MattR

In the phrase "game with a purpose" I like the outdoor fun aspect but I wonder what the purpose will be. That's the key for me.

Good for them. Now, just call it a patrol based summer camp and they might just have a great new program model.

Just one, huh? This is kind of like eating potato chips. Proposal #1: refocus every member (employees and volunteers) of the BSA to the core principles of scouting - having fun in the outdoors as a means to develop responsibility and good character. Support #1: The program is the most critical aspect of scouting but it has been watered down because of a lack of focus. Rather, there seem to be silos in the BSA that are diluting the focus. There is advancement, popcorn, making money selling scout stuff, scouting-as-a-way-to-a-better-career, JTE, leave no trace, STEM and just a really bloated program that tries to be everything to everyone. This is expensive and has little appeal to young parents that have no history with scouting. By focusing on outdoors and responsibility the silo that should rise to the top should be developing scouts that the adults can trust to make their own decisions. That means improving patrol method and scout run programs. It means having more fun at summer camp and making it less like school. It means rewriting requirements so scouts are doing rather than talking about it. It means taking every aspect of scouting and checking it against the core program. If it's not supporting the basic program than consider chucking it. It's like cleaning your basement. Think of it as Start, Stop, Continue, only with focus on what makes scouting great. Proposal #2: Change the hiring practices so external people can be hired into councils rather than only promoting from within. Support #2: Newly hired DE's make very little money and consequently all those great scouts that were trained in the program tend to find jobs elsewhere, where the pay is better. Consequently, the vast majority of people working for the BSA have no experience as scouts. Not only that but there is a fair number that have no experience working for well run operations. This results in a lot of problems such as: Council execs that have no training in running non-profits and few people that understand how scouting should run. Most of the people I see working at the BSA are focused on one thing - making more money for the council or the BSA to pay for programs that have little to do with the core program. Please note that proposal 2 is really just one instance of what proposal 1 is trying to address. The hiring model is not supporting the core program, so change it to match what every other non-profit uses.

That has to change. What I mean is I agree with you that this is an important skill - letting scouts fail - but it would be immensely benefitial to find a way to teach this to adults. Any ideas? No fair saying it can't be done or that there will be problems. Those can be dealt with later.

Please read the following thread as it explains why you're seeing the ads that you see and what little anyone can do about it. This thread is being locked so we can keep this discussion in one place. Thanks for your patience.

I suppose it depends on the scouts involved. If it's a group of 11 year olds, I absolutely agree with you. If it's a group of mature scouts, I can see it happening. It all gets back to trust. I would not open this idea up to anyone, though. I also wouldn't trust just any scouts to go hike on their own. And yet, groups of 10 is starting to be allowed. My county's hospitals are not even close to full (they've restarted elective surgeries), so it sounds plausible to me. Again, it depends on the scouts and whether there's a level of trust and preparedness. Identify issues and if everyone is comfortable, including the CDC, with how to deal with it then this is an opportunity for growth. You had concerns about shared cooking, cleaning, door knobs and the like . These are are easily eliminated - go hiking or backpacking and have everyone carry their own gear.

This thread is locked until after I split off the posts related to Governor Cuomo. I will unlock soon. If you want to comment about Governor Cuomo's comments go to If you post it here I will just hide it.

Yes, I agree with you. OTOH, we teach scouts how to shoot guns safely. Traveling: Hike or Camp nearby and have mom or dad drop you off and pick you up. Cooking: Bring your own backpacking stove and gear. Better yet, learn how to do no-cooking meals. Restrooms: Use the National Forest or BLM land. Tents, bring your own, preferably that you've made from a tarp, wood stakes and rope. These campouts do not need to be exotic. To be honest, starting with someone's big back yard would be great. Have each scout clean the bathroom after they use it. Sitting too close: Make a game of it. This could be a good memory. I agree that this will increase the risk of exposure. And maybe now is not the time to try this. It really depends on what the rules are as well as everyone's comfort level in the patrol. I've seen some parents in my neighborhood select a small group of friends for their kids that will play with each other and no others. It's worth considering this idea as it will still limit how far the virus could spread. It's the poor man's version of contact tracing. Speaking of which, when we finally do have contact tracing this could be a great way to limit exposure and still have some fun.

There are all sorts of problems with this 66% number. First of all, it does not include all those that have the virus, which we only have a vague idea what the number is, and the number of admitted vs having the virus. So that 66% could be closer to 1% of those that have the virus. But more importantly, this has nothing to do with the original topic and this thread is not in issues and topics. So let's get back on topic.

It just seems ironic that scouting, which is primarily about being in the outdoors, which in turn is all about getting away from society, which is just an old fashioned way of saying social distancing, is struggling to figure out what to do. If summer camp doesn't work then go for a hike. I am doing a lot of hiking these days. If I had young children around we'd be camping. The patrol model is ideal. Do things as a patrol. Minimize crossings between patrols. Have faith that scouts have the imagination to make fun from sticks, mud and rope. They don't need a dining hall and a shooting range. Some day those will seem like a luxury, but for now, stick with the basics and 6'. What they really need is confidence and knowledge to take care of themselves in the outdoors. That way the patrol can have fun while scouts keep their 6' bubbles. Make a game of it.

404 Not Found. Maybe someone changed their mind.

Given the recession we're about to enter depending on community confidence might not work for many councils.

Or maybe your ideas are good, you could keep generating them, gently push them and just accept the few scouts and parents that take you up on your ideas. So, do your best and know that that is a job well done. If only one scout liked what you did then that's one scout you helped. Virus or no, that's a healthier way of looking at this. I'm beginning to think the only way I can continue with scouts, between my frustrations with my council, bankruptcy and the virus, is to find a happy place where I can help and just ignore the rest of it.

Welcome to the forum.

I agree with your husband. Also, the stress of this epidemic is hitting people differently. I think many parents are just pushing aside things that they don't see as critical and for some, that's scouts.

I wonder what a healthy percentage is. 39% just seems like a lot these days. Just my opinion but basic costs like staffing and camp upkeep should be covered by the customers - scouts. If it's too high a cost then it's time to cut costs rather than lean on families and the community to bring in more donations.

Welcome to the forum, @Joris. It's always nice to see a scout here. Extra credit for being from outside the US! What I see in that picture is a scout that likely just got back from a backpacking trip, complete with spoon in pocket and plenty of dirt. But that's me, I've been there before so I know what scouts do. At the same time, my father was born in Krefeld and immigrated to the US in 1939. As a child in the 60's I remember the bad feelings my dad had about Germany. In the late 80's there was a push in Germany to reconnect with Jews that had left before the Holocaust and my dad was invited to travel back to his old town. It was a really good thing for everyone. My dad finally had some closure and the students he talked to learned a great deal as well. Everyone had a chance to see each other as human first rather than some preconceived label. To answer your question, what people see depends on who they are and what they know. The clothing you wear can not change that. This is not an issue about what clothing to wear, it's about people's preconceived ideas. We have a very similar problem in that many in scouts think some people see our uniform as being militaristic. Many of our scouts think that others see the uniform as being goofy, or silly, or just something for nerds and geeks. Note that the problem is where people in scouts are worried about how others see the uniform. Think of the uniform as an ink-blot psychology test. It's a way to look into what people think. You can't change how others think by what you wear. However, you can change opinions by representing the best of what scouting is while wearing your uniform. Be helpful, friendly and cheerful while wearing your uniform and people will change their minds. Again, let people see you as human first and that will help break down their preconceived ideas. By the way, I wish our uniform was similar to yours. It's much simpler than ours and looks more useful in the outdoors.

We can't. Ads are put on your page views based on your viewing history as well as whatever "related content" the search engine finds. The above ad contains a reference to "Boy Scout" and this is a forum related to Boy Scouts. Granted, it's ironic, but there's not much we can do. I suppose you could put your own ads on this forum (contact scouter-terry).

My council doesn't mention the virus on its website. However, if you read the state and county sites it's hard to imagine how they can operate a camp. Well, it would all be fine except for doing any events or eating. My guess is my council is desperate and have been doing a lot of rationalization. Seems to me there's an opportunity here for scouting. Ten people can do something together. That's a patrol and two adults. Think of the possibilities. This could be the most fun summer ever.

Guess when I first learned where one way signs are located.

I read the text. All I can think of is I feel sorry for Roger. He only signed up for bankruptcy and now this. He did mention big changes coming. I really hope he has a great vision.

I hope the SM's with the stereotypical SM gut stay home. That's just one more underlying condition. BTW, what will they do if they find someone with a high temperature? By that point they've already been spreading the virus for 2 days.

@Eagledad, those are some interesting views. Not bad, just different. I always thought the aims were the what and the methods were the how. So, there's no point in having what and how be the same thing. Unfortunately, I think the BSA thinks the aims are what the scouters are told and the methods are what the parents and scouts are told. The result is that there's a lot of not-on-the-same-page syndrome. Namely, the scouts don't understand the goals so there should be no surprise that many don't get it. I absolutely don't think advancement should be a goal of the program. Most problems I see with the program stem from the idea that advancement is the ultimate goal. As a method for giving patrols something to work on while they learn it could be a good motivator but advancement by itself is just a distraction. I think there's at least one missing method: fun. Why do we have to explain that online MB classes are a bad idea? Simple, they're boring for most scouts because advancement is reduced to schoolwork. I'm not sure this is a missing method but advancement and fun should be in balance to lead to something bigger. Advancement for advancement's sake is nothing more than school. Fun by itself is just as shallow. So I think learning skills should always be done in the context of enabling something fun, or challenging, or new, or something that must be done for the bulk of the outdoor method events. it's not enough to get signed off on canoeing MB, go on a canoeing campout with your patrol. Have canoeing competitions. All advancement should be a way to enable fun ideas that a patrol can do together. The excuse is that a MB might lead to a career. I'd rather a MB will lead to a good memory. And this brings up the biggest change I'd rather see. This whole idea of aims and methods is a philosophical discussion because it's off hidden in the weeds. I'd think changes in program would make a lot more sense if everyone in the BSA knew the aims and methods thoroughly. Not as a thread in a forum for old scouters but on the front page of the BSA website and the first pages of every manual, training and handbook that the BSA stamps it's name on. This is what we do and this is how we do it. Nobody should be confused about why massive online MB classes and online outdoor skills training is not a good idea.

Just my 2 cents but scouting would be greatly served if these kids were the target audience of the post covruptcy BSA.

Welcome to the forum, @BBQ. My council recently sent out email saying they would only open if allowed. Then they added that if they're allowed the refund policy still stands (i.e., no refund). So, if a scout has a family member that's diabetic, for example, and doesn't want to take a risk bringing home the virus then they take the loss I guess. So yes, money is clouding my council's view just like it always has. But, I seriously doubt scout camps are going to be allowed to open in most states. That's just my 2 cents, but we have plateaued on cases only because we've plateaued on tests.