Eagledad

Depends on the Council, but they usually keep the old records. I've never heard a council removing any records. But, up until around 2000 when the councils started converting to digital, the records were all hand written. So, the accuracy of the records, at least until around 2000, is a different discussion. I know that our Council put a lot of effort into converting the hand written records into digital. We found that up until 2000, every scout submitting paperwork for EBOR had a least one major advancement error by Council, usually several. Surprisingly few errors, if any, by Council after 2000. If your friend did an EBOR, then his records are very likely at council as well as national. Barry

I ran into the same frustration. My logical engineering mind couldn’t understand how to explain the budget of a youth program dynamic of activities we couldn’t predict would occur. I took it personally. But it wasn’t personal at all. My CPA wife explained that the church has to account for all their assets and activities. The budget is a baseline to keep track of their performance. As far as they are concerned, your troop is just asset “D” on the budget list. They can’t even guess asset D’s cost to the church, so they are asking the operators of asset D. Your basic answer is Ds operation will take in this much and spend this much. It will show no cost to the church. The church will move on to asset “E”. Barry

Maybe this is what gender discrimination really looks like in the United States. Barry

The title "First Female Eagle" says it all. Politicking to bend the rules for her to be the first Eagle lessons the award. We live in a hostel political environment. Following rules and fairness have little to do with political correctness. It's going to come down to crumbling under the pressure of name calling. I've been saying for awhile that the BSA should give all girls in the BSA (including cubs) the Eagle right now so they can move on to the business of scouting. The Eagle has lost it's luster in the race to be first, so let them all be first. Barry

I guess that is a class B uniform (winter?).

Exactly. My experiences with scouts not getting past a BOR had nothing to do with testing, it was confusion with completion of the requirements. Murkiness of reality often challenges the idealism of stated policies and guidelines. Adding the SM in the mix, an agnostic scout could be dealing with four different opinions of Duty to God. If that weren't a real concern, then why would the OP even ask the question. Or rather, why would this OP be one of many who have asked this question over the years. The answer is more often than not a simple answer, provided everyone is on board. Barry

I've was told this by camp directors in 1995. I trust their word. I can see by your post that you don't understand or respect the effort of distributing food from the delivery trucks to the patrols. It is quite an effort. One fact I think even todays camp directors will pass along (give one a call) is that summer camps operate with a very very tight budget. Insurance cost alone determined some of the activities provided. Mountain bikes is one activity taken from a camp we used. Barry

True, but let's also not under-emphasize the importance of the scoutmaster in the process. When push comes to the pinnacle shove, the committee has the final word. But, for most parents and scouts, the SM carries all the weight because they are the scouts' personal mentor, guide, coach, teacher, and assumed authority on advancement requirements. I've seen scoutmasters refused the scout a conference just to make a point. That is why I suggest a clear understanding of expectations early in the scout's career. Barry

Well, I'm told the reasoning most camps goto mess halls is economical. And, I think most folks, including adults, would rather spend time with the fun stuff than the something monotonous that they do on every other camp out the rest of the year. But, I said before, nothing pulls scouts through the team building experience better than summer camp patrol cooking. So, if the adults are looking for scout growth in their decision making process, nothing does it better than patrol cooking. Barry

Does he understand what agnostic means? "A person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God". I agree, at this age and experience of life, living the "Do a good turn daily" is a good approach. I caution though, these things can become complicated when a scout is close to Eagle. This usually becomes an issue when the adults have let the question pass without clarity of expectation for the requirement. You may not be the SM and he may be in a different troop when he is ready for his Life or Eagle SM Conference. I would not make a big deal of it now, in fact I wouldn't approach it until his First Class SM conference. But, the scout should have some clarity of expectation that would appease most adults for an agnostic. I would also approach the parents to get some understanding. But practice your question so that it's not alarming, just informative. Likely not, but sometimes the sons are a pawn in the matter, so it's good to know the big picture. As I said, informative, not alarming. Barry

The problem is breathing, sometimes the sweat can be worse than the rain. Cheap jackets tend not to breath, but I think Frogg Togg breaths pretty well. Even motorcyclist like them, which is a pretty good endorsement. I've not purchased Frogg Togg because they don't have a good reputation for durability. But durability has a cost. I personally use Eddie Bauer because they have different weights of breathable jackets and are more durable, but I they cost more. Barry

The 35# limit would stop me. Of course the goal is to stay below that weight, but that would be an easy weight to bust. There are all kinds of situations that could force sharing the load of a crew member. Spend some time on Craigslist. What state are you located? Barry

Boys, LOL, men are by nature not detail people. Sometime they, LOL, we will assume the best and basically ignore injuries. I'm looking at a few scouting scares on my fingers as I type through the arthritis. Usually, with something like this, the adult leadership comes up with kind of a policy for everyone to note. Doesn't have to be a written policy, but a mental process that if an injury has bleeding or protruding bone, the responsible adult needs to be told so they can determine what, if anything, needs attention. I would make it a troop policy for everyone, not just the scouts. Barry

No, what I mean is the logistics for the summer camp to handle food from delivery, dividing it out to patrols and transporting it to the troops is very complicated and time consuming. It requires a lot more staff hours. One little hic-up and the whole camp is set back. Been there done that. As I said, going to a mess hall reduces cost by a lot because it requires less staff and is easier on camp logistics. Barry

Logistics for patrol cooking summer camps is a lot more complicated than mess halls, which I understand is the main reason many camps we're glad to get away from it. Barry

Hmm, not in our dinning halls. Scouts are encouraged to get in and GET OUT to make room for the rest of the camp. My experience is that cooking is the most stressful activity for patrols because of the conflict of teamwork. As a result, patrol cooking is also where the most bonding occurs, as well as the most behavior growth from dealing with the conflict. The disadvantage is patrol cooking takes twice as long as dinning halls, so scouts have less time for other activities. Barry

Pretty good, Parkman. While the CC may have the final authority, final approval of the scouts' plan would be unusual. Parkman's explanation is accurate, but doesn't quite explain reality. The CC should be the final authority based from the SM's bad choices, not the scouts'. The distance between the PLC and the CC is wide because the scouts need room to fail. The SM is the mentor for the PLC and requires enough space for the scouts to learn if their original choices and decisions won't work. When other adults start pulling their authority card to instruct the scouts they made bad decisions, then they are undermining the relationship between the scouts and adults. It's simple and complicated at the same time. But if the scouts start making decisions based from trying to keep adults off their back, then the growth from the experience of improving behavior and decision processes is limited. It is said scouting is a safe place. As for the CO, it is their program. But they should understand the process of the PLC making making plans and learning from their effort of putting the plan together. If the CO has to check on the Scouts, then that CO doesn't want a boy run program where the scouts learn by failing. And their are CO's like that. Barry

One of my past Webelos was telling me at his ECOH that one of his most memorable Webelos meetings was learning how to safety operate a lawn mower. Only one of the 16 Webelos had mowed a lawn at the point of their life. Just starting it was a thrill he never forgot. Barry

Yes, but in general these things are discussed by adults for adult expectations, not as pre-expected actions for the scouts. In other words, adults completely ignore the Aims and Methods are discussed as the Aims. Badon Powell once talked about adults spending too much time on Drill and Parade. Example; who is really responsible for the expectation of wearing the uniform in most troops? For the adults, how the scouts look is the Aim, not the Aim of Character from the decision for wearing the uniform. My point of the Eagle is that it is a metaphor for how the image of scouting has changed from scout driven program to adult expectations. I taught in my training courses that "boy run" (patrol method) is more difficult than "adult run" because "boy run" requires that adults mentor each scout individually for their choices. Far easier to instruct the group of the right choice before they are released to make choices, than to mentor each individual after the experience of their choice. Since most parents are by nature self-serving to their kids needs, a program change would have to come from an authority (National). Barry

I just now saw this. To be honest, I don't remember if that scouts action was more representative of the scout's character, or the troop culture. But, the way I encouraged that type of action by scouts was initiating it through the PLC and acknowledging the actions through the whole troop. I called it a servant lifestyle to adults, but team work to the scouts. I impressed on them that when they saw another youth leader on the PLC struggling, walk over and offer help. What started me that way was the PLs struggle to deal with misbehaved scouts. We had several approaches, basically asking the misbehaved scout to leave the area. But, we also encouraged other youth leaders nearby to offer help. We also taught servant leadership as basically serving each member of the patrol. Get involved with their scouts and provide support if they show a need. The actions of leading by serving is a slow learned process because it's such difference of definition for leadership. In truth, it's giving the PL (and rest of the officers) permission to get more personal and offer their support. It starts with little actions like jumping in and helping with cooking or kp if the tasks are going slow. Asking their scouts if they brought rain gear or extra socks. The small actions leads to more intentional offering their support and assistance. Some of us humans are better than others at serving others. But, if we initiate the idea of it and support the actions, everybody will eventually became part of the culture in some part, even if the part is small. Barry

Wow, that's pretty good. Over the years, I have come to believe that the parents' are the driving force for youth joining the BSA in this generation of our culture. So, I don't think scouts are the main audience, from a marketing standing. I laugh a little thinking back of how I had to change my sells pitch with Webelos and their parents. We learned over time that to sell the Webelos, we sent them off with the patrols so they could experience a typical patrol experience. Sometimes that could be bad. We brought the SPL to talk to the parents about his troop and answer questions. That impressed the parents somewhat. Then the SM gets a few minutes to explain more of the meat of the program; camp outs, meetings, goals for their sons, and so forth. More often than not, when the SM asked for questions, the lead question was "how long before their son gets Eagle?". I don't know if the Eagle turned into the main reason for joining is the result of BSA marketing, or if the BSA markets the Eagle because they found it is the focus of parents. I still remember the long frustrating discussion with qwazse using his daughter as the example of girls getting the Eagle. To be fair, qwazse has also said that the Eagle was not the reason his daughter was in scouts, and anyone who knows him knows that he doesn't believe the Eagle is the main reason for scouting. I look back at the discussion and realize we were both coming from different perspectives. But that was a long passionate discussion among traditional scouters on this forum. Eagle, the bane (annoyance) of our existence. The Eagle is symbolic for the quandary your talking about. How can we appeal to the instinctive desires of the youth if we keep marketing to the selfish desires of the parents? Where I think you are missing in your post is that the adults don't spend enough time discussing Aims and goals. They don't understand how the intended structure works. So, they are locked in on the methods. Most parents today don't understand how the basic purity of Aims and Methods naturally work in the ultimate goal of making moral and ethical decisions. Parents aren't being shown how their kids character is developed by the continued actions of taking responsibility for their decisions. They only hear about the methods (or the method of advancement) as the goal, which is supposed to be the responsibility of the scouts. How can a parent see how the continued practice of taking responsibility for their decisions is the real virtue of opportunity in scouting. Not the pinnacle award that theoretically represents that effort? The program is stuck in the mud of the Eagle. As long as National believes that stature is the driving force for membership, the traditionalist and purist will have enfluence on the meat of the program. I have often said that the program lost it's soul when the respect of the First Class rank was replaced by the stature of the Eagle rank. That will have to change for there to be any hope of enabling the youth to control their experience in scouting. Barry

Great replies all. I will add my 2 cents because my ego requires some attention....😎 Elitts explains it very well here. Additionally the SM should strive to never get to a veto, but instead guide the decision process to where the scouts eventually come to a the conclusion that the SM would agree. Veto is generally only used by lesser experienced troops. Generally when either or both the SM and Scouts haven't developed the skills for scouts making complex independent decisions. What I learned is that as the SM gets better at scoutmasting, and the scouts get better with the process of making independent decisions, vetos eventually go away. That is the goal. Personally I find any envolvment for planning scout activities from the committee can make the process clumsy and time consuming. But that may be because we were a big troop with lots of adult resources at the ASM level. And, I believe the role of the main role of the CC is to ensure the program is going the direction of the CO's vision. CC is quality control of the SM's methods for working toward the vision. I have never been a fan of the idea that adults are the safety check valve for the scouts. Why can't the scouts learn to do that? Adults are accustom to being the check valve for safety and judge of ideas based from their life experiences as parents. What they have to learn to do is think of themselves as resources for the scouts. Some parts of planning just may require an adult, so the adult needs to see themselves a providing a service to the scouts. Adults tend to judge scouts ideas, and that is dangerous because I have watched scouts loose their enthusiasm for ideas simply from an adult interjecting a differing opinion. I have also seen scouts plan amazing trips even while the adults felt the scouts bit off more than they could chew. Trips to Alaska and Montana come to mind. The scouts made it happen even though the adults doubted their plan. If the CC feels they need to be part of the approval, then as qwazse points out, they are part of the team and a resource. Not the judge or check valve to say no. The scouts should learn and get the chance to become the check valve based from the resource information provided to them. We taught this process at NYLT (JLTC). And it's fun to watch once everyone understands their roles. Scouts can do amazing things that adults don't even imagine. Barry

Well OA is an outside organization for scouts of a specific interest, specifically camping and service. It is (was) viewed as an honor organization because the members peers picked them out specifically, and theoretically, for the exceptional camping and service (character) skills. Of course "exceptional", as well as "camping" and "service" skills have changed over the years. I believe the reason the program appeals to older scouts today is because they have the maturity in those areas to plan, organize, and act with those skills. Something troops should be doing. That stuff is boring to young scouts. OA needs to have an appeal that is exceptional to the Troop program. In my opinion, scouts who want super doses of outdoors and/or leadership responsibilities would be naturally attracted to the program. Actually, I feel the program (at least 20 years ago) wasn't failing. It just appeared as failing because they were loosing a lot of scouts by filtering out those who weren't really interested in the OA activities. The recruiting is high because peers aren't selecting the scouts for their skills anymore, they are just picking them because they were next in line. The maturity requirements of the program drives immature scouts away, or the program reduces itself to a boring program to reach the immature scouts. Where I think OA is failing is the adults advisers don't have good vision for the program. Tehy don't encourage activities that develop above average skills. They don't understand the comradery of working together, so the work camps don't have enough personal social activities. There isn't enough of outdoors development mixed with the service. Arrowmen should practice outdoors a step or two above common troop camp outs. For example, a weekend campout without tents, without stoves, or common cooking tools. Canoeing to a work camp. Rappelling near a trail that requires repair. Camping where the end of the day brings the crew. They should be LNT experts. Arrowmen should hike in and hike out. Building exceptional skills builds pride, and it's just plain fun. A troop wanting to try something new like rappelling or canoeing should only have to go to their troop Arrowmen to ask "how?". Lead us. Character is developed through giving and serving. Service should be visible in the community as much, if not more by the district. Helping a poor family paint their house. Raising food for the local needy. If OA has a bad reputation of slave work, then that is because they aren't spreading their time in the community. Finding service projects is only as far away as asking a church for helping one of their members. Teams of two to five Arrowmen for helping build an wheelchair ramp can be done in just a couple hours. Imagine how many of teams of 2 to 5 scouts can be organized by each district. Arrowmen should be expected to be the outdoor experts because they are trained and experienced in most outdoor skills. Likewise, they should be experts in arranging and planning service activities because they do so much of it. How hard is mowing the lawn of a bed ridden elderly person. And, to me, Arrowmen should always properly wear the field uniform in all their activities. Elite scouts should set an elite example. They shouldn't have to wear the sash or patch to be recognized An Arrowmen. Their actions speak loudly. Their appearance is professional and confident. As I said, the problem I saw with OA lately is the lack of vision from the adults. No real expectations for honor campers and servants. They were just repeating what they always did. OA should be known as training for each units camping expert. Don't worry about the little newby scouts who aren't ready for OA, if the organization has a true reputation of honor, then they will be back. Something like that I guess. Barry

Giving troops something for the older scouts is not a good marketing endorsement for the elite program or Troop Program. Elite implies exceptional. Is just being older an honor? What appeal does a Service/Camping organization have for the average older scout that a troop program could not provide? Seems OA is trying to find itself in a youth organization struggling to become relevant in todays social climate. In a culture of mediocrity, elitism, even in character, might have some resistance. Tomorrows parents will have to find the appeal with an OA program that is acceptable for their kids. Barry

Yes, I was reluctant to use the “f” word (family), but I was also thinking it. Barry