emb021

Adding to what Buffalo Skipper says. For me, if the person is an elected officer of a district or council VOA, and has a uniform for that postion (ie, they aren't wearing unit numbers), then sure they can wear silver loops. If they are just a member of the VOA (ie, they are their crew's rep to the VOA), I'd say no. There ARE office patches for both District Venturing President and Council Venturing President. (sadly, if they hold another office position on the VOA- say VP or Secretary or such, their SOL). I'll be giving my VOA President 3 items for her uniform: a Council Venturing President patch (once I can get one ), a VOA patch, and silver loops. Should she choose to put together a uniform shirt to wear as the VOA President, I'll support her doing so. Keep in mind that not all district/council venturing people have unit positions. I do agree that IF they hold a position in their unit (whatever it may be) they really should wear a uniform that reflects that and NOT their district/council position. Sounds like they 'showing off' by doing this...

"Urban legend also has it that GSUSA was negotiated a merge in the mid-60's, to create a program similar to the British Scouting Associations, but as usual negotiations broke down and we remained two seperate programs. (again, per urban Scouting legend)." This is not an urban legend. It did happen. I've spoken with professions who were involved with it. The BSA, GSUSA, and Camp Fire Girls were in discussion to merge in the late 60s. The BSA allowing Girl Scouts & Camp Fire Girls to be participants in Explorer Posts from 1969-71 was part of this effort. But discussions broke down and it didn't happen. The result was Exploring going fully co-ed in 1971 and Camp Fire themselves going co-ed in 75.

"Too bad it's not true (at this point). There would be quite a rush of girls wanting to join Venturing. GSA can't compete with the BSA on many levels, and girls know it." We already have many girls coming into Venturing because they want to do 'scouting' and aren't finding it in GSUSA. I don't most of them are upset about not getting Eagle in the bargain. "dg98adams mentioned changing the name to "Scouts" should this happen...got me thinking of the green 1970s uniform I wore as a scout, where the patch above the right pocket (my right your left) indeed said "Scouts." An adult told me when I was a scout this was done in anticipation of BSA going coed (those from early/mid 1970s may recall that debate). " That adult didn't know what he was talking about. He was confusing two different things. In the 1970s, the BSA allowed members of troops' Leadership Corps to wear the green Explorer shirt. The standard Explorer shirt had a strip that said "Explorer". As these boys were not Explorers, that wouldn't do, so they created the "Scouts BSA" strip for them to wear. It had nothing to do with the BSA going co-ed. There WAS discussion with GSUSA & Camp Fire Girls to join in with the BSA. This was in 1969-71, and during that time Girl Scouts & Camp Fire Girls could be participants in Explorer Posts. But then the talks broke down and the BSA took Explorers fully co-ed in 1971.

Hmmmmm. If I could change one thing, it would not be with the program, but with the organization, and it would be this: That the organization be run by the volunteers, with the professions in their proper place as employees of the volunteers. This means the professions will have no say in what the volunteers do or what positions they hold, and can only 'fire' volunteers if this was approved and directed by other volunteers. Every professional would be on a year to year 'contract', and must be approved to continue their yearly contract each year by volunteers (council board at the council level, national board at national, etc). This would also mean that the volunteers need to be the ones saying what happens in the organization, not the chartered organization reps (tho they can have a say). It really needs to be run similiar to most member-run non-profits out there.

"PING emb021: "What say you, Sir?" Well, I was at NOAC, but busy the whole time at the Experience co-running the APO Booth. Most of the stuff I heard was about upcoming OA events and stuff about the Jamboree site (all of which, AFAIK, is now public knowledge). Heard NOTHING about Venturing. I was disappointed that they didn't have a Venturing booth. None of the Venturing Cabinet where there (unlike past years). They had the Sea Scouts represented by Keith Christopher (Nat Director of Sea Scouts), but that was it. I chatted a little with Keith, but nothing new or different coming from them, tho he is working to try to get a Skipper & Crew Leader manual, even if its done on a CD or on-line, along with a new Sea Scout manual. IMO, this is a perfect example of why getting rid of the Divisions was stupid... Because I have heard that there are issues with allowing girls to get Eagle (been so since Exploring went co-ed) as well as joining the OA, I find such rumours dubious. Am not willing to call BS on them, but I'll not spread them until I get more concrete info.

I was told by someone at NOAC high up in the OA/BSA hierarchy, about the Jamboree site. (he told us about the Goshen deal falling thru) BSA was able to get a large, adjacent piece of property to the WV site which is largely flat, which will be added in and will serve as the Jamboree site. The National Jamboree WILL occur there in 2013.

I got the new Handbook and companion. As a scouting historian, I found SEVERAL factual errors in the text, along with a few photo errors. Off the top of my head: * gives the impression that BSA National was fully setup in February of 1910, including Seton being Chief Scout, Beard being National Scouting Commissioner. These things actually happened later that year. * gives the impression Air Scouting ended in 1949, when it really continued as Air Exploring until 1965. * mentions the establishment of Explorer Scouts in the 1930s, but incorrectly referes to it as Explorers, and shows a 1950 piece of artwork (the logos used for the programs were very different). * mentions the replacement of Senior Scouts with Explorers in 1949, but incorrectly refers to them as Explorer Scouts (that term was dropped in 1949). * mentioned the establishment of the 'modern' Exploring in 1959, but uses the post-1998 split Exploring logo with this, rather then the 1959 Exploring logo. * mentions the establishment of the Maine High Adventure base, but uses a picture of people next to the Northern Tier HA program. * mentions the inclusion of the Charles Sommner Base into the Northern Tier programs happening in the 1920s!!! The term "Northern Tier" is actually much recent.

"Still no pocket buttons." Actually, I took a look at the new poly-wools at NOAC. They DO have pocket buttons on both buttons. BUT what the did was put the button on the BACK of the pocket flap, with the button slit on the shirt pocket. Made it a bear to button them. The main difference I was with these new poly-wools over the past shirt was the button placement on the flaps and the buttons themselves. They area all the light tan buttons on the centennial shirt and not the brown ones on the current shirts.

"Personally, I wonder why we got rid of the red shoulder loops and troop numerals. There really wasn't anything wrong with that aestetic." Some thought it too bright/colorful. Same thing when they redid the rank & office patches around 1989, when we got rid of the colorful background of those patches. Some like that, some didn't. I think that what ever design change you make, there will always be some who like the old style.

"Just out of curiosity, what would ti take to get some of the books revised with a knowledgeable volunteer also doing some of the editing/ After all the first BSHB did have alot of editing done by volunteers prior to being published." No idea. I know I made some minor suggestions for the Venturing Leader Manual, and had a little thrill when they were incorporated in the next version. But my suggestions on fixes for the Venturer Handbook never got anywhere. But then I was asked to make suggestions for the Language of Scouting stuff. But nothing ever happened to all my work on suggested improvements for the next version of the Venturing Leader Specific Training. I wasn't even included in the recent revision team and have yet to see the draft for the new version after being promised a copy (and no idea when it will come out. its like a year or two behind). I guess you win some and you lose some. I think sometimes the size of the BSA works against them, and makes it harder for some volunteers to make a contribution beyond the local level unless they have an 'in' with the right people... And as to the comments about Silver & Ranger. Again, in the early years I heard a lot of confusion about Venturing Advancement. There were a lot of people convinced that Ranger was the top Venturing award, and good luck trying to change their minds...

"In your opinion how has training changed over the last 25 years, and has it been for the better." There has been 2 major changes in training in the last 25 years: * breaking up training back into units, including a unit for all leaders (they used to do this back in the 50s). * more training being done on-line, which makes it easier for leaders to get some training done. While other then certain position, most can't complete basic training this way, it elimiates the excuses some have to not get trained. Another change was to make WB the universal advanced training for all leaders, instead of just advanced leaders for certain leaders. When I started out as a leader (a boy scout leader to be exact), we had Boy Scout Basic Training (aka 'six sessions'), which was a weekend course. Later, this was revamped as Scoutmastership Fundamentals. We started getting video training: Fast Start and soon YPT. YPT was a pain to the extent that you had to retake it every so often (tho how often was never clear), and you had to have it done by qualified trainers. Then the big change was to create New Leader Essentials for all leaders, then followed by position-specific training. And the weekend camping portion of Scoutmastership Fundamentals was turned into Intro to Outdoor Leader Training, which made it easier for non-Boy Scout leaders to take it, if they needed it.

"Also the person was the national director of venturing, can't remember his name, but is was the guy that Holmes replaced." The guy you refer to was the first National Director of Venturing. I never knew his name. I know Holmes replaced him in early 1999 (because I met Holmes in April of 99). My understanding (which may be wrong) was that the guy died suddenly, hence him being replaced and ALSO that he was a bit of a control freak. In addition, the creation of Venturing was a rush job. Everything in Venturing was really being developed for Exploring, but the lawsuit in Chicago lead to them splitting off Venturing & Exploring in August of 98. It was the combination of all this why so little Venturing stuff came out in 98, and it took in some cases a year or two before the basic items did. I knew Venturing was coming in 98. I was engaged with people on-line regarding Venturing in the early years, and was one of handful of people on-line on places like Scouts-L trying to explain to people what this 'new' program was all about (as to most people, Exploring was just a career awareness program, nothing more) from the begining. This included explaining the Sea Scout-Venturing connection and all. I had many on-line exchanges with an old Sea Scout leader (and former Air Scout & Rover leader) named Bill Sills. He set me straight on a lot of things regarding Sea Scouts. So for me this is all old stuff we are speaking about.

When Venturing was rolled out, there were several of us who had discussions (and 'discussion') on line regarding non-Sea Scout Venturers earning Sea Scout Awards as well as the relationship between Sea Scout Bronze & Ordinary. What was hashed out AND confirmed by National was: * only Sea Scouts may earn Sea Scout Advancement (ie you're in a Sea Scout Ship, AKA a crew registered as 1208- Sea Scout Ship.) * Sea Scout Bronze & Ordinary have the same requirements. * ANY Venturer may earn Sea Scout Bronze. * ONLY Sea Scouts may earn Ordinary. But by doing so, they automatically receive Sea Scout Bronze. This allows the Sea Scout to go on and earn Gold & Silver, if they so desire. I know some of this I discussed with National and said they really need to revise the books to make this clearer. They never did. Now, if the National Sea Scout Support Committee is finally getting the books fixed to clearly say the above, good for them. But totally removing info on Sea Scouting isn't the way to do it.

"I'm on staff but have not been told about staff requirements yet." Unless your staff has certain requirements, the staff requirments were already stated in the Jamboree Staff Guide. Staff wear their regular scout uniforms (with the addition of the Jamboree patch). I've been on staff 4 prior times and have worn my full uniform. I do not expect staff to be requied to get the centennial uniform. (as I'm in Venturing, I'll be wearing green & gray) Now, some staff may have a 'class b' uniform (t-shirt, polo, etc), which you may wear while on duty, or only when you aren't. But that you will learn most likely after the begining of the year (mainly because you'll need to order these in advance from your staff group).

"In fact I have read recent literature from National, and our council exec. stating that the Quartermaster award is no longer available to Venturing crews and will be eliminated from the next Venturing Handbook." The Quartermaster award was never available to Venturing Crews. From day one, only Sea Scouts could earn Sea Scout Awards. I know this was confusing for some at the begining, but I thought that was all cleared up. Am pretty sure its clear in the Venturer Handbook (and other works) that only Sea Scouts can earn it. I would be curious to such 'literature'. "So it looks like the youth will have to be dual registered in both a ship and a crew if they want to earn both sets of awards and ranks." Since every Ship is really a crew, there is no reason for Sea Scouts to be dual registered. I do know of some Sea Scout leaders saying that they would 'dual register' their ship as a ship & crew, but that was redundant. Also, back in the old days of Senior Scouting in the 30s & 40s, we did not create walls between the various old boy programs (Explorer Scout, Sea Scout, Air Scout). All Senior Scouts could earn any senior scout awards regardless of the program they were in. Troops could have sea scout patrols in them. Sea Scout Ships could have Air Scout flights in them. Heck, they created the Senior Scout Outfit to allow for units in which the boys could do all the senior programs in one group. So I really don't understand this 'anti-venturing' attitude on the part of some sea scout leaders. For me, this belief that the Sea Scout program will be broken out from Venturing just because of an organizational change is reading a bit too much into things. I know I've had some long conversations with my regional commodore (who is a member of the national sea scout committee). He doesn't believe such a split is coming, and I have to agree.

You still see Sea Scouts pursuing Eagle. If some are going after Boy Scout awards, why not Venturing awards? The Gold & Silver are generic enought that any Sea Scout should easily be able to earn. If the Sea Scout has an interest in sport, why wouldn't they get Quest. Or an interest in their religious belief, why wouldn't they their religious award and on to TRUST? As Eagle92 noted, there ARE Sea Scouts who do work on all those awards. Our last Quartermaster recipient in my council was trying to get Silver & Ranger before aging out. Our past Regional Venturing President was past Regional Boatswain, and had most of the top Venturing & Sea Scout Awards. He was also involved in Camp Fire USA, and had recieved their WoHeLo Award (their Eagle, if you will).

Interesting... First off, you don't answer to any ASM (or even the SM). So he's out of line to 'tell you' to take it off. Now, had he inquired as to what training you had, and then advised you that you were/where not qualified to wear it, that would be one thing (but from your training list, you're qualified. He may think you need to the SM/ASM training, but committee members don't). As a committee member, you answer to the Troop Committee Chair, who, btw, is over the SM (and his assistants).

In general, to be considered trained and be able to wear the trained strip, you must complete basic training. Basic training is: * YPT * This is Scouting (or the prior New Leader Essentials) * the position-specific training for your position Be advised that for some positions, there is no position-specific training. From your list, you have completed basic training for a troop committee member.

"They have a NYLT buckle?" Yes. The number I have for it is #14203. However, I think for this purpose you'd need to have a special staff belt buckle. Its not uncommon to do so. When I first started to staff Jamborees, that was pretty much the only staff recognition I got. And I think they do staff buckles for NLS/NLATS (or did).

There are several good sites/books for good team building games. Many of these are the source for stuff in COPE etc. http://www.pa.org/ (Project Adventure) http://www.high5adventure.org/ http://www.adventurehardware.com Books: Silver Bullets Quicksilver ANYTHING by Karl Rohnke books by Sam Sikes (check out the bookstores at the above sites for many of these)

John-in-KC has it right. Venturing Crews are structured like any regular club/organization: President, 2 or more Vice Presidents, Secretary, Treasurer, etc. Those are the officers, and there are office patches for them. As needed, the group should form committees within the group to do certain things. Some might be long-term (exist for the whole year) lead by an elected officers (Program Committee headed by the VP-Program, Fundraising Committee headed by the Treasurer, etc), or short term (Awards Banquet Committee, Superactivity Committee, etc). Everyone in the crew should be in one or more committees. This way you spread the load and get everyone involved in the program of the crew. To a degree, your crew speciality will dictate your crew structure. (does every crew need a crew quartermaster? Some do, some don't). While some committees will be standard, some may be determined by what your crew does. In addition to the training noted, get a copy of the Venturing Leader Manual, which is the handbook for officers & advisors. You don't need patrols or patrol-like groups to organize a crew, even one of 20-30 kids. My APO chapter is usually around that size and we don't need that. We have officers who get things done. Everyone is involved by getting them into committees (do NOT compare committees to patrols, they are NOT the same).

"Someone mentioned that the Sash could now be worn every where. Nope. Still not proper to wear the OA Sash at any event other than an OA event. Not Council banquets, Blue and Gold, COHs, nothing except an OA sponsored event. The Sash is, for now, the only way to distinguish the different Honor Levels. This becomes necessary at OA events. At other events, the Flap and Pocket Device are the way to recognize OA members." You are largely correct, and I was going to mention the same thing. However, you left out one other time. You may wear your sash at non-OA events *IF* (big if) you are representing the OA or doing work there as an arrowman. And just because you are an arrowman doesn't necessarily mean you are representing the OA. So if you are representing the OA at the council banquet, wear it. (at a recent one, our lodge adviser & chief did, but other OA members did not and should not). If your lodge has a big presence at Scout Show and you are involved in that, wear it (mine does, but as I usually do something else, I do not wear my sash). Some people seem to want to try to make a big deal about when you can/cannot wear the sash. I figured it simple: at OA event and at any scouting events you are doing work as an arrowman (which not every arrowman will be doing).

Thanks. These patches you are calling "pocket rockets" (I've only heard that term in reference to the universal arrow ribbon) would be treated as temporary insignia. I don't know why National should care, unless they plan on going after the various people making these in red/white & white/black. I'd like to think National has more important things to worry about. Since National doesn't seem to have problems with lodges having programs with beads and the like, why should they care about this (and since they have even highlighted some of the lodge with such programs in their materials to lodges, that would indicate to me they are fine with them). As to jstephens42 comment. The Leadership in Service Award was a program that only lasted for a 3 years (2005-2007), as did the prior program. Since the LiS program ended almost 2 years ago, they have yet to roll out a new program. Maybe they will, maybe they won't.

I have no idea what this 'pocket rocket' is you are refering to. Your link to Photobucket doesn't work. I've heard the term 'pocket rocket' used to refer to the universal arrow, but obviously this is something else. But what, I have no idea, as I don't know of anything coming from national with a number and different versions for the 'degrees'.

"And I bet the new venturing pants will cost $75-$100 and won't be any more comfortable or durable than the current ones" Current switchbacks are about $40. I can't think the Venturing ones should be more expensive then that. As to comfortable/durability, we just have to see.