BadenP

Mr Boyce Based on your requirement besides the shoulder loops you would also have to get rid of all the patches and neckerchief as well.

MIB I have just four words of advice to you in this situation, RUN, RUN AWAY QUICKLY.

KC9, KC9, KC9, Are you going to tell us you never lost anything important in your life??? The BSHB after numerous outings starts to look like some worn out artifact dug out of the ground, in fact I have had scouts in my old troop present their handbooks to me and when you opened it the pages fell out in a heap, in other words it was well used. That's why IMO a freshly printed out troop advancement report of some kind is vastly superior to a mud soaked handbook, especially at an EBOR, where the committee doesn't have the time to thumb through a boys entire handbook. The very fact the boy is advancing means he is engaged in the scouting program so why should the adults throw roadblocks in his path??

AJR The high adventure bases have a dvd of what their bases are all about, all you need to do is write or email them. I have one showing Philmont, N. Tier, and the Seabase. When my Venturing crew saw sailing a large ship, scuba and snorkeling in the Caribbean they busted their behinds doing fundraisers to go. We have been to the Seabase three times and Philmont once. I have to admit sailing on a large ship in a gorgeous area of the world is hard to beat. A picture is worth a 1000 words.

While the handbook is good to have at the BOR, as another poster said it is NOT required. He should be able to easily get an advancement report from his troop before the BOR, and this should be discussed at the SM conference beforehand to prevent this slipup from ever occurring. By the way the boy scout handbook is not the "official" record of advancement, it is just one of several sources, whereas the troop advancement record is official. The handbook could be easily filled in by the scout with some scribbled initials and a date, it is a secondary source at best.

camiliam Psychotic and vindictive? Just read your prior posts directed at Beavah and then myself, if you can't see those traits in them then there is nothing more to say. For myself I have nothing more to say to you except, may the Great Scoutmaster watch over the youth in your troop. Pax

pack Excellent point in your last post. An institution claiming to being able to interpret and speak for God would cause so much discord and be at the root for most of the wars the world has and is still experiencing throughout time.

Barry The quote attributed to me in your last post was NOT mine, so before you start your criticism at least get your facts straight, geesh. What I have relayed in my posts for this thread have all come from my 25+ years of experience in all phases of the scouting program, I have never claimed to have all the answers but I know what works in the everyday world of scouting and what does not work. You my friend are even more critical than myself in many of your posts and have been very vindictive on several occassions. Camilam You really need to cool off, have a drink or a valium and calm down. These are discussions not worldwide negoitiations deciding the fate of scouting. Your rude attacks on me and vicious attacks on Beavah in this thread have bordered on the psychotic. Maybe you have been going through some rough times in your life right now, but taking it out in this forum is really inappropriate. We are all connected through scoutings values and we all look out for the interests of our youth first and foremost. We can all agree to disagree, but there is never any excuse to attack a scouters character.

I agree with Eagle92's post. The emphasis of todays DE is solely money almost to the exclusion of everything else, that is not a fun or desireable position. The hours do take a huge toll on the marriage and family. The huge turnover in DE's IMO is one of the motivating factors in reducing the number of councils and scouting exec's. Declining numbers, especially boy scouts and troops, will continue to be another factor as National continues its program of downsizing and consolidating. When I was a DE in the late 80's things were still pretty good, although I could see the beginnings of what has come to pass in the BSA. Honestly the DE position is just not attractive anymore to someone looking for a long term opportunity. Two years ago I was offered the opportunity to rejoin the profession which I quickly turned down. It really is too sad to see what professional scouting has become, there are parts of the good old days I really still miss very much.

This discussion reminds me of the debate between the Catholics and the Protestants over who was right regarding the Reformation. Look all of us scout leaders sees value in the troop being in full uniform, but as several have pointed out that is not always possible due to a variety of situations economically and otherwise. The debate then becomes are the troops who are in uniform from the waist up only the same quality of scout as a fully uniformed troop and the answer to that is a resounding YES. Then the debate centers around quality of program with some of the posters implying that the half uniformed troop has somehow a lesser quality program than the fully uniformed troop and that is just plain nonsense. So to you scout leaders who think your troop is somehow superior because they are fully uniformed and always love to point out at council and district events those units who are not in full uniform, IMHO are just being petty and vindictive and have forgotten what a scout leader truly is supposed to be. Scouting is a brotherhood that unites all of us to a greater purpose, accepting all of us in scouting no matter what. Getting hung up over the uniform, quoting passages from a century ago, criticizing those not in full uniform is undignified, unscoutlike, and has NO place in scouting. Methods of Scouting are guidelines to help develop your troop program they are NOT mandates from Mt. Sinai so get over yourselves already. We are here to serve the youth not to make some kind of fashion statement. Those of you who are so adamant about full uniforms being the ONLY way probably have been in scouting too long and need to find a new venue to volunteer your time.

Venturing is not hard to explain OGE, it is just hard for some scouters to get since it is not run like a pack or troop with all its members in the same dress, and all doing set requirements from a handbook. That kind of activity would be sure a way to repel any teen 14-20 years old. Venturing is about concentrating one or several specialties, incorporating things like ethics and leadership training into the mix, but allowing the flexibility to explore what the world has to offer without having to meet a presubscribed set of requirements in a handbook. It teaches independence, self reliance,participation, and personal responsibility within a group setting in developing a program that meets the interests of all the members. The Venturing Leaders Guide gives them a very good framework and resources to accomplish those goals. Venturing is that point in scouting where we stop treating the teens as children and start treating them as the adults they are becoming.

camilan The passage you quoted was taken out of context and shows me that you truly believe what I said in my post. I think your PLC can require full uniform, but tell me are you going to turn away any boy who can not fulfill that requirement? If so that is elitism.

camilan Quoting BP is nice, yet remember the first couple of scouting most of the boys had partial or no uniforms, are you saying those boys were not true scouts? I hope not. Baden Powell sure didn't think that way, look at some early photographs of him with scouts, many of them in partial or no uniforms. Yes full uniforms are the the ideal to strive for yet the reality is that for various reasons that goal is not always obtainable. Quoting BP to affirm your my way or the highway perspective smacks of elitism to me.

Qwasze Are you even involved in Venturing? Your posts say no. Venturing's problem is not the mission statement it is scouters who haven't got a clue what the program is all about, and think it is just another troop program for older boys. Personally the mission statement was created by National who at the time really did not truly understand the real purpose or focus of the program. The mission statement should really come from the Venturers themselves who have been directly involved with a successful crew. I'll tell you what teenagers could care less about a mission statement when they join a crew, what they do care about is the quality and fun involved in a crews program. That message gets spread by word of mouth rapidly, as our own crew proves. We have gotten so large that we are soon going to have to split into two crews to accomodate all the new teens we are attracting each year. It is not the mission statement that we need to focus on rather it is the type and quality of programs that crews offer that need some fine tuning.

KC9 Read Beavah's last post, it says many of the same things that I have been saying. Scouting is and always has been first and foremost about the boys and not about uniforms and badges, which are merely a means to an end. Scouting is all about how we develop the youth to become productive and effective leaders and citizens. As far as despots and dictators are concerned I was referring to three troops in my area who have massive dropout rates each year because the adult and youth leaders run the troop like a military boot camp. In spite of numerous complaints from parents and potential lawsuits the council continues to charter these mini troops (less than 10 boys) each year. Pro scouting in our council has become a joke, missing or unaccounted for funds, total lack of interest in the units, except during FOS campaigns, little to no support for trainings, etc, etc. Barry- you and I often disagree on methods yet I feel you are a good scouter who puts your boys first. The methods of scouting are guidelines for scout units to follow and adapt to each units unique situation, they are not do or die mandates. IMO, a troop who is dirt poor and has their boys in even partial uniforms, due to poverty, etc., IS following the uniform method to the best of their ability in spite of what the uniform police might think. To sum up scouting is first and foremost ALWAYS about the youth, uniforms and badges are merely the window dressing which will always be secondary in the development of every young persons full potential.

KC9 I am not bashing any troops, after all it is not the boys who are fault on this issue, it is the adult leaders who want to create their own perfectly matched para military unit that I have the issue with. Having boys in full uniforms is nice but is not always possible or practical in poor areas and a high percentage of unemployed parents as my previous post illustrated. My point is that it is not uniform that determines the quality of ANY troop program, how far the boy will advance, or the skills they will take with them after the days in scouting are over. So put your false accusations aside and concentrate more on what kind of boy scout you are producing in your troop rather than what they are wearing.

KC9 Slippery slope indeed, those are the facts. Tell me, if a boy came to your troop from a poor family, there was no access to goodwill type stores in your area to be able to afford any type of uniform you would turn him away because he was not able to be in full uniform? Sounds rather Draconian to me. Look, any boy can enjoy and participate fully in any well run program whether he is in a full uniform, an old used uniform shirt, or a necker and cap. If you equate a quality program to everyone in full uniform then I think you need to review your own interpretation and motivation of what makes a quality leader and what TRULY is a quality program. As I have posted before years ago I was an ASM for one of the poorest troops in inner city Los Angeles, none of the welfare families could afford $5 let alone a uniform. You know what, we scraped an assortment of all kinds of used uniform shirts from thrift shops at the leaders expense and those boys were proud of those shirts and being a boy scout. They excelled at scoutcraft skills and everyone of them made it to at least first class, over 70% made Eagle, at district camporees they always took a 1st Place or 2nd Place ribbon at every event, they loved going camping, sleeping in the open since we only had a few tents. Now I would put any of those scouts up against any one of your fully uniformed scouts any day of the week. Who had a quality program was and is NEVER determined by a full uniform. Any scout leader who says otherwise I seriously question their motivation for being in scouting. No KC9 those who are on a slippery slope are those scout leaders who run their troops like despots and dictators instead of trying to really change a boys life for the better.(This message has been edited by BadenP)

I always get a kick out of these uniforming debates. Since, as the post by SP points out, a uniform is not a requirement to be in scouts, why do so many leaders get their knickers in a twist over whether a boy or an adult is in full uniform or not? Are we adults here to mentor and teach leadership and scoutcraft to the youth or create a unit of sartorial correct drones ready for a parade? All of you "uniform police" type leaders really need to ask yourselves what are the real motivation and reasons you are a scout leader, is it to provide a fun and exciting program for your unit or create or recreate a troop in your own personal image/experience of what scouting is supposed to be?

I have to agree with Eamonn's point that most problems should be dealt with volunteer to volunteer. From my experience as both a long time volunteer and a District Executive when you get a pro scouter involved they will do what they see is as best for the councils interests since they have no personal investment in the units or district volunteers squabbling. The result is no one may get what they want or a person or two could be asked to leave their scouting position. A no win situation which could be better handled over a cup of coffee between the parties involved. Council advice should only be sought out for criminal issues or overall council situations.(This message has been edited by BadenP)

I agree with Nike's post, just because some former BSA moms don't get Girl scouts doesn't mean that the program is deficent rather than those adults may be too fixated and not flexible enough to understand they are in a new program with new rules. The BSA and GSA are not now or ever have been duplicate or parallel programs. To those troubled new leaders, if you don't like the GS go back to the BSA, they can always use your assistance.

It seems that most of the critics of Venturing are scouters who have no experience or real understanding of the program. Nike, Venturing's statement is not weak rather it is open ended to give greater flexibility to the interests of the crew it is NOT suppossed to be run like an older boy scout troop which too many scouters think it is. It truly is sad the condition of the Venturing program in some of your councils, probably because your pro scouters are only concerned with MONEY!!! Venturing is a great program especially when you have dedicated volunteer adults and youth involved. We have large and small crews in our council but all of us adults and youth officers have made it a priority to make all crews successful no matter what it takes. We are not competitive like so many packs and troops who see the demise of a unit as more members for their own group. A scout is helpful not competitive. We do not depend on support from the council rather from each other. Professional scouting IMHO has truly become jaded and corrupt for many years now.

I have to go along with much of Eamonns post. IMO there is no such thing as a natural born leader, rather a person who possesses a lot of common sense who listens to those around them and can take their ideas and their own and formulate a solid plan of action that appeals to others who will then follow that person, that is a true leader.

SR540 From your post it sounds like the Venturing DE and the rest of the professional staff haven't got a clue how to develop the Venturing program in your council. It is more than just devoting time it also means understanding how to develop a program to attract 14-20 year old teens. If your crews are small it probably means they may be too specialized, or have interests that are not appealing to teens. Are they youth led. Are they coed? If not then they are doomed to fail from the start.

Barry If anyone from National told you crews are folding faster than troops are full of it, the facts show otherwise. The reason it may seem like that in your area is the way many new crews are formed. In my experience a couple of adults who like say kayaking for example get their kids and a couple of their kids friends and start a crew with no experience or training, after a couple of trips the adults kids get bored hanging out with mom or dad and quit,the adults lose interest so the whole unit folds. The problem was the unit wasn't organized correctly in the first place, too limited in scope, the adults called all the shots, and the number of teens were way too few. The few crews in our council that failed were just like that example. Now we have a council Venturing committee whose main job it is to make sure any newly formed crew has all their ducks in a row before they can be chartered. The result has been we have had no crews fold for over five years in our council, we have a very active and well organized VOA supported by the council committee who organize activities and train new youth officers. Venturing is probably the strongest and best organized scout program in our council. We may be the exception to the rule but Venturing is very successful in our council thanks to many volunteers dedication, the council professional scouters still don't get it but those of us who have volunteered our time to our crews sure do. Venturing is NOT boy scouts, it never was and should NEVER be run that way.

This really sounds like a National idea passed down to the SE's from the CSE himself, bleed your volunteers, give National a cut, dry then transfer to another council before the volunteers force you out of town on a rail. boomer- the only problem with your idea is that the SE for the new council would still have to come from National's list of candidates, so you would still have that corruptive influence present.