eagle77

Problem is there are many leaders out there that do not even know "how" to plan or do a campout. Scouting is an "outdoor" activity. So to me before we can send our scouts into the outdoors we need to train our leaders. What makes it even better is if the leaders share with the boys the different steps required to do certain activities. I think too many time4s some guy watches one of theswe survivalo type shows and just says to himself "sure I can do that".

That was cool. I have not seen one of them since I was a kid. Had one in my upper side pocket on my pack. I also remember when the neckerchief was also your triangular bandage.

This is an excellent point. I would like to add something else to it. I was asked to take on a training session at one of our councils training sessions. For the last 15 minutes I put together a 20 question, multiple choice quiz for the class to take. I actually wanted to see if what I was teaching was getting through. This quiz would be animous and would have no effect on whether they would get credit for the course. In the morning session 3 refused to take the quiz stating that I was "adding to the requirements". The afternoon session had 2 that refused and gave basically the same excuse. Wh

That's a shame. Hopefully the new SM will allow your son to have both a fun and learning chance in scouting. I love how people take on, what I consider, an important job or hobby and feel no need to learn how to do it. Problem with that is although he misses out the scouts miss out even more, or simply walk away never to return. Good luck to you and your son with the new SM.

I understand that. My point being the previous SM should not have doen it either. Was he trained? I have found in many instances whether a leader is trained or not doesn't really matter. To me it's all part of raising our youth. They will never learn responsibility if it is never given to them.

Just another example of adults sticking their noses where it does not belong. Why the committee would have any say on this is beyond me. The blue cards basically should involve just 3 people the scout, the SM, and the MBC.

Some really good opinions and ideas on this. Now, what if their are other councils out there that did or are doing the same thing, or similar to what was going on in Alabama? How many of the members that National says it has are actual members? How many are "ghost members"? I think until those questions are asked, anything concerning the decline percentage is just speculation. What's saying that there aren't councils out there trying to "fix" things and are shaving "ghost members" off its rolls in a gradual manner as to not draw any attention to what was done in that council at one time? So u

In my years as a scout leader this was the only time parents had ever told me their sons were not joining because of money issues. As many of you have suggested there was some other reason for their refusal to join Boy Scouts. I scaled the program costs so far back that one of the dads told me out of frustration "stop trying to sell us on joining, its not happening". Even parents that I thought may have a legit money problem would never come out and say that was the reason. At the end of the meeting the CC told me that she felt I had scaled it back too far, I told her that I could have went ev

You know I've been reading this subject and all the different reasons that some of us have given for the decline in numbers and what scouting needs to do for the future the one that I was thinking of is not mentioned once and I really find it hard to believe. Doesn't anybody out there think that scouting is more expensive then many of the other activities that compete with us? I had an entire Webelos den come to one of the troop meetings and all 8 of them were there only for AOL requirement, not one single one was moving on to Boy Scouts. This really surprised me and while the boys were inter

TAHAWK, What I was referring to is the "honor" that when I sign a blue card for a scout to do a merit badge the signature that comes back on it is the counselor. I've had parents sign cards for their sons. You seem to be keying more on camp badges, please don't get me started on that one. I have yet to take the boys to any camp that follows those rules. These camps today are more concerned with numbers of boys in class and number of badges offered than quality of instruction. As a scout I did very few badges at camp, 2 was most on any week I went. I went to camp to have fun and try thin

Remember when the TV was called the "boob tube or electronic babysitter? Todays parents, I think, see it more as a protective thing. In my house, no drugs, no gangs, and no danger. When they need to go out they are only put into adult supervised activities. Want to socialize? Here open a facebook account. Even if you had parents today that might let you out, you would have to hope that some other parents felt the same way so you had someone to do something with. I would hate growing up today, but a kid growing up and being raised in this manner may not see any problem with it at all.

The MB program, as any advancement is based on an "honor" type system. The scout promises to do the requirements and the MBC promises to uphold the requirements (no add ons). What do you think BSA needs to do to enforce the rules?

National has been changing, updating, and tinkering since it first began. When I was a scout SOAR stood for "save our american resources" today its some computer program for tracking advancement or something. I also can't blame National for taking a CYA (cover your a**) attitude in todays world of law suits.I look at it like when my XBox gets an update, do I actually need it for what I do on the box? Maybe not but it may affect what other things it can do that someone else is using it for. I think to just blame National for declining membership is to easy. There are many other factors th

I don't think the answer is always pointing at National and blaming them for all that may be going down. Although I do agree the water gun thing is just wrong. I happen to be one of the scouters that DuctTape is talking about. I became SM 3 years after my son left scouting and stayed on for 11 years at that position. The reason I stepped down and out of scouting really had nothing to do with Irving. Burn out, frustration, no support from parents, I can go on and on. I remember hearing many of the things that Calico listed too. What's saying the core program of scouting doesn't evolve into some

Good point, sad part is just how true it is.

Welcome Jimbo, BSA does not provide meeting places for our troops or packs, they do have scout camps and council properties, but the COR provides the place to meet. For the most part this is an area or rooms at the COR that they allow the groups to meet. BSA does not pay for it. Next you put BSA under government control and you will have a quicker exodus then ever. The government would then be required to allow ALL to attend, not what many out there really want. Besides that I think our government already has its hands full trying to run our country.

I read a few times just be sure I wasn't misunderstanding what kind of point he was making or trying to make. But that's just wrong.

Like I said I'm still sitting on the fence with this issue, I think both sides have reasonable and valid points. I liked some of JoeBob's points too. Can we all agree though that even chopping some of the higher ups doesn't eliminate the fact that there still is a large amount of money that would be needed to sustain or keep a good part of the program still operating. Then look at how many members we will need and how much it would cost per member to do it. Do we just want to become some "rich kid" program? I guess it would be like saying how far are we willing to go with the lame horse before

JoeBob, There is no thinking outside the box with National, THEY OWN THE PROGRAM AND COPYRIGHTS TO IT. Caps for emphasis. You can bet National had a real hard look at what was going on when Trail of Life started, making sure that none of their program infringed on the copyrights that we have for BSA programs. How much would we save then if we were to lift the restrictions and all those groups would no longer be taking us to court? You make it sound so easy to just walk away and start up a new program. My entire point is that whatever decision BSA makes it isn't going to be an easy one a

Would just like to add. You make it sound like anyone who is a "pro" scouter is making big money. Maybe from say SE on up. The next time you are in the scout office ask the person behind the counter or the one answering the phones, how much are you paid? What kind of benefits, if any are you receiving? Then tell me you would have no problem stepping into their shoes. Heck for the most part the only real good DE are the ones that also share a strong dedication to the program and a real understanding spouse. Oh and that additional background check that I need is not because of some National flun

JoeBob, Do you have any idea what a DE gets paid? How much those "useless staffers" are paid? We are already in the process of elimenating overhead by merging councils and enlarging districts. Councils are already cutting paid staff positions to the bare minimal which as we have seen on the forum has an affect on the camping. I live in Pa. and in order to be a volunteer in scouting I'm going to have to shovel out more money for an additional background check. How do you think that will affect scouting here? I agree that having some sort of online purchasing would save some costs, but ar

Numbers are what keeps scouting affordable.. Volunteers are what keeps scouting affordable. How many of us already have many in our packs or troops that can barely afford to do scouting now even with fund raising. Scouting would become so expensive to do that it would basically price itself out of existence. Like it or not National owns the rights to the program. Why do you think that Trail of Life can not just take the requirements and rank titles and run their own scouting. No they had to alter it a little and rename all the ranks that they have. BSA is a business and will need to make wha

So then which of the options is causing good and what is causing bad for BSA I think the real question is: Does BSA need to conform to the changes and demands of society? or How long can BSA survive without changing? There are people out there and right here on this forum that can give you good arguments on both sides of the fence. We are already seeing some of the affects of standing our ground decrease in membership, merger and in some cases re-merger of our councils, and the selling off of scout properties. If things were thriving we wouldn't be doing any of these. Now the