HICO_Eagle

The troop I was involved with used to run TLT twice a year as an invited campout shortly after elections. We would go through the normal BSA TLT instruction supplemented with some confidence/team-building games outside and I added some video clips from various movies for discussion. I think I still have the PowerPoint with the video clips on DropBox -- PM or email me for a link.

All of these "innovations" occurred in the last 25 years. IMO, they -- like most of National's changes to the program in the last 25 years -- were irrelevant at best and most likely contributed to the degradation of the program over the years.

When I've made donations (nothing in that ballpark!), I've requested specific wishlists on concrete unfundeds. My annual payraises or bonuses (as well as an unexpected windfall) went toward a new Mule for the camp, new rifles, fixing some sliding wall partitions and shelves at the council office, etc. I asked for no recognition although the camp director asked for permission to put a small plaque on the Mule indicating my donation (I told him I didn't want it but he could do it if he thought it would spur other donations). Our council was pretty bad about the mandatory FOS participation

Sorry ghjim but THESE are the dark days of Scouting. Most of what you talk about since Dale vs. BSA is mythology being perpetrated by adults who seek to validate their own lifestyle or political philosophies. Scouting's stance since before Dale vs. BSA until very recently was holding to age old traditions and values. The liberal wing that has hijacked Scouting has been trying to push out social conservatives which is why their reaction to Trail Life USA and other groups was what it was: instead of seeing the long-term threat to Scouting in general, they rejoiced in their departure because

They were disappointed but said they understood and supported my decision but we've been talking about this since Gates made his announcement. Pretty much the same reaction from my SE and the council shooting sports committee. I suspect the COR will be more disappointed as I didn't tell her directly (she was talking with some parents and I didn't want to break it to them just yet). I've been a Scout leader for more than half my life but I will find other ways to help kids and the community -- and in fact I told the shooting sportsl committee and Scoutmasters that I was willing to help out i

Heck, I think they helped craft it. This language is exactly the kind of thing I expect from DC-type politicrats like Gates. They will use it as a hammer against those who don't conform to their new definition of appropriate activities and overlook those who support causes they like.

I wasn't a member of the denomination or church that sponsored my troop but that wouldn't keep me from helping them if they went the independent route. As it stands, I informed the Scoutmaster corps and committee members that were at the meeting this week that I will not be registering for 2016. Robert Gates made it an issue and did so in the most devious totalitarian (i.e., unScoutlike) way possible. I don't blame the COs that have thought about this if they no longer have any trust in National.

This is laughable considering how Bob Gates and activist members of the Board of Directors unnecessarily inserted themselves into social issues. BSA has been a focal point of the culture wars precisely because it was a pillar of traditional values.

@@Stosh ... and this is an example of why I have a problem with the contemporary definition from National. Since when is asking someone to demonstrate they still know something that is supposed to be a core skill the equivalent of an Inquisition? That attitude is right up there with Bryan on Scouting whining that having a boy sing or do something else to reclaim the handbook or other item he continually leaves laying around is "unkind" or that waterguns are to only be used on targets as if they were BB guns or .22s. You'd think National was headquartered in California rather than Texas with

Personally, I am becoming more and more convinced that the only way to save BSA is to vacate the entire Executive Board and terminate the "professionals" that have pushed the changes in the program for the last 20+ years. That's clearly not going to happen so I'm doing a lot of thinking about whether I will renew in January.

Somehow I suspect there will be by the time the self-proclaimed "enlightened" ones are done changing the program.

Stosh, I hear you but it used to actually be a Board of Review, not a Board of Kindly Discussion. For nearly my entire Scouting career, youth and adult, that meant a review of the Scout's progress, skills, and suitability for the next rank. The way modern "Scouts" want to treat it, you may as well not have it, just have a checklist and get the rank once you get everything checked since the Scoutmaster's Conference and Board of Review are no longer events to be passed but simply something to endure.

FIFY. Every unit is wired differently too.

I'm going to disagree here. I personally abhor the way National has watered down SMCs and BORs but what really matters is that the Scout doesn't get the rank until it's recorded on the advancement form. Rank advancements still have to be signed off by members of the BOR so much as I usually agree with Stosh, the Scout has not earned the rank by the time he reaches the BOR. He has been signed off on all the requirements except for the final signature of the BOR. Small but critical difference.

This debate boggles my mind. 20 or so years ago, the only people I knew who claimed the Civil War wasn't about slavery were racist blacks or left-wingers who didn't want to give the North/Republicans/Lincoln/etc. any credit for going to war to free the slaves. Was slavery the only issue? Not by a long shot but it was the primary issue. What disturbs me today is the heavy emphasis on imagery over substance by the "social justice warriors" (e.g., removal of "Dukes of Hazard" episodes or items for sale while Che Guevara and Nazi memorabilia is allowed) and deliberate misinterpretations of

You think so, huh? I thought many of the presentations after Train the Trainer were even worse than the ones I had to endure from professional military education.

That was exactly what I meant. I keep getting asked to take Wood Badge with an implication that it's "the thing" holding me back from a Silver Beaver nomination. Two problems with that: 1. I don't see that Wood Badge is anything other than a waste of time. Nothing anyone has shown or told me has demonstrated it will be anything other than yet another repeat of the various leadership/management classes I've had since college. 2. I really don't care about awards as an adult. I'm in this to help the boys. The best "award" I've ever gotten was meeting up with one of my former Scouts, find

True, there are no take-backs but a Scout is honest. This Scout wasn't. That calls for a Scoutmaster Conference and a note to the committee for any future BOR.

What infuriated me the most about this is the way they have tried to sneak it by. Announced on a Friday with the vote scheduled in 2 weeks while most units are busy camping. This has got to be the most unScoutlike behavior I've ever seen from National and as far as I'm concerned, every member of the Committee and Board that chose to sneak this implementation through this way ought to be removed. If you believe in your cause so much, why try to sneak it past with no time for reaction or comment? My SE said he was told ONE HOUR before the public announcement was made.

Some of this is a return to how things were 20-30 years ago. I don't mind that, in fact, I encourage it. Frankly, I'd be happy to toss out all changes in the program over the past 20 years and reinvoke the few that were positive. I don't understand people upset by Scout being a rank -- it's one the boys could earn at their first meeting and get a sense of accomplishment immediately. I don't like the requirements being shifted from Tenderfoot to Scout precisely because they make it harder to do Scout-on-the-first-night/month. I advised our new parents last night to photocopy or print th

Part of the problem Stosh is that many of the folks who preached tolerance really meant that everyone needed to accept THEIR point of view (and really beyond accept, EMBRACE). They have no tolerance for dissenting points of view once they get into positions of power or control.

I like the fact they're using "NCC-1701, no bloody -A, -B, -C, or -D!" I'd trade you a set of our Pikes Peak Council Stargate Jamboree patches for a set of those. 2010: 2013: I have to check my inventory, think I only have the 2010s left for trading (I liked them best anyway).

Troops don't own packs. IMO, one of the reasons Scouting is declining is that we don't encourage boys to find a troop that meets their particular needs or modus operandi. Webelos crosses over the troop he has been told his den always goes to and then finds he doesn't like it -- maybe the Scoutmaster is old-school like me, maybe he's new school and the Webelos or his parents want old school, maybe the troop is too big or too small. Not knowing any better, he probably quits Scouting altogether rather than figuring out there's another troop a mile or two away that he'd enjoy. I tell boys (

https://www.ar-15.co/threads/149525-Big-Weekend-In-Colfax-County-Floods FYSA.

I wouldn't ban or limit parents. Heck, our problems are usually not having enough adults participate. What I would do is make them understand any adults on the trip will effectively be an Old Goats patrol and adults will not work with their own children. "You want to come along? Great! I've already got Bob set up to work with your boy so can you and Henry take Jimmy and Tommy and work with them on first aid? Thanks alot!"