qwazse

Yes, if Scouts UK membership's trajectory has leveled, then they have only about 80% of the male membership that it did in 1990. However, there is no indication that this is a mere return to baseline. If they recruit another 20,000 boys, and 80,000 girls they will exceed thier historic number of boys served and be nearly 50% female. A thirty year wait for a recovery? Not sure BSA would withstand that in our environment of caustic punditry. However, unlike the Brits, we have had a 50 year decline with no end in sight. We are serving fewer American boys every year. Continuing to do so will open the door for an organization who may "crack the code" to attracting boys. I personally don't believe that extending membership to sisters and girlfriends in itself will be part of that code. But if the people who attracts those million boys also happen to have some couple hundred thousand girls who hike and camp independently along side them ... BSA may be found to join them under some new U.S. scouting federation.

Pride does get in the way. When my dad was a committee chair, they suspended a boy who had brought beer to camp. They told him if he came back in a couple of months (right before he became 17.5 years old), they would complete his Life BoR and support him in whatever he needed to complete Eagle. He chose not to return.

The deception may have started at the scout shop http://www.scoutstuff.org/venturing-uniform.htmlwhose lackeys stand to gain from ignorance that, for a person to be nationally recognized as a venturer, the hat is not required, and belt and grey pants may be purchase from any vendor and be of style appropriate to the needs of the venturer.

I think you either heard your instructor poorly, your instructor was misinformed, or your instructor's zeal for uniforming drove him/her to deceive.

I do not have census data from scouting organizations with respect to the membership regulations. Nor have I seen anything like that online. (That said, look up each country's website.) Like I said, I don't think the information will shed much light on the issue. The context in each country is diverse. Sweden has had co-ed scouting since the '60s. It was a placement of guides (i.e. girl scouts) and {boy} scouts under one umbrella organization. There is a white paper of statistics from 1993 (http://www.usscouts.org/internat/wosmstats93.html) with their membership at 146,215. Scouts Sweden's website (http://www.scouterna.se/other-languages/en/) currently puts that number at 70,000. So, after being co-ed for 30 years, one observes a 50% decline over the next 20. Czech, had no (legal) scouting movement for 49 years until '89, at that time scouting was allowed to be coed. So ignoring the political circumstances, one would observe that from the time scouting there was coed, membership soared from near 0 to the current 50,000. There have been ups an downs in membership numbers over the past three decades. Italy, had their scouting bottleneck with the rise of fascism. After WW-II they reconstituted as a loose federation. And, having lived there in the 80's, I can assure you that they had striking regional differences from town-to-town that would defy national edicts be it in language, food, religion, or culture. Scouting was no doubt the same. Forming a unified organization has been a rocky process. And, sex-segregation played a role in that, but it's not clear when that decision had the widest impact. Their numbers were 106,485 in 1993, and 102,066 in 2012. However, all of those numbers are favorable against trends in overall youth population. Of which Europe had been in decline. Here's a by-country report in great detail: https://issuu.com/worldscouting/docs/wsbero-membership_report_2013 The one striking decline that outpaces all others in shear numbers: BSA.

I think this is a little complex. For example, Scouts Sweden was coed in the 80s so these (maybe before that, I don't really know). I have scouts from Italy and the Czech Republic. Both countries have had coed scouting for decades. Both have a local option for sponsors who want single-sex units. The scouts I know we're from coed units and were quite pleased with how thier units operated. So in terms of morale, they are everything you'd want to see in a scout. (Then again, it takes a certain amount of optimism to be a young person making yourself at home on the opposite side of the world.) The Iron Curtain having quashed volunteerism and scouting especially, Czech scouts have had bigger problems than membership requirements. The scoutmaster is responsible for a group of 100+ 6-12 year olds. So the older scouts are cub masters and den leaders for the younger. They also plan and organize summer camp for the entire group. It seems that the SM selects a balance of male and female youth leaders who work together to implement the program. They have had steady growth since the collapse of the Eastern block in the 80s. But, I would credit that to the inspiring youth-led movement. The Italians have been coed for as long as I've been a scout. (In fact in the 80s, an Italian college girl once ask me to help start a scout group. I shrugged the idea off at the time. In retrospect, I regret not at least making the effort to ask around some local churches to see if any would like to sponsor one.) My current scout is veery enthusiastic about her program. When she joined our crew, she had her mom ship her uniform. Her unit operated along a nautical theme. And she dressed as sharp as a sea scout. (Although she made very clear they were more like our Boy Scouts, not Sea Scouts.) Their service projects included helping senior citizens boarding cruise ships. By her description, the sexes are never separated. By that, I think she means that patrols are mixed, and there are no restrictions on who bunks with whom. (It sounds like accommodations usually sleep 4 or more.) "We've been brothers and sisters together for years, so we don't think anything of sleeping in the same place." I don't have census data on either country, all I can tell you is that is that these kids really got a lot out of their respective programs.

There was some discussion in another thread about portable AEDs only 2.5 pounds in weight. However, I'm not sure if that includes a dry blanket or other nonconducting insulation. (Lots of places around here would require some distance to "clear".) Of course backpackers tend to be miserly in with weight. So, chances are it won't be carried unless the group is large enough for load balancing. Furthermore, making sure that the person with that component of the first aid kit is near the person who will need it is a non-trivial challenge. Secondly, maintenance and recertification procedures need to be in place. Field tested gear is a significant requirement. Which runs counter to bottom dollar cost constraints. Finally, every piece of gear is assessed for dual use. AEDs are specialty equipment. Is there any other emergency situation when the electronics in the AED might prove useful? Hikers favor one-time-use tools that cover a range of scenarios.

My sis-in-law once gave a plaque from Boston with the saying, "A good pun deserves to be drawn an quoted." Not sure how that translates in the age of +1/-1 buttons.

Son #1 and his wife, both trained as engineers, are in a leadership class through our church. Our young-adults' leader is an avid reader in the humanities. We love the guy: Eagle scout, his words always met with action, so he commands a lot of respect. His reading list for this class ... not so much. My poor linear thinkers are struggling to wade through these authors (Lewis being the notable exception): "Why is he taking 5 paragraphs to make one point?" "I started this supplemental survey online, four questions on the first screen, clicked submit, and 37 questions later ..." "I have no idea what we were supposed to glean from these five chapters." I'm on the verge of asking them if my suggestion to study some Islamic philosophy is starting to sound less far-fetched.

It is not the SM's prerogative to strip rank. I think, in the first years of scouting, it could have been the SPL's under certain conditions (e.g. failure to demonstrate a skill). But, I get the impression that that processes was not uniformly used and soon abandoned. We get the discipline a troop needs from its boys because, having achieved a certain rank, we ask them to live up to it. (E.g., simply saying, "You're a First Class scout, act like it." can quickly modify a lot of behavior.) Therefore, sending a boy home when there is no risk to life or limb is pointless. Creating drama of a youth who respectfully disagrees is detrimental to morale. Was the root cause was the SM or the boy? Transferring to another troop might be the best way to find out.

O/A and Venturing have the same challenges. Their target youth have available to them: a profusion of scholastic activities, competing non-scholastic activities, and financial pressures, the ability to self-select your associations on grounds that don't require physical presence, a la carte activities put on by adults who have the time to dote, and (you all will love me for this one) bloated troop committees who channel adults to dote on their unit and nothing else.

LDS is now "another faith" to him. So why not start by studying that religion? The advantage of the religious awards is that they help foster a constructive relationship between a youth and their (or their parent's) clergy. Most scouts who I know tell me that their work on a religious award is much different than sitting in a service or attending Sunday school. Also, if he is of venturing age, he may want to join a crew and consider the Trust award. Regarding duty to God, yes scouts have boundary issues. This goes straight back to the army of Baden Powell's day who had to incorporate fighters from all walks across the British empire. As St. Paul said, "forsake not the assembling of yourselves together". At the time, according to his and other apostles' writings, he was addressing folks from a broad swath of cultures and classes -- an intersection of bubbles, if you'll allow the use of a recently popular term. So, the proper exercise of religion is one of bringing people together -- a humanitarian endeavor indeed.

I agree with @@Stosh, the handbook says it all. If there's a doubt -- sometimes there is -- you need to allow for the notion that because of the goings-on in the troop, your son may not have mastered the skills the way he should have. It's a matter of the new SM contacting the old one. We do talk to one another from time to time. It doesn't take much to tell if a boy is "all that", and a caring SM will push the paperwork through to make sure his transfer scout is recognized by council to be at the appropriate rank on the appropriate date. It's sad to see an SM get all heavy-handed. It doesn't always end badly. I've seen them wise up and correct their course after a few boys transfer out.

There are a couple of other people who should be in his picture: the committee chairman and the charter organization representative. What they think matters a good bit. If your child has a pattern of noncompliance, however, you and him need to take that into consideration. Other troops may not use demerits, but they might be slower to grant ranks or quicker to suspend.

All that I can say: it's a big country. Based on experiences in my troop growing up, and some biographies of scouts pre WW-II, committees and COs have exercised varying degrees of latitude.Now that we can talk to each other, we're beginning to realize those differences.

Schools absolutely have that authority. But zero-tolerance can undermine that. Specifically, if a school must categorically dismiss a student, that removes any further ability to discipline. Admittedly, there's a huge liability allowing superintendents to use judgement to discern between the kid who knows he/she done wrong and the one who thinks the rules just cramp his/her style. But, I've seen it go the other way. Where schools were held liable because of applying zero tolerance to a victim acting in self-defense.

Yeah, David CO, most of us don't have a stomach for zero tolerance policies. The climb from purgatory might not need as many prayers as we law-keepers would like.

I would say there are no artificial consequences for not wearing it. There are natural consequences to wearing it, and that is what the BSHB spells out. Perhaps that's where the issue about BoR's comes to the fore. You all already know the boy. And completing the review should be a function of what more you'd like to know from him. Not necessarily what you see at the moment. But, at a meeting -- which is open to the public -- people won't recognize you for being a boy in the troop without that uniform. And @@Eagledad, maybe that's where your observation of boy-run comes to the fore. Boys know who their patrol members are. They are the one's always with them when they're hiking and camping independently! The odds are against mistaking scout for non-scout, so the consequences of going without the uniform are less. It only begins to matter when it's time to line up on the parade field, and those other not-so-familiar guys may or may not be from other patrols.

I have the same expectation. And maybe committee members call me overzealous. I feel they are a bit lax ... especially now that we merged and nearly any boy that wants pants can have them. Anyway, I acquiesce to them because at this point it's more their troop than mine. Most of the time, the boys show up looking sharp when they are in public (includes most meetings) anyway. I do wish someone would have busted my sons a little bit more ... especially checking the socks. That said, I understand that many of our older scouts are on a treadmill. And, if a fellow is coming from work looking sharp in his business suit, knowing that he could have stayed on the job instead of taking an hour out to come to a review (ours aren't always on meeting nights), I'm inclined to respect that. Him dashing to the closet and toss on a uniform doesn't tell me any more about his character than I should already know.

I can reasonably see someone viewing the BoR as an audition. Or, perhaps, trying out for the next rank. The "game" could be meetings, courts of honor, parades, etc ... It seems that much of BSA literature is intended to curb overzealous scouters who may be missing the larger picture of a scout who is a paragon of virtue, albeit out of uniform.

From replies to Bryan's blog on BoRs, a classic line: ... most Scouts would NOT show up to their “sporting†event, or “marching band†event WITHOUT being in full uniform. (http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2016/11/03/the-boy-scout-board-of-review-everything-you-need-to-know/#comment-168046) Which jarred my memory (and I expound upon from what I wrote in reply in scoutingmagazine.com): Players wear the uniform during the game. But often hit the showers and come out in civilian clothes for the “press conference†review. Likewise with marching band. We dressed up for the show, but for the audition for first chair/major/etc … we are in plain clothes. Tryouts? Same thing. Conferences with the coach, film study, most rehearsals ... not in uniform. Also, every band/sports banquet that I've seen, players wore their Sunday best, not their uniforms. All looked quite spiffy. The “game day†for a troop may be meetings, courts of honor, travel to/from camp, or on the trail. If you’ve seen your scout uniformed sharply in all of those circumstances, then your board has the latitude to credit that — and his non-uniform neat appearance — during the review. In other words, for public appearances, band members, cheerleaders, and athletes are uniform ... meticulously so; but, for backstage work (80% of the job), they are not. I'm not saying that it's wrong to ask scouts, inasmuch as they are able, to wear their field uniform for the BoR. I'm just saying that the band/sports as a metaphor is justification for not wearing your uniform at every event related to your activity.

Oh, I get it. Presume guilty first. Of course we make decisions based on ideology. From time to time those are political.

Sisal is good rope for most lashings. Check your hardware store or farm-supply and see if they'll give a bulk discount for scouts. Diameter really depends on the size of the spars and what you're building. The poineering merit badge book will have suggestions. If your boys really want to learn rope making, you start with a thinner diameter and build up. The best poles are ones the boys have to harvest themselves. Rough cut timber holds pretty well. Ask your scout families if anybody has cleared some brush. You might even call state game lands and national forests. In well maintained forests, the trees are often harvested, leaving plenty of downed tops. The holy grail would be a weekend (or two) campout on some land that was recently harvested for timber and the owner needs the tree-tops cleared, someone with block and tackle to help move limbs.and willing to part with their rope in the end is a real plus, and a safe place with for a really big fire to burn the scraps.

Venturers organize and participate in some activities along the lines of Areas. But, given their small numbers, I guess that makes your point.

@@gumbymaster, aside from your narrow characterization of partisan "get out the vote" strategies, I agree with you about the paucity of voter guides. I ultimately chose my candidates after clicking through to platforms buried deep in their campaign websites. (Really, how hard is it to just have a plain-text file with the issue in caps, carriage return, line feed, paragraph of opinion and strategy, date accepted, carriage return, line feed, next issue, etc ...?) I would also suggest that merely voting against a candidate is the rough equivalent of stealing your neighbor's vote. My general philosophy: consider the citizen (currently alive) who you admire the most, go down the long list of people running, find the person who most closely hews to that persons character, select him/her. Your neighbors candidate may win, for now. But in the long run, the minority party will begin to pay close attention to such candidates if they are chosen in large numbers. Or, resign yourself to "the way the world works", vote only to block, and be content with your perpetual dissatisfaction.