Peregrinator

Some interesting results if you Google the phrase "Making Scouting Accessible for Families": http://www.samoset.org/openrosters/ViewOrgPageLink.aspx?orgkey=1438&itemkey=14002- this one is open about its being about admitting girls into the BSA

I realize that this is a joke, but cold water is better because warm water will open up your pores.

Where is that figure from? Is that just the losses in Venturing? Because the loss in Cubs and Scouts from 2014-2016 is around 85,000.

Co-ed scouting:

The BSA National Council is definitely a 501©(3). 501©(1) organizations are "government instrumentalities" which the BSA is not, even though it is chartered by Congress. That is true but for-profit organizations cannot be tax exempt under 501©(3).

"Because [current year]" has to be one of the lamest arguments for anything.

That's true but that one's friends and peers would be made up entirely of boys one's own age is something new. @@The Latin Scot, I would love to read where B-P wrote about new scout patrols. It's not familiar to me.

If you're running age-based patrols (which I know are not unique to LDS) then you're not running the program as B-P envisioned it.

From what I have heard, most LDS boys 14+ do not participate in scouting (hence the push to get Eagle before 14), whether or not they are registered.

That was a Knights of Columbus decision.

The Catholic Church does not have a national policy setting group either, at least as far as the BSA is concerned. There's the NCCS, of course, but they don't set policy for the Church.

30% growth over 3 years (an average of over 9% per year) is "limping along"? I have my own criticisms of Trail Life but as far as I can tell they're not "limping along." 9% is good, sustainable growth.

The scandals have certainly played a part, but Catholic school enrollment has been declining for decades. Tuition goes up, enrollment declines. It's a never-ending cycle. And frankly, there is not much reason to pay tuition so your kids can learn the same thing in Catholic school that they would learn in public school.

It does not follow from that fact that co-education is better for youth.

They're in rut all the time.

I didn't say it shouldn't be done (married folks tenting together), I asked why it was "mad" (I guess that is British for "crazy") that they not.

Why is it? This is scouting not family camping.

Ironically, Canadian immigration law is probably more restrictive than American.

"The scout law is sacred and the Holy Bible its perfume. The scout law is our Lord Jesus’ law." --Fr. Jacques Sevin.

Then "they" will say that the girls aren't getting the real program because they are not working with and/or competing against the boys, or that the boys have the "better" scoutmasters, etc. The arguments they use now are just a means to an end, they will develop new arguments in order to reach the end they want.

That won't be enough for the people who believe co-education is the be-all and end-all.

I've only crossed the border twice in each direction (both times when Obama was President), but my experience is the same.

Apparently about 30K of the cubs in this year's report are Lions. So there's your answer.

My numbers come from the annual report, but I am counting the # of adult volunteers as well, and counting Venturers separately (as it's not a "traditional" program). And the steepest losses over the past few years have been in Venturing.

Anyway, as far as actual numbers are concerned, the BSA suffered a 5.36% loss from 2012 to 2013 (I am counting only traditional programs here) and a 6.08% loss from 2013 to 2014, but under 3% from 2014 to 2015 and possibly under 1% from 2015 to 2016 (I don't think official #s have been released yet). A lot of last year's non-loss is due to the Lion Cub pilot.