shortridge

BrentAllen, I'm going to have to disagree. If most units actually actively marketed and advertised the program in a coordinated fashion, it'd be different. But that's what National and the councils are supposed to do. There's no way small chartered organizations and units can compete with the professional expertise in community outreach and public relations that DEs and FDs and the like supposedly have. The units and COs can do small things on a community-by-community basis, but there's no comparison. National sets the tone, and it's gotten some really bad marketing advice. To another of your points: Boys' Life isn't a recruitment tool. It's a program tool. If it has much of an influence on membership, it's on the retention side. But let's look at the numbers anyway. The magazine doesn't even reach half of the registered Cub and Boy Scouts out there (2007 enrollment of 2.5 million, not counting Varsity or Venturers; Boys' Life Scout circulation of 1.1 million). It reaches an additional 200,000 non-Scout subscribers. And the "pass-through rate" of 6 million cited by National is a joke. When was the last time one of your Scouts actually handed a copy off to a friend to read? Aside from that, the Boys' Life image isn't what my council promotes on its Web site ("words to live by" tops the page). It's not the message that covered a billboard near where I used to live ("timeless values" was the dominant phrase). And it's not the impression you get from visiting one council's recruitment Web site (which focuses on "GIVING YOUTH SKILLS TO BE SUCCESSFULL IN LIFE" - spelling apparently not being among those skills). Log on to Scouting.org. The first main body of text you'll see is this: "The Boy Scouts of America is one of the nation's largest and most prominent values-based youth development organizations. The BSA provides a program for young people that builds character, trains them in the responsibilities of participating citizenship, and develops personal fitness. For nearly a century, the BSA has helped build the future leaders of this country by combining educational activities and lifelong values with fun. The Boy Scouts of America believes and through nearly a century of experience, knows that helping youth is a key to building a more conscientious, responsible, and productive society." Wow-eee. I can't wait to join, can you? Every 12-year-old wants to be a conscientious, responsible and productive citizen. Forget learning how to save a life or track a raccoon through a forest. I want to be a developed youth, darnit! [ end snark ] Edited to add: An earlier version of this post made some critical observations about beascout.org, which I thought was a recruitment site run by National. It's actually owned by the Cradle of Liberty Council. But it still reinforces the "values" marketing approach, with a healthy dose of typos and flat-out misinformation to boot.(This message has been edited by shortridge)

"Can a program that values Citizenship, Charactor and Personal Fitness survive in an increasingly hedonistic and anarchistic society?" I won't disagree with you, OGE. However, I do think there is a fundamental disconnect in the perception and marketing of the program today. Take a poll of your troop, team or crew and ask them what attracted them to Scouting. It's not going to be the Scout Law and Oath - and if even one Scout mentions "values," I'll eat my old Nalgene. Very, very few young men are interested in joining a program that promotes itself as teaching citizenship, character and personal fitness. Even fewer are going to be gung-ho about learning about "words to live by," "timeless values," or whatever the catchphrase of the day is. Those may be good marketing lines aimed at parents, but there's now way they're going to work for boys. And it's the boys who vote with their feet. I don't think that it's a matter of changing times and demographics - I sincerely doubt that boys back in the early 1900s were interested in "values" or meaningless marketing catchphrases, either. What attracted them, and what still draws boys today, is adventure, excitement and exploration. Honor, duty, country - those are more abstract things that they'll internalize as they get older, through both the natural course of the program and the natural course of maturation. I believe that the enrollment numbers are suffering and declining not because of its values, the God & gays controversies aside. They're declining because the program is being adulterated, becoming less about outdoor adventure and more about academics and technology. There's a page on Kudu's site - details below - that talks about how most boys will jump at the chance to do something that's hinted at being just a little bit too dangerous for them. Using an iPod isn't dangerous. Sitting at a computer isn't adventure. That's entertainment, not excitement. The same thinking can be applied to the current "values" marketing scheme, which has to be one of the worst recruitment messages I've ever heard. It might work for the clergy, but not for boys and young men. Being Kind and Courteous, Thrifty and Reverent are all excellent values, and I'm not saying otherwise. But there's no adventure there. A kid is not going to become a Boy Scout because he wants to be Trustworthy or Loyal. He's going to join because he wants to go whitewater rafting, hike the Appalachian Trail or shoot a tight grouping on a target. As long as the BSA talks the "character and values" talk in trying to draw Scouts in, it's going to fail. As soon as it starts promoting adventure, and delivering on that promise, there will be a boom. Get the extreme sports kids involved. Then work in the values. No prosyletizing, just good common sense. EDITED to add: I found the page on Kudu's site, inquiry.net. The relevant quotes, from a writeup of a school recruiting visit: "I try to convey the hint that Scouting might just be too dangerous for some sixth-grade boys. ... Most importantly, to shatter peer-pressure emphasize anything dangerous and forbidden: bears, rattlesnakes, knives, axes, matches, gas stoves, white water canoeing, repelling off cliffs, and primitive camping as an encounter with natural forces beyond our control." The page is http://www.inquiry.net/adult/recruiting.htm He also put it a lot more succinctly than I just did in writing: "The Outdoors is the primary attraction, never forget that. ... Surprisingly, the Ideals will emerge as a natural consequence of struggle in the great outdoors."(This message has been edited by shortridge)

While I'm also sorry for your feelings, doing something in anger or frustration is never a good path. Take a few days, do some deep breathing, reflect on your situation, and figure out what you want to do and what the best course of action is. If you do want to start a new troop, you'll need to find (a) some Scouts and (b) some adult leaders. At 18, you're not old enough to be a Scoutmaster. It should also be pointed out that Cub camping is a totally different animal from Boy Scout camping. Cubs do day camps, resident camps, Webelos den overnights, council-organized family camps and pack overnighters. They shouldn't be camping with Boy Scouts.

(This message has been edited by shortridge)

I am a man... I can change... If I have to... I guess.

VigilNavyCPO wrote: "On the flip side of rank advancement, my troop allows older Scouts to stay active in the Troop if they cannot make Eagle due to the time requirements." On the flippity-flip side, I'd hate to meet a troop that didn't allow Scouts to remain active just because they couldn't make Eagle. There's no dishonor in aging out at any of the other ranks. Achieving Eagle is not the goal of the Scouting program.

According to EPA it is dust that spreads the asbestos contamination. So all roads and trails will need to be hard covered (ie pavement or clay). Going by this, it would also include dirt parking lots, parade grounds, gathering areas, campsites, program areas, etc. - anywhere that the grass has been killed by thousands of feet. Sounds like a no-win for the council.

A fishing tournament is a great idea, and can often be done in conjunction with a Boy Scout troop, if they have room in their summer schedule. The minor-league team in these parts has a designated "Scout Night" coordinated with the local council, where Scouts in uniform get in free and get to camp out on the diamond after the game. But there's certainly nothing stopping you from just going to a game as a pack! A family picnic at a local state park is another good event. Connect with the naturalist staff and see if they can do a program for the Cubs and parents, too. That way you're also getting kids outdoors who aren't able to (or don't want to) go camping overnight. One note... With many families already having made summer plans, this may be cutting it a bit close for planning purposes. You might want to focus more on activities that don't require a critical mass of Cubs (as in minimum group size) to attend.

I agree with Eamonn. I'd be interested in the parents' perspective. Did they not think that $15 a month was really darn expensive for den dues? If they didn't feel they were getting their money's worth over the last few years, did they ever talk to the den leader or the pack leadership? If not, why not? And if they did feel that they were getting their money's worth, then why the fuss now? I know it's different for different people, but money is scarce enough these days that I'm not going to shell anything out unless I get some value for it that corresponds to what I'm paying. If I think I'm paying too much, I'll haggle, or go somewhere else.(This message has been edited by shortridge)

Adventure, exploration and wonder.

Does the camp have a swimming pool? Waterfront with canoes, rowboats, sailboats, kayaks and motorboats? A rifle range? Archery range? COPE course or climbing wall? Nature lodge? Do they send staffers to National Camping School? All that is overhead. I'll grant you that not having heavy canvas wall tents - more than $500 a pop last time I checked - or hot water for showers would save some money. But when compared to the actual costs of camp (see related thread here http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=236924&p=1), $225 is fairly cheap.

I went through such a program in the early '90s, and later staffed it at the same camp. As a camper, I had a great time, despite having already had most of the T-2-1 requirements already signed off before camp. (I started out gung-ho and gunning for Eagle by 13.) The director was a volunteer, an older gentleman who dressed in a '60s or '70s-era uniform and knew his skills inside and out. He was a great role model. It ran during the mornings, and we were free to take whatever MBs we wanted in the afternoon. I took and completed Swimming and Wilderness Survival. As a Scoutcraft/commissioner's staffer, I worked with the program a lot. It was very ad-hoc, with a small staff (the director/commissioner, me, and another instructor), so we relied heavily on the NSP ASMs. Needless to say, their own skills and Scouting experiences varied widely, with most having been Webelos den leaders just a few months before. Now, the program runs a full day, based on the model I wrote up when I was Scoutcraft director. They do Scout skills in the morning and take Swimming and do some Nature requirements together as a group in the afternoon. There's an 18+ staffer as director, but the other staffers are usually young. As a staffer, I have to say I was pretty amazed by how few of these new Scouts knew even the basics - square knots, salutes and signs, the Oath, flag-folding, etc. It seems to me that being able to ship new Scouts off to a "first-year camper program" has allowed some units to largely abdicate their responsibility to teach the skills themselves. They can just hand the boys off and forget 'em. Such a program, even if well-run from a skills perspective, also doesn't necessarily support the patrol method. We always tried to keep NSPs together if they came together, but we often had to add boys or split them up depending on overall enrollment.

Sounds like a ready-made solution for you both is at hand: Have them spin off completely and go with the crew. His son can finish Eagle there, and he's out of your hair. Then you can start another crew that will actually stick around for longer than the year or two it'll take for theirs to collapse under his tight control.

"It also just so happens that the oldest boy scout with our troop on this camp out was 13 years old. I can hardly expect a 13 year old to get up in the middle of the night to deal with some sleeping problem of a 10 or 11 year old." I can. Just my opinion, but that's not an unreasonable responsibility.

Has your son spoken to his Scoutmaster? Most unit leaders want their Scouts to get to camp, especially in that first year, whether it's with the troop or without it, and can point you in the right direction. I'd start first with your council office. I know that my council camp is completely filled all five weeks, judging by the online signups, but there may be one around you that has some slots open. You can ask your council office for the phone numbers of some neighboring councils. Most council camps do offer provisional camping, though some do limit it to experienced campers.

Does anyone have experience with council summer camps that also offer year-round programs? I'm not just talking about campmasters teaching dutch-oven cooking or fancy knots on weekends, but am interested in camps that might market their facilities and program expertise to schools, companies, other youth groups, etc., during the week and otherwise. Does your local camp open up its rifle range, canoes or nature trails to local high schools or Upward Bound programs? How about offering its COPE course to companies doing teambuilding exercises? Do they usually pay folks come in to run them, or just volunteers? And do they have many takers? Thanks for any insight, input and examples.(This message has been edited by shortridge)

It is a little known fact that the admonition and all mysteries of the OA are clearly explained within the lyrics of "Louie, Louie" by the Kingsman. I was inducted in the '90s, and my Elangomat told me it was the Macarena, the jerk!

"I also don't like the idea that they have to wake a buddy up at 3:00 AM to walk over to the tree line and take a leak." I have no data to back this up, but I'd wager that any Scout who tried to wake a buddy up at 3 a.m. for a potty escort would either (a) find out some very interesting colorful language, or (b) get punched.

The best way to learn it is to ask a local fellow Arrowman. Try your chapter chief if you have one, or your Scoutmaster, if he or she is a member. They'll help with both spelling and pronunciation. If you don't know which chapter you're in, try calling your council office and asking for that information. They may steer you to the lodge staff adviser.

"I know at camp as soon as my pants are around my and I've got myself situated that the strange guy from that strange district will come in singing all the verses of Green Grow the Rushes." This sounds like either the start of a really good story or a really bad story... Peanut gallery comments aside, this young man did nearly everything right. He knew his skill level, he knew the area, he had maps, he'd asked for advice, people knew where he was, and he knew his limits and when to turn back. The only mistake he made was taking a shortcut, and a buddy wouldn't necessarily have helped him make the right decision there. Heck, sometimes shortcuts work.

Having never been in a tank, I'm curious. Would a beret really protect one's head?

I don't think there's any need to send an e-mail to his bosses, unless he shows up uninvited and makes an ass of himself. My guess is that Lisabob hit the target - he's getting mucho pressure from above, and doing everything he can. Not that I'm saying he's right, but it's hard to blame him for trying to do his best.

"They wanted us to be prepared..." I think all of us already learned that lesson somewhere before.

When I taught Pioneering at summer camp (four years in a row), I told the Scouts that they should have the book for reference for practicing the knots, lashings and splices on their own - crucial if they wanted to actually earn the badge at camp. Very few of them had done splices before, so that was a major challenge in itself. And while those information and diagrams are also in the Handbook, I found that the number of Scouts who actually brought their Handbooks to camp was even lower than the number who'd done splicing previously. It's much cheaper to buy a MB pamphlet than a Handbook at the trading post. We had a couple to loan out, but not enough for everyone. I haven't seen the new color editions yet, but I found that the older ones were generally a good introduction to basic concepts. Yes, a counselor should be referring Scouts to outside material, and yes, a Scout should have done plenty of reading up on the subject before even approaching the counselor. But in the cases where those things don't happen, the pamphlets can be a good introductory resource. I saw what Gern described - poor work in written assignments - when I taught Camping at summer camp. Trip plans, gear checklists, menus and campsite layouts were for the most part shoddy or obviously done at the last minute before class. (One sentence is not a trip plan!) There were some exceptions, of course. But since these were things that Scouts should be doing as a matter of course on their regular patrol or troop camping trips, it made me doubly depressed.

Searching for some of the terms you provided leads to a story from the Onion News Network. It's not a real story. www.theonion.com/content/video/12_year_old_boy_scouts_volunteer Google is your friend!