fred8033

Well answered. Requirements are to enlighten the scout and lift his experience. ... IMHO, requirements are not to be "unreasonable" show-stoppers. If there would be a chance a year out to visit a federal facility and it fits the scouts journey, great. But if the requirement will cost $1000 ... or the scout has been showing advancement progress and this one requirement causes an big stopping point, then I'd look for more creative solutions.

Scouts are supposed to be active. 21 merit badges and too many are redundant with school or just boring paperwork. Now, we have yet another. Four citizenship MBs is just too many. ... Five actually ... family, society, nation, world, society? What next? Universe? ... Citizen of the Ecology?

That's the trouble with accusations. They happen. Sometimes real. Sometimes someone squirming to get out of somewhere they don't want to be. How do you defend against loose accusations but also protect the vulnerable. This #### is hard. Wishing you the best.

Lone scout learning leadership? Citizenship by themselves? Or do you mean the four merit badges? Character as a lone scout? Is it any different from homeschooling by the parents? Fitness by themselves? Fitness is achieved by being in an active, busy group; not just a merit badge. IMHO, a specific sport would be better than the lone scout program. Scouting is social. I'm not against the lone scout for isolated families, but I question the match in this situation.

The challenge is always that the unit leaders are volunteers. They are not paid or trained to handle EBD kids and EBD some of the hardest cases. Worse, those unit volunteers are usually parents too. They will say one thing and do another. My favorite: "if any kid needs scouting, it's this kid" ... BUT ... at the same time, they will quickly pull back on their own kid's involvement because they are afraid of the impact. OR, their own kid gets scared away. ... It can kill membership and influence previous recruiting ties to go elsewhere. I'm not saying abandon the scout. I'm sayin

It's okay to work with troubled scouts, but boundaries exist. Scouts that can't control themselves or are a risk to others do need to be separated from the troop. As for lone scout, I always question the value of it. Scout's value is in working with other scouts. Scouting is about community and developing connections. At some point, lone scout sounds more like getting rank than getting value.

You can provide friendly views to the SM, but at some point, you have to salute that the SM is the SM.

Monthly camping is the ideal; not a hard rule. 12 months a year is rare. 10 out of 12 months is outstanding. 7 to 9 months a year is good. 2 to 3 would be a warning sign. Also, it's how you count the outings. Camp in at the charter org? One night? Some months with two campouts in one month (some scouts go to one, some to another). ... I'd worry less about the number and more about holes in the calendar where the scouts could be active.

There is no meaningful scouting without camping and the associated adventures. Scouting is building character by being outside. You can't require camping, but why be in scouting if you don't learn to love the core activities. It would be like being on a football team, but not wanting to be on the field.

Schedule separation between your high adventure and the routine summer camp. Many scouts will want to do both. Many will want to brag about their pending or completed adventure. Our troop often did something like ... June = High Adventure. July = BSA Summer Camp. August = Troop summer camp.

BSA rules set the tone without addressing all twists and turns. A wise scouter once said you can't write concisely and still handle every possible nuanced twist. Leaders do need to interpret. It would be automatic if it was less than six nights, explicitly in the published rule. What about "resident"? Setup / tear down each night is not a resident camp. So not long term? Further, your own camping site is usually not considered a "resident camp". Resident camps are BSA run fixed location with fixed infrastructure sites. State parks, river edge camps, etc are have never generally been c

I fear that scouts sometimes are harder on themselves than others would be. I fear that many of us would pass him if he's a good scout, but the scout might block himself. IMHO, you have a legitimate argument that the canoe trek was not a long-term as each night was a completely different camp site with setup and tear down.

Your outside. With scouters. It's not perfect, but celebrate being together and honoring new members.

Yeah. I'm probably reading more into that others. One hand in pocket while other is up is common. I eas reading it as two hands not up. Probably best I start stepping away. I just don't spend enough time in scouting anymore.

I meant to mention in my previous post. I'm pretty lenient most of the time. I'm more concerned with active and program than formalities. BUT, this is a hard show stopper for me and is something that is immediately fixed. If the SPL won't put his hand up for oath and law ... and especially the Pledge ... I'd remove the scout as SPL. He's setting a bad example. That's one of the most important roles of the SPL: to set an example. I'd immediately talk to the SPL at the next appropriate moment and talk about offending others by not showing respect to the Pledge. Setting an example. etc,

Wow. Times change !!!! LED lanterns are a game changer. I never would have guessed LED lanterns would be a patrol box choice. BUT, it makes sense. Times change.

Thanks. I really question my advice these days as I don't spend all my life in scouting anymore. I'll be moving onto my next journey soon. I think that journey will be the health nut phase.

Absolutely agree !

Yeah, the scout spirit requirement can be problematic in many different ways. It should be obvious to most scouters that the scout spirit requirement is left to the SM to sign off. Our SM did mention to us new leaders that he wanted to be the signer on that one. ... As for the previous SM, boundaries can often get confused with transitions. Your old SM might not have realized he was doing something wrong I have to ask ... do you think the scout did an end around you? Was it intentional? Or a spacey scout? OR (my thinking) the former leader signed and the scout doesn't know how to

I've begun to believe those that volunteer at district level tend to hurt their own scout units. Not all, but a good number. Distractions. Confused priorities. Mixed signals. A person only has so much time. Time to work a full time professional job to earn money. Marriage and their own kids. Unit volunteering. District volunteering. As we've seen scouting affect marriages, I've begun to accept that there is a feedback loop going on also at the district to unit level. There are some advantages having a district volunteer in your scouting unit, but there are also big risks going the o

LOL ... You're right. I'm so used to stopping at the lines above the final signatures. I did not see the word was moved below. I sit corrected. ... I still stay with my original assertion. Eagle rank application is not required, but you can't earn Eagle without it.

A well thought out answer. I need to find when #2 had the words "on your Eagle Scout Rank Application" added. It would be within the last 12 years. The handbook I just grabbed does not say that. As you point out, it is in BSA's eagle rank requirements statement though. Hmmm... This is about BSA documentation biting us again. Someone added words without thinking about the circular requirement and how all the piece parts work together. It's circular because most scouts don't complete the Eagle rank application until they think they are done completing the requirements, but they can't c

It says "unit leader". If the SM has delegated blue cards and other ranks stuff, talk on phone with the existing SM or CC. If okay, sign and submit. If you want to help the council registrar (or person who processes the paperwork), insert a note about that this is temporary or that a transition is happening. That would be nice, but not necessarily required. Keep the paperwork moving ... for many reasons. Also ... requirements are in the BS handbook. Eagle app is not a requirement, but you can't achieve Eagle without it.

Late at night. Forgot this channel is not just about EBORs. It just came up because of comment about Eagle scouts not having skills. But the point is the same. BORs are not the point to fix advancement failures. BORs are the time to find out the troop is having trouble. I do 100% agree the advancement program needs drastic redesign. I'd be up for something significantly different. ... The most fundamental part I'd like to see is the scout-facing advancement requirements be at least half the number of words.

Fully disagree. EBORs do not exist to change advancement expectations at the end after years of failure by troops and many, many adults. I agree that every Eagle scout should be able to light a lantern and do basic 1st class scouting skills. I disagree that it's okay to try to enforce it right at the end. ... EBORs are more of a friendly conversation similar to the SMC, but done by other adults. Now ... if you want to assert all BORs should be youth or non-troop. We can talk. If you want to say the advancement program, shoudl be drastically different, fine. I just disagree th