ParkMan

Yes true. But just about everything they wrote in the article had been said here 100 times. What this also shows is that we're ceding the floor on this conversation to whatever article comes up. What I really wish is that at a national level we'd really engage in this conversation. See the quotes To which someone ought to immediately reply that this happened 20-30 years ago and that none of those people (whether the abusers or those who didn't stop it) are here anymore. Then talk about how the BSA has the strongest anti-abuse program today - bar none. Some

His quote is really not all that surprising or new. We all know that the rise in insurance prices is a direct result of the sexual abuse lawsuits. He puts it in very stark terms, but I think everyone knows that part is true. What he needed to also say was that the abuse happened long ago and that Scouting today has completely different leadership and membership than it did then. But, when folks make these knee jerk comments, they leave that part out. On his comments about national. Goodness, the NYPost could stop by here just about any day of the week and hear the same. Local Scoute

Holy cow! $200 to council?

Seems like a good point to me. We (volunteer leaders) feel that having scouts operate without direct adult supervision is an important part of the program. So, what steps need to happen to enable that to happen? Training? New policies? What?

It may have been lost in the noise. But, the recent decision about youth meeting alone was not just for bullying. It was as much (and I suspect more) to do with youth on youth sexual abuse.

Good point. Everyone involved in Scouting needs to talk a lot more about what we do (outdoors, camping, adventure, leadership) and less about how. In some fairness to national on this. We're in the middle of a historic event on sexual abuse. I expect that many people who are responsible for growing Scouting are very concerned about the implication that Scouting is not a safe place for kids. So, when you're concerned about it - you tend to over focus on it. I get that when all we hear from national is YPT, YPT, G2SS, it's demoralizing. But beyond the specific examples of how YPT d

Sorry - I misspoke. Having a digital copy is fine. Doing away with a physical copy in favor of a digital one is the kiss of death for the magazine. I hear this a lot from parents too. The magazine is a good tool to reinforce a kids involvement in Scouting. Is another way for a scout to have exposure to a Scouting world. If even for an hour a month that he/she looks through it. I never even asked my son if we wanted it - because I knew that it was going to be a way to reinforce his involvement in Scouting. So I'd chip in a $1 month with the idea that I'd have something to put

Hi @yknot This sentence jumped out at me this morning. How specifically would you like to see the structure reorganized? I ask this because part of the time I serve in a district capacity. I struggle with the right way to organize district volunteers to provide service to units. I watch all the energy our DE puts into supporting requests from units. Yet, I suspect if you asked our units locally they'd say much the same thing. Your answer here will help me in understanding these challenges. I would propose that we keep in minds there are some things we cannot change. Most

Around here Boys Life is optional. A digital/online version would be the kiss of death for the magazine. As a parent I always encouraged my son to read it. It was a good way to reinforce his involvement in Scouting. I can't say that he always read it, but I was surprised how putting it in his hand did help.

Perhaps. I suspect there is a rethinking of how Scouting is funded coming. I think we all noticed the comment about council program fees being capped at the national fee. I can certainly see in a few years: $60 to national $60 to council $60 to the unit I wouldn't be surprised to see $15 a month in fixed Scouting costs in a few years.

Thank you @qwazse. I asked for specifics and you kindly gave them. I appreciate you replying with just what I asked for. In my mind, I'd probably try to find a way to make this work. But, I can certainly see the value in having older Scouts experience the outdoors independent of adult supervision. Yes, this would be a case where the BSA's higher priority of youth protection has impacted what you are able to realize in the outdoors with your scouts. I'd propose that this doesn't suggest the BSA values outdoor programs less than they used to - just that in 2019 protecting youth fro

At some point I look at it as just part of the cost of having a program. If national has to shell out a million dollars a year for MBC background checks and that gets amortized across all of the registered Scouts, that doesn't seem so odd. Actually, I'm kind of surprised that national hasn't cut adult membership fees for the same reason.

HBO did convince me to pay $10 a month so I could watch Game of Thrones - so I'm guilty too. My daughter wanted Netflix for Stranger Things too. Don't even get me started on my monthly cable or phone bills. Both of which are way more each month than we'd pay all year to national. I'm with @Liz. Scouting is a core part of our families life. $60 a year to national is still a bargain to me.

I thought that was a normal Wednesday (kidding also)

I do see they've made it a little easier on families by keeping the adult fees essentially the same. It's small consolation, but it's something

My take away from this thread is that it is very easy to get caught up in the politics of Scouting. The national council did this, my local council did that. Be it professionals, council volunteers, Wood Badgers, whatever. I'm not for a minute going to pretend that any of those groups always or even often make the right choices. As a long time volunteer, I've come to appreciate just how little any of that matters to a specific unit program. The program I saw in the 80's is very, very similar to the one our troop runs. The amount of district and council interference I see is remarkabl

These sound like good things for a pack to use. Can you not do this now?

I like a good rant as much as anyone, but how does this impact prioritizing an outdoor program? If anything, providing more facilities for advanced outdoor programming is a good thing. The location is within a day car drive for a very large percentage of the US population. That would be good for encouraging more outdoor use.

The challenge with all the information available in our society today is that it's really difficult to make sense of questions like priorities. The BSA's priorities are different depending on who you talk to. If you're the Chief Scout Executive or the national board, what's more important - fostering an outdoor program that already exists or trying to stave off financial disaster, continual declines in membership, or abuse lawsuits? If you're a local Scout Executive, is it outdoor program or keeping your council camp open and stopping membership losses? If you're a Scou

Ok - then we should start preparing for $100.

@gpurlee & @Cubmaster Pete, I have absolutely no idea what the increase will be. Like everyone I hear it is significant. Perhaps going with an estimate of $60 a year for now would be a good estimate. National may come back with less. If they come back with more, then you're maybe a little closer?

I love the picture! As a Scout, I served as a Den Chief. The den leader was a big ham radio fan - he had all kinds of equipment. Every so often he'd break it out and we'd get to hear messages from around the world. I was a life long memory. You experience looks so much like that. Thanks for refreshing a wonderful memory!

I don't disagree with any of what you just said. Just not sure what I can do with it. As a local volunteer, I have three choices: ignore the rules and run a program like in the old days follow the rules, but try to find solutions to the obstacles they present. blindly follow the rules, decide I can't do what I want, and run a crappy program I like choice two. So while I agree with your premise (and most often others on this forum) I find myself saying "yeah, these new rules are a pain, but how can I make them work."

Thanks for sharing this. I think it is well said. Given recent G2SS decisions this is more difficult to accomplish. What does it take for youth & adults to develop a working relationship such that it becomes possible for the adults to still be present and achieve the same results? If adults make it clear to the Scouts that the Scouts are really in charge or certain decisions does that then provide the starting point for a more capable youth leadership team?

Only because you'll be asking them