NJCubScouter

I don't want to get too personal here, but is this the attitude you take with your own children? Let them eat whatever they want? Let the individual decide? And yes, I realize this is different, but it's not that much different.

I just heard back from the guy who, if anyone in our troop would know about this, he is the guy. He says: Interesting perspective from a wise man. Added: And his note suggests that the guy from Westfield (in the article) is not the only Scouter in Patriot's Path who is not willing to let Sabattis go quietly in the night. Now that I think about it, my friend has been in this council (first the Watchung Area Council, which I mistakenly called Watchung Hills before, and now Patriots Path), for his entire Scouting life - more than 60 years if he was a Cub Scout, and I know he was an Eagle Scout.

Well, there you go. What draws one troop may repel another. If you don't mind saying, how far is your troop from Sabattis? I am trying to get a sense of how much the distance may play a role in the use of the camp. And when you have been there in the past few years, how full (or empty) has the camp been? And do you know how many weeks of summer camp they run? And I just realized yet another reason why the camp may be under-used. When they have "extra" camping weeks to try to draw people in - like Trail to Eagle camp (really don't get me started) or ATV camp (or whatever it is) or coed-not-necessarily-BSA-members provisional camp, they never have them at Sabattis. I believe they are almost all at Winnebago though some may be at Allamuchy. I suspect this is at least partly because, all other things being equal, people would rather go one hour away than four. You don't need the Adirondacks to work on Citizenship in the Nation. (Nor do you need any camp at all, but we don't need to get into that.)

Of Sabbatis? Your post is the first I've heard of it. I get the council newsletter by email and it has not been in there. I am not really "in the loop" on council/district matters but one of the guys I emailed this morning is, I will be interested to see if he has heard anything.

I am in Patriot's Path Council. (I may never have said that before in this forum, but I have probably left enough hints that someone could have figured it out.) I have never been to Sabattis. The last time our troop did summer camp there was "before my time" with the troop, probably in the late 90's. I don't think anyone from that time period has ever mentioned to me why they didn't go back. It may be as simple as that the troop started going to Ockanickon in Bucks County Pa. (now the Washington Crossing Council) shortly after that time, and the kids have gotten comfortable going back there (a little too comfortable in my opinion) and that has become our every-year summer camp. Another factor may be that Sabattis is about a 4-hour drive while Ockanickon is about 45 minutes, and our council's own "regular" summer camp (Mt. Allamuchy) is also about 45 minutes. Sabattis is considered a "wilderness" camp and I am fairly sure it is patrol-cooking whereas Ockanickon has a reasonably nice air-conditioned dining hall (and don't get me started on that either.) My suspicion is that Sabattis has become substantially under-used. I have heard of only one troop in our area that has been there in the last 10 years. I am sure they try to get out-of-council troops to go there, but I am not sure what their selling-points would be. I do know that there is at least one other Boy Scout camp fairly close to Sabattis, about 15 miles as the crow flies (though as the car drives it would be more like 40 miles.) (I am talking about Camp Masawepie, where I went for summer camp twice as a Scout. From the information I just found, Masawepie is about three times as large as Sabbatis. I'm guessing that when out-of-council troops are looking for a place to go in that part of the Adirondacks, they are more likely to choose Masawepie.) It is concerning to me to hear (assuming that this rumor is true) that they are talking about selling it to a developer, because the Adirondacks are one of the last large areas of relatively unspoiled forests in the Northeastern U.S. It would be nice to preserve something from the chainsaws. Unfortunately, as they say, money talks. (I just emailed a couple of guys who might know more, we'll see what they have to say.) (Another added note: One thing that may make this less controversial than some other camp closures and probably less prone to heroic camp-saving efforts (like Glen Gray) is that Sabattis has never been anyone's "home camp." That is Mt. Allamuchy, and going back before the council merger around 2000, also Camp Winnebago for people who were in the Watchung Hills Council (which my current troop is; my troop as a Scout was in Morris-Sussex Area Council, and those are the two that merged to form Patriots Path.) Winnebago is now used mostly for Cub Scout camping and programs, for NYLT and for some adult training programs, while Allamuchy is the Boy Scout summer camp. Sabbatis is kind of "extra" and I have no real sense of how much it is used, but as I said before I strongly suspect that it is under-used.)

Learning for Life did not exist, but Exploring did exist, and it was fully coed starting in 1971 (at least according to this site, http://www.seniorscoutinghistory.org/seniorscoutsite/exploring2.html, I always thought it was 1972). Another thing that that web site says that I didn't know before is that starting in 1969, girls could be "Explorer Participants" but not actual members, and they also had to be members of an "associated group" such as Girl Scouts or Campfire Girls. (I'm not quite sure how BSA and GSUSA were "associated", but that's what the page says. This sounds like a very early and very limited attempt at a "partner/parallel program".) Of course, Exploring would not cover either the entire age range (only 14 and up) or time period (only starting in 1971, really) that you are talking about, so it probably doesn't explain it. My guess is that the "wink and a nod" is the better explanation. As we know, some councils have done all kinds of things in the past to make their numbers look better (and I am giving them the benefit of the doubt by saying "in the past".)

There is a difference between someone somewhere saying something and real, effective pressure that actually brings about change. Ranman says there is some group that wants to change the name of Father's Day. So what? Ten people want to change the name of Father's Day? In this country, there is someone somewhere who holds every conceivable ideological viewpoint, some just silly (like changing the name of Father's Day) and some of whom would like to see certain other groups of people wiped off the face of the Earth, and everything in between. It's when someone is gaining real political power with extremist beliefs that you have to be concerned. And then there's NOW. They were a political force in the 70's, and with largely positive results for the country, in my opinion. They really aren't a political force now. They can advocate for girls in the Boy Scouts all they want (and they have probably been doing so for at least 45 years, because that's how long the issue has been around), but when there are girls in the Cub Scouts and the BSA-Girl-Scouts, it's not going to be because of anything NOW has done. It's not going to be because of four girls here and one girl there who want to make Eagle. It's not going to be because of anyone carrying protest signs or filing lawsuits. It's going to be because it's what National wants to happen.

Well, this is not official, but it has been stated in this forum that the LDS negotiates its own fee structure with the BSA. (Presumably less per Scout.) Evidently it is the only CO that is permitted to do so, but it is also the only CO where the national hq of the CO writes the BSA a single check each year to register all of their units and members in the country. I am not an expert on this, but I know that's what I have read.

Does anyone know how many Varsity Scouting teams exist other than those chartered to the LDS church? I have never seen a Varsity Scout nor have I ever heard of any existing in my council. (Well, actually there are approximately two LDS troops in my council so it may well be that they have teams associated with them, since that's the LDS program - until the end of this year.) Occasionally I have seen a Scout wearing the "blaze" shoulder loops and upon inquiring I have learned that some Scoutmasters have "repurposed" those loops to signify members of a Venture Patrol within a troop - which is not what they are meant for.

Actually Ranman's idea of a "new program for coeds" is not so far from what the BSA is actually considering, according to the video presentation from the Chief Scout Executive that is linked in some thread in this forum. For Cub Scouts there would a local option for coed packs (but not coed dens), but at the Boy Scout level there would be a new, separate program - not coed, but for girls only. At last report they were still considering exactly what this program would look like, including the issue of Eagle. My opinion is that if this is what they are going to do, the new program for girls should be a mirror image of Boy Scouts, including Eagle.

That reminded me of this: http://dilbert.com/strip/1995-10-02 It's amazing what you can find on the Internet.

I agree with RememberSchiff. This program is consistent with the program of the BSA and even goes directly to one of the three aims (fitness). This is not part of any scheme to take away people's personal liberty. It is not "Big Brother" or the "deep state" or any of that.

Well, I get free coffee at work (keeping in mind that there's no such thing as a free cup of coffee), so you can't beat that.

Does Dunkin Donuts coffee count as "fancy?" I like that a lot better than what I get in a Starbucks, and it's probably about a dollar less and I get it a lot quicker.

I think your understanding is incorrect. The BSA leadership has decided that their salvation, numbers-wise, lies in expanding opportunities for girls to all age levels. There has been "pressure" about this issue for at least 45 years, and in terms of driving the decision, I think it has amounted to virtually nothing. National thinks this will draw in many, many more people (including more boys.) I think the fact that many people in this forum (including me) question whether this is actually going to happen leads some (not including me, and not necessarily including you, Ranman) to conclude that a substantial increase in membership cannot be the motivation, it must be something different. So the usual suspects of "PC" and "SWJ's" get rounded up, when what we are looking at is an internal, self-interest-motivated decision. I think the real driving force here is letting the girls in at Cub Scout age. If you watch Chief Scout Executive Surbaugh's presentation (which is linked in some thread around here somewhere), it is clear that that is what he is excited and enthusiastic about. That's where the big numbers are, and if you can draw in the girls starting in Kindergarten (as the GSUSA does with Daisies), your numbers are going to look really good. And that's what this is all about. It is when Mr. Surbaugh moves on to the point where we have a girl in fifth grade or age 11 and she loves Cub Scouts and now it's time to move on to something else, his entire mood changes. All of the oxygen has suddenly left the room. What was a great opportunity has now turned into a big problem: What do we do with these young ladies after Cub Scouts? We don't want to have nothing for them until Venturing, because most of them will probably just disappear. I think National is really stumped about what to do at that point. As you and others have suggested, they COULD lower the Venturing age to 11, but that defeats the whole purpose of Venturing (which is as an "older youth" program), which is why I don't think it is going to happen. As for "stealing Girl Scouts", if you think the GSUSA would not be upset about opening Venturing to 11-13 year old girls, I don't know what to tell you. They'd be just as upset as they already are, about the BSA considering starting a Boy Scout-age-level program for girls. I don't think the GSUSA cares what color uniforms the girls wear when they stop paying dues to the GSUSA and start paying them to the BSA. But as I said before, the big numbers are in Cub Scouts: Big numbers to gain in the hopes and dreams of BSA National, and big numbers to lose in the view of the GSUSA.

We ARE lovely, aren't we? Welcome to the forum Joe!

Except for the fact that I was a Cub Scout in the mid to late 60's, all of the above is true for me - in the Wolf and Bear years. (Lion was eliminated while I was in the Cub Scouts, but before I got to that point, so I went from Bear to Webelos as the kids do today.) Webelos was much less crafts-oriented (if at all) as we were working on Tenderfoot skills (what is today the Scout rank, except you had to know a lot more knots for Tenderfoot in those days) and on activity badges (which I think had been introduced at the same time Lion was eliminated.) But even in Webelos, there was no camping then.

It's kind of funny (ha ha) that it is on council sites but not on the National site, at least not on the home page or anywhere that I could find it in about five minutes of looking. For that matter, it's not on MY council's web site unless it is buried somewhere. Which I guess shouldn't surprise me since the front page of my council's web site is still urging people to sign up for the Jamboree (the one that already happened.)

It's a 37.5% increase. Though if you annualize it since the last increase, it's about 9.4% per year. Which actually makes it sound worse. Seriously, I think Scouting is a good value, now it's just a little less good.

I'm pretty sure Loomie is talking about the other kind of "doubling up." He's not talking about multiple jobs per person, he's talking about multiple persons in certain jobs.

Loomie, welcome to the forums! POR's are always a hot topic around here, especially as they relate to advancement... but leaving that aside and just answering your question... When you say "doubling up" I assume you mean having more than one Scout in a troop holding the same position. And I guess the real question is, which positions are "designed" to have more than one Scout in a troop in that position, at least in a larger troop. The ones I can think of off the bat are Instructor, ASPL and JASM.

In the Boy Scouts we sold lightbulbs door-to-door, and this was when I was an older Scout. My father once told me that I was the top-seller in the troop because I exuded an attitude of "I really hate what I'm doing, please take pity on me and buy some lightbulbs." (Hopefully without actually saying that.) Not an orthodox sales approach, but I guess it worked at that place and time. It probably contributed to me never wanting to go into sales. We also had a continuing paper drive for a few years and I assume we did something in the Great Spaghetti Dinner/Pancake Breakfast/Chili Dinner/Fish Fry fundraising continuum, but I don't remember that specifically.

Good point. And now that you mention it, I don't remember ever doing anything to raise money while in the Cub Scouts. Of course it has been awhile, but I do remember very clearly the fundraising that I did as a Boy Scout, so I am going to conclude that there was no fundraising while I was a Cub Scout. And the pack was chartered to a public school (this was in the 1960's) so I don't think our CO was giving the pack any money. Go figure. Maybe the dues were pretty high, but still... Added: This is totally off the point, but one of the most memorable (and surreal) experiences I had as a Cub Scout leader was participating in our pack's first "show and sell" of popcorn, at a supermarket. The date was scheduled weeks in advance: Sept. 15, 2001. Think about it. And our council is close enough to lower Manhattan that there had been a major, direct impact on a number of families in the area. Suddenly our little popcorn-selling table was surrounded by people raising funds from the Red Cross, Salvation Army and a half-dozen others. And, at our council's direction, we had a fund-raising jar too, separate from the popcorn till. Not exactly what we had planned, but necessary, and very memorable.

If you read through some of the older threads here, you will see that "burnout" (on the part of leaders, parents and kids) is a common and longstanding theme. On the other hand, my father said a long time ago that Cub Scouts would be the end of Boy Scouts because everyone would have "had enough." (Which didn't prevent him from being a Webelos leader and Cubmaster for several years each, in addition to many more years as a Scoutmaster, ASM and troop committee member, district volunteer, etc.) Well, both Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts are still here, though when my father said that, Cub Scouts was three years, not five and a half like it is becoming now.

The BSA runs pilot programs on a fairly regular basis. To my knowledge, there are two going on now, Lion Cubs and STEM Scouts. There has been no discussion that I have heard about expanding opportunities for girls on a pilot basis, but it is possible that National is considering this option. Personally I doubt that they will do it on a pilot basis.