Eagledad

I know this doesn’t directly contribute a lot to Eagle94’s OP, but it stirred up a lot of memories. Watching adult volunteers over the years I've come to realize how fragile the program is. We watch the politics, the angles, and the games adults play to our frustration, but it doesn't take much to upset the present trend. Businesses survive or fail by the quality of their product. If an employee is the cause of poor quality, then our culture expects and understands when they are asked to move on. But volunteer organizations are desperate to keep the program moving, even it that movement is going backwards. We are pretty much left (stuck) with who we get and as a result you would be amazed with the acceptance of really bad volunteers. I mean I have seen some horrible volunteerism accepted by the masses just because nobody else is willing to just say "no, that is stupid". Ok, stupid is unscout-like, but you know what I mean. A long time ago while I was on the district committee, I learned that the adults in our districts 2nd largest troop turned a blind eye to the PLC using hazing to drive out the weaker scouts. Nobody seemed to care because the troop had a good reputation on the whole and their adults volunteered for a lot of district activities. But I guess it got to me because when I bumped into one of their ASMs at the scout store one day, I quietly and politely let him know that I knew it was going on. I can't say our discussion is the reason, but the SM suddenly retired within 6 months and the hazing stopped. But come on, that went on for years. Bad acting goes on all the time from the Cubs down to council level because the show must go on. I've worked with a lot of scouting professionals and some aren’t very good, but I developed a respect for them because they have to deal with really bad volunteers every day. If you could follow a DE around for one day, you would understand. If you don't see the DE very much, it is likely because you have a sound program and their efforts are needed else where. However, as I said the system is fragile and can change quickly. Good or bad, typically adults with strong personalities change the routine at all levels of the program. I have caused change myself at all levels of the program many times. The reason it is so fragile is because 90% of volunteers are followers and/or don't like confrontation. So when a strong personality gets in the mix, they generally will change things up a little. That can be good or bad depending on the person. But I see it over and over as I observe the program. Consistent training is the best way to resist a fickle program. That is why you see me call out extreme untried philosophies on this forum. As the pros have shown me, a little of the bad is acceptable so that the good can move forward because there isn’t enough time in the day to fix every problem and make every program perfect. So they apply their energy where it can have the most positive effect. Usually in the long run it eventually balances out. We all hope that adults eventually get it and things turn around, but sadly my experience is adults don’t change and we have to wait for the circle of life to come back around to make the fix. Likely this SM won't change and the program will suffer until a new volunteer takes over. I have spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to get rid of bad volunteers, but they are like trying to untangled a child's fingers from fly paper. Get this, I even tried to kill a troop once with the objective of starting it back up again with a new committee. Even with some support from the DC, we couldn’t pull it off and the troop still struggles with the same committee 20 years later. Shesh. My apologies to Eagle94 for my wandering off and venting. Barry

And that is important. We found that while they are a bit of pain, pump filtration filters the most water the fastest. Boiling is faster for the amount of water, but that requires fuel for stoves in areas where weren't allowed fires. We take tablets for back up. One thing for sure, practice using whatever system you choose before the trek. I can remember one trek where we spent more time reading the instructions than purifying the water. Barry

Boy, you got some really good suggestions. Swearing is a problem because the adults don't see it as a problem. Like qwazse, there is no swearing in our troop because the the SM stops it every time. But you have to approach it differently because of your adults. As was said by one of the wiser SMs here, if a couple other members of the PLC agree with you, then get the PLC to set some standards for the scouts. Once you do that, then ask the SM and CC to meet with the PLC and ask them to hold the adults accountable to the same policy. As for too many adults, distance is how our troop handles that. We don't set limits on who can attend campouts, but we put enough distance between scouts and parents that it is difficult for them to interfere. Again, the SM can help here by guiding the parents to observe at a distance. That may also help the scout problem you mentioned as well. He is using his parents to get what he wants over the PLC. Given enough distance, the scout and parents will have to make a choice for him to either grow up, or not. Sounds like you have a pretty good troop. I don't have a feel for how your SM leads, but if he is willing to listen to a strong PLC and help you guys in your request to improve the program, you can lead in these changes. Barry

Yes, same thing with cleaning fish, it takes a lot of scrubbing to get rid of that smell. The blueberries were so thick in the Boundary Waters one year that we actually brought enough home to freeze and enjoy for a year. The Canadian ranger (Mounted Police?) told us that bear problems are rare when the blueberries are out because they fill their bellies with them. I don't know, we still played it safe. Barry

We tried to not put repellent on the skin if possible, only our clothing. But if it were applied to skin, we generally only did that in the morning and it wore off by evening where the human smell was stronger. We generally were in our tents before dark in areas of heavy mosquitoes like the Boundary Waters before they became a problem. It was never a problem in mountains where bears might be a concern. Barry

Yes, I haven't been in bear county in a few years, so there may be some new odorless products I haven't seen. But some things just have a smell, so sometimes not attracting critters is more about using a strategy of what odors and when. For example, the clothes we wear during the day with mosquito repellent and other odors we keep in the bear bag at night. Same goes with clothing that has spilled food on them. Just about every attack of a scout at Philmont was a result of food, food wrappers, or food on clothing in the tent. Bears in general don't like the smell of humans, so it's the other smells that overpower their repulsion of man. Good question, I'll be interested in the other comments. Barry

Pragmatically, the line of acceptance of a role model is when the actions or reputation of the role model are considered safe for a scout to imitate in his own behavior as a result of his observations or respect of the role model. Barry

Pragmatism. The goal of the program is to develop boys into making ethical and moral decisions. Race has little or no influence to do with that goal. Girls dilutes the program quality because boys of this age are biologically distracted during the activities intended to develop their decision making maturity. And homosexuality is an issue of moral role modeling. If one is capable of leaving their emotions and biases out, the membership structure makes sense to achieve the best performing program for the vision. Barry

This isn't like ebonics, the education elites are pushing this model across the county. Oklahoma City is dealing with it right now. There is a middle school where most of the teachers are threatening to leave. My son who teaches at an at risk high school get many of those students and he is concerned enough with the this trend and how much politics is influencing basic education that he is considering a new line of work. Many say that the BSA is a white mans program. If this education model becomes popular in minority communities, scouting will be even more politically incorrect and more controversial. Barry

I have two kids who are teachers and the Oklahoma City school district is going through this issue right now with a new adminstrator who is following this approach to change the culture. A lot of teachers are very concerned. But notice what the training is trying to discourage. ""The manual defines this “white culture†with a list of values, such as “promoting independence, self expression, personal choice, individual thinking and achievement,†because apparently those are strictly “white†concepts and not emphasized in black communities. Read the whole article: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/oregon-white-privilege-100K Barry

Makes sense. I would say half of our troops SMs were not registered members in their pack. But, they didn't come forward for a troop job either. They were recruited (heels dragging) to be ASMs and eventually found the passion to be very good Scoutmasters. And, I can think of three pack leaders (Eagles/SPL/OA during youth) who planned to be SM's when they joined the BSA in Tigers, but declined the SM gig a few years later because they had burned out. However, it wasn't do to a lack of warning by me. I actually insisted two of these guys not get involved at the pack level, and they still did. You just can fight passion and enthusiasm. They would have been great Scoutmasters. Barry

This is not what I mean. I don't have a problem with female leaders per say, I am being more pragmatic to how the introduction of female leaders has changed the program. And really, it not so much about females, admitting females was the defining moment when the majority of adult leaders didn't have experience with scouting or camping. Even men who have never camped or experienced scouts from a youth perspective have a completely different vision of boy scouting. Just the simple task of starting a fire is a huge undertaking for these adults. Can they really appreciate the reward of watching a boy mature from the decisions made from being responsible for some tasks. The last thing on my mind of a Scout taking on a POR is that he can use it to advance in rank. I think of it as maturing in making decisions based on thinking for others. I think in terms of character, but folks who never experience personal growth in the scouting seem to think in terms of rank. When a scout takes on a new MB, I am more concerned how well he performed the responsibilties of communicating the counselor and filling out the paperwork than I am of him completing the badge. Lacking enough experienced adult leaders is what I mean by the changes as a result of admitting women. Barry

Yeah, and Bad Wolfs baby boomers explanation makes sense as well. There was a lot of program dynamics going on in the 90s. I was right in the middle of it trying run a program that looked something like what I experienced in the 60s/70s. It was a challenging time. We had the video game challenges of the time, but I missed the social media thing the scouts have today. Barry

Must be a local thing. I've attended hundreds of crossovers and there was always someone (usually SPL and SM at least) receiving them. But the packs set the time and place of their crossovers, so it can be difficult to have troop representatives at every crossover. I remember our troop had to visit three crossover one night. We had half our PLC and ASMs covering them. Probably why I like the District crossover so much. Our troop was trying to help packs by letting us do the crossover, but folks would be surprised to learn the most Webelos families choose their troop within one day of their crossover. That made it impossible for our PLC to plan. If I were to get back on district, I would try to change the tradtition from the packs being responsible for crossovers to the troops. Then see what happens. Barry

Flash in the Pan? Go ask the Girl Scouts, Campfire Girls and Canadian Scouts how flash in the pan accepting gay scouts was to their program. It is the direct cause of the single largest loss of scouts in the history of all three of those programs. It completely change the face of Canadian Scouts to what is seen more now as kind of a YMCA style of program. We have yet to see how flash in the pan it will be to the BSA numbers, but it sure won't be anything to cheer about. As for the parent not having camping experience, that happened the year they accepted women. The organization is still today realigning its traditional program structure to adjust for that one policy change. You think the water gun restriction would have come up in a room full of men? There are a lot of causes to the changes in the program or membership decline, but you can make light of the impact the gay issue acceptance of women have on the program.

If I remember right, the BSA made big membership gains in the early 90's where they had the most scouts ever. I can't remember the details, the 90s were a huge boon for membership. Theory is the Gulf war inspired a lot of patriotism. The big decline really started after 2000. I do not believe the gay issue is smoke and mirrors because it was even a topic of several discussions here at work with folks who didn't have boys or kids. Everyone knew about it. In fact my fear was many parents stayed away from the BSA more to just not get in discussions with friends who were judging. And history supports it as well because every youth scouting organization that made the gay membership change took big hits. Only the Scouts in England have recovered as far as I know. Now a lot of folks think allowing women leaders was a big boost to the program. I don't know how that can be measured, but I will say that most of the changes we have seen in training in the last 20 years are a result of the huge influx of inexperienced adult leaders. Does that make a difference? Well many here believe the number one reason the BSA doesn't have a good image today is because it is getting away from the out doors. It certainly isn't promoting it as much. It is fair to say that almost 3/4 or new adult leaders today have never camped in their life before joining the BSA. They don't have any memories of camping or scouting as a youth. They only have training. Before the women leaders policy change, it went without saying that most leaders had at least camped in their youth and likely had some boy scout experience. You don't think that has something to do with those who have some control of image? So, trying to figure this out is a lot more complicated than comparing membership numbers 50 years apart. National has made A LOT of major policy and program changes that have had a "Huge" "Huge" effect on the program. Most folks here know that I am no fan of the Tiger program. I believe it is a major contributor to adult burnout which has led to less than 50 percent of Webelos not making it to the Troop program. Maybe what we are really dealing with here is that the present image of the BSA is a casualty of the natural evolution of progress and we shouldn't fight it. Some of the old timers here are mocking traditional scouting anyway, so maybe it is time to accept a paradigm shift. That is what the Girl Scouts have been doing. Barry

A lot of packs, including ours, has the same tradition of the 2nd year Webs doing B&G. We fixed our long B&G by doing the Crossover at the Pack Meeting before or after the B&G. Actually the parents (everyone) liked that change because it made the B&G much easier to plan, and a lot shorter in length. Barry

That is pretty cool. Barry

Yes, I did it when I was SM of 90 scouts and the present SM is doing it now with about 60. It just has to be an expected part of the program so the process develops in that direction. Barry

Thanks Barry

Bad Wolf, I can only say that your troop's goals are different than ours. Our scouts can manage the elections and leadership responsibilities without the adults. Like Twocub, we don't use leadership for advancement. If scouts need a POR to advance, they figure something out. But our PLC works very hard, so you don't see scouts looking for a POR there just to knock of a rank requirement. And SM special projects are rare and usually only for a handicap scout. Barry

I'm still not sure what the point of this discussion, or if there really ever was one. Why the sudden latest decline, it is a guess without all the numbers that the gay issue hit the BSA hard, but it is a pretty safe guess. Personally I think the BSA is fairing better than I thought. The same left turn move hit the Girls Scouts and Campfire kids pretty hard and almost took the Canadian Scouts down completely. In fact compared to what the Canadian Scouts were in the mid 90s before their progressive policy changes, the Canadian Scouts ARE dead. But, all that being said, the BSA has internal program policies that are killing numbers as well. Tigers and Webelos both loose almost 50% of their scouts. That is a huge problem. But I'm not sure that the OP is even talking about that. So what is this discussion really about? How to build elite units? What is that? Barry

It doesn't really matter Bad Wolf what system a troop uses as long as the scouts manage it themselves and use it to provide leadership growth. I have seen dozens of different styles of election processes that work. I know of a troop with about 50 scouts that uses Stosh's style. It's harder for the adults in bigger troop to keep up with, but that is generally the case for troops with a lot of patrol independence. I find many election styles work fine so long as the scouts feel they aren't being held back by the process. Barry

This takes a little time because it works best when the scouts hold each other accountable. And while they are talking a big story now, they will find that holding their best friend accountable isn't always as easy as that sounds. I was just saying another thread that one reason scouting units struggle at the adult level is because adults don't hold each other accountable. They don't want to be a that confrontational bad guy. So encourage all the scouts to hold everyone accountable. For example, I remember a scout who cut his foot pretty bad because he ran through camp barefooted, which is against troop policy. This happened right in front of the SPL, but when I asked who else saw him run through camp and didn't say anything, half the troop raise their hand. So I held all those scouts accountable and gave them a harsher SM conference because they didn't stop their fellow scout from breaking policy and having to go to the emergency room as a result. I worked with every PLC to support each other and work as a team as they worked with the scouts. If a senior leader is having difficulty with an unruly scout, another scout nearby should quietly walk over to help the first scout instead of waiting until the situation escalates to yelling. I wanted the PLC to set an example of everyone taking responsibility for each others behavior and not be afraid to say something. And it works, in a couple years the troop will have very few misbehaviors because the scouts have learned how to nip them in the bud. They don't even realize they are doing it. "Hey Bob, quit running and get some shoes on before you get hurt". As an adult, you will find that boys this age actually hate chaos and lazyness of others, but they don't feel they have permission to hold those scouts accountable. Up to this point in their lives, they have been taught to hand these matters to adults. Now you have to give those scouts permission to act adult and hold their fellow scouts up to the expectations of the patrol or troop. They want that responsibility, they just need to be shown that they have permission. As our troop got bigger, we had less misbehavior and accountability issues because the scouts just got better at doing it themselves. Once you start seeing it come together, you find yourself loving this scouting stuff. It really works. Barry