greenSM

Isn't most of this discussion based on the FALSE assumption that any Scout should be First Class within a year?

Absolutely any well run Troop should be ABLE to advance MANY of the boys through 1C in 12 or so months. Some will go faster, some will take lots of time and patience. Why all the rancor over the purely subjective "one year plan(s)?"

My experience has been Troops that cling to the FCFY idea begin churning out Scouts that have little or no real knowlege of the information. My barely 12 yo nephew, for example, is 1C and working toward his Star. And yet he cannot tie anything except a square knot (and then only with rope in hand), cannot use a compass, thinks a band-aid IS First Aid, can barely dog paddle across his family pool, and cannot walk more than a few yards without stopping to play a video game. If he can stay awake through enough meetings though, he will get enough MB to make Eagle.

Advancement is not only part of the Methods, it is an extremely important part of Scouting. FCFY is, however, NOT.

Trevorum was right. KISS. Model the Patrol Method. Yes, the boys may be too lazy to plan properly or cook but, eating steak and baked potatoes on a Patrol budget in front of them may inspire one of those 12 yo boys to something better. Shazam!

How about this? Run the Troop and Patrols according to the materials derived and distilled over the last 100 years until ALL of the adults and boys KNOW what is supposed to happen. Then, if there is something that doesn't fit/work (eg: most Troops in my area are 10 or less Scouts so traditional PLC-Troop-Patrol method morphs), tweak that instead of reinventing the wheel continuously.

Maybe there's too many chiefs and not enough trained leaders?

Don't bet the farm on the Eagle records! In our council virtually every Eagle candidate and his MB councelors have been forced to dig and find their own copy of the MB card for one or more awards. My first Eagle Scout was missing five cards at Council, three of which I myself had hand delivered to the office!

I still don't know why the rules laid out in the G2SS are so difficult to understand: Webelos may not camp at Camporees but MAY visit during the event.

I still don't know why the rules laid out in the G2SS are so difficult to understand: Webelos may not camp at Camporees but MAY visit during the event.

When I stumbled on these forums I often thought EaMonn's constant mantra of "follow the program" was a little oversimplified.

As it turned out the problems I faced as a SM and now as a Cub CM were frequently the refusal of, well, pretty much everyone, to follow that same program. As has been spelled out here on this thread, not following the program begets bad results.

As I said on a different thread it is sad and discouraging to see the length and breadth of the problems caused by people simply not following the rules and the program.

P.S: The paid staff for the GSUSA councils are as political and incompetent as the DEs and other "professional Scouters" of the BSA. My wife, a troop leader, has held three troop organizational meetings while her $50K+ director cannot even tell her where or how many troops there are in our zip code. Above the troop level it's just bureaucracy.

I would like to agree 100% with EaMonn. I have observed, however, in both my former troop and in my son's current troop a sad trend. Many boys are so used to being coddled and pandered to by their parents that the Boy Scout program is actually too hard for them. It's too much "work." They can't push a button or get an adrenaline rush every thirty seconds. I have seen Scouts rebel against "boy led troop" because taking responsibilty for anything is completely foreign to them.

It's also difficult for trained, informed, and well-meaning leaders to move these kids 'off the dime' when their parents are-often literally- telling them, "You don't have to do that. I'll fix it for you."

Gosh. My _Guide to Safe Scouting_ says that Webelos are allowed to "visit only" Boy Scout Camporees.

I find it extremely disheartening that this rule is almost universally broken by "trained" Scouters, Districts, and Councils.

Situation: a fifth grade Webelo quite our pack last spring. He had already met the minimum requirements for Webelo but, not for AOL. Now, in October, with her son in sixth grade and almost 12, the mother wants the pack (which has moved to a new district and a new CO) to work with her son to get his AOL. Despite telling her that he doesn't need an AOL to join Boy Scouts, she insists that he get it. The CC hates confrontation and is considering doing this.

The committee is not opposed to doing this (if he pays his recharter) but, we feel there is a time for a Scout that age to simply move on to Boy Scouts. We, however, can only find guidelines for the minimum age and grade requirements. Any suggestions?

This issue is not about camping in the cold, it's about FOLLOWING THE RULES!

Why are so many scouters so intent on bending and distorting not only the rules but the entire program?

If memory serves, the CC and the UC are required to sign-off on the QU app. It is far more likely that the unit or district is playing fast and loose with the paperwork than the Council (and there is no love lost between me and Scout Scouncils).

Remind the committee that, as Scouters, "a scout is... honest" applies to them too.

I understand the concept of the CO 'owning' the unit but, that is not related to my request in any way.

A Scout from my unit was removed from Scouting by the Assistant SE. The council and the region refuse to divulge any information or sources of that information to the Scout and his parents except to say that the Scout was 'involved with the police' according to their information (which was recieved frm inside the District apparatus). Nor will thay release any information on the appeals process except the addresses to which the family should write.

AGAIN: I am requesting the specifics of the BSA appeal process and its specific source(s). The "Membership Standards" manual appears to be the source we seek but, we cannot locate it. Any help locating specific information on this process is appreciated.

The Council and Region should be providing the "facts" they have used in their decision. The burden of proof is on the accuser.

The law is not the problem. The questions revolve around the BSA's appeal procedures and their refusal to reveal information used to punish Boy Scouts.

I am looking for info specific to the BSA and its rules and procedures and the exact sources for that info.

Update: BSA now expects the SCOUT to prove he was not involved with the police. Why is the burden of proof for a false BSA allegation resting on a 16 y.o. Scout?

"If he knows that it is a rumor why is he paying attention to it?"

Everyone should be concerned when Boy Scouts are being thrown out of Scouts because of unfounded and malicious rumors. They should be even more concerned when said rumors appear to start within and then are promoted by the BSA itself.

This relates to an issue on a different thread ("he committed a felony" in the Open Discussion).

Adult applications grant the right to examine and refute "public record sources." What is the actual source of this policy and where can I get a copy?

I find no mention anywhere where a Scout has the same right. Is it correct that a Boy Scout has no right to review alleged records used to discredit and dismiss him?

I saw reference to "Procedures for Maintaining Standards of Membership." I have not seen this document at any scout shop. Is it available to mere Scouters? The only source I have seen that lays out rules for disciplining Scouts is the GTSS and it does not address dismissals for unproven allegations which don't even involve Scouting!

Any references to source material would be appreciated!

Entire herds of commisioners- both the unit variety and their elder cousins the District Commisioners- can be seen grazing at the annual awards banquet. They will be the ones accepting the awards for all the time and effort that you put in at your unit. Keep your hands inside the vehicle at all times.

With respect to BobWhite, you are incorrect. I have seen the letter that was sent to the scout and subsequent documents. The Council is not claiming confidentiality for the SCOUT rather they are claiming their own "right" to conduct the revocation "confidentialy" and without revealing any information to anyone. The SE has previously stated (under oath in court) that the BSA is under no obligation to tell even the accused any information. Other Scouters have ALREADY BEEN TOLD their 2006 apps may not be approved.

Unfortunately you are correct that the letters of recommendation will probably not change anything.

If the Scout has NOT done the requirements for the badge has he earned his Eagle? True, it is the result of the adult leadership but, when the Scout knows that he has done virtually none of the requirements for his MB, his project, and possibly even his rank advancement is it fair for him to demand and expect the honor of Eagle Scout? When the "technical requirements" have not been met and the Scout cannot muster the "work and committment" to know and earn the MB is this still a "valid route?"

OK. I'll admit I'm venting a little. I have met a Paper Eagles who did Orienteering inside a classroom, Wilderness Survival without camping, Personal Management (a twelve week badge) in one hour, and made a single phone call for their 'blood drive' projects. He, his parents, and the BOR saw no problems with all of this.

Expecting the numbers driven Council to stop this trend is futile.

First let me state that my input is purely anecdotal.

Our De was recently promoted to SrDE for all of his 'efforts.' Yet within two miles of my house there are at least five "ghost packs." Some of these "packs" have existed for over a decade. The District hierarchy awarded themselves many awards last fall for all of heir hard work as leaders and commisioners of these units.

When faced with this kind of attitude even at the District level (and an even less responsive Council) many Scouters and parents elect to spend their time on other activities- any other activities.

When it gets to be ALL about the numbers and the MONEY it is no longer about the boys.

Should this boy earn his Eagle? Should he even remain in Scouts?

In our Council a Scout (three MB from Eagle) has been removed from Scouting because someone started a rumor at the District level that he "was removed from school by a policeman." No conviction. No crime. No facts. No reality at all.

Council refuses to release any details or the source of the rumor stating only that the Scout can go through the- secret- Regional Appeal Committee and appeal the unknown rumor.

The Scouts and Scouters (like myself) that have written to defend him face reprimand and possible dismissal for publically contradicting a Council level decision. The Unit Commisioner has already delivered the message from the DE that some Scouters "don't need to fill out the ap" for 2006. The boy's parents- MB counselors and Cub leaders- also face 'non-renewal' of their next membership.

Is this supposed to give one warm fuzzies about 'second chances' and reacting to 'youthful exhuberance (sp?)?' Upon what should this Scout 'reflect?' Be 'remorseful?' When the "more constructive" route through the District and the Council yields responses like, "We have a right NOT to tell you..." what then should this Scout, his parents, and all of the other Scout members do? THAT is why this topic is on the forum.

Before someone says it; yes, I am angry at this situation. The reality of BSA politics makes many of these posts seem almost silly.

LauraT7- Pay attention to these guys! I split my small (12 boys) troop into patrols and the troop is already the better for it.

I have also taken to telling new parents, "If you don't have a trailer hitch on a van we'll see you at the family camp in May." It took me two years to convince one very type-A father that speed was NOT of the essence, teaching was.

Reread the other posts again. And again. I am!

I would never assume a boy led troop cannot be organized. Personally I would prefer a little disorganization and lots of happy, learning Scouts to perfect formations and bored chair fillers!

As the SM of a small troop this thread hits home and is fascinating to follow (even if I am Late to the party).

Yes it is difficult to run a program with only 5 participants. "Multi day backpacking trips" may not work but, camping still does! We have gone to summer camp with as few as 6 scouts (in years past this troop has had 3 at summercamp).

After three years of work we now have two patrols (one for older scouts working on Life and Eagle and one NSP). Although I would love to have 20-32 scouts just being able to split into two patrols has re-invigorated the troop! Even I was surprised and I have been the one dragging the leaders (including my CC/CR) to use the WHOLE Scout program.

I disagree that the size of the Unit is solely a reflection of the program. I have had parents- even entire Webeloes dens- shy away from our boy-led Troop because we were "disorganized" and the adults "had no control over the Scouts." The two large, adult run "Eagle Factories" in our city seem to fit the parents better and therefore that's where the Scouts go. My PLC can put on 9 campouts, three fundraisers, remodel the Troop trailer, and do dozens of hours of service work but, my DE and DC will refer inquiring boys to troops that don't even attend the District Camp-o-ree. But they're big and organized....