MoosetheItalianBlacksmith

Basementdweller.....that statement was more in terms of knowing the people on the board not me...although I also agree with that statement

Because as my mother is making apparent now....the workbook makes it all too possible for Eagle Projects to become a joke in the not too distant future.

There needs to be leadership in it and a reasonable amount.....our board uses the internal gauge of 100 hours but we do not live by that.

The project we denied on Sunday had a lot of hours but not enough leadership with the new work book that project could have passed......I dont think I want to live in a world where the term eagle project is a joke and has no integrity to it and there is no strength an backbone behind it.

If the projects get weaker then peoples perception of eagle scouts in general will get weaker...and where will we be then.

So on top of telling us what in your mind makes a good project.your internal gauge.Id like to know if you really want possibility of weakening our eagle projects.

(This message has been edited by MoosetheItalianBlacksmith)

As I said before I know that is not a rule and our board knows its not a rule.but go to other eagle boardsthey will all have their own small rules and benchmarks in place. 100 hours is extremely common.

So yes we all know its not a rule and their not supposed to add anything but no matter how many times you say that or to who.its still going to happen and in some cases it should.

Our board is actually the most lenient and easiest in the council from what I hear about the districts. We dont let them get away with junk but we dont make obnoxious rule for them to try and work around.

When we tell a boy we are looking for 100 hours we also tell them its not a rule its more of a guideline for us to see that you have the chance to put the leadership in.and on multiple occasions we have approved people whose projects came in under that if we felt there was enough to it. We count all hours including hours on the phone or any hours spent on the project setting it up in order to be approved by the board in the first place. Which makes 100 hours really really easy to get.

Mother.as I said before I have not ever heard of this council workbook until dad mentioned it the other day. Nor have I ever seen one. I was just going off of what he said. I honestly think he is mistaken in that fact.

Also I dont care if the workbook says it.our board will never allow the leadership to just be over 2 people.cause what our district is big on is not the hours or the money or anything except that they are showing leader ship. It is huge to our district and I believe that is the right way to go about it because it is an EAGLE project to show LEADERSHIP.

For those that may get confused we look at 100 hours but it is not mandatory for us and very rarely does somebody come to the board with a project that will take less then that.if they do we hear everything out and if they are showing enough leadership we pass it and let it go..if we dont feel there is enough leadership we have the boy do a little more work such as an extra fundraiser. It is really just a guide for us..what we are actually looking for it the amount of LEADERSHIP he is going to be showing.

Our Eagle board chair does use the Guide to advancement for all other aspects of the eagle project. Such as who it should benefit ect ect.

I was only saying from what you read to me both me and my fianc both said it sounded the same as the old on......when dad said council had its own it was news to me (cause I kind of dont think they do the one sent to us is the same one we pull off line). He said the council one was exactly the same with more information so that it was easier to understand though....so even if there is a council one its the same thing.

Also the head of the Eagle board does not review application requirements to determine the legitimacy of a project....he looks at the section referring to eagle projection in the advancement guide or whatever its called and thats the booklet he pulled out on Sunday night and actually read out of to explain why the project was not going to be approved.

You can say all the words you like though....some things will not change nor do I think they necessarily should....councils will make minor adjustments as they see fit to things. Such as the Guideline of 100 hours for an eagle project....a lot of councils and districts use that as a standard to make sure the same amount of work is going into projects or some people are going above and beyond....and with that amount of time there is ample opportunity to show leadership yet its not so much time that its unreasonable. But technically there is no minimum time limit on eagle projects and we all know this.

There are lots of examples of council and district alterations that no matter how many words you use in an application wont change.

To everyone out there if it looks like Im shooting down an idea Im not....Im looking for more supporting evidence or reasons that that idea might be a good one.

By talking to people I can see why satellite training on the specifics they need before they go to the IOLS is the better idea....and if we cant get the satellite trainings then we might have to put together a bare bones video that gets them the info they need to know before coming but doesnt replace the actual training.

Im not shooting down ideas......but give me reasons as to why your idea is a good one. I like a healthy debate. Some ideas have merit that I didnt see before I started you will therefore have to explain it to me some more.

Such as bringing food and cooking for everybody....I personally would prefer if we did it by patrol method....but once somebody debated it with me I can see merit with that as well. We would need to find a person that is willing to do that cooking and we would need a location where that cooking can be done and we would need that very soon so we can set a price for registration. We can find that location and person then great go for it.....if not then its gonna go back to patrol method.

Im not hard to work with but I am not a yes man. Give me information as to why that is better and your fine.

As far as far as I remember what I actually said was as follows:

I am not opposed to other peoples opinions and advice and greatly appreciate them but in the end I will make the decisions that I feel will suit the program the best

We dont have a district training committee except for MT, my fianc, and me. District has not been helpful in getting us a committee and seems fine with what we have....we have been recruiting people for trainers and if we could get more people on the district committee we would.

So we came here advice on how to make this run better. As the event organizer I am accepting all ideas that are given to us. But in the end we need to come up with what ideas we will implement and what we will not (i.e. things that will not work or there is a better idea on the table for them.) If you disagree with me give me logical reasons as to why and your idea is better than mine and I will change my mind. That is always the way I have been if there is enough supporting evidence and reasoning for something then by all means run with that.

My mother and fianc may agree with some of your ideas that I over looked in which case they will come to me with a logical reasonable argument/debate as to why I should change one thing to another and I will do such. But being the event organizer at least in my area it means that I am running the training...maybe in the spring we will have somebody brand new running the training.

I understand and agree with BP's statement that this is a massive machine and it needs to be well oiled and all gears lined up in order for this to work.....if we miss anything the entire thing will come to a screeching halt....but if it is planned and implemented well we can end up with a beautiful elgant machine.

There is a little more leeway for mistakes in smaller courses....we dont have that leeway here. So we have to go in with everything planned and knowing what we will be doing.

As I keep saying I Fully welcome advice and CONSTRUCTIVE criticism as it will make the course the best it can be. What I dont welcome is an argument that this should never happen. This training needs to be done this year so everybody needs it and were the only ones running a course this falls. We dont have the time or people to do many many courses as we try to cycle our trainers so that were not using the same ones all the time and they dont get burnt out. On this course we will probably need all hands on deck and then some.

So with no other routes I appreciate the advice and constructive criticism but I will remain optimistic about this training as I still believe that it can be done and it can be done well.

Im with Basement dweller. If I need my uniform cleaned I through it in the washand Im doneIve met the clean requirement. I never iron the uniform. I dont see a point as its going to get wrinkled again and I have better things to do then constantly iron my uniform.

But I am one of the people with pins and OA things and a lot of other stuff on my uniform due to the fact that I earned that stuff and am proud of it. I do a lot of different things at district and people like to know who I am.so I have the name tag (this is also cause our OA lodge bought them for every member of the lodge.) I like the comments from people wondering what different things on my uniform stand for.its a conversation starter.

I have recently started velcroing on certain patches though. Such as my position patch which changes and my quality unit patch which gets replaced every year. It really works well.

I by no stretch of the imagination said I was going to be the only one teaching.Ive said from the get go that a lot of trainers are needed.my term I is due to the fact that we always have A event organizer and this time around I am the event organizer. I know I can ask for help and fully plan on doing so. I dont see where it has ever been said that MT or myself have not wanted helpas far as I can tell weve been saying the opposite.that we need to find additional help on top of what we normally use.

SS Scout said it perfectly its going to end up as a big training camporee. There will be more than 20 min to first aid as we usually do a 2 day course. Maybe it might be a little better to bump it to a 3 day. So that there is even more timebut in our district none of our individual parts of IOLS are taught in under an hour. And we still end up with extra time on Sunday.

I know a lot of people do 1 day training courses..we do not.and we cannot afford to even if we did with this many people coming.

I fully understand that some people will come not knowing about this stuff.which is why we have to teach them..and different instructors have different ways of teaching.

I know when I teach I generally have the people in the group teach each other and I am only an observer.unless something needs to be corrected or nobody knows the info. But I want it interactive so that they are engaged in the learning and not bored by a lecture. This also allows them to learn how to teach these things to their Scouters back at the troop level. Not to mention it breaks up the ice and gets everybody to learn each other.

We generally have the individual patrols bring all their own equipment. Such as First aide kits and food and ice chests and cook ware.we are willing to help out but this is designed to run as if they were patrols as a part of a troop going on a camp out. I know my troop doesnt bring all the equipment the boys need if they forgot it oh well theyll remember next time. Sometimes you have to learn by your mistakes. We will be giving them a list of what they should be bringing and were willing to help out but its not the instructors jobs to provide everything.

We will be doing as much as we can outside due to the nature of the course (intro to OUTDOOR leader skills). But we do make sure there are always some indoor places to go if we should need them.

SSScout- I appreciate the optimism even though you have never seen it done this large and your adviceand if I thought you lived anywhere around here id ask you to come and help me out. Not to mention you teach one of the pieces of this course we have a harder time locating people for Plants and animals.

BadenP - I find what you said to be very rude. So far everyone in our district loves the way MT does as a District Training Chairman shes already been awarded for this. We ask every person that comes through our training for ways to improve it. This is NOT a dictator ship we dont not run a my way or the highway training. MT So far has not done much actual training more the setting up of training.and if she were to do training shed make sure it was on a subject she knew very well. We have multiple other people come in and do our trainings for us.and Im not usually the one who sets up the actual courses but rather Im the one that takes charge and becomes the main leader of the training..usually somebody else plans the actual training. So there is no mother and son stuff going on. Thats like saying that a guy cant coach his sons baseball team otherwise it would be a father son proposition and that wouldnt be good.

MooseTracker- I do listen to ideas for information on how to better the course.but I have an entrepreneurial mind. I am going to give this my all and come up with all ways I can look at it.I already have been doing brainstorming of what wont work as is evident by the fact that we cant have a video cooking without a quiz. Because I have attached myself to the idea I will try and find every possible way to make it work even if I have to get new trainers. I understand if we cant make the classes smaller and more indivualized this program wont work but I see that as a challenge and ready to go for that challenge. I am going to look at specific ideas until I hear a better onethen I may find a way to implement both or chose the better one. I am not blocking out any new ideas but I whole heartedly believe that if done right this could be an awesome training.

So dont assume Im not listening to ideas just because I dont implement any of them I may have looked at them and decided on a better way to go. I am not opposed to other peoples opinions and advice and greatly appreciate them but in the end I will make the decisions that I feel will suit the program the best. I already want to implement the advice from our last IOLS Participants.

I am not looking at everything thing as if I have stares in my eyes. I thoroughly realize that this will be a difficult training to set up and there will be a lot of problems. But I believe that it can work and as an entrepreneur I will stay optimistic about it. I realize problems will have to be thought of and dealt with before they happen.I will have to come up with some contingency plans. But this is no different than making a business plan or a course of action for a business.

People need to look at big picture and then figure out the best way to get there. This is how you start a business and this is how this is gonna have to be handled as well. If we were bill gates deciding computers could be a great thing and starting Microsoft wed run into the naysayers and wed run into a lot of problems and challenges.but by planning and thinking things through we can come out with a great product and a great company(ie. The IOLS Training)

Shortridge- I appreciate the input and I hadnt thought of that before.Im gonna have to look into that one.

The previous message was directed at basement dwellers post all the other ones since then showed up while I was writing.

I am going to be splitting people into patrols as we always do in IOLS I have no interest in bring food for them which is why a cooking demo needs to be done before going so they can all get together and figure out in some way via email or actually getting together what they want to make and whose bringing what.

I dont picture the video for cooking being a problem due to the fact that it needs to be done before going to the training and a lot of this training cannot be done online. We dont have to put it out for everyone just for the individuals that are going to be coming to training. For smaller courses the pre meeting would work fine. But Im very leery of that for the bigger course as were not sure whos gonna be in what patrols and if they are going to pre-meeting I want them to meet with their patrols.

I have to go to my law class but I thank you all for your suggestions.if you have more just let me know and Ill try to respond when I can.

That would be why were going to have the round robin going..so they are in smaller classeswhere more discussion and individualized attention can take place.

I understand that people can get lost in a crowd. But by breaking it up you dont have the crowd effect going on and we dont have the pain in the ass time of setting up multiple courses.

When you dont have enough trainers due to other things going on or just plain not enough trainers ..Its hard to set up multiple training courses. In some cases its easier to set up a bigger course so you dont have to do everything multiple times. Even the people in charge of training are volunteers.

So by doing this we have one difficult event we need to plan for and people get trained and still have their individual attention. Instead of multiple courses and multiple times it needs to be set up.

It the best of both worlds..and Ill repeat its just plain cool.

Even this way they get more individual attention then if they were to take an online course (not that they offer it for IOLS). They meet new people that they can turn to with questions or when they need help long after the course. Both Trainers and their individuals in their patrols..they may even make friends outside of their own patrol. They will get individuals experiences of what works and what doesnt.

It will be big and focused on the individuals while having a lot of comradery.

If you look at the fact that Wood Badge is a big training course and they still get their individual attention and discussion time. Then what is the problem with a large IOLS course.

The training of a few with the comradery of many!!

Go big or go home!!

Dont worry....I'll get it together.....I like big....big is cool.

Ive already come up with some of the ideas on how to make it work. Like the video for the cooking demo with quiz. I did this since it is impractical to have everybody drive to us 2ce to get a basic training. But the quiz is going to be implemented due to the fact that it is a part of the course and they need to view it but if the video is sent to them they have far too great a likely hood of never watching it.

I figured we can set up patrols and give them each others contact info so that they can meet or communicate over email in order to plan for whose bringing what for camping supplies and food. I want them to cook as part of the IOLS is to teach them how to go out into the woods and camp and make food for themselves.....if we do it for them then they dont learn anything from it.

I will admit finding trainers for this event will be a little harder than usual especially seeing as they way I look at it some stuff will have to be round robined and we quite often have trainers come in teach 1 course and then leave again. I know a few people that arent on training lists that might be able to help out. And I myself have had experience in all of these areas being an eagle scout.

It will take some more planning but I think it will still turn out well in the end. Bigger always makes for more interesting.....and a lot of fun. But just because its bigger doesnt mean we can skimp them on any training they should get the full experience and I dont see why they cant have it. They have a right to the same great training as everybody else.

Everybody is in agreement that nothing happens until the COR Signs the papers. There is nobody arguing about that.

Whats at question are the steps to get to that signature.

I know in our troop it is a committee decision because our old COR once needed to fire a CC so she called an emergency committee meeting and had the committee vote on it. She had the committee decide what was gonna happen.....she gave her reasoning as to why he needed to be fired and everything but then left the decision to the committee.

A lot of people my thing that this is because she didnt have the backbone to fire the person herself......and that is far from the truth....this lady was in our area was pretty much the godmother of scouting....you could go to any troop or the highest people in council and mention her name and they knew exactly who she was and had the utmost respect for her. If she asked for something to be done whether it was on council, district or troop level.it was done. She said jump any scouter in our area would say how high. She was a stickler for the rules and making sure everything was done correctly and fairly. If you pissed her off you stayed out of her way for awhile but she was the nicest lady in the world. She was highly trained and recognized if there was any questions about scouting she knew it....we had DE's come to her to ask questions.

But I also remember the Training Videos that MOOSETRACKER was talking about saying that committee has hire and fire power upon approval of the COR.

In most cases what Beavah is saying is correct as well....a lot of COR's at least in my area do rubber stamp everything and a lot arent even involved until it somebody needs them for a signature.

But this is all based off of my area and my chats with people from out of my area.

I sit on the Advancement Board for the District and we have this problem with every boy we see because we are not members of their troop. We have to make sure when we approve the project that there are opportunities to show leadership and when they finish it we need to ask questions that delve into those areas and look for that leadership to have been shown.

We try to assign 1 advisor from the board to each boy when he gets his project approved. This does multiple things.

1) If they have questions they can talk to us.

2) They are supposed to invite us to every work day they have

This is so we can see whos running the project and give helpful hints. This does not mean the advisor will come to them all; it depends on each others schedules. But if there are any questions the advisor is the person the board can turn to and double check stuff with.

3) The advisor also ends up being a face that the boy is more comfortable with when they come back for the eagle board.

The problem is getting the boys to actually use the advisors. Where happy when they call us (although recently they have been getting better with it).

SO back on topic. Its all a matter of asking the right questions if youre worried see if there was anybody else you might be able to talk to double check how the project ran.

and Beav's right if he did it hell know his topic and be able to answer any of the questions you wanna throw at him... if he doesnt know it off the top of his head he should have it in his binder.

Hope that helped.

Okay now after talking to the DE I have found in our area the SE dispersed the OA advisor appointment roles to the DE's. SO the DE is in charge of finding and appointing OA advisors. But the old OA advisors still believe its done by the lodge.

It was decided that the current OA advisor will keep his job. He asked if I would like to be the District representative for the OA though (not sure as this is his job and he has an Assistant OA advisor to do it when he cant but Ill think about it).

I will never see the difference between Advisor and Adviser....Im just a small town country hick.

we know how you feel about age requirements, this one can not be altered, or ignored.

Okay that comment bugs me. Feels snarky. The DE and District Chair really didnt have an issue with it and were having me fill out an app right away. They just had to talk about it for a second.

But that comment also had absolutely nothing to do with my question and there for had no purpose being there.

With the OA being very much youth run, at all levels, if you are active in the OA, why did you never try for local/regional/national leadership positions?

Because I was very active before the OA in my district folded. Once they got it up and going again I couldnt really get back into the swing of things for a long time.

I also dont like being looked at as a kid. I very much prefer being out of youth roles all together. I go for the more challenging things and I work with adults. Thats where Im comfortable. I like being looked at as an equal not an underling or a youth. And most of the time I get that. Very rarely do I have an issue with that in any organization I go into. It just happens that that issue comes from 4 adults in my Troop.

Age is just a number it should not be a determining factor in deciding what I can and cannot do my skill level and maturity level and personality should be the determining factors.

Thank you to every one that answered and tryed to help clear up that confusion.(This message has been edited by MoosetheItalianBlacksmith)

Congrats

I used to be an Eagle.

I went to the District Committee meeting and next to the OA programs area it said vacant. I showed interest and the DE and CC talked for a sec and gave me an application in order to become the OA advisor. I know the old one and the OA advisor before that and get along well with both of them. So I emailed them to get some information.

The response was that the OA advisor position was not vacant. That he was still doing it. They both also said that its not the district committees place to appoint an OA advisor. They said

These positions are not appointed by a DE. There is a process that starts with an interview with the Lodge Adviser, we serve at his discretion.

I contacted the DE and the confusion was all over the fact that the committee assumed that he was no longer interested in the job since he had not shown up to the district committee meetings in the last 4 months.

The OA book about the appointing of OA advisors.

Each Chapter or lodge officer or committee chairman has an appointed advisor. Officers in the order are elected by the youth members, and the officers appoint committee chairmen. Advisers are appointed or approved by the scout executive, usually for the same term as the officers. The Scout Executive, as the lodge's Supreme chief of the fire, is the highest advisor in the lodge.

To me that means that the District Executive is the one that appoints advisors. Not that I want to take anybodys job away from them or cause any problems. Because I get along really well with everybody involved.

Im just curious how OA advisors are appointed in other areas because there seems to be some confusion here.

(This message has been edited by MoosetheItalianBlacksmith)

We had an issue similar to this a few years back. But scoutmaster has the final sign off.....scout spirit/scoutmaster conference......and he refused to sign it off.

The boys father got so pissed he took it all the way to National and our SM was getting calls left and right about it but he wouldnt back down because he knew very well that he didnt deserve the eagle scout. National didnt over ride him.

The scoutmaster did make a deal with the boy that if he showed scout spirit for a year or something like that hed sign it off.....and the boy did just that but then we never heard from him again.

So Troop has the power to stop somebody from making eagle and if the boy doesnt deserve the rank and they should do that.

The eagle scout rank is a recognition of high moral character .the army recognizes it employers recognize it, schools recognize it, even some insurance companies recognize it.if we have too many eagle scouts walking around that sour the name then it wont mean as much when decent eagle scouts want to get somewhere.

So dont leave because you sound like you are on the right track and thinking of scouting and everybody else involved. But defiantly dont sign the form.hold your ground.

So the answer is neither sign nor resign. Best answer is to just hold your ground and prepare for some phone calls and this boys angry parents. It will also show the other boys that if they want that rank they better deserve it.

Worst comes to worst council or national will over ride you.... but its better then sitting arond and letting it happen. and if you have a solid argument then they probably wont. One of the other posters were right though....try to get the SM on your side. have a talk with him and see if he'll stick with you.

On the day of elections we call the position in question and everybody interested comes to the front of the room. And we go down the line allowing each interested candidate to explain why they would like the position and why theyd be good at it, ECT. After that its up to the boys to do a vote.

We just put certain requirements in place for certain positions. Such as SPL and PL must be 1st class or above ect. You can make them whatever works best for you.

For the big positions such as SPL and ASPL we do paper ballots but for everything else the boys just raise our hands for who they want and somebody keeps a tally.

Recently weve been doing it so that we don't vote on our SPL only the ASPL and the ASPL will automatically become the next SPL.

This will allow them to run their own troop and run their own election. It can all be done in one night and you get interested candidates for the job.

Everyone seems to be talking a lot about the getting parents to put their trust in young adults. Ive literally been the acting scoutmaster on multiple trips and my best friend another young adult was acting SM on another we had more people attend those trips then the ones run by our normal SM.

I know this may be an oddity and not admissible in the court of forum but its just showing that it really is not as big an issue as everybody thinks it is. Once people start to see that you are there you are responsible and you know what youre doing they relax and treat you like any other adult.

My recommendation for new crossover parents if they dont trust you as a young adult is that yha have a camp out where they are invited with the one proviso is that their boy tents with another boy and they are not leaders they observers at that point (unless theyve already done paperwork to become a leader). Then they start to see how the Troop functions and they see how you function as a leader. If they are still nervous after that then you tell them to fill out the paperwork and become an ASM or committee member and come to some outings.

Then you have both yourself and an over 21 year old there. This is another thing people seem to be forgetting. It is unlikely that even if you have a young SM that you older adults will be leaving scouting.

So #1 there will always be at least 1 other adult on an outing and # 2 the likely hood that the other adult is over 21 is very high. Especially since unless it changes that is a Tour Permit policy and one that I really dont see an issue with.

But even adults can lose boys when they take the SM position when the current SM we have took the role we mysteriously had 6 or 7 boy leave the troop. So the fact that its a young adult really doesnt change this fact.

Im sorry I dont understand the principle analogy. In all the schools Ive gone to the principle is just in charge of discipline and running the school you didnt see them except for that. To me that all powerful position behind the scenes position sounds more like the COR or CC.

Sorry I just dont see the correlation. The Scout Master position Is in front of people empowering the boys to run their own troop meetings and Troop in general so its a position that is an odd mixture of being in the front but being able to step into the background as well.

I just dont see that with the Principle analogy.

The SM needs to be somewhat of a "the buck stops here" figure in his troop when it comes to working with the youth membership. While its true that from an administrative side, the SM can rely on the committee, his UC, and the district/council structure for backup and support on certain issues, I feel that when it comes to working directly with the youth, he needs to be the "top dog."

Again young adults are not fragile and if they learned what they were supposed to from the BSA Program then they have the leadership skills that you trained them with. Some are natural leaders and some are not and have to develop a comfort to leading and their own leading style but they can all get the boys to listen to them if they are any good as a leader.

We had one Patrol leader that is in college now and when he started being a patrol leader he leader by yelling and screaming and trying to bully people into submission. But over time he learned how to finesse the situation and now you would swear he was a natural leader if there is any fooling around that shouldnt be going on he has the buck stops here. That was before he got out of the troop so again that particular thing is something that people should be able to learn right from your Troop program.

Now I myself am not ashamed to admit that I am not a natural leader. But I know how to lead and have developed my own personal style and people follow me and I have been mistaken for having natural leadership ability.

I worry that often young adults in leadership positions are seen more as "older brothers", and less as mentoring adults. I feel that there is ample room for both types of adult roles in a Boy Scout troop - but I feel that the SM needs to be seen as something more than an "older brother."

I have also already told you all that the boys do look at the young adults I know as leaders. But also as leaders they can relate too. Theyll come to us to talk after a meeting or during if there is nothing going on (yes thats how bad our meeting are). But if we tell them something its done first time. Once or twice weve had better luck getting them to listen then the adults. And Ive seen this in another troop that Im closely affiliated with as well.

Difference between a young adult and older adult is its enough of an adult to get response but not enough to get the rebellious teenager side. Ive heard the boys complain about being told what to do by leaders because they were old farts (sorry direct quote no offence meant) and it was supposed to be a boy led troop.

So as I said I would greatly prefer the age limit just dropped across the board and let the Troops and Parents and COR all decide what is best for their troop and their situation. But I also see merit in a hybrid program listed by Moosetracker and Oak Tree awhile ago. In one all but CC and SM are 18 and the others are allowed by exception. In the other all but SM is at 18 and thats allowed with exceptions.

I also dont have an issue with the out of high school exception since this may be a problem if they are still actively going to school with the scouts but at 18 your usually senior moving on to college so its not that big of a deal to wait just that period of time. That to me is another acceptable arrangement.

And thank you Irsap for the compliments.

(This message has been edited by MoosetheItalianBlacksmith)

Sorry the last message may have been confusing as the quotes I was using disappeared and everything else got italicized. So Ill try again. I know these all come from the same person and Im really not picking on you and I agreed with most of your last posting. Its just that I already said most of these and just wanted to clear them up.

I thought you wanted to GET RID of age limits! Why keep the age 18 limit for Scouts? Isn't that just as arbitrary as an age limit of 21?

No the point is to get rid of age restrictions on the ADULTS. And not it is not arbitrary. Everyone knows of the 18-21 year olds as Grey area scouters they dont know what to do with them because they cant do anything with them. Since they are not youth and not allowed to be full adults.

You change that age all of a sudden they are no longer Grey area scouters and full fledged adults.

Suppose Scouting raised the age of leaving Scouting to 21 and kept the restriction on adult leaders at 21. Would that make you happy by keeping those other positions open for youth leaders? I don't think so!

Think of it this way. Scouting has a hard time keeping people in starting at 16 due to girls cars sports and jobs. (As I said before I limited what I was talking about before to those that made it to 18). This is why Ventures was created was to try and keep those boy that werent "lifers" (people that will stay in scouting past what they need) in a little longer.

By age 18 youve figured out who the active scouters are and who wants to be there. But they are also ready to move on to new challenges such as college, full time jobs, family ect. How do we keep them offer them a new challenge allow them to take committee roles or other adult roles. Whatever is of interest to them.

So no raising the age to 21 wouldnt make me happy and would actually be detrimental to scouting as a whole. As by 18 they are off trying to find new challenges. If allowed those could be found right in the comfort of their own troop with people that will support them and help them out.

But we've explored reasonable ideas on why that might be a problem in this thread, and I don't think we have the information or expertise to resolve the issues raised

This is the new one that was not on the last post. Yes some reasonable things as to why it shouldnt be done have been brought up but there have been very solid reasons as to why young adults should/ or could be allowed to be SM or CC.

Heres another question as a fellow scouter(from me to everybody out there) following the scout law and having been in scouting a long time if somebody decided the best person for one of those positions was somebody between the ages of 18 to 21.

Would you HELP them in any way you could and try to be there for them if they needed you. Would you be LOYAL to the committee or COR that put them there and to the person doing the job. Would you be FRIENDLY to them so that they have somebody they know they can come talk too or just to be a smiling face to brighten their day and make them feel better. Would you be courteous and not try to get in the way of their job all the time and not put them down for doing the job. Would you be BRAVE enough to accept the change and work with the young adult and listen to what they have to say. ECT.

I dont need an answer to that question but its something to think about if you truly believe in the scout law then even if a 21 year old is the best candidate and put in the position youll be there for them.

Whether its your favorite candidate for the job maybe a different situation but you would be there for them. And if you have multiple people that believe strongly in the scout law as demonstrated above then adults dont have a reason not to listen to the young adult they can listen to the other people following the young adult.

But dont take this to mean that the young adult cant deal with adults and make them listen on their own Im just showing another reason that it is not an issue for people to be in those roles.

Im not trying to start anything again just throwing some more info out there.

(This message has been edited by MoosetheItalianBlacksmith)

Moose tracker is right about that its not just about the scout master position and by not giving 18-21 year old responsibilities I mean the BSA.

We cant be the only one that finds it odd that you have an option to decide what you want to do right up until you turn 18 and then all of a sudden you no longer have options. Till you turn 21 that is then everything opens up to you as if at 21 you suddenly become intelligent again.

I have not really asked about people that leave because of scoutmaster positions not being available or not getting that position. Just havent thought of it. I asked the other question because I was interested in knowing why they left scouting.

And nobodys saying that there shouldnt be an age requirement we just feel that it should be the age at which you become an "adult in this program.

Sorry if this is brief its family time..but we may e off and on as we get some free time.

>

Think of it this way. Scouting has a hard time keeping people in starting at 16 due to girls cars sports and jobs. (As I said before I limited what I was talking about before to those that made it to 18). This is why Ventures was created was to try and keep those boy that werent "lifers" (people that will stay in scouting past what they need) in a little longer.

By age 18 youve figured out who the active scouters are and who wants to be there. But they are also ready to move on to new challenges such as college, full time jobs, family ect. How do we keep them offer them a new challenge allow them to take committee roles or other adult roles. Whatever is of interest to them.

So no raising the age to 21 wouldnt make me happy and would actually be detrimental to scouting as a whole. As by 18 they are off trying to find new challenges. If allowed those could be found right in the comfort of their own troop with people that will support them and help them out.

(This message has been edited by MoosetheItalianBlacksmith)

Seattle Pioneer: Stop with the 16 and 14 year old stuff. Well all know nothings ever going to change with them as do they and theres no issues there. They are Scouts until the age of 18.

As scouts they have choices to be patrol members PL, APL, SPL, ASPL, Scribe, Historian, Quartermaster, Librarian, ECT ECT ECT.

But after 18 they become adult leaders. Right now they have one choice ASM or leave.

So why do we go from giving the boys all types of responsibility to giving the young adults none. and why is it the position we are allowed to take at 18 is the one where we work directly with the boys if the issue is that we are not old enough to be taken seriously as adults. Instead of one the committee where we are helping out but not really in direct contact with the boys.

KC9DDI: Ive talked to lots of scouter parents and college kids that were in scouts and have had long conversations about lots of scouting things but one thing I always like to talk about just because I personally find it interesting is why they left scouting in the first place. Ill narrow to people who made it to their 18th birthday for convince sake. I will admit that some times it has to do with other issues such as family problems and or going to college. But a lot Say they stayed in as an ASM for awhile and got BORED. If the reason was college then I tend to go on to ask why they didnt find another troop to join out where they were going to school. Answer is usually either was too busy or that they were not thrilled with what position they would be forced to hold.

Im a huge scouter I talk about it to a lot of people and I learn a lot. SO no its not the only reason we lose bright young minds that we have been training for years but thats sure a big one.

MooseTracker:

You have a nice hybrid idea I would prefer if they just dropped the age to 18 all together across the board but what your suggesting works too. But to add on she is correct about young people bringing their own support group. If youve ever noticed how young adults work now they can do things alone and are not afraid of doing things on their own but if they have a choice they will bring people with them. So quite often Young people bring a support network into the troop with them if they take on a massive job or they develop one from the people around them. People they feel are aptly suited to mentoring them and helping them out. They will not take the job from them but rather be an advisor.

But MooseTracker the dysfunction shouldnt be the only consideration to whether somebody can do a job or not. That would leave the boys high and dry and at the hands of the dysfunction and us young people are not as fragile as older adults tend to think we are. We can deal with a lot. The only thing is the more dysfunctional the troop is the more work that a person is gonna have to put in to get it functioning again. Be it a young adult or not. As always there are different issues with the different ages. But nothing that is unworkable.

We already in this forum have 4 solid "exceptions" of young adults being mature enough to take on adult roles. With Beavs SM that he talked about, with Scoutfishs firefighting stuff, and according to some other people on the forum both teacher/scout and myself. And I personally know of multiple other exceptions and Im sure other people do too.

Again we are not just talking about the SM role we are talking about Leader Roles in general anything more than ASM (since that all they allow young leaders to do). And the lack of roles leads to young leaders leaving, unfortunately its a fact.

In my opinion the age should be lowered so that people capable of doing roles are allowed to do them.

This wouldnt effect anybody because if you dont want young leaders in your troop that would then be up to you because at that point its up to the troop to decide whether the person is qualified to do the role or not. This as I said before, is what we do any way with adults over 21, so the only thing that changes is that nobody capable of doing jobs is excluded.

Just because somebody isnt 21 doesnt mean they arent a great candidate for any one of those positions if given the chance to do it. They may do it differently than an older adult would but theres nothing saying there way is wrong. And if they are a good candidate why cant you give them a chance?

Cool thanks guys that was the type of info i was looking for know ill have a better idea what im getting myself into when i get the okay from my DE. Sounds Interesting to me.

I had a scoutmaster that had a similar tent and would bring it on all the outings. It worked well for him. He brought a tent heater and a cot and really lived it up. We all used to tease him about his "taj ma hal" but at the same time it was rare he didnt have another adult stay in it with him. At one point we gave him pink flamingos to put outside his tent....just to razz him (he had everything else).

But my family also has one of these tents as well as about 7 other tents they range in size from one in which the "taj ma hal" can fit inside of very easily and one that you can just get inside of without equipment (designed for backpacking).

We love the "taj ma hal" and its lasted a long time and weve never had any issues with it. Its a great tent

But Im just not sure whether its the same manufacture or quality or anything like that so just be careful in that sense.