Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

FW: Scouting Safely: Question

Expand Messages
  • Bob Ruggieri
    Lisa, Thanks for the response. some thoughts in response. Below is the email I received from National Health and Safety Team (together with a copy of my
    Message 1 of 17 , Apr 21, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Lisa,

      Thanks for the response. some thoughts in response.

      Below is the email I received from National Health and Safety Team (together
      with a copy of my original inquiry), confirming that BALOO is required for a
      Webelos trip. That's what National told us and so that's what we tell
      people at OWLS and BALOO.

      In that regard, I'll note that the inquiry got prompted because the two of
      us who were leading OWLS in our Council for the first time had different
      interpretations of the Guide to Safe Scouting with regard to question. So I
      could certainly understand that there's confusion on the topic.

      I agree that OWLS is NOT required -- simply recommended -- that's what been
      said for years in all the BSA literature. But that email indicates BALOO is
      required. That's actually not surprising -- the OWLS syllabus only has very
      short segments on things covered in BALOO like health and safety
      considerations and event planning and like (indeed much shorter than even
      what Boy Scout leaders get between BSLS and OLS). That's because the
      authors understood that OWLS participants would also have taken (or would
      take) BALOO.

      With regard to sites, as I indicated in the YAHOO posting, in our Council
      the public parks were long ago approved (and indeed, Council automatically
      sends out to them every year a Certif of Ins when new policy kicks in).
      Likewise, many of the private grounds in the region were also approved long
      ago (and again automatically get Certifs of Ins). If someone were to come
      up with a new place that hadn't been previously approved, then obviously
      Council would have to make evaluation, but from what I understand it's very
      rare -- because all the places likely to be chosen in our area have already
      been evaluated.

      Good luck,

      Bob

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Health and Safety Team [mailto:Health.Safety@...]
      Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 1:40 PM
      To: rwruggieri@...
      Subject: RE: Scouting Safely: Question

      BALOO is required for at least one adult. Webelos "Dens" can camp as a den
      without the rest of the pack but all other Cub Scout program requirements
      remain in place. Will forward it to the council to see if they have
      additional input.

      Thanks,


      Richard

      Richard R. Bourlon, P.E., CSP | Team Leader, Health and Safety BOY SCOUTS
      OF AMERICA
      1325 West Walnut Hill Lane  |  P.O. Box 152079 Irving, Texas 75015-2079






      -----Original Message-----
      From: rwruggieri@... [mailto:rwruggieri@...]
      Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 12:16 PM
      To: Health and Safety Team
      Subject: Scouting Safely: Question

      User's Name: Bob Ruggieri
      User's E-mail: rwruggieri@...
      User's Phone Number: 908-770-8268
      Submitted On: 05/10/2012 12:15:37 CDT
      Scouting Role: Adult Volunteer
      Position: District Training Chair
      Council: Patriots Path Council
      Unit:
      Question: I and team are currently preparing to present
      Outdoor Leader Skills for Webelos Leaders, and have come up with question,
      where we have difference of opinion, and need clarification, so that we can
      properly advise those taking course. When a Webelos Den goes camping, does
      somebody on trip need to be BALOO trained? I've always understood that
      BALOO trained leader is required on every Cub outing. However, another on
      team notes that literally Guide to Safe Scouting only says it's required for
      "pack overnights" -- which he interprets as being overnights of whole pack,
      not outings of Den. With the new on-line Tour Plan system, I would assume
      the computer system is programmed one way or other when trip entered is a
      Webelos Den camping trip -- is BALOO mandatory or not?

      References Cited: GISS, Scouting.org/HealthandSafety, OLSWL syllabus,
      BALOO syllabus

      Others Contacted: Contacted Council staffer responsible for Health and
      Safety, and he couldn't answer.
    • Connie Knie
      I am not sure what is going on but I have asked this question in another forum where Richard is a member and I will be interested in what he has to say.   I
      Message 2 of 17 , Apr 21, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        I am not sure what is going on but I have asked this question in another forum where Richard is a member and I will be interested in what he has to say.
         
        I can't find any supporting documentation that says BALOO is required.

        Connie

        --- On Sun, 4/21/13, Bob Ruggieri <rwruggieri@...> wrote:







        Lisa,

        Thanks for the response. some thoughts in response.

        Below is the email I received from National Health and Safety Team (together
        with a copy of my original inquiry), confirming that BALOO is required for a
        Webelos trip. That's what National told us and so that's what we tell
        people at OWLS and BALOO.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • frank
        The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000 persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn t get the same message.  The rest of
        Message 3 of 17 , Apr 21, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000 persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn't get the same message.  The rest of us rely on the publications, and until they are updated to change things, we will likely continue as guided in the publications.
          Frank


          >________________________________
          > From: Connie Knie <cknie23100@...>
          >To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
          >Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:08 PM
          >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
          >
          >
          >

          >
          >I am not sure what is going on but I have asked this question in another forum where Richard is a member and I will be interested in what he has to say.

          >I can't find any supporting documentation that says BALOO is required.
          >
          >Connie
          >
          >--- On Sun, 4/21/13, Bob Ruggieri <mailto:rwruggieri%40verizon.net> wrote:
          >
          >Lisa,
          >
          >Thanks for the response. some thoughts in response.
          >
          >Below is the email I received from National Health and Safety Team (together
          >with a copy of my original inquiry), confirming that BALOO is required for a
          >Webelos trip. That's what National told us and so that's what we tell
          >people at OWLS and BALOO.
          >
          >

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Connie Knie
          Yeah except the email comes from what seems to be a very reliable source. I mean if someone from National is stating this then why if it is not true? Connie
          Message 4 of 17 , Apr 21, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Yeah except the email comes from what seems to be a very reliable source. I mean if someone from National is stating this then why if it is not true?

            Connie

            --- On Sun, 4/21/13, frank <ftooth@...> wrote:







            The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000 persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn't get the same message.  The rest of us rely on the publications, and until they are updated to change things, we will likely continue as guided in the publications.
            Frank



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • frank
            Sure, it s probably spot on.  The trouble comes when folks start relying on e-mails, and anouncements, and what they heard at RT or at a training.  There s
            Message 5 of 17 , Apr 21, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Sure, it's probably spot on.  The trouble comes when folks start relying on e-mails, and anouncements, and what they heard at RT or at a training.  There's no place to go to read more about it. It perpetuates the idea that the publication is fine, "but here's the real scoop on that".  Most of what folks hear about that can't be found in a pub is misconstrued, or wrong. How many times did you hear an announcement about something that turned out to be baloney?  After being burned a few times, one learns to just go by the book and ignore the talk.  If it's true, the new version of the book will reflect it.
              Frank


              >________________________________
              > From: Connie Knie <cknie23100@...>
              >To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
              >Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:32 PM
              >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
              >
              >
              >

              >
              >Yeah except the email comes from what seems to be a very reliable source. I mean if someone from National is stating this then why if it is not true?
              >
              >Connie
              >
              >--- On Sun, 4/21/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
              >
              >The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000 persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn't get the same message.  The rest of us rely on the publications, and until they are updated to change things, we will likely continue as guided in the publications.
              >Frank
              >
              >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >
              >

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Lisa Titus
              I think we all need to hear it from national in some form direct to ALL of us. A publication update would be great - but in the meantime - electronic should
              Message 6 of 17 , Apr 21, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                I think we all need to hear it from national in some form direct to ALL
                of us. A publication update would be great - but in the meantime -
                electronic should be more than acceptable. But it has to come from
                them through official channels. They can't expect leaders to pass
                along an email.




                On 04/21/2013 11:09 PM, frank wrote:
                > Sure, it's probably spot on. The trouble comes when folks start relying on e-mails, and anouncements, and what they heard at RT or at a training. There's no place to go to read more about it. It perpetuates the idea that the publication is fine, "but here's the real scoop on that". Most of what folks hear about that can't be found in a pub is misconstrued, or wrong. How many times did you hear an announcement about something that turned out to be baloney? After being burned a few times, one learns to just go by the book and ignore the talk. If it's true, the new version of the book will reflect it.
                > Frank
                >
                >
                >> ________________________________
                >> From: Connie Knie <cknie23100@...>
                >> To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                >> Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:32 PM
                >> Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                >>
                >>
                >>
                >>
                >>
                >> Yeah except the email comes from what seems to be a very reliable source. I mean if someone from National is stating this then why if it is not true?
                >>
                >> Connie
                >>
                >> --- On Sun, 4/21/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                >>
                >> The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000 persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn't get the same message. The rest of us rely on the publications, and until they are updated to change things, we will likely continue as guided in the publications.
                >> Frank
                >>
                >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >>
                >>
                >>
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------
                >
                > For subscription and delevery options send a message to:
                > scouter_t-help@yahoogroups.com
                >
                > Scouting The Net - http://www.ScoutingTheNet.com/Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Chip Coy
                The Tour and Activity Plan appears to require a BALOO trained adult for any cub scout camping outing. The best person to ask is the person who approves the
                Message 7 of 17 , Apr 21, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  The Tour and Activity Plan appears to require a BALOO trained adult for any cub scout camping outing.

                  The best person to ask is the person who approves the Tour and Activity Plans you submit. If they will not approve without a BALOO trained adult then you have your answer, or at least your answer until you convince them otherwise.

                  If you're in the central Texas area I can make you a deal on getting both BALOO and the Outdoor Webelos Leader class next weekend (Friday evening to end of day Saturday).

                  Chip.
                  On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:09 PM, frank wrote:

                  > Sure, it's probably spot on. The trouble comes when folks start relying on e-mails, and anouncements, and what they heard at RT or at a training. There's no place to go to read more about it. It perpetuates the idea that the publication is fine, "but here's the real scoop on that". Most of what folks hear about that can't be found in a pub is misconstrued, or wrong. How many times did you hear an announcement about something that turned out to be baloney? After being burned a few times, one learns to just go by the book and ignore the talk. If it's true, the new version of the book will reflect it.
                  > Frank
                  >
                  > >________________________________
                  > > From: Connie Knie <cknie23100@...>
                  > >To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                  > >Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:32 PM
                  > >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >Yeah except the email comes from what seems to be a very reliable source. I mean if someone from National is stating this then why if it is not true?
                  > >
                  > >Connie
                  > >
                  > >--- On Sun, 4/21/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                  > >
                  > >The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000 persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn't get the same message. The rest of us rely on the publications, and until they are updated to change things, we will likely continue as guided in the publications.
                  > >Frank
                  > >
                  > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • A. Dukovic
                  Look all, the bottom line is you really need somebody trained when you re exposing new parents and Cub Scouts to perhaps, their first camping experience?? 
                  Message 8 of 17 , Apr 22, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Look all, the bottom line is you really need somebody "trained" when you're exposing new parents and Cub Scouts to perhaps, their first camping experience??  It's the real purpose behind the training??
                     
                    A "bad experience" can literally turn-off parents and future Boy Scouts to the program and do any of you want that, really??  How many times have you been on camping experiences where the "know-it-alls" have made your life miserable and again, this is what this training is designed to help with; "required" or not folks, common sense would dictate to have somebody there that's really "trained" to give the boys the very best program we can offer them. 
                     
                    Bottom line is a "great experience" encourages the boys AND parents who'll want to volunteer maybe ... food for thought?? We already know what a "bad experience" can do as well??


                    - Art
                    --- On Sun, 4/21/13, Chip Coy <coy@...> wrote:

                    From: Chip Coy <coy@...>
                    Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                    To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                    Date: Sunday, April 21, 2013, 10:18 PM



                     



                    The Tour and Activity Plan appears to require a BALOO trained adult for any cub scout camping outing.

                    The best person to ask is the person who approves the Tour and Activity Plans you submit. If they will not approve without a BALOO trained adult then you have your answer, or at least your answer until you convince them otherwise.

                    If you're in the central Texas area I can make you a deal on getting both BALOO and the Outdoor Webelos Leader class next weekend (Friday evening to end of day Saturday).

                    Chip.
                    On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:09 PM, frank wrote:

                    > Sure, it's probably spot on. The trouble comes when folks start relying on e-mails, and anouncements, and what they heard at RT or at a training. There's no place to go to read more about it. It perpetuates the idea that the publication is fine, "but here's the real scoop on that". Most of what folks hear about that can't be found in a pub is misconstrued, or wrong. How many times did you hear an announcement about something that turned out to be baloney? After being burned a few times, one learns to just go by the book and ignore the talk. If it's true, the new version of the book will reflect it.
                    > Frank
                    >
                    > >________________________________
                    > > From: Connie Knie <cknie23100@...>
                    > >To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                    > >Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:32 PM
                    > >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >Yeah except the email comes from what seems to be a very reliable source. I mean if someone from National is stating this then why if it is not true?
                    > >
                    > >Connie
                    > >
                    > >--- On Sun, 4/21/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                    > >
                    > >The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000 persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn't get the same message. The rest of us rely on the publications, and until they are updated to change things, we will likely continue as guided in the publications.
                    > >Frank
                    > >
                    > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • apatschin75
                    Excellent thought. I tend to lurk and not say a lot, but training is not intended to be a punishment or impediment to Scouting activities. Sometimes folks
                    Message 9 of 17 , Apr 22, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Excellent thought. I tend to lurk and not say a lot, but training is not
                      intended to be a punishment or impediment to Scouting activities.
                      Sometimes folks lose sight of that.


                      In a message dated 4/22/2013 1:43:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
                      artdukovic@... writes:




                      Look all, the bottom line is you really need somebody "trained" when you're
                      exposing new parents and Cub Scouts to perhaps, their first camping
                      experience?? It's the real purpose behind the training??

                      A "bad experience" can literally turn-off parents and future Boy Scouts to
                      the program and do any of you want that, really?? How many times have you
                      been on camping experiences where the "know-it-alls" have made your life
                      miserable and again, this is what this training is designed to help with;
                      "required" or not folks, common sense would dictate to have somebody there
                      that's really "trained" to give the boys the very best program we can offer
                      them.

                      Bottom line is a "great experience" encourages the boys AND parents who'll
                      want to volunteer maybe ... food for thought?? We already know what a "bad
                      experience" can do as well??

                      - Art
                      --- On Sun, 4/21/13, Chip Coy <_coy@..._ (mailto:coy@...) > wrote:

                      From: Chip Coy <_coy@..._ (mailto:coy@...) >
                      Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                      To: _scouter_t@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:scouter_t@yahoogroups.com)
                      Date: Sunday, April 21, 2013, 10:18 PM



                      The Tour and Activity Plan appears to require a BALOO trained adult for
                      any cub scout camping outing.

                      The best person to ask is the person who approves the Tour and Activity
                      Plans you submit. If they will not approve without a BALOO trained adult then
                      you have your answer, or at least your answer until you convince them
                      otherwise.

                      If you're in the central Texas area I can make you a deal on getting both
                      BALOO and the Outdoor Webelos Leader class next weekend (Friday evening to
                      end of day Saturday).

                      Chip.
                      On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:09 PM, frank wrote:

                      > Sure, it's probably spot on. The trouble comes when folks start relying
                      on e-mails, and anouncements, and what they heard at RT or at a training.
                      There's no place to go to read more about it. It perpetuates the idea that
                      the publication is fine, "but here's the real scoop on that". Most of what
                      folks hear about that can't be found in a pub is misconstrued, or wrong. How
                      many times did you hear an announcement about something that turned out to
                      be baloney? After being burned a few times, one learns to just go by the
                      book and ignore the talk. If it's true, the new version of the book will
                      reflect it.
                      > Frank
                      >
                      > >________________________________
                      > > From: Connie Knie <_cknie23100@..._ (mailto:cknie23100@...)
                      >
                      > >To: _scouter_t@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:scouter_t@yahoogroups.com)
                      > >Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:32 PM
                      > >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >Yeah except the email comes from what seems to be a very reliable
                      source. I mean if someone from National is stating this then why if it is not
                      true?
                      > >
                      > >Connie
                      > >
                      > >--- On Sun, 4/21/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                      > >
                      > >The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000
                      persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn't get the same message.
                      The rest of us rely on the publications, and until they are updated to change
                      things, we will likely continue as guided in the publications.
                      > >Frank
                      > >
                      > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • A. Dukovic
                      Thanks, some of the conversations made required sound like a sentence rather than what it is, help with the program ??     This is allegedly a
                      Message 10 of 17 , Apr 22, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  
                         
                        This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??
                         
                        Keep the faith folks please; we all know "bad" but we want the boy's experience to be the very best it can be and training can help that!!


                        - Art
                        --- On Mon, 4/22/13, tttrack@... <tttrack@...> wrote:

                        From: tttrack@... <tttrack@...>
                        Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                        To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                        Date: Monday, April 22, 2013, 5:24 PM



                         



                        Excellent thought. I tend to lurk and not say a lot, but training is not
                        intended to be a punishment or impediment to Scouting activities.
                        Sometimes folks lose sight of that.


                        In a message dated 4/22/2013 1:43:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
                        artdukovic@... writes:

                        Look all, the bottom line is you really need somebody "trained" when you're
                        exposing new parents and Cub Scouts to perhaps, their first camping
                        experience?? It's the real purpose behind the training??

                        A "bad experience" can literally turn-off parents and future Boy Scouts to
                        the program and do any of you want that, really?? How many times have you
                        been on camping experiences where the "know-it-alls" have made your life
                        miserable and again, this is what this training is designed to help with;
                        "required" or not folks, common sense would dictate to have somebody there
                        that's really "trained" to give the boys the very best program we can offer
                        them.

                        Bottom line is a "great experience" encourages the boys AND parents who'll
                        want to volunteer maybe ... food for thought?? We already know what a "bad
                        experience" can do as well??

                        - Art
                        --- On Sun, 4/21/13, Chip Coy <_coy@..._ (mailto:coy@...) > wrote:

                        From: Chip Coy <_coy@..._ (mailto:coy@...) >
                        Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                        To: _scouter_t@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:scouter_t@yahoogroups.com)
                        Date: Sunday, April 21, 2013, 10:18 PM

                        The Tour and Activity Plan appears to require a BALOO trained adult for
                        any cub scout camping outing.

                        The best person to ask is the person who approves the Tour and Activity
                        Plans you submit. If they will not approve without a BALOO trained adult then
                        you have your answer, or at least your answer until you convince them
                        otherwise.

                        If you're in the central Texas area I can make you a deal on getting both
                        BALOO and the Outdoor Webelos Leader class next weekend (Friday evening to
                        end of day Saturday).

                        Chip.
                        On Apr 21, 2013, at 10:09 PM, frank wrote:

                        > Sure, it's probably spot on. The trouble comes when folks start relying
                        on e-mails, and anouncements, and what they heard at RT or at a training.
                        There's no place to go to read more about it. It perpetuates the idea that
                        the publication is fine, "but here's the real scoop on that". Most of what
                        folks hear about that can't be found in a pub is misconstrued, or wrong. How
                        many times did you hear an announcement about something that turned out to
                        be baloney? After being burned a few times, one learns to just go by the
                        book and ignore the talk. If it's true, the new version of the book will
                        reflect it.
                        > Frank
                        >
                        > >________________________________
                        > > From: Connie Knie <_cknie23100@..._ (mailto:cknie23100@...)
                        >
                        > >To: _scouter_t@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:scouter_t@yahoogroups.com)
                        > >Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 7:32 PM
                        > >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >Yeah except the email comes from what seems to be a very reliable
                        source. I mean if someone from National is stating this then why if it is not
                        true?
                        > >
                        > >Connie
                        > >
                        > >--- On Sun, 4/21/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                        > >
                        > >The trouble with an e-mail to one person is that the other 10,000
                        persons in the country involved with Cub camping didn't get the same message.
                        The rest of us rely on the publications, and until they are updated to change
                        things, we will likely continue as guided in the publications.
                        > >Frank
                        > >
                        > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Connie Knie
                        Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.   First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I
                        Message 11 of 17 , Apr 22, 2013
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.
                           
                          First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.
                           
                           The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........
                           
                          Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........
                           
                          And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......

                          Connie

                          --- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...> wrote:







                          Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  
                           
                          This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??
                           


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • A. Dukovic
                          I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we ve got to know just what the heck we re doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who
                          Message 12 of 17 , Apr 22, 2013
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??
                             
                            Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.
                             
                            Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    


                            - Art
                            --- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <cknie23100@...> wrote:

                            From: Connie Knie <cknie23100@...>
                            Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                            To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                            Date: Monday, April 22, 2013, 10:00 PM



                             



                            Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.
                             
                            First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.
                             
                             The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........
                             
                            Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........
                             
                            And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......

                            Connie

                            --- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...> wrote:

                            Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  
                             
                            This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??
                             

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • frank
                            The difference between required/must and best practice  is decidedly different when the unit is forced to cancel their outing due to a leader not having
                            Message 13 of 17 , Apr 23, 2013
                            • 0 Attachment
                              The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.

                              Frank


                              >________________________________
                              > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>
                              >  
                              >

                              >
                              >I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??

                              >Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.

                              >Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    
                              >
                              >- Art
                              >
                              >--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:

                              >
                              >Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.

                              >First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.

                              > The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........

                              >Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........

                              >And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
                              >
                              >Connie
                              >
                              >--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                              >
                              >Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  

                              >This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??  

                              .
                              >

                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • A. Dukovic
                              Very true Frank but the reason we re following BSAs rules is so we re covered by their insurance I m thinkin??  Yep, we all want the best  program possible
                              Message 14 of 17 , Apr 23, 2013
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Very true Frank but the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance I'm thinkin??  Yep, we all want the best "program" possible for the boys and nobody really wants to "cancel" an outing for any reason, especially lack of "training" but some Parents unfortunately don't care about getting trained or "helping out" UNTIL Junior comes home complaining that his campout was cancelled for "lack of interest" by Parents?? 
                                 
                                The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they "require" some training; being prepared also means trained for what MAY happen I'm thinkin??

                                "Forced to cancel" is better than "why didn't we think of that before" or OOPS after something has happened!!


                                - Art
                                --- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <ftooth@...> wrote:

                                From: frank <ftooth@...>
                                Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                                To: "scouter_t@yahoogroups.com" <scouter_t@yahoogroups.com>
                                Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 10:43 AM



                                 



                                The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.

                                Frank

                                >________________________________
                                > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>
                                >  
                                >

                                >
                                >I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??

                                >Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.

                                >Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    
                                >
                                >- Art
                                >
                                >--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:

                                >
                                >Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.

                                >First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.

                                > The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........

                                >Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........

                                >And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
                                >
                                >Connie
                                >
                                >--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                                >
                                >Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  

                                >This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??  

                                .
                                >

                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • frank
                                ...the reason we re following BSAs rules is so we re covered by their insurance... What does that mean? Sounds like the ol insurance boogeyman ploy that has
                                Message 15 of 17 , Apr 23, 2013
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  "...the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance..."
                                  What does that mean? Sounds like the ol' insurance boogeyman ploy that has been repeated over and over for years and years, yet never in print, never in G2SS, never in a syllabus.
                                   
                                  "The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they 'require' some training..."
                                  Mandate? So is it two or some other number?  It is disingenuous and confusing to tell folks "two", and in the same breath say it's more.   When the trainer hems and haws about a rule or a policy, folks taking the training tend to dismiss it and wind up doing what they want for lack of clear direction.
                                   
                                  And look at this discussion.  38+ posts between training people and no agreement to a simple question:  is or is not BALOO required? 
                                   
                                  This is why I NEVER pay any attention to talk that cannot be backed up in writing. Tell me the rule, and then tell me where I can read more about it.
                                   
                                  Frank


                                  >________________________________
                                  > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>
                                  >To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                                  >Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 1:24 PM
                                  >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                                  >
                                  >

                                  >
                                  >Very true Frank but the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance I'm thinkin??  Yep, we all want the best "program" possible for the boys and nobody really wants to "cancel" an outing for any reason, especially lack of "training" but some Parents unfortunately don't care about getting trained or "helping out" UNTIL Junior comes home complaining that his campout was cancelled for "lack of interest" by Parents?? 

                                  >The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they "require" some training; being prepared also means trained for what MAY happen I'm thinkin??
                                  >
                                  >"Forced to cancel" is better than "why didn't we think of that before" or OOPS after something has happened!!
                                  >
                                  >- Art
                                  >--- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                                  >
                                  >From: frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com>
                                  >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                                  >To: "mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com>
                                  >Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 10:43 AM
                                  >

                                  >
                                  >The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.
                                  >
                                  >Frank
                                  >
                                  >>________________________________
                                  >> From: A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com>
                                  >>  
                                  >>
                                  >> 
                                  >>
                                  >>I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??
                                  >> 
                                  >>Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.
                                  >> 
                                  >>Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    
                                  >>
                                  >>- Art
                                  >>
                                  >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                                  >> 
                                  >>
                                  >>Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.
                                  >> 
                                  >>First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.
                                  >> 
                                  >> The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........
                                  >> 
                                  >>Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........
                                  >> 
                                  >>And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
                                  >>
                                  >>Connie
                                  >>
                                  >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                                  >>
                                  >>Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  
                                  >> 
                                  >>This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??  
                                  >
                                  >.
                                  >>
                                  >
                                  >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  >
                                  >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >

                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • A. Dukovic
                                  Ok, ya got me there??  The 2 thinnest books in Scouting are their Rules & Regulations and Charter & Bylaws which leaves the rest kinda to us; instead of
                                  Message 16 of 17 , Apr 23, 2013
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Ok, ya got me there??  The 2 thinnest books in Scouting are their "Rules & Regulations" and "Charter & Bylaws" which leaves the rest kinda to us; instead of "volumes" of rules and requirements that only the friggin lawyers can figure out, I like it this way myself.
                                     
                                    And yeah, sorry about the "insurance boogeyman" but I've found most adults need an "attention getter" for them to listen at times but I never want to have the need to test the rumor myself??
                                     

                                    - Art
                                    --- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <ftooth@...> wrote:

                                    From: frank <ftooth@...>
                                    Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                                    To: "scouter_t@yahoogroups.com" <scouter_t@yahoogroups.com>
                                    Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 7:38 PM



                                     



                                    "...the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance..."
                                    What does that mean? Sounds like the ol' insurance boogeyman ploy that has been repeated over and over for years and years, yet never in print, never in G2SS, never in a syllabus.
                                     
                                    "The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they 'require' some training..."
                                    Mandate? So is it two or some other number?  It is disingenuous and confusing to tell folks "two", and in the same breath say it's more.   When the trainer hems and haws about a rule or a policy, folks taking the training tend to dismiss it and wind up doing what they want for lack of clear direction.
                                     
                                    And look at this discussion.  38+ posts between training people and no agreement to a simple question:  is or is not BALOO required? 
                                     
                                    This is why I NEVER pay any attention to talk that cannot be backed up in writing. Tell me the rule, and then tell me where I can read more about it.
                                     
                                    Frank

                                    >________________________________
                                    > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>
                                    >To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                                    >Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 1:24 PM
                                    >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                                    >
                                    >

                                    >
                                    >Very true Frank but the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance I'm thinkin??  Yep, we all want the best "program" possible for the boys and nobody really wants to "cancel" an outing for any reason, especially lack of "training" but some Parents unfortunately don't care about getting trained or "helping out" UNTIL Junior comes home complaining that his campout was cancelled for "lack of interest" by Parents?? 

                                    >The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they "require" some training; being prepared also means trained for what MAY happen I'm thinkin??
                                    >
                                    >"Forced to cancel" is better than "why didn't we think of that before" or OOPS after something has happened!!
                                    >
                                    >- Art
                                    >--- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                                    >
                                    >From: frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com>
                                    >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                                    >To: "mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com>
                                    >Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 10:43 AM
                                    >

                                    >
                                    >The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.
                                    >
                                    >Frank
                                    >
                                    >>________________________________
                                    >> From: A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com>
                                    >>  
                                    >>
                                    >> 
                                    >>
                                    >>I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares??  If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??
                                    >> 
                                    >>Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance??  I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.
                                    >> 
                                    >>Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??    
                                    >>
                                    >>- Art
                                    >>
                                    >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                                    >> 
                                    >>
                                    >>Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.
                                    >> 
                                    >>First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.
                                    >> 
                                    >> The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........
                                    >> 
                                    >>Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........
                                    >> 
                                    >>And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
                                    >>
                                    >>Connie
                                    >>
                                    >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                                    >>
                                    >>Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??  
                                    >> 
                                    >>This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??  
                                    >
                                    >.
                                    >>
                                    >
                                    >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    >
                                    >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >

                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • jlshannon
                                    Has anyone consulted their commissioner about their concerns? Commissioners are there to help get the answers that you need to run your programs. Sent from my
                                    Message 17 of 17 , Apr 24, 2013
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Has anyone consulted their commissioner about their concerns? Commissioners are there to help get the answers that you need to run your programs.

                                      Sent from my iPhone

                                      On Apr 23, 2013, at 8:34 PM, "A. Dukovic" <artdukovic@...> wrote:

                                      > Ok, ya got me there?? The 2 thinnest books in Scouting are their "Rules & Regulations" and "Charter & Bylaws" which leaves the rest kinda to us; instead of "volumes" of rules and requirements that only the friggin lawyers can figure out, I like it this way myself.
                                      >
                                      > And yeah, sorry about the "insurance boogeyman" but I've found most adults need an "attention getter" for them to listen at times but I never want to have the need to test the rumor myself??
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > - Art
                                      > --- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <ftooth@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > From: frank <ftooth@...>
                                      > Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                                      > To: "scouter_t@yahoogroups.com" <scouter_t@yahoogroups.com>
                                      > Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 7:38 PM
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > "...the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance..."
                                      > What does that mean? Sounds like the ol' insurance boogeyman ploy that has been repeated over and over for years and years, yet never in print, never in G2SS, never in a syllabus.
                                      >
                                      > "The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they 'require' some training..."
                                      > Mandate? So is it two or some other number? It is disingenuous and confusing to tell folks "two", and in the same breath say it's more. When the trainer hems and haws about a rule or a policy, folks taking the training tend to dismiss it and wind up doing what they want for lack of clear direction.
                                      >
                                      > And look at this discussion. 38+ posts between training people and no agreement to a simple question: is or is not BALOO required?
                                      >
                                      > This is why I NEVER pay any attention to talk that cannot be backed up in writing. Tell me the rule, and then tell me where I can read more about it.
                                      >
                                      > Frank
                                      >
                                      > >________________________________
                                      > > From: A. Dukovic <artdukovic@...>
                                      > >To: scouter_t@yahoogroups.com
                                      > >Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 1:24 PM
                                      > >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >Very true Frank but the reason we're following BSAs rules is so we're covered by their insurance I'm thinkin?? Yep, we all want the best "program" possible for the boys and nobody really wants to "cancel" an outing for any reason, especially lack of "training" but some Parents unfortunately don't care about getting trained or "helping out" UNTIL Junior comes home complaining that his campout was cancelled for "lack of interest" by Parents??
                                      > >
                                      > >The minimum is 2 deep we all know, but trips to the hospital, emergencies, etc. mandate more leaders are always needed which is why they "require" some training; being prepared also means trained for what MAY happen I'm thinkin??
                                      > >
                                      > >"Forced to cancel" is better than "why didn't we think of that before" or OOPS after something has happened!!
                                      > >
                                      > >- Art
                                      > >--- On Tue, 4/23/13, frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > >From: frank <mailto:ftooth%40yahoo.com>
                                      > >Subject: Re: [Scouter_T] FW: Scouting Safely: Question
                                      > >To: "mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:scouter_t%40yahoogroups.com>
                                      > >Date: Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 10:43 AM
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >The difference between "required/must" and "best practice" is decidedly different when the unit is "forced" to cancel their outing due to a leader not having completed the training.
                                      > >
                                      > >Frank
                                      > >
                                      > >>________________________________
                                      > >> From: A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com>
                                      > >>
                                      > >>
                                      > >>
                                      > >>
                                      > >>I do understand, but my message is the same; to do our best we've got to know just what the heck we're doing and yes, National is messed up at times but who cares?? If the boys are getting the "best" we can offer, who suffers??
                                      > >>
                                      > >>Again, we know they're going to suffer from a "bad" experience so why take the chance?? I hate folks that make everything "required" and invent rules that aren't there but for Scouting training I always ask just how "comfortable" folks are with what they're going to do?? If an adult doesn't care about his/her "trained" strip but knows what they're doing, they're ahead of the game but if they hesitate I always suggest "training" so they don't look like dopes in front of other adults or the boys especially.
                                      > >>
                                      > >>Again sorry, "should" or "have to" aren't much different when it affects "program" right??
                                      > >>
                                      > >>- Art
                                      > >>
                                      > >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, Connie Knie <mailto:cknie23100%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                                      > >>
                                      > >>
                                      > >>Ok this may seem like splitting hairs BUT................. there are two different things being discussed.
                                      > >>
                                      > >>First a disclaimer. I am all about training. I would much rather have all of the leaders trained before they take anyone anywhere...... BUT .......... the discussion started because the thought is that OWL and BALOO are required before a WL can take the youth camping.
                                      > >>
                                      > >> The discussion is not whether they should be trained but do they have to be...........
                                      > >>
                                      > >>Yes this is a training group, and misinformation is our worst enemy.........
                                      > >>
                                      > >>And until I see it in official documentation I will maintain that National does not require these trainings prior to the leaders taking the youth camping.......
                                      > >>
                                      > >>Connie
                                      > >>
                                      > >>--- On Mon, 4/22/13, A. Dukovic <mailto:artdukovic%40yahoo.com> wrote:
                                      > >>
                                      > >>Thanks, some of the conversations made "required" sound like a "sentence" rather than what it is, help with the "program"??
                                      > >>
                                      > >>This is allegedly a "trainer" site correct, so why all the complaining; again, just a little knowledge makes everything run smoother and we all know the "networking" is the best part of BSA training??
                                      > >
                                      > >.
                                      > >>
                                      > >
                                      > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      > >
                                      > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      >
                                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      >
                                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      >
                                      >


                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.