Proud Eagle

If the reason the troop is not active, is because the boys aren't around during the summer, that puts it in a much different light.

If the Quartermaster wants to count those summer months for rank, and yet he was gone the entire time to some other state on vacation or what have you, then I would say no. He wasn't available to do the job had he been called on to do it.

If the boys are the ones choosing not to be around during the summer and so the troop doesn't do anything because there is no one to do it, I would say then the boys have chosen to take a vacation not just from troop meetings, but from their positions as well.

Now if someone held a POR and was actually there and ready to do the job if called on, then I would consider counting it, but that would be a tough call.

I would suggest using your start up money on long term capital costs.

Then use money earned through fund raising to pay for program fees, etc.

That way, the boys can see exactly what they are earning money for. They will know that if they raise money, they get their camping paid for. If they don't raise money, they will have to pay themselves, or do less expensive camping.

Totally free program is a great objective, but you should consider weather or not that is a realistic, and sustainable goal. Maybe you can do it this year if you spend all your start up money on it, but can you keep it going in the future, particularly if you have more new Scouts join?

If you can raise that kind of money year after year, that is great. If not, then perhaps it would be best not to create unrealistic expectations for the Scouts and their parents.

You may be correct that it shouldn't concern me.

Though you are most certainly wrong on one point.

No, I won't be able to say I am already registered in another position, in another unit, in the BSA.

I tried that last summer. It didn't work.

It was made quite clear, even put in writing, that we had to register as members of the Crew to work at the camp. It was also camp policy that only the Crew's uniform could be worn by paid staff.

I did break that policy once per week at the parents night campfire, because I was asked to speak on behalf of the OA, and since OA is a Boy Scout program, I wore my Boy Scout uniform instead of the Crew uniform for the campfire. Even that was a bit of a problem the first week I did so.

Even the cooks had to be part of the Crew, which caused a problem when midway through the summer the background checks came back on two of them with some rather interesting things. That caused a rough couple of days while they found new cooks.

You would be suprised how many youth find the sort of thing that goes on at such meetings to be really interesting. It isn't so much the subject matter, it is the fact that they are trusted enough, and their thoughts valued enough, to be given a seat at the table.

In the case of OA officers they see such involvement as a way to serve their fellow Scouts. I would bet most upper level OA types would say that they would rather work with adults to serve others rather than have adults serve them. Obviously they aren't ready for all issues, but for many they are. Also, an OA officer would see serving on a committee or a board as a chance to serve the youth that elected them by giving those youth a voice in what goes on beyond the unit level. After all, a couple of youth speaking their mind certainly can't do much harm with all those adults around. Plus, the youth may actually have a perspective that none of the adults do.

Now, you mention you don't see a youth on the district committee as contributing much. OA Scoutreach mentoring is one area that the chapter chief could work with the district committee on. Also, the Webelos to Scout tranisition is another area that OA could contribute to. OA can also provide a service corps for district events, serve as a driving force behind a district level service project, and serve as an extra communications tool for the district to both relay information, and recieve feedback from the units. Also, camping promotion is a key goal for OA, and I would certainly think it would be for the district as well. In fact, most of the information the OA produces on camp promotions suggests coordinating with the district or council to produce the best results.

In the OA, the youth make the decisions, the adults are there to provide advice and support. So, if the district wants something out of OA, or if OA wants something out of the district, then it would actually be best if the proper youth officer were used.

Also, it helps both the individual youth officer, and the entire organization they represent feel as if they are valued members of the Scouting team if they are given a seat at the table. Even if they never come to meetings, knowing they are invited would mean something.

Oh, one further reason for including youth OA officers. Rumor control. OA is the ultimate grapevine, or back fence network. Information spreads at an incredible pace. Unfortunately, many of those spreading information don't have the truth. With a youth on the board or committee, that is someone that can use the truth to answer rumor.

Just as a closing thought on the value of including youth, consider what in my very, very, messed up council the abilities the also messed up OA lodge or chapter could bring to the table (and will be more willing to commit if their elected leader, not just the adviser, has a seat at that table).

The lodge does all of the following:

We contact every troop and team every year and offer camp promotions and OA elections.

Most units are visited for a promotion, election, or both.

At least one member of most units is active, therby providing a link to that unit.

When the wood badge coarse was short $500, and couldn't get it from council, the only source for it was to ask the Lodge Executive Committee to make a donation.

For a significant number of units, the only visit from someone that in any way represents Scouting beyond the unit level is by the OA election and promotion team.

For a significant number of units, the only Scouting meeting beyond the unit level that either the Scouts or Scouters participate in is the OA chapter or lodge meetings.

This year every registered adult in the council recieved two mailings. One from the Souther Region explaining the council's difficulties, and the other inviting them to attend a leadership training conference being hosted by the OA lodge.

We have the best communication network in the council, it includes regular newsletters, special mailings, email, and an informative and easy to navigate website. The council has a hard to navigate, out of date site, and only sends email newsletters, no written ones.

The lodge is offering youth protection, new leader essentials, leave no trace, mentoring, meeting running, Cub Scout Leader, Webelos leader, SM/ASM, and other trainings. For many leaders, this will be the only training opportunity available to them this year. Why are we conducting a training conference that is well outside our normal list of activities, and certainly not our responsibility? Because if we don't, no one else will, and we have the ability to get it done.

Now there are alot of things OA can't do. There are also many OA lodges and chapters that face challenges and have problems of their own to deal with. Perhaps if the council and district help they OA when they can, and the OA helps them when it can, we will all be better off in the end. We are, after all, one big team, even when we don't see eye to eye on everything.

So maybe the question shouldn't be what will the youth gain from the experience, but what can we all work together to accomplish. After all, both OA and Venturing are youth led, so if you want something from them, it may be a good idea to have the youth leading them as part of the team.

Political Factions

Most bodies that involve debate, elections, voting, and decision making become political in some way.

In the case of the council Executive Board, and the council as a whole, it is extremely political. I don't mean Republican or Democrat, or Liberal or Conservative.

I mean East v West, and pro-former SE and anti former SE. You see, the Audobon council merged with the Four Rivers council in 1994. Neither council's leadership, nor the membership, were really happy about, or comfortable with, the merger. The division was there from the start. The Four Rivers people insisted their camp stay open and recieve most of the resources. The Audubon people did the same for their camp. In the end both stayed open, but the Four Rivers camp (the wester half of the council) became the Boy Scout resident camp and recieved almost all the future investments. Then there was the SE. The Audobon SE became SE of the merged council. He ruffled many feathers during and after the merger. However, eventually, the program began to come apart at the seems, fund raising started to slide, people lost faith, etc, etc, etc, Yet, he failed to improve things. In many cases he personally caused the problems by creating personal conflict with volunteers. So, there became in both parts of the council a group that supported the SE, and a group that didn't like him. The group that supported him always seemed to win, but even within this group east and west didn't agree on much. So, here we are 10 years after the merger. Many people in the west still think of Manchester as THEIR camp, while people in the east think of Wildcat Hollow as THEIR camp. There is a core group that cares more about the program than the location, but they are a minority of those that are active at the district and council levels. Now that the former SE is gone, the faction against him is having a major "I told you so" case, while the faction that supported him is more or less falling apart, and according to some, since they have no SE to rally around, they are going back to the east-west fight.

However, I should note things are actually better now that the SE is gone. Mostly this is due to the help of the fine people at the Southern Region. Also, many of those who had faded away because of the old SE are returning to the program. Donors who didn't trust the SE are considering giving again.

This is exactly the problem I am concerned with.

Someone could have a decade old version of the guide to safe scouting and honestly claim they have a copy and have read it. They could even be totally ignorant of the fact there is a newer version.

There has got to be a better way to handle this.

Maybe we should all start complaining.

Or perhaps we should start working on a solution.

Heck, I found all sorts of forms and papers in our troop library and filing cabinets after the meeting tonight. Some may still be current. Others are thing I had never heard of. Still other are things I know have been replaced by newer things, but I wouldn't know that unless I just happened to be familiar with the new versions.

Also, whatever solution is found there needs to be an explanation if it is a minor update of cosmetic things, or a significant change that would make it necessary to buy the new version to be up to date.

Oh, NJ,

we had been using Woods Wisdom. That is, until our program planning process fell apart a few years ago. After that the planning sucked, and nothing was used.

Now I am trying to get things back on track. I did go dig out an old copy of Woods Wisdom, and we may still use some of the stuff out of it. However, with any luck, I will be able to get the program features (I would buy them myself, but I just can't justify spending money on more Scouting stuff right now).

Use your start up money to buy things the troop will always need that will last a long time.

Create a list of essentials. Consider if you can get those essential things from some other place, at least for a while.

Also, don't just buy camping equipment.

The troop is going to need some materials, books, and resources. You don't need to go buy every merit badge book, but there are some things you really will need.

On equipment, consider options for getting equipment at a low rate. There are many discount programs available. Also, using a less well known brand can sometimes save you a pile of money. There is a particular brand of cooking gear that is often much cheeper than the well known brands. Shop around.

One final suggestion is that Alps Mountaineering has the best Scout discount program of any I know. They apply their Scout prices to Scout units, as well as individual Scouts and Scouters.

http://www.alpsmountaineering.com/

http://www.scoutdirect.com/

They sell tents, sleeping bags, and packs.

I have only used one of their tents, but it was for a week, and it worked quite well. My council purchased 120+ of their tents and all performed well.

I personally like Eureka tents, but they are much more expensive. However, if you buy the Outfitter series from Eureka, they will literaly last a decade or more even when used by Scouts, so long as they are cared for properly. I would say the Eureka Timberline Outfitter 4 is about the best tent a Scout troop could get. I am biased since that is what my troop uses, and has used since I joined in 1995. Some of our tents were well worn at that time, and some of those that were worn then are still in use today.

It is also possible to get by with $30 discount tents, but they won't last very long, nor will they do the job in extreme conditions. However, some units go this rought, so that if something is damaged it will be cheep to replace.

I feel your pain.

We finally managed to get rid of our Scout Executive. Unfortunately, the council to our south hired him, even though he mismanaged things so badly in our council that several lawyers involved in the council on a volunteer basis have suggested convictions on multiple criminal charges would be possible.

We also once had an Assistant Scout Executive who engaged in drunk driving during Scouting functions and on council properties, and did this in situations that youth witnessed it. One of those youth attempted to do something about it, but the Scout Executive told him he would revoke his membership in BSA if he tried to take it further. That former assistant exec got promoted and has his own council now. That former youth is now an employee of the BSA.

So, these sort of strange things happen.

We live through them.

Unit level Scouters keep on doing the job they always did. Maybe they don't volunteer to help the district or council any more, or maybe they don't go looking for help like they once did.

In the end though, most of the youth never know anything strange is happening. Kids keep joining, people go camping, they earn badges, ranks, and all sorts of things. They have fun and learn stuff.

Donors that don't know or care bout the new SE keep giving.

Those that do know probably either designate their donations for specific projects just to be safe, or decide to give to some other worthy cause.

In the end though, the council is volunteer run. The volunteers hired the SE. The volunteers can fire him too. Now that won't stop some other council from hiring him, but at least he wouldn't be your problem any more.

Now, who exactly can hire and fire the exec? That would be the council executive board (or whatever name they give that in your neck of the woods). This is probably a group of a dozen or two dozen people. Some will be long time Scouters. Others will be business men, experts in some field, or some other prominent member of the community. Some may be clergy of churches, some may be doctors or lawyers. Some may be politicians. They are all volunteers. They probably have a meeting once per month or so to discuss things and conduct business. Usually these meeting are open to the public, but normally only board members show up.

Now, what if the executive board won't do the right thing? Now that is a problem. Usually only the council president can do anything about removing an executive board member. However, once per year there is a council business meeting. At this meeting all the Charter Organization Reps, all the executive board members, all the council members at large, and a variety of other people will get together. The main point of business is to elect new members for the executive board.

So, as I was saying, volunteers have the ability to make changes if they want to.

However, the Scout Executive does wield enormous power and authority. He is after all the CEO of the local council. In many ways he is the most powerful person in the council. Yet, even he is not all powerful. (I guess if a SE really wanted to, he could revoke the membership of the board members he didn't like, but that would probably draw unwanted attention.) In the end, volunteers can stop him if they really want to.

The problem is, most volunteers don't want to interfere with the way the Scout Executive does his job. They assume he is a professional with years of experience and should know best what to do. In many cases that is true, but sometimes the council board and council committee use it as an excuse not to do there job properly.

OK.

That was all very interesting but it didn't answer your question.

Find witnesses to the alcohol thing.

Get them to write down what happened, sign the statement, and give the statement to the police or local prosecutor in the area the event happened.

Or, just have the witnesses contact the police or prosecutor and let them handle it from there.

Also, someone should probably pass the word about it up the Scouting chain of command. If someone is willing to produce a signed statement, it should probably be sent to the Area Directer, Region Directer, and to someone at the national office.

After that, the problem should sort itself out.

Unfortunately this will be a PR disaster for Scouting and the council, but sometimes it hurts to do the right thing. Besides, BSA has people to clear thing up with the press.

Now, about that SM. In all honesty, an SM really could get rid of a Scout. It isn't part of the normal duties of an SM, but if he wants a Scout gone, he could talk the committee, or the charter organization, into getting rid of him. He could also just ask the Scout to go.

About those volunteers. He really shouldn't threaten people. It violates the Scout Oath and Law. Now if he is promising to enforce BSA policy, and some people take that as a threat, that is something else. Chances are, he thinks some of those old volunteers aren't doing things correctly and he is trying to correct them in a rather non-diplomatic manner. The SE may be right. He could also just be flexing his muscle to make it clear he is in charge. It is hard to say.

I would certainly take his disregard for long serving volunteers as a bad sign. It is either a bad sign about what those volunteers have been doing, or an even worse sign about your new SE.

Ultimately though, we can't give you the best advice on so very little information. Also, keep in mind we are volunteers, and none of us have any special power to fix your situation. We don't run a Scout Executive removal firm. Most of us don't have any direct experience in dealing with a situation like yours. It is certainly something they don't write about in the books.

One final thought. You could always contact the national office and ask them about all this. They really aren't there to deal with complaints about every Scout Executive. They certainly won't really care if there are disagreements with a few volunteers. However, they could get very interested in that fundraiser with the alcohol and the Scouts. Or they may just think it is some crazy story from someone with a grudge against an SE.

Before you do anything, make sure that alcohol story is true, and not just a rumor. That is the most important allegation in this story. If he knew, for a fact, that Scouts would be serving drinks at a fundraiser and approved it, he could be in deep both with Scouting and the law. However, if he didn't approve of it or know about it, he really isn't responsible. Check out that story and let us know.

I don't know where this idea of OA lodges and chapters chartering Venturing Crews has come from. Frankly it is nuts. I think it has even come up on here a few times before.

I know I have heard about it in other places.

There was a report that the Venturing division was handing out information on how OA lodges could start crews back at the 2002 NOAC. I don't know if they actually did, but there was certainly talk of it going on at the time.

Apparently some people seem to think that OA lodges and chapters are seperate entities, rather than being a integral part of the councils they serve. I could understand someone working only with Venturing getting that idea, however, it doesn't make any sense that a council would ever allow it. Yet, this is not the first story of a council pushing this idea that I have heard either.

Oh well.

Oh, and Bob, as to why I want to know, yes it is largely academic, however there are some other reasons I would be interested to know about it. One of those being I think forcing the staff to become a Crew is stupid. It is a Boy Scout camp. We had easily 60, maybe 100 troops at camp last summer. We had one Venturing Crew and one Sea Scout Ship, not counting the staff. We also had a co-ed Troop from the Czech Republic. Now I understand they can hire 14 year old girls with no other involvement in Scouting if they have a Crew, but I don't much care for making everyone else pretend to be Venturers for the summer. Most of the rest of the staff didn't care for it either, but no one thought it was worth raising a fuss about. However, if some sort of reasonable argument could be presented detailing why there should not be a unit chartered to the camp, that would likely hold up reasonably well.

Also, if I am going to return on staff, that would mean I would have to register as either a Crew Committee member or an Associate Adviser. Now, if by some chance something severly bad were to happen at camp, and there were any legal unpleasantries, I don't much like the idea that the charter for that unit is in any way questionable.

Plus, being an adult leader in a unit that doesn't even make an attempt to deliver the program to its members isn't something I particularly like the idea of either.

How many of your councils have youth serving on the council executive board?

How about on the the district committee?

I know our council by-laws state that there can be two, and no more than two, youth serving on the executive board.

Traditionally those seats went to the OA lodge chief, and the Exploring president.

However, several years ago there was a major confrontation between the Scout Executive and the former Lodge Chief turned Section Vice Chief. The end result was the Section Vice Chief was forced to keep a very low profile at all lodge and council functions for several years. The Scout Executive also arranged for the new Lodge Chiefs not to be invited to sit on the Executive Board, which lead to no youth serving in a council position for a period of about 4 years.

That trend continued until the current Lodge Chief, who was asked to serve as some sort of non-voting member of the camping committee.

Obviously when Exploring became a learning for life program, that ended the seat for the Exploring president. The Venturing officer association hasn't yet gotten up and running at the council level, and only in one district, so that seat hasn't been occupied either.

Also, I know in some places the OA chapter chiefs and district Venturing presidents are asked to sit on the district committee. I don't think that is being done in my council.

So, how about in your council? Do any youth sit on the district committee, the council board, or any of the council committees?

Do you think any should?

I personally think they should. Youth are open minded. They are also directly involved in the program. Further, youth will, when asked, tell you what they actually think, while many adults often tell people what they want to hear. Also, youth wouldn't be worried so much about political factions or any other such thing, since they would normally only be there for a year.

Lets see, the OA Chapter Adviser comes to our meetings about once every month or so. I know him quite well, as did our former SM. It also happens that he lives across the street from the place our troop meets. He is the SM of another troop in town. He doesn't wear his Adviser patch, nor does he wear silver loops, even though he could. (Actually, I am not certain anyone has told him he could if he wanted. Probably haven't told him he is on the district camping committee either. Maybe I should mention that next time.)

Other than that, the District Commish showed up around recharter time two years ago without being invited or having called ahead. He then went on to chew out the SM (in front of parents and youth) about the recharter not being turned in by the district deadline. The SM of coarse was furious, but managed to keep himself under control, and informed him our recharter wasn't due yet, but that it would be in on time. Turns out the district had decided all recharters needed to be in at least a month before the normal deadline, and then as usual didn't bother to communicate this new policy.

Oh well, the District Commish means well.

As to Eagle COH, we usually have the DAC in attendance, but then he is also our COR, so that is expected.

I did go to one COH for a friend of mine (he had asked me to be the MC) and no one at all with any district or council position was in attenance. In fact, I was the closest thing to such a person we had, since I was a member of the LEC.

Oh, I guess we used to, and still do, have youth OA officers at our meetings on a regular basis. I got that trend started, and some of the current Scouts have continued it.

Does BSA publish some master list of when each publication was last updated, or at least a yearly list of everything new and updated for that year?

I can't seem to find anything that tells me when something new comes out. I just bought a copy of the troop program resources yesterday, it is the 2002 edition. Yet, the 2003 edition of the SPL handbook, which I also purchased yesterday, claims there is material in the program resources which are not there, or at least I can't find them.

Speaking of the program resources, does anyone else think the forms section was a bit lacking? It seems to me if you are going to put a class 3 medical form in it, there should also be a class 1 and 2, yet, there doesn't seem to be. Maybe a just got a bad edition or something.

I have looked at the charter, and I recall that it said "Camp Roy C. Manchester".

There was no "friends of" or "staff association of" or any other such thing. Now I am sure if anyone made an issue of it, they would claim that was the case, but it is not.

You are quite right.

I some how missed the "is trained in" part of defense # 1.

Must have been getting late or something. I noticed it said the person had to be know the defenses and follow them, yet I somehow missed the key part.

I would say, that it wouldn't be a bad idea to put the first sentence in bold just to make extra certain people get the point. After all, they put the sentence that serves the same purpose under Safety Afloat in bold.

Any how, it would seem there is most certainly not a loop hole, instead there was just a minor oversight in my reading.

OK, I think I see what you are saying now. I had the totally wrong idea before. I thought you were saying units shouldn't do PR and should leave it to the council and district. What you are saying now makes sense. I agree it would be a good idea for districts or the council to make such info available in a ready to use form, with perhaps some nice guidelines on when to make a press release or contact the media, and when not to do so.

As for why a unit needs to do PR, there is one rather obvious answer.

Advertising for fund raisers. Our troop, as previsouly mentioned, does a Christmas tree sale. We have a real need to get the word out in the community about this, otherwise we can't raise money. If we can't raise money, we would have to severly cut back on the type of outings we do, or make major increases in the cost of events.

So, we usually have someone type up a press release and send it to all the local media outlets. Out of this we usually are able to get a write up in the paper in the section dedicated to community organizations, pluss at least one real news piece talking about our tree sales, and all the things that sale supports, complete with pictures of Scouts moving big green pine trees around etc. We also usually get at least one television news program to cover it. Once we even got a live feed. Also, the local cable public access channel runs text information on things and we use it. Finally, the local radio station (which is run by our town mayor, often with him behind the microphone himself) gives us some exposure.

This added public awarness helps us with selling those trees, which pays for insuring and maintaing the van and trailer, new equipment, registration fees, activities fees for required adult leaders, most of the activities fees for youth, and assistance to needy families that couldn't pay those costs that are passed on to the families of the boys.

That is one reason.

Another obvious one would be that improving the image of Scouting in the community improves the level of cooperation we get from members of the community in doing things like recruitment, fund raising, finding volunteers, finding places to hold activities, in getting materials for service projects, including Eagle Scout leadership projects, and getting Scouting for food donations. Those benefits extend to the whole local Scouting community, and in some cases back to the community at large, even when a story only talks about one unit.

Further, I would think it certainly wouldn't make it any harder to get FOS donations if there has been a good deal of information in the press showing all the activities local Scouts are doing. I would imagine if someone goes to some corporate donor and he mentions the article he just read about the great time the local Scout troop had at camp, that person would be thinking they aren't going to have as much difficulty getting that FOS donation they are seeking.(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

I served on the camp staff this summer and will likely do so again. I could even wind up in a leadership role at the camp in the future.

Since all members of the staff at the camp are required to register in said crew, and since the camp leaders are made the leaders of the crew, it could at least be of interest to me.

So, Bob, what should we do if our council actually is chartering a unit to its camp?

In my council, I know, with a relatively high degree of certainty (I would put it at 90% certainty), that is exactly what has been done for years. The unit has even been recieving quality unit even though it isn't even chartered for the whole year.

Venturing Crew 207 in Council 200, is chartered to Camp Roy C. Manchester, which is a facility partially owned by the counci, and partially leased from TVA, and operated by the council.

It isn't chartered to the staff association or any such other thing. It is chartered to the camp, which was a council operated facility carrying out a council operated BSA resident camp program and other activities.

To make matters worse, all aspects of the program in our council are now being operated by the BSA itself, through the Southern Region. So, now in essence the council is chartering a unit to itself to provide a unit for the staff of a camp whose program is the direct responsibility of the BSA due to a legaly binding subcontracter relationship entered into by the council and the BSA.

That is about a half step away from BSA issuing a charter to itself.

Yikes, what a mess.(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

Reading over the Guide to Safe Scouting I noticed something odd.

The first sentence under "Safe Swim Defense" is in normal, not bold type.

This seems rather strange that a sentence that says units MUST have a safe swimmed defense trained leader would be in normal type, meaning that it is a guideline rather than a mandatory policy. Now the 8 defenses are in bold, so they must be followed, but the statement that a leader must be trained is not.

I then went on to check to see what a tour permit says, and while it seems a bit clearer, it isn't completely clear either.

Then there are those situations that no tour permit is required.

My council for example says that no tour permit is required when camping at the council camps, or when conducting short in town activities of no more than a few hours, even if aquatics are involved. This information is included in the little known and little read unit Risk Management guide our council produced.

This would seem to indicate that having a safe swim defense trained leader is not actually required before conducting an aquatics activity, but that the 8 defences must be followed.

Now I am not trying to create a loop hole, but it appears one does exist.

It seems that first sentence should be in bold, yet it is not.(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

Bob,

Perhaps I am not seeing the benefit of your plan because I don't really understand how it would work.

If you could provide an example, or an outline of the process as you see it, then perhaps I would see the benefit in it.

Bob,

I am sorry if I came off as defeatist, or as being against your idea.

I think you are probably right, but that in this case that makes very little difference to any of us.

Let me explain why. Most of us here are unit level volunteers with only minimal if any involvement with the organization and operation of the district and council.

Therefore, I think it would be great if the district and council started doing some PR work. However, being a unit level volunteer, there really isn't anything I can do to make that happen, especially since I an not a PR expert.

However, what I can do, is make certain my unit makes good use of the PR options available to it. Now if the district comes up with a PR coordinator and asks us to work with them, fine I will be glad to play along. At the moment though, there is no such person or if there is they haven't bothered to tell the units.

Sometimes I do have a poor outlook on the ability of the district or council to do anything, particularly if it is something more than they are currently doing. This likely has something to do with the very poor performance of the district and council in certain areas visible to the unit, and in some other areas I happen to know about for various reasons.

I guess if I thought I had anything to offer to the district or council I could probably get a volunteer position at that level. Unfortunately, I don't really see there being much of a way for me to help, though they probably need whatever help they can get. (Our Lodge Staff Adviser thought I would make a decent Lodge Adviser if our current one has to be replaced, I happen to think he wasn't thinking clearly when he commented on that.)

So, I am sorry if I seem like a defeatist. Its just I see so many problems with Scouting around here, and it seems like no one knows how to fix them. I know I certainly don't. Oh, sure I am good at finding what is going wrong, but figuring out how to fix it is something else entirely. I wish I were more of an optimist, but reality makes being an optimist hard, at least for me.

I had always heard that they could not.

Yet our camp also charters a Venturing Crew. This isn't just the staff being organized as a crew, there is an actual Crew Charter hanging on the camp office wall naming the camp as the charter organization. I asked one of the pros that worked on staff about this, and he said the camp isn't really the same as the council, so they can do it.

This was one of many things I thought were a bit odd about the camp and its staff crew...

First quick explanation-

Went to nearest scout shop and service center, which involves driving ten minutes, but crossing state, council, and region lines.

I asked if I could get a copy of the guide to safe scouting, and the lady says sure, they give those out for free.

Now that I look at it, it is just a photocopy of a print out of the online version. It is the 2001 edition with the 2003 age appropriate activities update mentioned, but not included.

So, is this the current edition, and if not, should I order one from supply?

Are service centers supposed to be handing out photocopies of the things?

What is info.netbsa.org ?

Why would a warning not to release information from info.netbsa.org appear at the end of the guide?

Bob,

I think you have good intentions, but I don't think your concept is realistic in many cases.

If, for example, in our attempt to have co-ordinated PR, we didn't bother to contact the media outlets ourselves, then who would? In you system, it would seem we would go through channels and pass the info to the district or council person in charge of PR. That person then might pass it on to the media if it fit in with the larger council PR agenda. Of coarse, one of the obvious flaws is that news must be new. By the time we send the information up the chain, and whoever is in charge (and knowing how beloved committees are, it would probably be a group of people) has a chance to look at it, and then gets in contact with the media, it is already old news. Also, it takes almost as much effort for us to send information up the chain, as it would to get in contact with our local paper and radio station.

Our council has only put out one major press release in the last several years. It was to let the public know about certain financial difficulties and accounting irregularities.

Normally if the council is trying to get something in the press, it only bothers with the media in the city the office is in, which serves only a tiny fraction of those people living in the council.

Now, in a large city, with no small media outlets, it would be difficult for a Scout troop with a couple dozen members to ever get anything of significance published on its own. So in those cases, someone probably really is needed to make it work.

However, most of us live in small towns and such where the local paper can far more easily interact with a variety of local groups.

Really it comes down to this, if we want our unit service projects, or our unit's Eagles to ever recieve even the slightest mention in the press, in our town, the unit leaders must be the ones to do the job. My troop has had quite a good experience in the past running our own little PR program. Any time we contact them about a significant community service project, the local paper is willing to cover it. Any time the paper has a chance to write an article about a new Eagle Scout, or a Scout completing his Eagle project, they take it.

We are usually able to get coverage from multiple TV stations for our annual Christmas tree sale, as well as spots on the local public access channel, on the local radio station, and multiple mentions in the paper.

Now to produce this effort, it required the work of a couple of troop committee members. One of them was a professional graphic artist and photographer with experience producing advertising material, the other was a business owner. Unfortunately the troop no longer has either of those committee members, and no one currently has those levels of skill. Yet we still get some results, though not quite as good as in the past. (Plus, on tree sales for example, once we got TV coverage, other troops in another council covered by those same stations realised it was a good idea and started doing the same, so it reduced our exposure level.)

So, in the final analysis, a PR pro would be nice, but so far council and district level PR has produced far less positive results then the efforts of any of a number of individual Scout units. The success my troop has had in the past isn't much different from that of many other units across the council. In the end, it is a job that needs to be done, and if the district and council can't or won't do it, that means those of us at the unit level are going to have to figure it out ourselves. I would rather spend time working on something of direct benefit to the boys, and I know most other unit leaders and committee members feel the same way. Yet, if not us, then who?

The answer, at least around here is, if not us, then no one.(This message has been edited by Proud Eagle)

I have some thoughts on this issue based on what I have heard from others, but since I don't really know all the details of the hiring and promotion policies myself, I would mostly just like to say that I would be interested in hearing more on this topic.

Some other possible questions-

Is the professional system too linear?

Why is the turn over rate so high?

Can a council hire an outside expert? or do they have to choose someone off the list of eligible pros that BSA gives them?

Doesn't it seem the training, experience, and even education desired for a DE, an SE, a field directer, or a finance directer would be quite a bit different from that desired for any of the other positions?

It is my understanding that at one time, almost all of the new 2nd Lt. in the Army started out in combat units, mostly infantry. Many were infantry platoon leaders, some executive officers for a company. Then they went on to their specialized assignments later in their career.

Well, now the Army starts most of its officer out in jobs related to the specific branch they are being detailed to. Essentially, they decided that people going into many specialized fields would not benefit much from experience leading infantrymen or other combat troops, and that the time would be better spent in additional training in their specialty either through the Army's schools or on the job training.

So, do we have specialists or generalists in the Scouting profession? and which would we be better served by?

Bob,

That is good advice for the council and/or district. Certainly a true public relations campaign needs to be run by someone that knows the business. The problem is finding someone that knows the stuff and is willing to do it, but then that is the problem with all volunteer positions.

However, I think a grass roots effort may have even more of an impact than a council or district level PR campaign.

Plus, we can all make a difference in a grass roots campaign, but most of us would have nothing to contribute to some fancy council organized media project.

NJ, sounds like that must be a nightmare from the policy or administration point of view.

Down here in Kentucky, most of the school districts cover the entire county. Historically, most cities once had indipendent school systems for their residents. However, now, most of the city systems have merged with the county school systems, so most counties only have one public school system. Also, in Kentucky, the school boards have a limited taxing authority to rais additional funds. If there is something like that in New Jersey, I can't even imagine the squables over which district gets to claim which high dollar new developments.

So in Kentucky, we have 120 counties, each with a school system. Then there are perhaps a couple dozen independent public school systems.

Oh, and speeking of school districts serving as boundaries, our council contains half of one community in Tennessee. It has nothing to do with schools or counties, but rather some sort of long ago disagreement between local volunteers and council level people in another council. Some how or another they put up enough of a fuss to get the place they lived moved into another council. Or at least that is how the story goes.