emb021

"With regard to patrol medallions, in or around 1972, they went from the red-and-black batches to designs similar to today." Correct. As part of the "improved scouting program", patrol medallions went colorful, as did the rank patches with the oval designs. Office patches were also redesigned to add lettering to give the title and more colorful backgrounds. (prior you had to figure out the office based on the color of the position patch and wreath (if it existed)). "In 1989, they lost the yellow/orange/blue/colorful backgrounds, according to the folks at patrolPatch (gilwell.com)" Again, correct. In 1989, the patrol patches, office patches for troops, and rank patches had the colorful background dropped in favor of more subdued tan (to match the shirt). A throw back to the pre-1972 designs.

I look forward to seeing this new book. That's one thing I hope will come out of the 2010 celebration: new books on our history, and much needed reprints of others. As I understand it, Boyce was introduced to scouting in 1909, and setup the BSA in February of 1910 and really didn't do anything (as you note). Robinson et al came around in May of that year, and started work to take on the org. Am aware of the money issues from reading Boyce's bio. A John Alexander was the first managing secretary (what is today called a executive secretary or executive director) from May to October of 1910. Robinson then became the second thru the end of the year, afterwhich West took over the position. It was during 1910 the Robinson brought on board all the other people who made the BSA what it would be.

"Hearst is a footnote because his venture lost and the other teanm one. Had circumstances been different and the scouting program that Hearst was backing come out on top then it would be Boyce who was the footnote." Well, it goes deeper then that. We have little info on what Hearst intended for his group. He established it and turned it over to others, who turned out to be the wrong people. In contrast, Robinson got just about everyone involved in 'boys work' involved with the BSA. That made the BSA a much stronger group. Hearst was given the chance to join in, but choice not to. I think had he joined in, and had he been more involved, he could have been a more important figure. Instead he went independent, then compounded this by allowing his group to go bad. "It can be easily argued that no one person is responsible for the founding of the BSA nor doid it just spring up over night. It tokk a few yeqars a number of talented and dedicated people to create the foundation that today's BSA has built upon over the decades." Totally agree. You list about all the important figures in making the BSA what it is. "Was Boyce the "most" important? Perhaps, and perhaps not, it would appear that from 1910 to 1916 you have to agree that at least 5 main characters were involved." I agree he's amoung the important main figures at the time. "I agree that Robinson's role was important, but one of the reasons why he is seldom mentioned is that he was only involved for the first year. Once he replaced himself with his friend James West, Robinson returned to his work with the YMCA, and so few people were aware of his contributions to the scouting movement." Yes, but even there, what he did was important. He was responsible for taking over the moribund organization established by Boyce, getting all those important people really involved (Seton and Beard were not involved, etc), and getting them to hire a real exec sec in West (not aware that they were friends). I think he's too often ignored due to his brief involvement, but IMO what he did during that brief period was critical. After all, Robinson DID get Silver Buffalo #8.

"In a stern letter to the BSA, Boyce stopped his $1000 a month contributions to the BSA around 1915 asking them not to contact him for further contributions stating that it was not his intention to fund a national program but simply to bring the Scout handbook to youth in the US." Ok. My response to that would be to ask what, if anything, Boyce did to get the Scout Handbook published? Did he publish or fund the publishing of either B-P's handbook or an american boy scout handbook? AFAIK, no he didn't. It was left up to the BSA to publish, AFAIK without any assistance from Boyce, the first american boy scout handbooks. Yes, Boyce established the BSA and funded their office, but then left them to their own devices. "No one disputes that Boyce played a role in bringing scouting to the US, a recognition still afforded him by the BSA along with other key individuals." No disagreement with that. What I do have a disagreement with is when I encounter people who try to give Boyce more credit then he really deserves (my prior comments about people on other forums making claims as if Boyce was activily involved with the running of the BSA, instead of it being people like Robinson, West, etc) "The question was "why the rush" at that particular time in history, and one cannot fail to recognize that the two people most prominent in trying to get the program started here were competing publishers, and that Baden-Powell's book was a best-seller at the time." Sorry, but again, I have a problem with Hearst being considered 'prominent in trying to get the program started here'. AFAIK, he did little, even less then Boyce, to get Scouting going. Hearst, to me, is a johnny come lately, more doing so because Boyce was involved. He seems to have been involved with scouting for maybe a year, and that's it. Even with Boyce I have a problem with him being credited with geting the program started. The program was getting going on its own without him, what with people forming their own patrols or troops. What he *did* do was establish an organization (the BSA) which others took to establish the true US national scouting organization/program. Yes, Boyce deserves the credit he does. But he should not be given credit that rightfully belongs to others (Robinson or West or whoever). And certainly Hearst should not be credited for more then he really did. AFAIC, Hearst is a minor figure, a footnote, in the history of establishing scouting in the US.

"What's wrong with the volunteers taking ownership of their units? This usually leads to stronger units." For that to happen the volunteers would have to establish themselves as a non-profit group for the purposes of being the charter org. How would they provide the unit a meeting space? How do they ensure the group stays viable and stable? Not an impossibility, but it brings its own problems.

I place the World Crest halfway between the top of my pocket and the begining of the epaulets. That's the simpliest for me. I will use a yard stick, and place the edge over the pocket so the edge touches the bottom point of the pocket and pocket flap, so I will know the horizontal halfway point, then move the world crest along that edge until its halfway between the top of the pocket and epaults. This is why I wish National would sew the world crest on the uniform like they do with the american flag. Most other scout associations do that. Heck, the philippine uniform embroidered the world crest on their uniform.

"It could be that new colors wil be used to match the fabric color of the new uniform." That makes no sense. The new uniform is the same basic color as the current uniform. The shirts are tan. I expect the merit badge sash will stay the same color. There is no reason to chance the merit badges, other then to have new designs, and National rarely chances the designs.

"For a very long time I have been told that the number of Venturers is a mess because Councils have played with the membership numbers." You've been misinformed. Everyone is assigned a unique ID number in the BSA. So regardless of the number of units you may be registered with, you are only counted ONCE for purposes of membership. With Venturing Crews, the youth would be registered as primary in ONE (and only one) crew, and secondary in as many as they wish.

"But did you know that Boyce also stopped his $1000 a month financial support of the BSA after a falling out with West just a few years after the program began, and he started a new program called Lone Scouts which later was absorbed into the BSA?" Boyce actually stopped his $1000 before West came along. That was an issue that Robinson actually worked on, and while it was resolved briefly, he (or his agents) stopped it again. Am not aware of any falling out between West and Boyce. Source? Am fully aware of the history of the Lone Scout program. Boyce established the program mainly because he felt the BSA program requiring at least 8-boy patrols, was leaving out the rural boys (who were his main source of newsboys around the mid-west. His papers were sold in rural communities) out. Hence he established the LSA. When he couldn't handle the costs, he turned it over to the BSA. "That Boyce saw much good in the scouting movement for the benefit of Youth is not in question. But the meeting in the fog is more legend than fact and it is no coincidence that the nations top two publishers "found" the scouting program (which at the time was growing all over Eurpope thankis to the sales of B-P's book) at the same time, and each fought to have their version recognized as the official one." True, the meeting in the fog is more legend then fact. I don't know if I would call Boyce one of the nation's top publishers. And I think you give too much credit to Hearst being a founder of scouting in the US. Hearst apparently only got into the scouting game because of Boyce's involvement. I bet if Boyce had not gotten involved (or if no major newspaper publisher had gotten involved to the same degree), he would never have bothered. Hearst's involvement was brief. So speaking of them 'fighting it out' I think is misplaced. Boyce's involvement was more behind the scenes. Boyce established the BSA, and give it $1000 a month. That was the extent of his involvement. It was thus left to others (Robinson et al) to take it on (take it over) and really turn it into a scouting program. Boyce really didn't bother to get re-involved in scouting until he later decided to establish the LSA. And again with that group, left it to others to run. Hearst's involvement was to establish the American Boy Scout, which, like with Boyce, he turned over to others to run. Within a year of doing so, he disassociated himself from that group, denouncing them in his papers. If he was that big a supporting of scouting, why did he not just take back the group or the like. This ended the involment of Hearst in scouting. Did either Hearst or Boyce publishing ANY Scouting-related publications in the 1910-15 period. AFAIK, they didn't. Boyce only started to publishing scouting related stuff with the LSA (Lone Scout newspaper and their booklets). It was left to others to publish stuff like Boys Life, the handbooks and the like.

"Consider this...Boyce and Hearst were both publishers, and the Baden-Powell's "Scouting for Boys" was the runaway best-seller in all of Europe." If so, why did Boyce never publish any BSA materials? No idea about Hearst. "Hearst had enemies in congress and Boyce did not. Boyce was able to get Congress to recognize his BSA rather than Hearst's version. Boyce had B-pPs support, Hearst did not." Keep in mind that Hearst disassociated himself with the American Boy Scout org early on. We're talking about 1911 or 12. Boyce had, AFAIK, little to do with the effort to get Congress to give the BSA a charter. "Neither was concerned with the philanthropic betterment of the lives or paperboys. It was simply a business decision for them. They were publishers, it was a popular book, and we were a country filled with youth." I would disagree with that in regards to Boyce. I think Boyce DID have in mind the betterment of his paperboys. This seems clear to me from reading his bio. "If you are looking for the people who were the spiritual heart of the fledgling BSA that would be folks like B-P, Seton, and Beard." No argument there.

Most of the camp staff Venturing crews I am aware of really exist only for the purpose of ensuring all the camp staff have BSA registrations. They pretty much have no existance outside of camp staff. What ever their existance is, it starts and ends with camp and any camp-related activities. If any of the members of the camp staff want to do any Venturing stuff, its as a member of a 'regular' Venturing crew.

"if someone could get the position roles of the advisors" The OA's Lodge Leadership Development websit has resources that give clear job descriptions for several officer and advisor positions. Further, check out the "Guide for Officers and Advisors", which is the handbook for these people. Can be downloaded from the OA website, and ALL Officers and Advisors should have a copy. Your Lodge DOES run LLD each year, right?

"New councils are formed all the time - but only through the merger of two or more smaller councils. I think the last time a new council was formed out of whole cloth was probably in the 1930s. Since then, all territory has been taken." Not so. My home council was formed sometime in the 1960s, as a split off from another council (Sunnyland). The council area was growing and could support another council. Funny thing that: * back in the 1930s, the territory covered by this split off was its own council, and it and Sunnyland were formed about the same time. However, the council had financial problems and went under, to be merged into Sunnyland. * in the 1990s, Sunnyland was in dire financial straits, and IT was merged into my home council. Bit of a turn around... So new councils COULD be formed, but by split off territory from an existing council. My feeling is that National doesn't want to do that.

"Mine will be buried with me." "you'll get my eagle medal when you pry it out of my cold, dead, fingers..."

"Yes, it's pretty dull, but if you compare it to other books of the time, even the handbook and very popular boys' books, like Dan Beard's The American Boy's Handy Book, they make pretty dull reading today." You're joking, right? I got a copy of the American Boy's Handy Book as a scout and loved it. Its extensive illustrations and such really inspired me. That 1st ed SM Handbook seemed written to a college-level reader, and wasn't very inspiring for a scouting book (as compared to B-P Scoutmastership book, which is way better).

Sterling silver is expensive. If you want a sterling silver eagle, you can order one, I believe. And what does National do with those returned eagle medals???

I only recently got a reprint edition of the first edition of the BSA's SM Handbook. (for others, look for it on eBay. You can also get it on CD). What a boooring work. Dull, dull, dull. GBB's SM Handbooks are way better. A perfect example of some of the dull materials from National at the time.

Sounds like taking the idea of a "Quality Unit" (meet certainly clearly defined goals and achieve levels of quality or the like, which is frankly used in many orgs) where a unit works toward a set of goals and turn it into a competition where units are competing against each other. Don't think its a good idea. Every unit is a little different, so this sounds a little unfair. I prefer units working toward a set of goals and being recognized for that. In fact, I like how with some orgs, there are different levels of such goals (met a certain set, and you are at Bronze level, met more of a set, you are at Silver level, and met even more of that set, and you are at Gold level).

"I would say that it was more West who turned it into a rigid monopoly," Agree. It was West who, for better or worse, went after the various other scouting groups to get them to merge into the BSA or shutdown. I'm always amazed by some people who seem to ignore the impact of West. In another forum, I had people claiming that Boyce was much more involved in the BSA and acting as tho Boyce was the guy running the BSA, when it was really West. "but I'm curious as to Kudu's statement about the patrol method. The very first Boy Scout Handbook (1911) talks about troops being divided into patrols which are given names, etc, etc. Sounds like the patrol method to me." Subdiving a troop into patrols doesn't mean you follow the patrol method. If you look at the materials from the early days (teens) of the BSA, the Scoutmasters really ran the troops, not the junior leaders. It wasn't until Bill Hillcourt came along and thru his influence was able to implement the patrol method and such more in-line with how B-P had envisioned it, then how it was happening in the BSA at the time. GBB was the really 'father' of the patrol method in the BSA, having written the first American PL Handbook and many other BSA handbooks, ensuring that we would more following the way it should have been.

The Brothers of APO are also sadden by the passing of "The Chief's" daughter. She was a presence at many of our National Conventions, and will be missed.

"The irony of Hearst's militaristic "American Boy Scout" organization was that it was affiliated with Sir Frances Vane's "Order of World Scouts" (which predated WOSM by 11 years). Vane's "British Boy Scouts" had broken away from Baden-Powell's association in part because B-P's brand of centrally controlled Scouting was perceived as too closely involved with military organizations." Yes, this is something I noticed years ago. Since there is little info/history on the ABS group, its hard to understand why they joine with the OWS and what that meant. (I believe they were really only part of it for a brief time, and later leaders were totally ignorant of the OWS). And it seems to me that the ABS seems to have become more militant, as witnessed in the names they adopted after the BSA sued them: American Cadets and later the U.S. Junior Military Forces "Some of these sponsoring organizations had further aspirations of forming national Scouting movements, and by 1910 these included the publisher William R. Hearst's "American Boy Scout" (later the "United States Boy Scout"); the National Highway Protection Association's "Boy Scouts of the United States;" "The Peace Scouts of California;" the "National Scouts of America," formed by a military school in Manlius, NY; and "The YMCA Scouts" ... if Robinson had not been able to turn Boyce's fledgling group into a rigid monopoly on Scouting in the United States, would any of the five rival national Scouting movements been based on Baden-Powell's Patrol System?" Well, first off its questionable how many of those groups were really 'national' orgs, or just local or regional groups with delusions/hopes of grandeur. Also a big unknown is how well they followed B-P's program, or just glommed onto the word 'scout' for their own purposes. Without known more about this group's programs, its debatable how much they really followed B-P's program. I would hazard that most didn't. (tho I would think the various independet troops formed here and there probably did, because they were formed by local people using B-P's book).

Not sure exactly what you mean. Boyce's connection seems clear. He did have an interest in boys of that age. Probably more so then other newspapers, his relayed on all those newsboys selling his papers. So Scouting seemed a natural to him, which also lead him to establish the Lone Scouts. Hearst, it seems to me, weren't so noble. He saw the BSA as nothing more then an extension of Boyce papers, which I think was incorrect. He was asked to joined the flegling BSA that was clearly setting up afterwards under the leadership of Robinson. Not sure what you mean by these "great numbers of men are rushing around trying to set up scouting organizations." Few of the various rival Scouting orgs in the US were really National groups. Most were really local/regional, and I think most were done because these people read B-P work and decided to setup a group, unaware that others were doing the same. Other groups were obviously tying in their scouting work with already existing programs (such as the forest scouts that were more focused on stopping forest fires in one state) and the like. It was only the Hearst-backed group that really went bad, such that Hearst dumped them (why he didn't just shut them down I have no idea).

"I've been thinking of all the Scouters that I know and there are only a few who are involved without having kids in the unit. Most were Scouts and became ASMs after they turned 18 and just stuck around." Well, my experience is that most scouters I know fall into one of two categories: * joined scouting because their kids joined. Many of them stayed even after their kids aged out (who themselves may have also stayed) * joined scouting as a kid and stayed on as adults (tho may have gone inactive from time to time during certain 'life changes'). its very very rare I run into anyone who isn't in one of those 2 groups.

All- The 2008 World Scout Youth Forum (held every 3 years prior to the World Scout Conference) was concluded this past year. I have been checking the WOSM site for info on any updates or final reports (I would have liked to have seen daily reports of the event or the like, but no such luck), but as yet there have been no new info. I especially am interesting in the outcome of the election of the Youth Advisors (these are youth who are elected at the Forum to represent them and advise the WSC), as I am curious as to who amoung the candidates got elected. There were 15 candidates for the 6 positions. Anyone know the results? Am a little surprised/annoyed that there are no updates about this on the WOSM site.

"My council STILL has not put out any info at all about jambo; nothing on our website, in our newsletter, or available in any other format. When I talked with a couple of our council pros recently they didn't seem to have any idea what was going on or when info would be available." Don't worry. None of the councils in my area have anything as yet on their websites or newsletters for Jamboree. I think most are still getting their leadership organized. I really really don't expect to hear anything until this Fall. There is an 'All Hands' meeting of the professionals in early August, so am sure this will be a venue for bring the council pros up to speed on things and the like. The National Jambo website still is missing info and the like. So don't get all worked up. Am sure when the fall rolls around (Sept/Oct I would hope) councils will start their recruitement. Heck, AFAIK my council exec hasn't approved my staff application. I wonder if he's approved any at this point. (course, I could be the only one who has applied so far from my council ).