Leaderboard

@Tampa Turtle Thank you. I am actually not walking away from BSA - BSA walked away from me. I have stayed the same - Scouting has changed. I am not leaving in protest and anger. Rather I am leaving in sadness for what has been lost. I have a lifetime of good Scouting memories, and I'm especially grateful my son was able to experience it before BSA lost its way. It has been a wonderful ride. To be clear - these membership changes are rooted in financial desperation. It won't work. As BSA adds girls it will lose even more boys, and thus the membership declines will continue. When

Adding girls to Scouts Canada did nothing to stop the declining membership. I left Scouts as a youth before it went co-ed and came back as a leader afterwards. The difference is obvious and glaring. Add to that the brand new, severely watered down program and I don't see boys continuing to be attracted to the program. I will also add that the useless training burden and ever thickening red tape is causing Scouters drop out since it has become far easier to organize something among friends than it is to go as an organization. In Canada, for many activities, girls have the choice

I also love neckerchiefs and wish that more troops would bring them back, especially now that they come in a larger size. It always seemed to me that the neckerchief is the most characteristic and recognizable element of the scout uniform.

Regarding the World Crest, some of you may not remember that prior to August 1, 1989, you had to EARN (emphasis) the World Crest in order to wear it.I earned mine in 1987. I remember that exact date that allowed everyone to wear it because I was on a bus in Canada in the middle of an international trip that would have qualified everyone for the award when the adults apologized to use about the new rule. Trip was advertised as a way to earn that award. To make up for the rule change, we received the Canadian version of the badge, which is on a velvet background. So no, I will not be remo

The reasons for the intial decline were complex and having been a scout during that time it is broadly described as due to years of stagnation and failure to modernise. Also it is rapidly approaching previous levels. The best estimates, before proper censuses were done is that membership peaked at about 650K. Last census we were at 618K, widely expected to be up again this year. So yes, growing and thriving.

You have to take the longer term view, BSA4G spelled another way = Coed. That is where the train is headed with CSE Surbaugh and the National board stoking the fires to keep up the full head of steam. We all have a couple of choices, get on board and embrace the change (make no mistake the whole CO has a choice will be an cast aside) or just be pushed to the side. Those that want to experience a single gender type program for boys, not sure where you can go. Apparently there is one for girls called Girl Scouts. Unlike the BSA (name subject to change) they are pretty adamant about the who

While ultimately the membership decision is the COs, and I agree with that because they own the unit. But if you were considering a major change, wouldn't you want to know what your major stakeholder's think about the changes? National didn't listen to the membership when they made membership policies in the past. As a result, Scouting is suffering greatly in my area. The active volunteers who got things done quit because they thought BSA was not listening to them. COs have backed away from BSA, going to Trails Life. Not including the inflated numbers from when I first got here, we have lost

This is a common mistake made by people who take the boy led argument too far. Boy led does not mean that the boys get to make each and every decision. Boys do not make membership policy. A scout can choose to join or not to join a unit. He does not get to choose who else can join or cannot join the unit.

Yes, but many places won't allow people under 18 (or sometimes 21) to reserve campsites.

Not discounting your anecdotal experience But to be clear, there is nothing preventing her Girl Scout troop from doing any of the activities similar to a BSA unit. That is their choice. Not knowing the breakdown, demographics, or flow of participants within GSUSA; one would presume that if there was demand for mirror type activities similar to the BSA, then that would have been incorporated. Perhaps GSUSA is as tone deaf as BSA with regards to actual things that happen at the actual unit with actual scouts. As long as you sell cookies, all is well

The WAGGGS symbol is a trefoil, not a fleur-de-lis. Worn by Girl Scouts and Girl Guides all over the world, who are WAGGGS members. https://www.wagggs.org/en/about-us/who-we-are/symbols-movement/

@CalicoPenn There are great scouters on both side of this issue. @gblotter should not be chased off. I don't see this change in the same light as I see discriminating against race, creed or sexual orientation. Girls have another option and the BSA has been serving many girls in various capacities. This is truly optional for the BSA and I'm not surprised that some scouters see this as a fundamental change where they can no longer continue. The fact that @gblotter recognizes he cannot support the program to the point he is willing to leave is honorable. I support the additional of g

You ascribe the emotion "fear" to @gblotter when he quite clearly said "sad" and explained his position. As with the previous membership changes, the onus is on the supporters now to make it work, not on those who decide to move on to defend their decision. When I was a boy I learned A Scout is Loyal: He is loyal to those to whom loyalty is due. It's a two-way relationship. Our brothers and sisters who might feel betrayed have every right to move on without having their motives questioned.

It's like my Son #2 has an evil twin a decade delayed! That boy got a partial year 1 and held on to it for 6 years without walking down to the nearest aquatics area and completing his surface dives (which he would do frequently and often in a lake at half the temperature, twice as turbid, and a billion times the volume of the lake (let alone the aquatics area) at camp. He wound up earning Hiking MB for his Eagle requirement. So, as you can see, distance wasn't the issue. The issue was we had storms nearly every day the first summer he took the badge, and a short attention span for six yea

Packsaddle would be proud!

This is the one major concern I have and the only issue I have heard consistently raised by youth. If the activities remain the same and there are simply some groups that include girls I don’t see a major negative impact to boys. If the activities do change, I expect my son and I would also leave (I have no desire to lead a generic youth organization). I am hopeful and expect the activities will remain but have to admit there is a risk. I believe this will somewhat have to do with how many (and which) girls join.

Wouldn't your parents count? Reasonableness. With any requirement, we need to think about thresholds and did you fulfill the expectation of the requirement. It's like the scout looking to fulfill the camping MB requirement who puts up and sleeps inside a tent inside an air conditioned building. Yes, he put up a tent and slept in it. But he defeated the whole purpose of the requirement. A reasonable person would say no. Likewise, I'd argue a reasonable person would say you did not meet the expectation of the requirement if you only led your parents. I'd argue further that only lea

Fair enough. Can we agree to have this conversation again in February 2019?

GSUSA, as I understand, is a member of WAGGGS not the WOSM.

wasn't this a movie?.... the boys would sneak over to the girls side of the lake and prank them....and the girls would at other times sneak over to the boy's side for revenge funny thing.... I've never seen this thing on my daughters' GSUSA uniforms.... so much for unity.

I don't disagree, but how can ANYONE in advance of what this will look like even come to an informed decision that they can no longer function as a leader? Again, if BSA forces a troop to take on girls, then I both sympathize and support the decision of leaders to step away if they is how they feel - but we are not there yet. We have only the FEAR of what BSA might look like in 2019 and to make a decision in advance of that conveys that the decision is not about inability to function as a leader but more a dislike of girls anywhere at all in BSA. Quitting over a fear of how a policy will

I think all businesses would like to have some degree of "customer loyalty" or "brand loyalty" in their customers. This is to be expected. Most businesses understand, however, that the customers' loyalty will often change if they raise the price or alter the product. We teach our boys to be educated and thrifty consumers in regard to all of their other purchases. Why shouldn't we encourage them, and ourselves, to exercise good judgement when purchasing goods and services from BSA? Of course I am a conditional scouter. Being a careful and thrifty consumer is good thing.

Thank you then for your time over the years and the difference you have made in boy's lives. And the UK is growing, and has also been co-ed for a fair while too. We can all pick and choose stats to lean on.

Funny, I had the same sort of feedback when I spoke with our local SE (sorry CEO) after the announcement, he rolled out the term "conditional scouters". Guess the implication is I was only active and supportive as long as I like the conditions. Clearly the challenge is conditions have changed. I did not change it, you did not change it. Not sure this is all good change management

gblotter is entitled to his opinion. Oh, I know.... Agree to disagree

The World Crest is a symbol of unity and world brotherhood. If you don't believe that and you are free to do so, then don't wear the World Crest on your uniform. To understate I was EXTREMELY unhappy with women becoming SM's back in the 80's, that said I would still participate with them in any scout function. We were all scout leaders.

@RememberSchiff, I don't think "global-shaming" American scouters is appropriate. Nor is it fair. Pakistan, one of the fastest growing associations -- strictly boys -- also wears its crest with pride. Other associations work hard to honor their groups who want their youth to have a unisex camping experience.

THAT is your work around for placing needing adults to make the reservations. That, in my view, is one of the major responsibilities of the SM and ASM's....to do the bidding on direction form the scout leaders. You don't go telling some state park that they MUST allow a minor to reserve a spot. that would never fly..... instead, your scouts say, "Mr, SM, we would like to go camping 'there', are you available to drive us? Yes? great thank you. We have confirmed that the group site is available, we'll need the outdoor committee chair to book the site. here's the link and instructions.

Do you take them to a BSA Summer camp that staff girls as councilors? I know its not the same, but I would assume it has similar issues.

I don't think that there would be enough interested girls for all the current troops to go coed, even if they wanted to. I know one girl who is gung-ho about joining BSA in 2019: my daughter. Problem is I know only one girl: my daughter. Seems like it will need a minimum of 5-10 girls for a viable patrol or "linked" troop. None of her female schoolmates are interested. The girls in her GSUSA troop (grades 6-12) don't seem very enthusiastic about camping. About a month ago I talked with the scoutmasters of the three boy scout troops in our town -- to see if they were aware of any girls

Depends on the girl. My daughter-in-law very happily accompanies my son to meetings at his old college where they play D&D and other nerdy games. Nerds in love, it's a beautiful thing.

@Eagle94-A1 Ill see if they want to join this forum. Probably shouldn’t run that suggested experiment... I think it probably violates G2SS. 😀 I definitely think there is a variety of Troop cultures and some lead to boys being more accepting of girls than others. My opinion of girls in scouts goes back to the early 1990s when we had some girls tag along on our high adventure outings (not sure they were called HA then). We had a great time and all of the boys supported our SMs futal attempt to get them registered. The Troop we feed already has girls as unofficial members so

Nothing wrong with games just as long as every campout doesn't become game club. IMHO.

Kinda like patches at Jambo, huh?

I wouldn't have allowed that at a scout activity. I guess it all depends on whether or not you have the authority to stop it. If you do, go ahead and stop it. You have plenty of justification. If you don't have the authority, then all you can do is tell your kid not to participate.

Very true, this side of the pond the necker is very much what says "scout". Typically on camp we don't wear full uniform except for formal moments except for the necker which we normally wear all the time. Typically worn over the collar (if what we're wearing has a collar) but I don't think we have a specific rule about it. Nearest we have is that the official badge positioning diagrams show it as over.

Yes, both options, as well as not wearing a necker at all, have been around since 1972. When I was overseas, many Scouts were surprised we had the option to not wearing a necker. The Scouter from Croatia told me that the only mandatory uniform item was a necker, and she had sponsor pay for an official uniform shirt so she could participate in the exchange program. This was in the mid 1990s in the middle of the Balkans War, and Scouting was taking off as best it could under the circumstances there.

While the handbooks are authoritative, just like today BSA publishes additional literature to clarify and expand upon the handbooks. By any chance do you have a copy of the 1927 Scouting with a Neckerchief?" I ask because I do not have a copy. Closest I can find is a modern document with an except from the SwaN stating a necker is worn over a tucked under collar. That si what I am basing my info on. But in trying to find a pdf or scan of the original 1927 document, I found another source saying over the collar. Now I do know BSA made collarless shirts for Scouts. I have a couple and it

Actually it was! I am looking at the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th editions of the Handbook which I have in front of me right now (it's good to have a solid library), and in the uniform illustrations, all of them have uniform diagrams featuring the neckerchief being worn over the collar. In fact, let's not overlook the fact that on the very cover of the 3rd edition, there is an illustration of a Scout in profile - with the neckerchief over the collar! And just about every early painting by Norman Rockwell shows Scouts wearing the neckers old school style - with the neckerchief over the collar. And with al

Yes, if you look at materials from the 20's and 30's, it was expected of boys to wear their neckerchiefs over the collar, a look I very much enjoy. When I take my boys on service projects or especially rigorous outdoor activities, I only require them to wear the necker so that they can be recognized as Scouts. At this point I have emphasized the appropriateness of this option so often that most of the boys in our pack and troop can quote with a degree of precision the exeprt from the guide to uniforms and insignia regarding the appropriate wearing of the neckerchief without the rest of t

It’s a great look - I agree. Wonder if my SPL would go for it.

Was there a time when neckerchief-over-the-collar was the rule? Maybe back when neckers were larger and thus the size made under-collar more difficult? I kind of wish we went back to the larger size neckers. And wore them more without the uniform, like a lot of non-US orgs do. We had a boy at camp recently wearing his neckerchief over a t-shirt. I'm keeping hope alive that maybe this could catch on.

I must have been in the minority also. The collarless shirt made wearing the neckerchief so much more comfortable, rather than tucking the collar. My current unit does not opt to wear a neckerchief though, so a moot point for me.

I love the hats, just can't find one big enough for my head

Yes, the whole tucking the collar in is why I really miss the collarless shirts. I loved the old OD green uniforms with no collar. But I believe I was in the minority.

This is absolutely correct; in fact, for many decades Scouts were supposed to wear the neckerchief over the collar with the collar tucked under. Allowing them to tuck the necker under is the more recent option, but as @HelpfulTracks has pointed out, both are entirely permitted.

I collect neckers (I love them) and have several different Eagle versions (Blue, White NESA, Lifetime NESA, NESA Jambo, Staff etc). I usually wear my white NESA to Eagle CoH. But I have seen various versions worn by adults and think it is appropriate no matter which color, after all, Once an Eagle Always an Eagle. And I have never considered the blue one to signify anything other than Eagle Scout (no age qualifier I mean). BTW - if you are looking to return the favor, NESA makes a red "Eagle Awarded in 2018" necker that would be a nice gift

I LOVE neckerchiefs! They add such a classic feel to the uniform, not to mention their little splash of color does a lot to brighten up the earth tones of the rest of its items. I admit I am starting to amass quite a little collection of neckers, all for different occassion - I have my Cub Scout Leader blue, and my Webelos plaid, not to mention the white NESA necker I just got a from a boy's parents to wear at his coming Eagle Court of Honor. I can easily see myself ending up with a whole plethora of colors to choose from; I love colors, and the neckerchief is the one part of the uniform where

The black neckerchief is standard issue from the BSA Scout shop. The hat emblem is the regular BSA fleur-de-lys used in the 50-60s. I'm sure others here on Scouter.com are better experts than I about uniform etiquette. But I believe neckerchief slides are highly customizable and can be almost anything you like - even carve your own. That sounds like a Democrat vs Republican debate to me - not going there - haha. My son and I regularly argue over that point, actually. I'm sure others here will have something more definitive to say. And I have no doubt it has alrea

Maybe I am mistaken, but isn't Venturing ment to be HIGHER "Venturing" then normal scouts? Going on more challenging trips then local "car camping". In my mind, Boy Scouts from 11-14 would be time to work on merit badges and eagle, and assuming they get their eagle before 18, they would then join Venturing to stay motivated in Scouting. I have had a few 14 year old Eagle Scouts that drifted away because there was "nothing left" for them to do, I always promote Venturing as the next step.