fred johnson

Yeah ... BSA is being bone-headed and dumb. It will hurt the program and the membership. Even worse ... this expansion will result in fewer adults of faith. You can't force a belief. I am Catholic and live in a state that a few years ago had strong pushes by the Church to remind people continually about the evils of abortion and same-sex marriage. All it did was drive people away. It took our nuns to shame the leaders by stating their role was to take care of those in need and not to be public advocates for political positions. ... The Church has not changed it's beliefs, but it seems to be focusing more now on serving the needs of others, both faith and physical needs. The Church got side-tracked by huge political fights and it hurt the Church badly. It's the same thing with BSA. Many teenagers are not sure on their faith beliefs and test out atheism. If you ask them, many that are loosely grounded will make a poor choice and we lose them. Many families that are not rooted will be lost too. SO THEN .... What happens when the person is 20+ and has problems? What happens when they lose their job or one of many critical life events? What happens when they are at their parents death bed? What will happen when that man is facing his own death? Will he pray? I believe young people are influenced by their surroundings. In scouting, there is prayer and talk of the importance of reverence. And, I'd hope the scouts see prayers before meals and at ceremonies. And, I hope scouts meet in churches and such. I hope the scouts have chances to associate with people of faith. It is the "association" with those of faith that is important. These new requirements have nothing to do with helping youth develop reverence. They are using God in a political battle and it's shameful. A very special man I respect greatly once said "What man is there among you who has a sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it and lift it out?" ... We believe faith is important and rightly so. ... But to be meaningful ... we need to preach to more than those already in the flock. Worse yet, many people who love Scouting will be forced ... including myself ... to tell people to skirt that part ... to minimize ... to ignore. I will do it, but what does that tell our scouts and our scouting families. It's a sad and damages the program. But, otherwise our pack will need to fold soon if we keep telling people they don't match our membership requirements. ========================================= Scouting has always been "faith friendly" and not Scouting needs to serve everyone ... and hopefully as a result of an example set ... we will have many adults re-discover faith because they saw the example during their scouting years.

JC's Mom ... My statement of "Stop asking for advice" is more harsh than I meant. I just meant that you won't get a good clean answer here. ... Other than you are right. They are not supposed to do what is happening. It might be your son's troop personality. But it doesn't matter. What matters is a positive and growing experience for your son. ... and ... IMHO, if adults a screwing things up, then that is the time for parents and others to step in to help.

JC's Mom - Stop asking for advice. READ the parent into in the Eagle Service Project workbook. Your son has it. Read it. It's there because of all the mis-information and well-meant but misplaced extra stuff pushed by other adults. If you want more explicit info, READ the BSA Guide To Advancement. http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/33088.pdf Read the section on Eagle service projects and Eagle boards of review. The BSA Guide To Advancement was written because of what we see in this thread. Mis-information. Agendas. I've seen both the old and new process in detail. I'll take the new process any day of the week. It's not perfect, but it is a huge improvement. Don't hesitate to call the district advancement chair for advice and help too. That is why they are there. -------------------------------- HOURS ... Your troop may just think that he did a great project and it had to be more hours. AND they might have thought that he truely just missed hours. Example - We teach our scouts about how to record using the district proposal review. Reviewer. Scout. And another adult for youth protection and to help take notes. Duration is usually 60 minutes. Scout and other adult take average of 30 minutes to commute each way. That's five hours credited to the project. Your son might ahve just recorded one hour or three hours. Scouts often miss hours. BUT ... it's no reason to hold off on the SM signing the final report. IMHO ... Unless it is unreadable or really poor writing, there is never a reason to not sign a final report. Otherwise, it's the scouts words. Sign it.

"interested" ... that's the issue. Excited scouts start merit badges only to have WAY WAY WAY less interest after the merit badge. Shoddy, dry, power-point, hands-off merit badges kill interest. Then badges that are redundant with school and where the schools deal with the topic much more thoroughly and professionally. Scouts know when something is junk. Then, to get a merit badge for it? It creates jaded scouts and tarnishes the image of scouts. Giving the scouts choices may be good, but start at the heart of the issue. Merit badge counselors have no guidance how to teach. Revise the program by creating expectations for merit badge counselors Guidelines Hands-on and physical demonstrations. Avoid power point presentations. Personal learning experience. Participatory and interactive. Avoid class room lectures. Actively learning instead of passive learning. Requirements completed as part of learning. Avoid an after-the-fact review or test. RulesNo worksheets. Scouting is not school. Scouts is about doing things. Merit badges should be that way too.

The first GTA ... 2011 ... replaced the ACPP and did clarify greatly. It left less flexibility in the program on topics such as this. But then BSA received strong feedback. The 2011 GTA was then replaced with the 2013 GTA that includes wishy-washy language as above that allows troops to justify doing what they choose to do. IMHO, BSA received a huge amount of push back on having clear rules for everyone because everyone does NOT agree on how the program should work. Some say that is good. Some say otherwise. I just looked it up. Section 4.2.3.6 was added in the 2013 GTA. 2011 GTA did not have it. Similar thing happened with positions of responsibility. 2013 GTA re-worked the rules to give the troop "limited" flexibility.

There is "should" and "a good idea" and "what's required". Repeating is useful to refresh and entrench knowledge. BUT unless BSA say's you can't as found about cooking above, then don't read more into the requirements than are there. Setup a rich and rewarding program so they can keep growing in knowledge and skill. But advancement is what it is. Support the scout.

AND ... except the best multi-tools ... many of the multi-tools break falling apart into pieces. That itself is dangerous. I've had that happen to multiple cheap ones including the ones I've bought from BSA scout shops.

Wow. I had to look that up. Hedgehog is right. I was 100% sure you had to have passed a swim test to be on a canoe trip. Low and behold, I can't find such a requirement. When it comes to the scouting unit I'm responsible for, it's a required. Period. I need to know the scout can swim otherwise he's not going on an a canoe trip. This is different than advancement. BSA advancement rules are a promise to the scout. G2SS rules are the minimum for safety expected by BSA. I, as a unit leader, can add more if I believe it necessary. If people protest, either they can go elsewhere or I can give up responsibility for the unit. Swim test not required for canoeing. Who would have thought ... Same can be said for sheathed knives. BSA does not ban them, but units can choose not to allow them. We allow them, but that's our troop. I know many troops that do not allow them.

Sounds fine to me. I'd probably even been okay with a BOR doing something like that. Evaluating the effectiveness of the sign-offs, but not undoing the scout's progress. BOR is supposed to be a feedback step to improve the troop and seems reasonable there. For me the issue is telling a scout he's done and then telling him whoops, not quite yet.

SM can re-evaluate all he wants during a SMC, but the SMC is checked off. No pass or fail with SMC. If the scoutmaster designate signed off on the requirement, it's done. Even the scoutmaster can't undo it.

What is the time setting of the server? I just made a few posts and the time is eight hours behind. 10:51pm showing 2:51pm.

Old topic ... but fully agree. Though there can be some flexibility, the strong preference is boy scout camps are for boy scouts. Adults are there to keep the boy scouts safe and to coach at times. Bringing others is a distraction and can defeat the goals of scouting.

Best transitions are fast transitions. Drawing things out is almost never good.

It really depends .... Will it spoil ? What season of the year ? We'd rather not have food sit in a trailer in 100 degree whether. But when it's -20, it's usually not an issue. Things that don't spoil are encouraged to be used the next camp out. Ideally, with the same patrol. Otherwise ... When the patrols buy for themselves, it's a patrol issue. We let them decide what is fair. Usually the boys do a pretty good job deciding how to handle it. Some things get split. Some gets taken by one person. IMHO, it's a learning lesson in how to deal with other people, how to trust, how to share, etc. When larger shopping occurs such as when shopping for a pack camp out or some larger event, we only buy what we would consume normally. As such, the person who shops often buys back the extra or other adults buy some or all.

SSF - Thank you for replying. Scouts can be stressful. It's often the first time the boys are responsible for their themselves for days and feel really independent. Changing clothes. Grooming. Getting up and going to bed. Cooking. Cleaning. That stress can bring out bad behavior. But if we can teach past it, those kids have strength for a life time. IMHO. The one thing that I can say is that scouting is more tolerant of kids with problems. Kids who get distracted or are space cadets or have other issues. As such, we tend to collect some "interesting" youth at times and significantly out of proportion to other groups such as sports. IMHO, this is an area us adult leaders are not good at. We are not always sure who we can work with and who we can't. We have had some scouts with autism spectrum disorders from mild to major. They are almost always great kids and fit in fine. On the flip side, we've also had kids with really bad behavior. Oppositional. Defiant. One scout that was stressed vented his emotions by knifing up a tent. Another socialized by swearing all the time. Both of them excelled in sports. Star basketball player. Star wrestler. But they could not ... or would not ... handle the freedom and responsibility in scouts. IMHO, us adult leaders need to recognize and be decisive on some of these issues and get the bad behavior out of the troop. It's the expression all kids need scouting, but scouting does not need all kids. Some do way more damage than any benefit we can teach. We need to recognize that earlier than we usually do.

You're right. I read that originally but put it out of my mind. I guess that's right. He is talking the Boy Scout years. We've had some bad behaving scouts in the past. And ... it was our mistake to not ask them to shape up or ship out earlier. And parents took the view that if any kid needed scouting the troubled kids did ... but at the same time ... their own kids would drop out. Thus lowering the maturity of the program. It's a point well made by the original poster. And something we can all think about.

Most of us begin by assuming "Boy Scouts" as the poster said "Boy Scouts", but we all know how often people mean Cub Scouts when saying Boy Scouts. When talking bratty behavior, I often wonder because Tiger dens are often wild. And, Cub Scout leaders are usually much less experienced and know less about controlling the kids. It's not easy. During Boy Scout years, it can still happen. But when the poster said six years, that's making me think Cub Scouts.

SSF - Question ... You said six years. That makes me think you mainly were in the Cub Scout program. Could you comment on what years of scouting you saw? Lion? Tiger? Wolf? Bear? Webelos 1? Webelos 2?

This really triggers many many thoughts. ... Another being cub scout meetings. Many times the parent leader are asked to step up with little or no experience and now run events every month with 40+ cub scouts. The meetings can get away from leaders and the young scouts take advantage and the parents sit in the background. Just thousands of thoughts on this. I don't think the original posters statement is fair, but I can understand some of the experiences.

Fully agree. Scouts are more comfortable being themselves around scout leaders. It's a more relaxed environment. That's when real behavior is visible. I do believe scout leaders need to address character and humility more. Generally, the environments are not comparable.

When I was younger, it was the sports kids that were trouble. Locker room hazing that would be criminal today. Drinking parties. Swearing. And just being a general thug. Saw it with hockey players near my house and self-absorbed football stars. It's the main reason I did not push sports with my kids and could not recommend it. Even today, I know some parents like the local traveling sports programs because the parents get to hang out and disappear to a bar at times. Also, it always includes one or two big tournaments a year where they stay at hotels. The parents I know like those tournaments because the kids are left in the hotel room and the parents go hang in the bar. I've heard it from several hockey parents. They were astounded when they learned all the 12 year old hockey players were left in a few hotel rooms for the evening with one parent who hung back and the rest went to the bar. That was 2014. Way way after all the youth protection was a known issue. ----------------------------------------------- With that said, here are some things I've seen ... - Parents using scouting as an informal treatment plan for autism spectrum disorders or major behavior issues. - Parents forcing kids to participate. IMHO, bad results will be much more visible in scouting than in the on-the-field sports areas because scouts is about independence. And, it's hard to be independent in a program they don't want to be in. - Adult leaders that have not evolved with the times and want to re-create the "Leave It To Beaver" troop of 1950s. - Adult leaders who don't call out bad behavior early. - Fewer adult leaders who really focus on behavior and teaching character. And too many that just want to hang out. ​- BSA thinking kids should stay in scouts from six years old to 18. IMHO, there is a sweet spot where the program fresh and the kids are motivated. IMHO, kids are starting scouts too early and are already burnt out by the time the really cool stuff starts. ----------------------------------------------- I've been watching our scouts lately and I have never been prouder of them. They are extremely well behaved and best of friends. We have to get on them at times when they want to test the limits. But all kids want to test the limits. ----------------------------------------------- IMHO, the original poster is talking from his experience and his view point. For him, it may be valid. But it is not the common experience. On the whole, I've seen extremely good behavior from our scouts. It's a very good program.

There are only two official committee positions. Committee chair and committee member. The details are assignments and can be cut and assembled to fit as necessary or as best fitting the people available. Personally, I think treasurer is the one position that should NOT be mixed with other roles. It's hard to keep organized. I'd also not have the treasurer be the spouse of the committee chair or scoutmaster. It's too much in one house. And I agree, it is about transparency and perception. Who sees the monthly statements? Who can write checks or deposit money? Who approves the money being spent? -------------------------- It's also about feelings. When too much is in one place, people will feel left out. Left out of decisions. Left out of discussions. Left out of information that they may not really need to know but that helps keep them informed and feeling part of the scouting unit. Even when doing things right, people are might lose trust because the decisions are hidden.

perdidochas is right. What else could the council do? They do not have authority in your school or with your police force or within your neighborhoods. Their zone of influence is the scouting community. The scout is gone. That is about as much as can be done. They fact that they did so many interviews means they took the situation very seriously and spent lots of $$$ on it. And it was to protect everyone involved.

Again I cringe saying this, but Stosh is right. The original question was about adults who fill out applications and are they adult leaders. And he's right and the answer is yes. And like scouts who get PORs and do little, they probably should get credit for time served. Otherwise, why did the CC & COR accept the application in the first place. But they are registered leaders in their troop.

Is this a Catholic charter organization? I've heard similar, but don't know as I'm Catholic, but my scouts are in non-Catholic troops. At some point, it's just a witch hunt. And, you might as well register everyone as you never know who is going to drive who and might cause an issue. IMHO, it's very important to register the leaders and make sure they oversee that YPT is implemented and followed consistently. Now, if an adult wanted to camp with the troop and his son was not there, then I'd say he was working in the role of a leader and needed to have an application completed. But I just don't believe every parent camping with the troop should be registered as a leader. I think it does more harm than good.