same thing. If the former,
then perhaps you all need to approach the district advancement committee
and ask for an extension for this Scout, to give him the time to correct
a misapprehension?
Meanwhile, although the Eleventh Edition of the handbook, which has been
the fundamental source for the past twelve years, covers this Scout's
entire Boy Scout experience, and should therefore suffice as a
reference, the Tenth Edition doesn't show Bugler as qualifying for
Eagle, and neither does the Ninth, either of the Eighth editions, the
Seventh... shall we keep going? Bottom line: It's simply not there.
Life itself is a series
of lessons. Each lesson is presented to us in different forms until we
learn it. Then, the next lesson is presented.
Dear Andy,
I’m on a parent
committee of a rather small troop that seems to be shrinking rather than
growing (we have 18 Scouts in the troop, of which about ten show up
regularly). One of the things that seems to be hampering the troop’s
growth (and spirit) is the Scoutmaster’s way of handling youth
leadership. For the past three years, he’s been encouraging the Patrol
Leaders Council to create a “percent of participation” or “point system”
to limit Scouts who may be eligible to be elected Senior Patrol Leader,
and Patrol Leader. It seems to me that a policy of placing some sort of
percentage of participation and/or a point system for attendance is the
antithesis of BSA policy and what Scouting is trying to accomplish… We
shouldn’t be limiting Scouts; instead, we need to be treating all Scouts
the same and give all the same opportunities. Boys in general are
involved in many activities, and I’d think that Scouting wants
well-rounded boys. Any help or advice you can offer would be greatly
appreciated, so that we can once and for all stop this ongoing problem.
(Name & Council Withheld)
Get yourself a copy of the 2010 Boy Scout Requirements book (No.
34765), and then refer to page 20: DEFINITION OF "ACTIVE." Show this to
the Scoutmaster and tell him in no uncertain terms that unless he can
abide by national standards, the troop will need to replace him. No
discussion, no equivocation, and absolutely no "I'll get around to this
sometime..." He either does this immediately or he's history.
Dear Andy,
I've searched the archives for my question, and haven't found an answer
yet. Hopefully you can help…
We have two boys who are interested in maintaining registrations in two
different troops. I don't know why they would want to do this, as I've
only heard about their desire from others. To my knowledge, boys can
only be registered in one troop. They can be in a crew and a troop, but
not two units of the same unit type. Can you point me to a specific
policy on this?
This actually prompts
another dual registration question… Can an Eagle Scout, who’s not yet
18, be a member of one troop as a Boy Scout and another (different)
troop as a Junior Assistant Scoutmaster? I'm guessing not, because he’d
still be a Boy Scout. Any enlightenment here? (Ray Bahr)
I think the reason why these boys want to be in two troops
simultaneously is definitely important. It's equally important that
they understand that they'll be going to two troop meetings each week,
going hiking and camping on weekends with two troops, going to summer
camp with both troops, and on and on... Or did they have something else
in mind. Before we all spin our wheels based on hearsay at best, let's
find out what's actually going on.
To your other question: Eagle or otherwise, Junior Assistant Scoutmaster
is a youth leadership position, not an adult position. But, again, why
two different troops? Why not simply transfer into the preferred troop?
Hello Andy,
My question’s about
Camping merit badge and req. 9a: “Camp a total of at least 20 days and
20 nights. Sleep each night under the sky or in a tent you have pitched.
The 20 days and 20 nights must be at a designated Scouting activity or
event. You may use a week of long-term camp toward this requirement…”
On the point about "You may use a week of long term camp," can a Scout
combine weeks from more than one year of long-term Scout camping?
In our council, summer
camp “weeks” run from Sundays to Fridays—that’s five days and nights.
So, if a Scout’s gone to Scout summer camp over two years (each for five
days-and-nights), can that Scout get credit for one week (five from
“year one” and two from “year two”)? The requirement doesn’t specify if
separate long-term camps can be combined for a total of "a week."
As a related question,
if Philmont is a two week Scouting "long-term camp," does this
count as "a week” of long-term camp? (Name & Council Withheld)
The key word is "week":
Seven days and nights. Whether these are all together or not isn't a
part of this requirement. This means that, per your scenario, if a
Scout has had five days and nights in one summer he can use two more
days and nights from another summer to total up to seven, if he wishes.
Philmont treks aren't "long-term camps," but they're certainly camping
nights, and count toward the 20 needed for this merit badge. The
Philmont NAYLE program is, however, a long-term camp, and these days and
nights would count in that way.
Is there an official rule page about this that I can show to our
scout leader, who thinks that only one year of long-term Scout camping
can be used? He doesn’t believe that two years can be combined to get
to the total of seven days. (N&CW)
Reverse the challenge: Ask the Scoutmaster to show you, in writing, that
the BSA disallows the accumulation of long-term camping days and
nights. Of course, he won't be able to do this. This is when you point
out that it's not our job to "read into" requirements things that just
aren't there. The requirement states specifically that a week (i.e.,
seven days and nights) of long-term camping may be used toward the 20
required, and is totally silent on whether this is all at once or not,
which is absolutely deliberate on the BSA's part.
Oh, yeah... Is the Scoutmaster a registered Merit Badge Counselor for
this merit badge? If by any chance he's not, then his individual
opinion doesn't matter, anyway. (But it sure gets high marks on my
Dumbbell Meter.)
Dear Andy,
My son has been a Cub
Scout from Tiger to Webelos I; he’s been an exemplary Cub, with no
discipline problems, perfect attendance, thousands of dollars in popcorn
sales, top positions in our Pinewood Derby, and on and on.
As for me, I was the
Den Leader for his Wolf and Bear dens, and now for Webelos I. But
there’s been a personality clash between me and the other WDL (who is
also the pack’s Committee Chair). So, when the two Webelos dens were
merged into one, I was told I’m out of a “job,” and at the same time my
son was de-registered from the pack, on the basis of
“non-participation.” I’ve read the references to what “active” means
(and doesn’t) for Boy Scouts, but I can’t find a similar reference for
Cub Scouts.
Meanwhile, our
district is about to charter a brand-new pack and I’ve been asked by our
District Executive to chair the newly-formed pack committee (which I had
to decline, due to work conflicts). Yes, I know that my son could join
up with this new pack, but I’d obviously prefer that he be with the boys
he started out with, three-and-a-half years ago. How do I get my son
reinstated? (Name & Council Withheld)
It's regrettable that you and your son encountered this mess. In my
experience, inter-adult disputes produce more problems in Scouting (and
elsewhere!) than any other single cause. Yes, your son appears to have
been wrongly and incorrectly "dismissed" from the pack; however,
reinstatement attempts will probably be less than productive and rife
with rancor. The best recommendation I can offer you is to either get
him into that new pack or another nearby one, or apply for Lone Cub
Scout status until he's eligible to be a Boy Scout, and then have him
join a friendly troop. For you to try to "fight the good fight" will
take more energy and create more discord than either of you deserves;
best to move on.
Dear Andy,
Our Cubmaster wanted
to start monthly pack hikes but couldn’t find anyone willing to take on
the responsibility, so he “volunteered” us and we reluctantly agreed,
only because, as a family we do our own hiking anyway, and felt it would
be fun for our son to have other boys along. But, for the past two
months, we’ve been the only people that went on the hikes. Then, last
night, we had this request from a Webelos II Den Leader—He asked us to
contact the parents of one of his Webelos II Scouts, to let them know
when this month’s hike would be, because this boy needs to do a Webelos
day hike to meet Arrow of Light req. 5. Well, this month we scheduled a
sled ride instead, because there have been no takers for the hikes we’ve
announced.
Can you please
define a “Webelos day hike”? The Cubmaster’s asked us to keep the hikes
simple and not too long, because we have to allow for Tiger Cubs
participating. The hikes we have always chosen have been under two
miles each way, and on gentle grades.
The Arrow of Light
ceremony is planned for just a month from now, and although I feel badly
that this one Webelos Scout hasn’t met all his Arrow of Light
requirements and is now trying to, I don’t feel that we should have to
change plans at this juncture. Any thoughts? (Name Withheld in Longs
Peak Council)
Things are just a bit messed up here. To begin with, hiking isn’t a
regular activity for Tiger Cubs, Cub Scouts, or even Webelos Scouts. In
short, what you've been asked to do is something outside the regular Cub
Scouting program. In your shoes, I'd "un-volunteer," on the basis that
a regular hiking program is unnecessary at the Cub Scouting level.
If your Cubmaster (and other adult volunteers in your pack) took the
time to read (or re-read) the Cub Scout Leader Book, or attend (or
re-attend) the training courses for Cub Scout leaders provided by your
district and council, they’d discover that hiking programs aren't part
of an overall pack program.
Hikes such as Webelos Scouts do (in part, to complete requirements) are
supposed to be organized and led by their Webelos Den Leaders; not
someone else. Therefore, the hike that this boy needs is the
responsibility of his Webelos Den Leader, not you. Responsibilities
need to stay where they belong. Do have a talk with that leader and let
him or her know that this isn’t something you should have been doing, or
will be doing in the future.
On the subject of "what constitutes a day hike," the idea is to simply
hike for a part of the day. There's no specific distance to be covered,
so long as the hike is interesting and fun for the boys. That's it.
Thank you so much for your help. And now another problem seems to
have arisen… The Cubmaster’s decided that the overnight camp-out at a
local ranch that the pack did last summer meets the requirements for a
“Webelos overnight camp-out.” This is a camp-out that the pack does
every year with all dens, including all family members. The activities
are all fun with outdoor games provided by each den, campfire skits,
roasting marshmallows and giving out den awards, plus, we do a small
service project for our hosts. I can tell you that, at the time we did
it, no one considered this a “Webelos overnight camp-out.”
I know that my
responsibility as pack advancement coordinator doesn’t include policing
rank or other award requirements, but I feel like the rules have been
changed just to accommodate this one boy, so that he’ll get his Arrow of
Light. I may be viewing this incorrectly, but it seems that the message
the pack is sending to the boys is, “Don’t worry about doing things the
right way; we’ll change or adjust the rules so you can get what you
want.” I appreciate that you’re a voice of sanity and will respect
whatever direction you give. (NW)
Don't fret... It's pretty much OK. No, it may not be perfect, but the
boys "got out there" last summer shared an outdoor experience. If the
Webelos Den Leaders signed off on the requirement, leave it at that;
there's never a "board of review" for Cub/Webelos Scout advancements
and, as you pointed out correctly, the last thing you want to be is the
requirement “completion cop.” Did the boys get outdoors? Did they
learn a few things? Did they have fun? Does this encourage them to
become Boy Scouts and experience the bigger adventure there? If these
things generally happened, then I'd roll with it! Let's just make sure
that, whatever happens, it's done in time for the Webelos II Scouts to
complete their Arrow of Light on schedule, so they can join the Boy
Scout troop of their choice by the end of February, or March at the
latest!
Dear Andy,
At a recent troop
meeting, that Scoutmaster handed the Senior Patrol Leader a length rope
in front of the entire troop of Scouts, and told him to tie a timber
hitch: “You should know how to tie this knot…you’re a Star Scout.” The
Scout replied that he’d forgot how to tie this particular knot, but
he’ll refer to his handbook to refresh his memory, and then he’ll tie
it. To this, the Scoutmaster replied, “You need to do this now, no
looking for the answer; you’re the leader, so lead us.” The SPL asked to
have the JASM, who was standing there also, tie the knot, but the
Scoutmaster said, “I'm asking you now show me the knot.” At this, the
SPL got out his handbook, looked up the knot, and correctly tied it. The
Scoutmaster walked off, unhappy. This doesn’t appear to be a Scoutmaster
supporting the troop’s key youth leader, but more like intimidation and
belittling, in front of the troop. Your thoughts? (John Carney)
By his actions with the SPL on that knot-tying scenario (the SPL handled
it brilliantly, by the way), this Scoutmaster has shown clearly that
he’s not the man for the job.
Dear Andy,
Thank you for your continued service and columns (I’ve gone back and
read all of them and have pointed many other adults in my units to them,
as well). In a recent column, there was a question about a 12 year-old
Life-rank Scout having applied to go to the National Scout Jamboree this
summer. This turns out to be OK. Per the BSA site (http://www.bsajamboree.org/Registration.aspx),
"Boy Scouts and Varsity Scouts must be at least First Class Scouts. They
must have completed the sixth grade or be at least 12 years of age by
July 1, 2010, but not have reached their 18th
birthday by August 4, 2010." So, for this concern, the Scout in question
is allowed to register, since he does meet both criteria. (Matt
Nieberger, ASM, Longs Peak Council, CO)
Yup, you're absolutely correct about the age requirement for a National
Scout Jamboree. With regard to the question I was asked, I decided to
leave that aspect alone, since the situation described was not one to be
handled by the home troop, but, rather, by the local council (especially
since "parents and sons" don't "register" to attend a Jamboree!). Thanks
for your sharp eyes, and for writing.
Hey Andy,
I know they’re
coming out soon with four new “old” merit badges, and one of them will
be Signaling. Do you know where I can find the semaphore flags, or do we
have to make our own? (Erick Hudson)
"Dealer's choice" here... Pre-made semaphore flag sets are available
online (just check Google, eBay, etc.), or you can make them yourselves
with a bit of sewing and constructing. Remember that, in addition to
semaphore, there's also "wig-wag" for Morse Code (with differently
patterned flags).
Dear Andy,
In a recent column,
you said, "Once a Merit Badge Counselor has registered as such, he or
she is automatically renewed each year, along with every other non-unit,
non-district volunteer. Merit Badge Counselors absolutely do not need to
fill out new applications every year." That's what I thought, too, but
this has apparently changed. To quote from the “Volunteer FAQ” page at
www.scouting.org:
Q. Once a volunteer is registered and approved as a merit badge counselor, is that registration for life?
A. Approvals for merit badge counselors and all other adult volunteer
positions are valid for one year only and must be renewed annually.
This a little annoying, but helps keep the list of counselors "fresh" and presumably is one more line of defense in Youth Protection.
However, this one
doesn't make sense… Check out the following Q&A from the same FAQ page:
Q. Must individuals who are serving as a merit badge counselor register as a merit badge counselor with the Boy Scouts of America?
A. Yes, an Adult Application must be completed for each position in
which the individual wants to serve. The application allows only one position per form. For instance, an individual who wants to serve only
as a merit badge counselor will need to complete only one application.
However, a Scoutmaster or assistant Scoutmaster who wants to serve as a
merit badge counselor must complete two applications—one for the
Scoutmaster position and one for the counselor position.
Any idea why? (Name Withheld, San Diego-Imperial Council)
There's a difference between annual registration (per the BSA Adult
Volunteer Application) and annual approval (or reaffirmation) of Merit
Badge Counselors. For registration as a volunteer, the BSA Adult
Volunteer Application is filled out only once (just like all other
volunteers) and is renewed each year automatically (for MBCs, there's no
annual registration fee); however, councils and districts typically
renew the approval for MBCs relative to the merit badges they are
responsible for, annually (or in some cases every two years).
This is the only BSA position for which two applications are used, the
only position for which there's no annual fee, and the only position
that goes through a regular (annual or every couple of years)
re-approval process.
As for holding multiple positions, it's been the policy for quite some
time that the BSA Adult Volunteer Application is filled out (once) for
each position.
I hope this clears up your (understandable) confusion, and thanks for
asking.
Dear Andy,
Your recent response
on the use of lighter fluid was, as always, spot on. However, you
didn’t offer an alternative method to get charcoal briquettes started,
or a resource to help him get back on track. I’d like to help fill in
that information…
To get briquettes
started without lighter fluid, use a “charcoal chimney.” They’re
inexpensive and readily available at your local “big box” hardware store
(Lowe’s, Home Depot, etc.). Some crumpled newspaper in the bottom and
then a few matches is all it takes to get that charcoal going!
An even better
solution is for the Scouts themselves to fabricate charcoal chimneys.
Boys love to build things and I’m sure the Senior Patrol Leader could
even find a way to turn this into a good patrol competition. A “Google”
search for “charcoal chimney homemade” turns up thousands of citations.
The first one on my own list is:
http://www.opentutorial.com/Make_a_charcoal_chimney. This
is a very well-written step-by-step set of instructions, with pictures!
Thank you for all
you do. Keep it up! (TJ Kackowski, MC, Crossroads of America Council,
IN)
Yup, I didn't. I try
to stick with answering the question (especially when I'm not asked for
a solution), and in this case I wanted to make absolutely sure there
would be no confusion.
That said, your ideas are top-drawer (especially the patrol competition)
so thanks for reading, and for writing!
Dear Andy,
I need some guidance
regarding a recent board of review for a Gold Palm… The Eagle Scout
(having already earned his Eagle and a Bronze Palm in this troop)
arrived for his board of review and was instantly told that since he was
considered “inactive,” his board of review is denied. On being told
this, the Scout quickly spoke with his Scoutmaster, who provided him
with the current (and most complete) definition of “active” by the BSA.
Returning to the troop committee, the Scout presented this information
to the reviewers, who, upon receiving it, asked him to leave the room
while they further discussed the matter. Shortly, they then called him
back in and told him that he would still be denied, because he hadn’t
shown leadership in the troop in the prior three months. They went on
to say that the requirements for this Palm are four-pronged, so that
although he’d earned the necessary merit badges and would be considered
active, he lacked in the areas of leading and leadership assistance.
They did not provide this Scout with the opportunity to describe or
discuss his achievements or his leadership. They have not yet provided
this rationale to him in writing.
Some background on
this Scout: He earned Eagle about two years ago, at age 14, and
continued active in the troop, attending both troop meetings and
campouts until about six months ago, when his school obligations
consumed nearly all his free time. Nevertheless, since earning Eagle,
he still has accomplished: Bronze Palm a year ago and 32 merit badges
to date (11 past Eagle), current OA Lodge Membership Chair, Venturing
crew President, Council E.D.G.E. Trainer, NYLT Staff, Philmont trek,
church acolyte, Varsity Soccer team, Varsity Track & Field team, and
more.
Based on this
information, do you have any suggestions on how to handle this
situation… What would you do if a troop you served had this happen?
(Unit Commissioner, Great Trail Council, OH)
As a Unit Commissioner, my hands would be tied. This may be a good
thing, because if they weren't, I'd be tempted to lock n' load, and then
blow away every one of those review members. What a bunch of
vindictive, anti-Scouting fools!
But since we Unit Commissioners are diplomats and not law enforcement
officers, the question becomes: What will this Scoutmaster do, to
rectify a self-inflicted disaster by members of the troop committee?
(I'm assuming that every member of the board of review was indeed a
registered member of the troop committee, otherwise, this purported
board of review is invalid —it, in fact, never happened.) In this
regard, did the Scoutmaster sit in on the board of review as an
observer? Does he know he's 100% entitled to do this? Does he know
he’s also entitled to come to the defense of any Scout he recommends to
a board of review, and stay put right there while they discuss and make
their decision?
Further, has the chair of the review given the Scout written
documentation of the members' unanimous decision, with a timetable and
recommended actions for the Scout, to assure that the next review will
be successful? If this hasn't happened, the Scout has the right to
demand it, and the chair must oblige. If the chair refuses to oblige,
or unnecessarily delays compliance, then the Scout has the right to go
directly to the District Advancement Chair (with his Scoutmaster at his
side) and request a district-level review.
In short, this situation needs to be solved within the troop, and cannot
be "legislated" from the outside (i.e., you), because neither the
district nor the council "owns" the troop—it's owned by its sponsor.
Hmm... There's an idea... Is the head of the sponsoring organization
aware of what these people just did? Maybe this needs to happen...
Through the Scoutmaster and/or the Committee Chair (assuming the CC
wasn't sitting on that abortive review).
Dear Andy,
Regarding
Eagle-required merit badges when earning them for Star and Life ranks,
can you verify whether this information is accurate or not...
On the Eagle Scout
rank application, merit badge lines 6 and 9, merit badges that do not
apply have a line drawn through them. If any of the lined-out merit
badges are counted toward the total of 21 total merit badges, these are
be put in one of the other boxes (13 through 21).
Four of the
Eagle-required merit badges would have a completion date prior to the
Star rank board of review date. Credit at the Eagle level can be given
to a Scout who earned both Emergency Preparedness and Lifesaving, or any
combination of Swimming, Hiking, and Cycling. Two additional merit
badges must have a date prior to the Star board of review date.
Three Eagle-required merit badges will have a date prior to the Life
board of review. These Eagle-required merit badges are in addition to
the ones earned for Star rank. Credit is given if the Scout earned both
Emergency Preparedness and Lifesaving, or any combination of Swimming,
Hiking, and Cycling. Two additional merit badges must have a date prior
to the Life board of review date. These merit badges are in addition to
those earned for Star rank. Thank you! (Troop Committee Chair, Gulf
Ridge Council, FL)
I think you’ve got it.
I’ll review, keeping it as simple as I can…
MBs for Star: Total of 6 merit badges, including any 4 from the Eagle
list (even if "alternatives" on the Eagle Scout rank application).
MBs for Life: Total of 11 merit badges, including any 7 (Star, 4; plus
Life, 3 more) from the Eagle list (even if "alternatives" on the Eagle
Scout rank application).
MBs for Eagle: Total of 21, which must include, specifically, (1) First
Aid, (2) Cit-Community, (3) Cit-Nation, (4) Cit-World, (5)
Communication, (6) Personal Fitness, (7) Environmental Science, (8)
Personal Management, (9) Camping, (10) Family Life, and (11) either
Swimming or Hiking or Cycling, and (12) either Lifesaving or Emergency
Preparedness, and then nine more (13-21) at the Scout's discretion.
With regard to the nine discretionary merit badges, if a Scout has
earned any of the alternatives for (11) or (12) he can count these as
discretionary. For instance, if a Scout has earned both Lifesaving AND
Emergency Preparedness, he puts Lifesaving in slot (12) and puts
Emergency Preparedness in a discretionary list.
All merit badges count in one way or another, regardless of when
earned. In other words, it's not "chronological": If a seventh merit
badge was earned back when the Scout was First Class rank, which he
didn't need for Star, he still gets to count it for Life or for Eagle.
Or, to put it another way, if a First Class Scout earns a dozen or more
merit badges while working toward Star rank, he gets to use these later
on, for Life and for Eagle... He doesn't have to earn the additional
five merit badges for Life only after he's Star rank, or earn the
additional ten merit badges for Eagle only after he's Life rank.
All of this is described in the 2010 Boy Scout Requirements book (No.
34765), and, since this is the national standard, this is what must be
abided by without exception or alteration.
Dear Andy,
You made the comment, in a recent column, that "The Swimming
requirements for Second and First Class ranks are rudimentary and
fundamental, at best." That being said, I need some help as this
has just become an issue. I’m Scoutmaster for my home troop as well as a
National Scout Jamboree troop. The Jamboree Scout must be First Class.
The problem here is that I have two Scouts who have a genuine fear of
water over their heads. They’re from different home troops, but they
have very similar fears. Other than that fear, they are exceptional
Scouts. What can I do to pass them (on swimming) and still preserve the
sanctity of rank and the honor of attending the Jamboree? My gut
feeling is to not block either of these Scouts from being First Class or
to deny either one the chance to attend the Jamboree, no matter what it
takes. (Cycling was ruled out for one of the Scouts—He's just not that
stable.) (Name & Council Withheld)
First, let's not take things out of context... I was comparing the
rank-related swim tests to specifically the more rigorous requirements
of Swimming merit badge. With that understanding, here we go…
As Jamboree Scoutmaster, your responsibility is to insure that all
Scouts in your Jamboree troop have met the requirements for
participation, including First Class rank. It's not your responsibility
to "pass" them... This is the responsibility of the Scouts themselves,
together with their home troop Scoutmasters. Therefore, the first thing
you need to do is to make certain that the Scoutmasters of these two
Second Class (or less?) Scouts understand that First Class is what they
must be, or they simply won't qualify to be members of the Jamboree
troop. These Scoutmasters, then, may want to conference with their
respective Scouts, pointing out to them that there can't be any
"sliding" of requirements here, not only because no requirements can
ever be altered but also because there are major safety issues involved,
and then asking each Scout what he intends to do in order to get to
First Class rank in the next few months, so that participation is
assured. Each Scoutmaster can make recommendations, such as finding a
qualified swimming instructor and taking lessons so that the Scouts can
meet the First Class swim test stipulations. These conversations might
include each Scout's parents as well, so that there are no
misunderstandings about what's expected here, and so that the parents
can help their sons find a pathway to success. The bottom line, as you
know, is that there are no substitutes for the First Class swim test...
not cycling, or hiking, or anything else: The swim test must be
completed, as stated, including the very first element of jumping
feet-first into water over their heads, coming to the surface, and
leveling off. A competent instructor can help them through whatever
blocks to doing this they may have, but it will be in stages and won't
necessarily happen overnight (I'm a former camp Aquatics Director and
BSA Lifeguard Counselor, and I'm still a MBC for both Swimming and
Lifesaving, so I’m not talking through my Smokey Bear in this area).
I truly appreciate your interest in these Scouts and your desire for
their success; success will happen when they meet the stated
requirements and become First Class rank. Short of this, you'll need to
replace them with two Scouts from the waiting list.
Continue to keep this in mind: Advancement is 99% in the hands of the
Scouts themselves—this is for them to do and not for anyone to either do
it for them or loosen up requirements, because this would be patently
unfair to those Scouts who have made the effort to qualify in every way,
plus IT’S BLOODY DANGEROUS!
Hi Andy,
In a recent column, you said, "The normal time it would take to complete
rank requirements in an active troop are: Tenderfoot, 30 days [one
month]; Second Class, 2 months; First Class, 3 months..." Now I
understand the 30 days for Tenderfoot, since requirement 10a and 10b
require a 30-day gap, but how did you come up with two months for Second
Class and three months for First Class? There are no time-in-rank
requirements that I could find for either one. (Gene Kulyk, ASM,
Northeast Illinois Council)
The operative words are "normal time." An enthusiastic Scout in an
active troop can knock off Second Class in a couple of months and then
First Class in a few more months. No one said "required time-in-rank."
Dear Andy,
I'm a former
Scoutmaster, presently an ASM and high adventure coordinator for the
troop. This past summer, one of our Scouts completed his Eagle service
project. While I was Scoutmaster, I’d counseled him on his project
several times, including the need to get project plan sign-offs from the
appropriate people, including the District Advancement Chair (DAC).
Before starting the actual work, he did obtain the signatures of
everyone he needed to…except the DAC. At the time the work was being
done, no one asked or verified that he had all the proper approvals;
then, several months after completion, he apparently realized that he
still needed this approval, so he went to the DAC for a review and
approval, obviously putting the DAC in a difficult position. The DAC in
turn contacted both myself and the troop’s current Scoutmaster, and both
of us were surprised to learn that this Scout hadn't obtained the final
sign-off before proceeding (even though he’d been told he must do this
multiple times). To assist in reaching a decision, the DAC consulted
with the Council Advancement Chair for guidance, and subsequently
denied the project, stipulating that the Scout carry out a second
project, accurately and thoroughly citing the requirement that the
project be approved by all appropriate parties before it’s
performed.
The DAC acknowledged
that the project was acceptable, as far as concept and execution, and
that it would have been approved had proper procedure been followed,
further noting that the Scout had appropriately demonstrated leadership
and accommodated changes that arose, so that not having acquired the
final sign-off was the sole reason for rejecting his project.
Then, in a
subsequent discussion with this Scout's parents, it became known that he
has a profound case of Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and is under a
doctor's care, with medication for the disorder, and that his grades in
school have been extremely poor and he’s participating in a school
program focused on his disability (with some positive improvement). His
parents hadn’t previously disclosed this information to any of us in the
troop (he’d transferred into our troop about two years ago, so we didn’t
know him from the very start). Upon learning of this, it became
apparent to me and to the DAC as well that it wasn’t surprising that
missing one signature on his service project workbook could occur. In
fact, at this point I'm frankly surprised he did as well has he did, and
I only wish I’d been aware of his condition and the need for more
thorough counseling or support. On top of this, in this same time
period, his dad had lost his job and needed to seek employment out of
state, and so wasn’t there, as he usually was, to provide a father’s
guidance, which may well have also contributed to this young man’s
failure to get that one last signature.
In light of this new
information, the DAC relented, convinced that her denial was perhaps the
wrong action, so she requested (and received) a note from the Scout's
physician and further documentation from his school, confirming the
ADD. With this information in hand, the DAC went to the Council AC for
concurrence and a reversal of the first decision; however, the CAC did
not agree, and requested that the Scout attend the next meeting of the
Council Advancement Committee (this will happen in about a month), with
the options of presenting his project and explaining himself, or
performing a second service project, this time following stated
procedures.
It would seem to me
that holding a board of review-type event with this 16 year-old Scout
would be inappropriate, because his only real defense for not obtaining
that fourth signature is his long-term and pervasive attention deficit
disability—I can't imagine a conversation going down a path that
wouldn't oblige him to acknowledge a disorder that has already been
documented by a physician and educational institution, so what else
would be learned? Moreover, having him stand in front of up to 14 adult
strangers to discuss his own disorder seems like a burden we in Scouting
wouldn't want to place on anyone, Scout or otherwise. In short, this
request doesn't seem to be in the spirit of scouting. What advice would
you have for us in the troop, and for this young man? (Name & Council
Withheld)
The absence of a green-light signature from the DAC is obviously a goof.
But is the onus entirely on the Scout? Frankly, that's not likely. The
reason we have troop-level advisers for Scouts in this position is to
prevent things like this from happening. So, while that doesn't excuse
this Scout, it pretty much says that there was an error of omission at
the adult mentor/adviser level as well.
Personally, I agree with the DAC's second decision: We don't "punish"
Scouts for errors like these, especially when the end-result is, by
everyone's agreement, more than acceptable in concept and scope, work
plan, execution, leadership opportunity, and outcome.
So, what will this council-level "review" accomplish? Little more,
apparently, than embarrassing the Scout and forcing him to talk about a
liability he's working hard to overcome. If I were the Council
Advancement Chair, I'd probably change my mind and cancel the review,
permitting the project to go through as approved and completed in
accordance with the spirit of Scouting and what we're trying to instill
in the young men we're here to serve. Let’s remember that, in fact, the
Scout did have three of the four necessary signatures—one from his
Scoutmaster, one from his troop committee, and one from a representative
of the recipient organization—in place before proceeding. Moreover, the
absence of the fourth signature is unlikely to have occurred because the
Scout was attempting to consciously slip something past the
district—this was an error of omission and not of deliberate
evasiveness.
At this point, in your
shoes (you know the Scout perhaps better than others), I'd ask the DAC
to appeal to the CAC to cancel the review. If that is unsuccessful,
then I'd personally attend the review with the Scout and, having also
recruited the DAC and the current Scoutmaster to do so as well, and
maybe the parents, too, attend at the Scout's side, as advocates and
supporters. Consider, in fact, asking his physician and an
authoritative representative of his school to attend on his behalf as
well. (Let’s remember that Daniel didn't enter the lion's den alone; he
had his God on his side!)
I'd also insist that the reviewers limit their number to a maximum of
six, which follows the same protocol as boards of review (no fewer than
three; no more than six), so as not to create the appearance or
atmosphere of a "kangaroo court."
The overarching principle to follow, I believe, is a simple one:
Scouting is a safe haven, where a young man can make an error and it's
not "lethal" and the world doesn't come crashing down around him!
Especially since, in this case, it's more than obvious that this was a
simple error; that is, it was purely an accident: The Scout was not
consciously trying to surreptitiously side-step or slip around a
requirement.
Best wishes to you all for success –
Happy Scouting!
|
Got a
question? Have an idea? Send it to
AskAndyBSA@yahoo.com. (Please include your POSITION
and COUNCIL NAME or TOWN & STATE)
(February 12, 2010 – Copyright © Andy McCommish 2010) |
|
|
Letters to AskAndy may be published at the discretion of
the columnist and the editor. If you
prefer to have your name or affiliation withheld from
publication, please advise in your letter..
|